Status and trends in the international wildlife trade in Chameleons with a focus on Tanzania.

Chameleons (family Chamaeleonidae) are a distinctive group of reptiles, mainly found in Africa, which have high local endemism and face significant threats from the international wildlife trade. We review the scale and structure of international chameleon trade, with a focus on collection in and exports from Tanzania; a hotspot of chameleon diversity. Analysis used data from the CITES Trade Database 2000-2019, combined with assessment of online trade, and on-the-ground surveys in Tanzania in 2019. Between 2000 and 2019, 1,128,776 live chameleons from 108 species were reported as exported globally, with 193,093 of these (from 32 species) exported by Tanzania. Both global and Tanzanian chameleon exports declined across the study period, driven by decreased trade in generalist genera. Whilst the proportion of captive-bred individuals increased across time for the generalist taxa, the majority of range-restricted taxa in trade remained largely wild-sourced. For Tanzanian exports, 41% of chameleons were from one of the 23 endemic species, and 10 of the 12 Tanzanian endemic species in trade are categorised as threatened with extinction by IUCN. In terms of online trade, of the 42 Tanzanian species assessed, there was evidence of online sale for 83.3% species, and 69% were actively for sale with prices listed. Prices were on average highest for Trioceros species, followed by Kinyongia, Rieppeleon, Rhampholeon, and Chameleo. Field work in Tanzania provided evidence that the historic harvest of endemic chameleon species has been higher than the quantities of these species reported as exported by Tanzania in their annual trade reports to CITES. However, we found no field evidence for trade in 2020 and 2021, in line with Tanzanian regulations that applied a blanket ban on all exports of live wild animals. Literature evidence, however, suggests that illegal trade continued to Europe from seizures of Tanzanian chameleon species in Austria in 2021.

Evaluating the Contribution of Complex International Research-for-Development Programmes to the Sustainable Development Goals.

While evaluation of research-to-policy projects is a fundamental aspect of measuring the impact of new knowledge, limited studies have examined evaluation methods in such projects, as well as how the evaluation can generate learning to facilitate the progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This study conducted a systematic literature review and found that the most commonly used methods for SDG contribution evaluation were Analytical Hierarchy Process (40.4%), Fuzzy TOPSIS (13.2%) and ELECTRE and SPADE Methodology (3.5% each). Ranking analysis was undertaken to determine priorities among the six "Big Wins" as defined for the UKRI-GCRF Trade Hub Project, as a case, where the ranking was exercised by the project partners across the globe. Results revealed that "nature and social factors" was better considered in international trade agreements as the priority (36.4%) among others. Moreover, among the four "mechanisms" of the project, "knowledge, networks, and connectivity" was ranked as the top priority (56.9%), followed by "capacity building" (28.5%), "metrics, tools and models" (7.2%), and "improving the knowledge base" (4.6%). Mapping and evaluation revealed that the Big Wins of the Trade Hub contributed to ten out of the 17 SDGs. The most fulfilled goals were SDG 12 (Sustainable Consumption and Production), SDG 15 (Life on Land), and SDG 2 (Zero Hunger) in descending order. Furthermore, interaction analysis of the core SDGs revealed both synergy and tradeoff between different outputs. The research articles reviewed for this paper showed no gold standard framework for assessing international development projects against the SDGs. Further research should develop a tool to capture holistic and synergistic contributions of the target outcomes of projects to sustainable development.

Bien que l'évaluation des projets sur le lien entre recherche et politique soit un aspect fondamental de la mesure de l'impact des nouvelles connaissances, peu d'études ont examiné les méthodes d'évaluation de tels projets, ainsi que la manière dont l'évaluation peut générer un apprentissage pour faciliter la progression vers les objectifs de développement durable (ODD). Cette étude a mené une revue systématique de la littérature et a constaté que les méthodes les plus couramment utilisées pour l'évaluation de la contribution aux ODD étaient le processus d'analyse hiérarchique (40,4%), la méthode TOPSIS floue (13,2%), et les méthodes ELECTRE et SPADE (3,5% chacune). Une analyse par classement a été entreprise pour déterminer les priorités parmi les six « Grands Succès¼ tels que définis pour le projet UKRI-GCRF Trade Hub, par exemple, où le classement a été réalisé par les partenaires du projet à travers le monde. Les résultats ont révélé que les « facteurs naturels et sociaux¼ étaient mieux considérés dans les accords commerciaux internationaux comme la priorité (36,4%), parmi d'autres. De plus, parmi les quatre « mécanismes¼ du projet, « les connaissances, les réseaux et la connectivité¼ ont été classés comme la première priorité (56,9%), suivis du « renforcement des capacités¼ (28,5%), « les mesures, les outils et les modèles¼ (7,2%) et « améliorer la base de connaissances¼ (4,6%). La cartographie et l'évaluation ont révélé que les Grands Succès du projet Trade Hub ont contribué à dix des 17 ODD. La contribution aux objectifs était la plus importante, par ordre décroissant, pour l'ODD 12 (Consommation et production durables), l'ODD 15 (Vie terrestre) et l'ODD 2 (Faim zéro). En outre, l'analyse des interactions des principaux ODD a révélé à la fois une synergie et un compromis entre les différents produits. Les études examinées pour cet article n'ont montré aucun cadre de référence pour évaluer les projets de développement international par rapport aux ODD. Des études supplémentaires devraient être conduites pour développer un outil permettant de mesurer les contributions holistiques et synergiques des résultats cibles des projets au développement durable.