Motivations for the use and consumption of wildlife products.

The dominant approach to combating the illegal wildlife trade has traditionally been to restrict the supply of wildlife products. Yet conservationists increasingly recognize the importance of implementing demand-side interventions that target the end consumers in the trade chain. Their aim is to curb the consumption of wildlife or shift consumption to more sustainable alternatives. However, there are still considerable knowledge gaps in understanding of the diversity of consumer motivations in the context of illegal wildlife trade, which includes hundreds of thousands of species, different uses, and diverse contexts. Based on consultation with multiple experts from a diversity of backgrounds, nationalities, and focal taxa, we developed a typology of common motivations held by wildlife consumers that can be used to inform conservation interventions. We identified 5 main motivational categories for wildlife use: experiential, social, functional, financial, and spiritual, each containing subcategories. This framework is intended to facilitate the segmentation of consumers based on psychographics and allow the tailoring of interventions-whether behavior change campaigns, enforcement efforts, or incentive programs-to the specific context in which they will be used. Underlining the importance of consumer research and collaborating with local actors is an important step toward promoting a more systematic approach to the design of demand reduction interventions.

Motivaciones para el Uso y Consumo de Productos de Fauna Resumen Tradicionalmente, la estrategia dominante para combatir el mercado ilegal de fauna ha sido restringir la oferta de productos de fauna. Aun así, los conservacionistas cada vez reconocen más la importancia de implementar intervenciones por el lado de la demanda que se enfoquen en los consumidores finales en la cadena de mercado. Su objetivo es reducir el consumo de fauna o redirigir ese consumo hacia alternativas más sustentables. Sin embargo, todavía existen vacíos de conocimiento en el entendimiento de la diversidad de motivos para los consumidores dentro del contexto del mercado ilegal de fauna, el cual incluye cientos de miles de especies, diferentes usos y contextos diversos. Con base en consultas a varios expertos con una diversidad de antecedentes, nacionalidades y taxones de enfoque desarrollamos una tipología de motivos comunes que tienen los consumidores de fauna que pueden usarse para orientar las intervenciones de conservación. Identificamos cinco categorías principales de motivos para el uso de fauna: vivencial, social, funcional, financiero y espiritual, cada uno con subcategorías. Este marco de trabajo tiene la intención de facilitar la segmentación de consumidores con base en psicográficos y permitir la personalización de las intervenciones - sean campañas de cambios en el comportamiento, esfuerzos por hacer cumplir las reglas o programas de incentivos - al contexto específico en el que serán utilizadas. Resaltar la importancia de los estudios de mercado y la colaboración con los actores locales es un paso importante hacia la promoción de una estrategia más sistemática para el diseño de intervenciones para reducir la demanda.

Response to "The imaginary 'Asian Super Consumer': A critique of demand reduction campaigns for the illegal wildlife trade".

In a recent paper in Geoforum, Margulies et al. (2019) outline what they perceive as a bias toward an "Asian super consumer". They argue that wildlife trade demand reduction campaigns are unfocused, untargeted, and therefore have a tendency to place blame on people of colour and communities in the Global South as key actors in driving illegal wildlife trade. As researchers and practitioners, we have been studying the demand for wildlife and wildlife products for many years. While we agree that it is vitally important to consider the cultural nuances of illegal and unsustainable wildlife trade and to operate in a manner that is respectful toward different cultures, we believe that the authors have overlooked the fact that modern wildlife trade demand reduction campaigns are already conducting in-depth research and using it to target their campaigns to specific groups.