Study counts more than 107,000 species in global wildlife use and trade

What you need to know

• The study's headline figure is 107,356 species in use and trade. It spans plants, animals and fungi, and includes activity across sectors such as timber, seafood, medicinal plants, pets and ornamental fish. 123
• The comparison with the roughly 50,000 figure needs care. IPBES reported wild species used for food, energy, medicine, materials and other purposes, while the new study describes species in use and trade. The terms do not establish a like-for-like comparison. 14
• The authors identify a major reporting blind spot: most countries lack systematic trade data for species not listed under CITES. The researchers call for standardised collation of information beyond species covered by that system. 12
• The scale of the count broadens the picture of how many species are involved across different uses and markets. It does not, by itself, show how much trade takes place in each species or whether that trade affects wild populations. 123
• The reporting also points to sectors where monitoring has not kept pace with trade, including online exotic-pet sales. The study is therefore both a global estimate and an account of limitations in the information available to assess trade. 23

Why this matters

Incomplete records make it harder to establish the reach of wildlife trade and identify which species may face risks. A broader, standardised evidence base could help clarify those questions, but the reported count alone does not establish conservation impacts. 123

What happens next

The study identifies standardised data collation beyond CITES-listed species as a need. The supplied reporting does not describe a specific follow-up system or timeline, so it remains unclear how monitoring will change or how much better coverage would alter the estimate. 12

What we know

• The study reports 107,356 species in use and trade globally. 123
• The earlier IPBES assessment cited approximately 50,000 wild species used for a range of purposes. The figure is useful context, but its scope is not necessarily equivalent to the new study's measure. 14
• The study and its coverage describe incomplete monitoring, especially for species outside CITES listings, as a limit on understanding the scale and risks of trade. 123

What we don't know

• The supplied reporting does not establish how much the total might change if domestic trade, poorly documented sectors and regions with limited reporting were better covered. 123
• It remains unclear what share of the 107,356 species are traded commercially rather than included in the broader category of species in use and trade. 13
• The count does not show which traded species face population-level risks, or whether trade is sustainable for each species. The supplied reporting does not resolve those questions. 123

Read the reporting

This WildNews briefing synthesises and summarises reporting from the sources below. WildNews did not produce the original reporting. Learn more about how we use AI