ArticleWorld development2020
Understanding China's wildlife markets: Trade and tradition in an age of pandemic.
Article in World development, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mapping the Potential Risk of Coronavirus Spillovers in a Global Hotspot.Global change biology · 2025Article
- Wildlife Consumption, Health, and Zoonotic Disease in China After the Emergence of COVID-19.EcoHealth · 2023Article
- Perceptions of COVID-19 origins and China's wildlife policy reforms.Global ecology and conservation · 2023Article
- Limiting the spillover of zoonotic pathogens from traditional food markets in developing countries and a new market design for risk-proofing.Epidemiology and health · 2023Article
- A better classification of wet markets is key to safeguarding human health and biodiversity.The Lancet. Planetary health · 2021Review
- In the post-COVID-19 era, is the illegal wildlife trade the most serious form of trafficking?Crime science · 2021Article
- COVID-19 and environment: a poignant reminder of sustainability in the new normal.Environmental sustainability (Singapore) · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Environmentalists have long been concerned about the rate at which China is consuming and trading in threatened and endangered wildlife. The recent COVID-19 global pandemic has made wildlife consumption an issue that concerns everyone around the world. Formerly obscure practices like wet markets and commodities like pangolin scales or bear bile have gained international notoriety. Along with that attention has come increasing politicization and ideological polarization. Beyond the global fight against the pandemic, there has been another global struggle over the meaning and origin of the disease, as evidenced by the spread of terms like "Wuhan Flu" and "bat soup." What has become obscured by the news cycle struggling to keep up with the rapid spread of the virus and the political sound and fury surrounding it is any meaningful understanding of China's wildlife consumption and trade. Deeply ingrained in Chinese culture and history, the wildlife trade is not going away anytime soon. Despite a national ban, already wet markets are returning across China. Addressing the wildlife trade in China, we argue, requires first understanding it.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.