ArticleEcoHealth2020
Mapping the Illegal International Ivory Trading Network to Identify Key Hubs and Smuggling Routes : Illegal International Ivory Trading Network from 1975 to 2017.
Article in EcoHealth, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biodiversity loss is on the list of the most challenging issues the world sustainability faces. This study aims to examine the global illegal ivory trades, identify key hub countries and map the key smuggling routes in the worldwide illegal ivory trading network. A social network analysis (SNA) and a set of network indicators are used to investigate CITES's (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) ivory trading data from 1975 to 2017. Several important conclusions are derived: (1) The social network of global ivory trading is closely connected, with an average path length of 2.643 and an average clustering coefficient of 0.463. An average of 45,410.384 kg of ivory products was trafficked from each of the 182 countries to an average of another 8.17 countries. The dynamic networks of global ivory trading show the pattern of high connectivity and high aggregation. (2) The USA, the UK, Zimbabwe, South Africa, China, Japan, Sudan, Belgium and Hong Kong are the most important hubs in the worldwide ivory trade according to degrees and centralities in the SNA. (3) According to trading weight density, three significant ivory trafficking routes are illustrated: 1. African countries (Sudan, Zimbabwe, South Africa, Central African Republic, the Republic of Congo, Somalia and Uganda) to Hong Kong; 2. Belgium to Hong Kong and Japan; 3. Mutual transactions between Japan and Hong Kong. The analytical framework in this study can also be useful for studying other illegal trading activities, like other animal trades, with respect to biodiversity conversation, and could serve as a reference for other network-based sustainability challenges, such as human migration, biological invasion, and waste smuggling and dumping.
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.