Determining the legality of newly described CITES‐listed species in the horticulture trade of tropical pitcher plants (Nepenthes )

Due diligence is a fundamental component of ensuring a sustainable and legal wildlife trade that is also supportive of the livelihoods and businesses that depend on the trade. This is particularly true with species listed on the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) that are considered threatened or may become threatened by trade. Undertaking due diligence exercises requires access to information on which to base such decisions; however, the extent to which information is available is unclear. We used the trade in tropical pitcher plants (Nepenthes) for horticultural purposes as a case study to determine the extent to which information is available. A systematic survey of online trade was conducted for species described from 1996 to 2016. For the species found in trade, these were cross‐referenced with the CITES trade database, and inquiries were made to the relevant CITES Management Authorities and National Focal Points Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS). Of 83 newly described species, 61% were offered for sale online in 2018. Despite all Nepenthes species being listed on CITES, only 23% (n = 19) of the species being sold online were reported in trade on the CITES Trade Database, and only 3 were from the countries of origin. Thirty‐two of these species had no international trade recorded according to the database. Management authorities of CITES for the countries of origin confirmed trade had been permitted for 5 of 32 species. Lack of CITES records may be explained by trade under “Nepenthes spp.” or as exempt parts and derivatives. However, permits to collect and commercialize are likely to be required as part of the Nagoya Protocol on ABS from the Convention on Biological Diversity. The ABS National Focal Points were contacted to determine whether collection or commercialization permits had been issued for the remaining species. Only 2 of 7 focal points replied, and both stated no permits had been issued. Lack of traceability information or response related to the issuance of collection and commercialization permits is concerning and hinders the due diligence of businesses and consumers wanting to ensure their trade is legal, sustainable, and ethical.