TR A FF I C
B R I E F I N G

AUGUST 2017

REVISITING CHINA’S IVORY MARKETSIN 2017
Yuankun Zhao, Ling Xu, Yu Xiao, Jing Guan and Wilson Lau

KEY points:• In December 2016, the State Council of thePeople’s Republic of China announced thetimetable for a domestic ivory trade ban. A
first batch of 67 ivory manufacturers andretail stores was slated to cease processing
and selling of elephant ivory on or before 31
March 2017, whilst the remaining group of
105 manufacturers and stores are set to shut
down all ivory operations before 31 December
2017. The legal commercial ivory trade fromall registered manufactures and retail storesin China will be completely prohibited by thestart of 2018.

• In the legal ivory market, the average price ofa pair of ivory chopsticks was USD542/pair,while ivory bangles averaged USD1,581. In theillegal market, the corresponding prices were
USD153 for a pair of chopsticks and USD568
for a bangle, lower than the legal market priceby 72% and 64%, respectively. Compared to2012, the average price of ivory chopsticks
and bangles in the illegal market in 2017
had declined by 57% and 25%, respectively.
The average price of ivory pendants in illegal
markets was USD4.60/gram in 2012, which was
similar to the price in 2017 of USD4.70/gram).
• From January to April 2017, TRAFFIC
monitored 31 websites and found 1,687 new
advertisements for ivory items, some 382
advertisements (19%) fewer compared to thesame period in 2016. Among them, 1,658 (98%)
advertisements were concentrated on just fivecollection websites. Some 19 (more than 60%)of monitored websites were not found to have
any illegal ivory products for sale.
• On 24 April 2017, TRAFFIC reviewed 35
targeted social media users and found 301
postings of illegal ivory items, 1,779 picturesand 27 videos. On average, each of thesetargeted users had nine advertisements, 51
pictures and one video, which represents a
decrease of 28%, 15% and 47%, respectively,
compared to the same month in 2016.
Seven active users posted 99% of the ivory
advertisements observed. Moreover, semiworked and raw ivory pieces were being
marketed through social media channels,
presumably in an attempt to target illegal ivory
processors.

Legal market stores in Guangzhou.

Introduction
China’s domestic trade in wildlife and other commodities has been highly influenced
by the rising value of per capita income in recent decades. China’s ivory trade has
experienced great fluctuations during this period, including a rapid expansion of
the consumer base, increasing prices and various means to manage and control thecommerce—culminating in the announcement of a total ban on ivory trade to comeinto force in 2018. This report addresses the evolving domestic situation in the year
before all trade in elephant ivory is indefinitely suspended in China.
• In 1981, China became a Party to the Convention on International Trade inEndangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), which had already enforced
a global ban on the trade of Asian Elephants Elephas maximus and their products
through listing in CITES Appendix I.
• In 1988, China issued the Wild Animal Protection Law, which listed the Asian
Elephant as a first class protected species.
• In 1989, at the 7th Conference of the Parties to CITES (CoP7), the African Elephant
Loxodonta africana was upgraded to CITES Appendix I, which prohibited allinternational ivory trade for commercial purposes. China banned the import of

TRAF FIC BR IEFI NG PAPER• With respect to illegal ivory markets in China,
22 cities were visited in March–May 2017 anda total of 2,307 ivory products in 503 illegal
outlets were observed. The average numberof ivory items openly displayed or shown to
TRAFFIC per outlet was five, with 90% of theivory products found to be small items, forexample bangles, bracelets, necklaces, rings andpendants. Illegal ivory products were reported
to be sourced mainly from manufacturers in
Fujian Province, with a very small number of
items were said to be smuggled from Thailand
and Viet Nam.

© TRAFFIC• In terms of China’s legal ivory market, 50 of
the total of 55 accredited retail outlets thatwere shut down by March 2017 were visitedby researchers in the period April to June
2017, and the findings suggest that all 50of these stores had ceased (openly) to offer
ivory products for sale. One of the surveyed
accredited stores was found to sell illegal ivory
secretly. Surveys were also conducted at another60 accredited stores that were slated to closeby the end of the year, with 17 stores (28.3%)
found to be violating various regulations andfour (6.7%) operating outside of the State
Forestry Administration (SFA)-designated store
locations, thus breaking existing ivory tradelaws in China; 23 offered discounts of varying
degrees on their ivory products; and 21 dealersmentioned their opinions on what should
happen with respect to unsold ivory stocks
when the ban takes effect.

1

African Elephants and ivory products in 1990, and then began to conduct an inventory and registration
process for its stockpile of raw ivory.
• In 1993, the African Elephant was classified as a national first-class protected species under Chinese law
in order to improve management and enforcement of any ivory trade in China (SFA, 1993).
• In 1997, at CITES CoP10, the elephant populations of Botswana, Namibia and Zimbabwe were downlisted
to CITES Appendix II, and a one-off sale of ivory from these countries to Japan was sanctioned, which
took place in 1999.
• In 2000, at CITES CoP11, South Africa’s elephant population was added to CITES Appendix II, but theParties did not allow any further ivory sales.
• In 2002, at CITES CoP12, the ivory trade ban was partly lifted with the approval of a second conditional
one-off sale involving three African countries, Botswana, Namibia and South Africa (Zimbabwe’s bid was
defeated). However, a series of conditional milestones needed to be achieved first, including the effectiveroll-out of the Monitoring Illegal Killing of Elephants (MIKE) programme’s baseline.
• In 2004, China initiated an Ivory Registration and Certification system to allow the processing and sale ofivory by authorized manufacturers and outlets (SFA, 2008).
• In 2006, ivory carving was listed as a component of China’s intangible cultural heritage (The State Council,
2006).
• In 2006, the baseline data were still not in place but the Standing Committee approved Japan as a trading
partner for the one-off sale approved in 2002.
• In 2007, the Standing Committee meeting before CITES CoP14 agreed that the baseline data were met,
but rejected an application by China to be a trading partner. At CoP14, a negotiation between African
Elephant range States, otherwise known as the African Compromise, was approved by the CITES Parties
and resulted in adding Zimbabwe to the list of African countries allowed to sell government stocks ofivory in the still pending one-off ivory sale.
• In 2007, at the 57th meeting of the CITES Standing Committee, on a recommendation from the CITES
Secretariat, China was designated as an ivory trading partner in the context of the one-off ivory sale thatwas previously agreed in 2002. This designation allowed China to join Japan and legally import raw ivory
stocks that had been approved at CITES CoP14 as eligible for trade under the African Compromise.

2• The population of African Elephants
declined from an estimated 1.2 million
in 1981 to less than 500,000 in 2016
(Thouless et al., 2016). The Elephant Trade
Information System (ETIS), which collates
and analyses ivory seizure informationfrom around the world on behalf of CITES
Parties, has identified China as the leadingivory smuggling destination globally since
2002. To support international efforts
for elephant conservation, President
Xi and President Obama made a joint
announcement in 2015 to commit to
shutting down domestic ivory markets in
China and the United States.

© TRAFFIC

TRAF FIC BR IEFI NG PAPER• In 2008, the Standing Committee approved a new application from China for trading partner status andthe one-off sale took place later that year. This development ultimately allowed for 62 tonnes of elephanttusks from Zimbabwe, Botswana, Namibia and South Africa to be legally imported into China as raw
materials for the country’s domestic ivory carving industry.

African Elephants Loxodonta africana• On 20 March 2016, China issued a one-year ban on the import of ivory hunting trophies and all otherivory imports for commercial purposes.
• On 30 December 2016, the State Council Office of China announced a national ban on ivory trade will be
implemented by the end of 2017 (SFA, 2016).
• On 1 January 2017, China’s revised Wild Animal Protection Law came into effect. It aims to fill any regulatory
loopholes with respect to wildlife trade online, particularly through Articles 31 and 32. Article 31 prohibits
individual traders from online advertising in relation to the sale, purchase or utilization of threatened
wildlife and their products (including ivory) while Article 32 prohibits online trading platforms, exchange
markets or other online trading spaces from providing services for the sale, purchase or utilization of
threatened wildlife and their products.
• On 31 March 2017, the State Forestry Administration announced the first batch of 67 ivory manufacturers
and retail stores that had been shut down (SFA, 2017). By 31 December 2017, the remaining 105 ivory
manufacturers and retail stores will also be closed or prohibited from selling elephant ivory products. Allelephant ivory products in China will be prohibited for sale after this date.
This research into the status of ivory trading in China was conducted after the first group of ivory manufacturers
and retail stores had ceased trading in ivory on 31 March 2017. The research assesses the compliance of theseivory manufacturers and retail stores in implementing the ivory ban, and to some extent, the readiness ofthe second batch of outlets to do so by the end of December 2017. It also examined other illegal avenues
through which ivory continues to be offered for sale. The aim of TRAFFIC’s research, therefore, is to assess theeffectiveness and impact of the ivory ban and to provide recommendations successfully to shut down illegal
ivory markets domestically and support efforts to reduce consumer demand for ivory in China.

Methodology
Legal ivory1 market

1

HarbinShenyang

BaotouBeijing Tianjin

Taiyuan Shijiazhuang

Xi’an

DalianWeifang

Zhengzhou
NanjingChangzhou

ShanghaiHangzhouChongqing

Kunming
1:42 000 000

WenzhouFuzhouPutianGuangzhou
FoshanFigure number: GS(2016) No.1550
Source: The State Bureau of Surveying and
Mapping

Figure 1. The regional distribution of legal ivory markets visited in China in 2017

This report refers to elephant ivory as “ivory”, other types of ivory are separately described.

TRAF FIC BR IEFI NG PAPERIn April and May 2017, a TRAFFIC
and WWF team visited 110
accredited ivory stores in 23 cities(Figure 1), which represented 85%
of all accredited shops approved by
the State Forestry Administration(SFA) in 2015 (SFA, 2015). Amongst
the stores visited, 50 stores had been
included in the first batch of retail
outlets that had ceased ivory tradingby 31 March 2017 (out of 55 retailstores, or 90% of those affected in thefirst phase), which were located in
21 cities. The other 60 outlets visitedwere located in 11 cities, and belong
to the second batch of retail outlets
due to cease ivory trading by the endof December 2017, accounting for
68% of all second batch retail outlets(Figure 2). The survey locations weremainly found in shopping malls andantiques markets.

3

No. of accredited shops

50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
No. of accredited shops to shut
down before 31 December 2017

BJ GD FJ JS SH ZJ LN SX TJ GXHLJHBHN JX IM SD S'X YN SC HB CQ
33 15 9 12 12 4 2 1 4 1 2 3 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1No.of accredited shops shut down
14 10 7 5 5 5 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0
before 31 March 2017
No. of accredited shops to shut down before 31 December 2017
No.of accredited shops shut down before 31 March 2017
Figure 2. Distribution of accredited shops in different provinces and municipalities2 affected by the first and second
phase of the ivory market shut down

The main issue assessed amongst the first batch of ivory outlets was whether they were still selling ivory
products or not and, for the second group of ivory stores, whether they were abiding by the ivory registrationand certification regulations. The relevant SFA regulations related to:• Displaying ivory products with accompanying individual identification cards;• The identification cards were given with the product upon purchase, if asked;• Displaying the registration certification of accredited ivory stores, and materials and signage that show themessage that “ivory can only be sold in mainland China”, as well as other communications materials on
elephant conservation required by the SFA (SFA, 2008).
To aid analysis, the various cities offering ivory for sale wereclassified by TRAFFIC into three categories, according to thecompliance with regulations by accredited stores located in the city.

4• Category B: 30–60% of accredited stores in the city violating
the regulations, e.g. not displaying licences, slogans andcorresponding identification cards with ivory products, andrefusing to provide identification cards with purchases;©TRAFFIC

TRAF FIC BR IEFI NG PAPER• Category A: all accredited stores in the city abiding by theregulations;

Accredited stores in Beijing legal market.
2• Category C: 60–100% accredited stores in the city violating
the regulations, e.g. not displaying licences and corresponding
identification cards with ivory products, and refusing toprovide identification cards with purchases.

BJ-Beijing; GD-Guangdong; FJ-Fujian; JS-Jiangsu; SH-Shanghai; ZJ-Zhejiang; LN-Liaoning; SX-Shanxi; TJ-Tianjin; GX-Guangxi; HLJ-Heilongjiang;
HB-Hebei; HN-Henan; JX-Jiangxi; IM-Inner Mongolia; SD-Shandong; S’X-Shan’xi; YN-Yunnan; SC-Sichuan; HB-Hubei; CQ-Chongqing.

Illegal ivory market
Physical market
TRAFFIC and WWF have been conducting market surveys on illegal ivory trade since 2007. During eachsurvey, details about illegal ivory trade were recorded, including cities, names and addresses of the markets andshops visited, and the number and type of ivory products, prices and weight of the items, as well as sources andorigins, if possible, via in-depth conversation. Due to differences in the number of surveyed cities/markets indifferent years, “the average number of ivory items openly displayed for sale per outlet” is used to compare andassess trade trends in physical markets over the past years.
For this research, TRAFFIC and WWF visited ivory outlets in 22 cities (Table 1), which can be divided into firsttier (mega)-cities, second-tier cities and third-tier cities. Beyond the mega-cities of Beijing, Tianjin, Shanghai
and Guangzhou, China has some 170 second-tier cities, which are loosely defined as provincial capital cities
or municipalities with populations ranging from four to over 14 million people. Others are listed in third-tiercities.
Table 1. Cities visited for the physical market survey in 2017

First-tier cities (4)Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, Tianjin

Second-tier cities (14)Hangzhou, Nanjing, Suzhou, Harbin, Xi’an, Taiyuan, Zhengzhou, Chengdu,
Chongqing, Kunming, Changzhou, Xiamen, Fuzhou, Nanning

Third-tier cities (4)Pu’er, Putian, Xishuangbanna, Yuxi

In China, all online ivory trade is prohibited and therefore all findings of ivory being offered online areconsidered illegal. TRAFFIC started undertaking online monitoring of illegal ivory trade from 2010. Since
2012, monthly online monitoring has been carried out. The methodology of this research was the same as thatused in previous e-commerce surveys, which is based on the routine monitoring of selected Chinese websites
by searching keywords for specific illegal wildlife products and recording the number of new ivory productadvertisements every month (Xiao and Wang, 2015). Due to the very large number of advertisements, it is
not possible to capture all online ivory trade, so “Total Ivory Product Advertisements (TIPA)”3 and “New
Ivory Product Advertisements (NIPA)”4 are recorded monthly to evaluate illegal activities on each individual
website monitored. Previous research indicates that the NIPA indicator does reflect adequately the level andtrend in illegal ivory trade online overall. In this regard, NIPA excludes older advertisements of illegal ivory,
capturing data on new offers of ivory trade products (Xiao and Wang, 2015). TRAFFIC also routinely monitors
a growing number of websites through keyword searches, many of which are purposefully designed to evadethe monitoring of law enforcement. A total of 40 keywords were used in the current survey to identify ivory
products online, including “XY”, “ㄨㄚ”, “X teeth”, “white plastic”, “jelly”, “yellow material”, “African material” andso on. TRAFFIC divides websites into four types, according to the way commodities are sold and/or advertisedon the different platforms: Collection websites, Collection forums, Service websites and E-commence websites(Guan, unpublished report). Collection websites are mainly focused on the antiques trade; Collection forums
are used for information exchange where users can share or advertise information on specific boards; Service
websites and E-commence websites are places where a wide range of products are sold, not only ivory items,
and generally include basic information, unlike on Collection websites and forums. TRAFFIC sends the resultsof its online monitoring to website/platform managers and government law enforcement agencies for theirreference and follow-up, which could lead to punitive actions being taken.

3
4

TIPA: Total Ivory Product Advertisements
NIPA: New Ivory Product Advertisements

TRAF FIC BR IEFI NG PAPER

Online Market

5©TRAFFIC

Social Media Market
In March 2014, TRAFFIC began monitoring illegal ivory trade on social media platforms, which were increasing
rapidly at the time (Xiao and Wang, 2015). TRAFFIC surveyed targeted users who regularly posted illegal
ivory advertisements on exclusive invitation-only social media platforms and recorded important information,
including the number of illegal ivory advertisements, pictures and videos, types of ivory products, and theirprices. “The number of advertisements, pictures and videos per user” have been used for comparison in order
to assess trade trends on social media platforms (Xiao et al., 2017).
Finally, prices of different ivory products in legal and illegal markets, from the different platforms on which they
appear, were compared. In the legal physical markets, chopsticks and bangles were selected for comparison;in the illegal physical, online and social media markets, chopsticks, bangles and non-carved pendants wereselected for comparison. The prices of these machine-produced ivory products can be a relative indicator of raw
ivory values. By comparing the prices of these generic ivory products, which are less influenced by the valueadded artistic embellishment attributed to masterly carved ivory objects, overall trends in the value of ivory
products on the Chinese market can be assessed over time.
A conversion rate of US Dollar (USD)1 = 6.89171 Chinese Renminbi (RMB) / RMB 1 = 0.14507 USD was used5.

Results and Discussion

TRAF FIC BR IEFI NG PAPER

Legal ivory market

6

The survey of the 50 accredited ivory outlets which were included in the first batch of outlets to cease ivory
trading in the context of the national ivory ban found that all surveyed outlets have stopped open sales ofelephant ivory products. One outlet in Beijing, however, was found to offer illegal elephant ivory products
secretly. Out of the 50 accredited ivory outlets surveyed, 12 stores (24.0%) have changed their business totrade in mammoth ivory, jade and wood carvings; while 38 stores (76.0%) were closed for business. The single
exception was an accredited shop in Beijing that was ostensibly selling only mammoth ivory, but when asked
for elephant ivory, products were produced from under the table; the vendor also said that the ivory productidentification card, which was also observed, would not be provided in the event of a sale.

5

https://www.oanda.com/currency/converter/ accessed on 3 May 2017

©TRAFFIC

Amongst the 60 accredited stores from the second
batch that are scheduled to end ivory sales by
December 2017, some were found to be violating
current regulations: 16 stores (26.7%) did not display
the corresponding ivory product identification cardwith displayed ivory items; three stores (5.0%) had
no accreditation licence on display; while two stores(3.3%) had no communications materials, such as
posters and slogans, on display. In all, 17 accredited
stores (28.3%) were found to violate the ivory
registration and certification regulations to varying
degrees. In addition, four stores (6.7%) had failed
to sell ivory from the registered location, which isagainst the law.

Legal ivory carving in Beijing market.

The percentage of outlets by cities that were foundto be violating regulations was compared (Figure 3).
Kunming had a score of 100% of stores in violation,
as the one accredited store located in that city did
not have its registered licence on display. Meanwhile,
three out of four stores in Putian failed to display
the corresponding identification cards, giving it aviolation rate of 75%. By comparison, 12 out of 17
stores in Beijing had violated regulations (71%).

Kunming, Putian and Beijing are therefore listed as Category C, for a violation rate of over 70%. Stores in
Tianjin, Fuzhou, Changzhou and Nanjing were found to have some violation issues, including a number ofivory products that did not have an accompanying ivory product identification card. With violation rates ofthese cities around 50%, these four cities are listed as Category B (30-60% of outlets violating regulations).
There were no violation issues amongst stores in Shanghai, Hangzhou, Guangzhou and Shanxi, which are listed
as Category A cities.
Category A: Shanghai, Hangzhou, Guangzhou, Taiyuan
Category B: Tianjin, Fuzhou, Changzhou, Nanjing
Category C: Kunming, Putian, Beijing

120%

%

80%
60%
40%

100%
75%

71%
50%

50%

40%

33%

20%
0%

0%

0%

0%

Figure 3. Percentage of shops with violations among all shops visited in different cities

0%

TRAF FIC BR IEFI NG PAPER

100%

7

Since the announcement of the ivory ban, a total of 23 accredited stores were found to be offering sales anddiscounts on ivory items to attract consumers and to liquidate their stocks. These discount-offering outlets wereconcentrated in Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou. Six out of the 23 stores were State-owned enterprises and
17 were private companies. As for the discounts, four stores in Guangzhou, Nanjing and Dalian were offering
discounts of 60% or more off ivory items. The remaining (19) stores were offering discounts on some items,
ranging between 10% and 40% off: among them, three stores had 40% off, 10 stores had 30% off, two shops had
20% off and one shop had 10% off. This suggested that a 30% discount was an average discount level for mostivory dealers at the current point in time.
Although an ivory trade ban is imminent, the China government has yet to articulate a clear ivory stock
management policy concerning what will happen to unsold ivory stocks currently in the hands of (formerly)accredited ivory dealers in the country after 31 December 2017. In the absence of a clear directive, industry
insiders currently hold a wide range of opinions concerning what should happen. Based on insights from 21
accredited stores, seven (33%) had expectations that the government would re-purchase unsold stocks, five(24%) stated that they expected to display their ivory products in museums, four (19%) expected to keep theirivory stock collections and await for China’s ivory market to re-open in the future, three (14%) stated thatthey will attempt to put unsold ivory products up for auction, while two (9.5%) will attempt to sell all ivory
stocks by the end of December 2017 (Figure 4). Government re-purchase and museum displays were the twomost preferred options for managing unsold ivory stockpiles after the ban for most surveyed ivory dealers, butdisposal through auctions or a future re-opening of the ivory market was not discounted.

10%
33%

14%

19%
23%

Government repurchaseMuseum display

TRAF FIC BR IEFI NG PAPER

Sold out

8

Figure 4. Accredited dealers’ opinions on what will happen to unsold ivory stock

Collect and reserve

Illegal ivory market
Physical market
From March to May 2017, a survey of illegal ivory trade was conducted in 22 cities in China. A total of 503
outlets were found to sell 2,307 ivory items illegally, which is an average of some five ivory items per outlet. This
was a decline of 49% compared to findings in 2016, a 73% decline compared to a decade ago in 2007 (18 ivory
items per outlet), and a 88% decline since the peak in 2011 (40 items per outlet) (Table 2 and Figure 5).
Table2. Illegal ivory market availability, as observed by TRAFFIC in China (2007–2017)

Average No. of Average No. ofillegal outlets ivory items per
per city
outletYear

No. of cities
surveyed

No. of illegal
outlets

No. of ivory
items

2007

2

27

487

14

18

2008

3

14

530

5

38

2009

5

111

3981

22

36

2010

5

66

1184

13

18

2011

5

221

8818

44

40

2012

10

260

9239

26

36

2013

3

128

1473

43

12

2014

11

359

3690

33

10

2015

8

168

1318

21

8

2016

11

282

2596

26

9

2017

25

503

2307

20

5

50
40
30
20
10
'07

'08

'09

'10

'11

'12

'13

'14

'15

'16

Average number of ivory items per outlet
Average number of shops illegally selling ivory per city
Poly (Average number of ivory items per outlet)
Poly (Average number of shops illegally selling ivory per city)
Figure 5. Domestic ivory market trends in China 2007–2017'17

TRAF FIC BR IEFI NG PAPER

0

9

Trends in the number of ivory items observed being sold illegally in shops, as indicated by the average numberof ivory items openly displayed per outlet, suggest that many items were openly displayed around 2008–2009
and 2011–2012 (Table 2 and Figure 5). For the period 2011–2012, more illegal ivory items in a larger numberof outlets were observed in 2012 than 2011. However, 2011 had a higher average number of ivory items openly
displayed per outlet. The high levels of ivory items observed between 2008 and 2012 began to drop significantly
in 2013, stabilizing between 2013 and 2016 at much lower levels, before reaching its lowest point in 2017, in partdue to policy change combined with persistent and effective law enforcement.

TRAF FIC BR IEFI NG PAPER©TRAFFIC

In the current 2017 survey, most illegal ivory items were sold in the second-tier cities. There were 1,742 ivory
items found in 350 outlets in second-tier cities (n=14), accounting for 76% of the total observed ivory items.
In contrast, the number of ivory items observedin 134 outlets in first-tier cities (n=4) totaled
513, accounting for 22% of the illegal ivory items
observed during the survey. In the third-tiercities (n=4), only 33 ivory items were available
in 19 outlets, making up just over 1% of the total
observed ivory. The average number of ivory items
openly displayed per outlet (five) was also highest
in second-tier cities, compared to four items peroutlet in first-tier cities and two in third-tier cities.

10

According to survey results and interviews withtraders, most ivory products could be traced backto factories located in Fujian province, with a few
items reportedly carved in Thailand or Viet Nam,which were presumably smuggled into China.
Fujian is a leading distribution centre for small
worked ivory products observed in other parts ofChina. In another province, Guangdong, tradersreported that some ivory products were smuggledfrom Africa, others were from Viet Nam with
Guangxi as a transit hub. Raw elephant tusks wererarely sold in physical illegal markets, and even insecond-tier cities with a greater number of illegal
ivory and respective outlets, 90% of ivory products
were small items, especially bangles, bracelets,
necklaces, rings and pendants.

To gain insight into ivory trade trends concerning what has been observable in one of the biggest ivory markets
in China, TRAFFIC has been conducting annual surveys of illegal ivory markets in Beijing since 2007. The data
allow for an analysis of trends in an illegal domestic ivory market over the past decade. Table 3 and Figure 6
show that during the period 2007–2017, a total of 4,593 ivory items were found in 551 illegal outlets in Beijing,indicating an average of eight ivory items per outlet over the 11-year period. The greatest average number ofivory items observed in Beijing was in 2009, when an average 39 ivory items openly displayed per outlet was
found. In all other years, the average number of ivory items openly displayed per outlet never exceeded 17,
with a continuous decrease from 2013 onwards to the present. The pattern of the average number of ivory
items openly displayed per outlet in 2007–2017 in Beijing shows that immediate growth happened in 2009 andthen stayed relatively stable at high levels between 2010 and 2014. It then dropped significantly in 2015 with aperiod of stability between 2015–2017 at lower levels. This change coincided with a period of concerted action
by Beijing Forest Police in combating wildlife crime. For example, in the period from 2014 to mid-2016, a totalof 51 criminal cases—mainly involving illegal ivory trade—were detected, and 86 suspects were arrested6. At
CITES CoP17 in 2016 in Johannesburg, Sun Lei, Deputy Director of Beijing Forest Police received the Clark
Bavin Award for Wildlife Law Enforcement for his contributions to combating wildlife crime in China.

6

Beijing Forest Police: information submitted to the Clark Bavin Awards for Wildlife Law Enforcement before CITES CoP17 in September 2016.

Table 3. Observations at illegal ivory outlets in Beijing in 2007–2017

No. of illegal ivory sell- No. of illegal ivory items Average No. of ivory items
ing outlets foundobserved
openly displayed per outlet
6
101
17
4
30
8
6
236
39
14
182
13
91
956
11
30
225
8
73
826
11
136
1254
9
56
247
4
64
293
5
71
243
3
551
4593
8

Year
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
Total

Average number of ivory items per outlet in
illegal markets in Beijing
45

39

40
35

Number

30
25
20

17
13

15

8

10

11

8

11

9

5

4

5

2015

2016

3

0
2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2017

Online market
From January to April 2017, TRAFFIC monitored 31 websites and found 1,687 new ivory advertisements amonga total of 2,069 endangered species product advertisements; in the same months of 2016, 2,367 new ivory
advertisements were found among 3,250 endangered species product advertisements (Figure 7). This represents
an increasing ratio of ivory advertisements among all targeted endangered species7 product advertisementsfrom 73% to 82% in 2016–2017. However, the number of new ivory advertisements in 2017 is lower than thatin 2016 (19%).
7

TRAFFIC’s online research targets the following species: Elephants, rhinos, Tigers, sea turtles, pangolins, leopards, Helmeted Hornbills and Saiga Antelopes .

TRAF FIC BR IEFI NG PAPER

Figure 6. The average number of ivory items openly displayed per illegal ivory market outlet in Beijing in 2007–2017

11

Among 1,687 new ivory advertisements observed in 2017, 1,658 (98%) were found on five collection websites.
Some 19 (more than 60%) of websites surveyed did not have any illegal ivory products for sale. TRAFFIC’s
online survey of ivory products was conducted monthly, and these monthly survey results are shared withwebsite/platform operators, who then take a range of enforcement actions, including removal of advertisements,
blocking keywords and closing the user’s account. The survey results indicate that the number of monthly newivory advertisements tends to fluctuate from month to month, for example there were 487 advertisements inJanuary; 357 in February; 490 in March and 353 in April.
Analysis of New Ivory Product Advertisements (NIPA) was undertaken over a longer period from January 2016
to April 2017. Figure 8 shows that NIPA reached a peak in May 2016 (1,036 new advertisements per month),but has gradually declined thereafter. The latest monitoring results in April 2017 showed that the NIPA is 353
new advertisements per month, which represented a decrease of 66% compared to the May 2016 peak. Thisdecrease could be an indication of the impact of persistent monitoring work (in part by TRAFFIC) which has
led to greater law enforcement actions by website managers and government law enforcement agencies.

Online Market Survey Result
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0

2016

2017

Figure 7. Online Market Survey Results in the months January to April, in 2016 and 2017

(NIPA)
1200

1036

1000
800
600

797
556

469

795

740 773560 602 565

545

664
490

487
357

400

353

200
01-Apr-17

01-Mar-17

01-Feb-17

01-Jan-17

01-Dec-16

01-Nov-16

01-Oct-16

01-Sep-16

01-Aug-16

01-Jul-16

01-Jun-16

01-May-16

01-Apr-16

01-Mar-16

01-Feb-16

01-Jan-16

0

Figure 8. The number of New Ivory Product Advertisements (NIPA) from January 2016 to April 2017

Social media market
The social media market has become another major channel for illegal ivory trade in China. Comparative
monitoring results in 2015 and 2016 have shown that the number of illegal ivory products posted on social
media platforms is increasing, as has the quantity of trade transactions (Xiao et al., 2017). More and more,dealers are using social media apps due to a number of favorable characteristics:
1. There is a widely-held perception that social media provides a secure, private platform, enabling people thathave become “friends” to receive messages and make transactions in relative privacy;
2. Dealers can often use encrypted messaging, double-talk, video and emoji to replace text descriptions;3. The final prices for ivory products sold through social media are not open to the public, and require direct
consultation with the dealer, which then puts consumers directly in touch with those selling ivory and awayfrom prying eyes;
4. Users can delete “moments” and “chat history” at any time and continue
to post illegal ivory advertisements by using their “backup accounts” iftheir original accounts are ever blocked;
5. Some users hire “agents” to extend their audiences, which can massively
increase the reach of illegal ivory dealers;

TRAF FIC BR IEFI NG PAPER

In a one-day snapshot survey conducted on 24 April 2017, TRAFFIC
surveyed 35 targeted users and found 301 illegal ivory advertisements, aswell as 1,779 pictures and 27 videos of ivory items. On average, each ofthese targeted users had produced about nine illegal ivory advertisements,
51 pictures and one video, representing a decrease of 28%, 15% and 47%,
respectively, compared to a 2016 survey on the same date. However, the great
majority of the illegal ivory advertisements (99%) were in fact posted by justseven active users (out of the 35 surveyed).

©TRAFFIC

6. Raw elephant tusks or semi-worked ivory products can often be found on
the social media platform, which are otherwise relatively difficult to findfor sale in physical markets.

13Price comparisons
Legal ivory market

USD

Price information was recorded in the market surveys of eight cities for ivory chopsticks (n=28), and six cities
for ivory bangles (n=17) (Figures 9 and 10). As many legal retailers were offering major discounts on ivory
products, all price information was recorded at the discounted price. The most expensive pair of ivory chopsticks
was found in Tianjin (USD1,712) whilst the cheapest was found in Beijing (USD145). Overall, the average pricein this dataset was USD542. The most expensive ivory bangles were found in Shanghai (USD3,556) whilst thecheapest was found in Beijing (USD348). Overall, the average price in this dataset was USD 1,581.

1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0

1713

1219

1103
842
536

435

435

377

Average price
Figure 9. The highest prices for a pair of chopsticks recorded in eight Chinese cities with orange line
noting the average price, 2017

TRAF FIC BR IEFI NG PAPER

USD

The highest prices for bangles

14

4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0

3556
2874

2612
1379

The highest prices for bangles

987

726

Average price

Figure 10. The highest prices for (single) bangles recorded in six Chinese cities with orange line
noting the average price, 2017

Illegal ivory market
The survey recorded price information on illegal new ivory chopsticks (n=11) in four cities, ivory bangles(n=47) in 14 cities and non-carved ivory pendants (n=39) in eight cities (Figures 11, 12 and 13). The mostexpensive pair of ivory chopsticks was found in Hangzhou (USD290) whilst the cheapest was found in Beijing(USD116). Overall, the average price in this dataset was USD153.

Figure 11. The highest prices for a pair of chopsticks recorded in four Chinese cities with orange line
noting the average price, 2017

The most expensive ivory bangle was found in Hangzhou (USD1,000) whilst the cheapest was also found inHangzhou (USD232). Overall, the average price in this dataset was USD 568.

The highest prices for bangles
1200
1000

USD

800

1000 987

871

871

871

813

600

726

653

581

508

400

426

363

Xi
sh
ua
ng
ba
nn
a

0

The highest prices for bangles

Average price

Figure 12. The highest prices for (single) bangles recorded in 12 Chinese cities with orange line noting
the average price, 2017

TRAF FIC BR IEFI NG PAPER

200

15

For non-carved ivory pendants, the most expensive price was found in Harbin (USD7.30) whilst the cheapest
was found in Zhengzhou (USD4.50). Overall, the average price in this dataset was USD4.60.

USD

The highest prices for (non-carved) pendants
8.00
7.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00

7.30

6.50

5.80

5.10

5.10

The highest prices for pendants

5.10

5.10

4.40

Average price

Figure 13 The highest prices for (single) pendants recorded in eight Chinese cities with orange line
noting the average price, 2017

This research compared the prices of ivory chopsticks, bangles and non-carved pendants in both legal andillegal ivory markets in first-tier and second-tier cities. The ivory chopsticks, bangles and non-carved pendants
are mostly machine-produced functional products, and their prices are usually not affected by artistic factors,
so the prices can indirectly reflect the profitability of raw ivory markets.
Table 4. Comparative average price information for ivory chopsticks, bangles and pendants in first- and second-tiercities (Unit: USD)

TRAF FIC BR IEFI NG PAPER

A pair of chopsticks (New)16(Single) bangles (New)(Single) non-carved
pendants

Legal

IllegalLegal

IllegalIllegalFirst-tier cities

560 (n=22)

116 (n=4)

1,783 (n=12)642 (n=14)

4.40 (n=5)

Second-tiercities474 (n=6)

174 (n=7)

1,097 (n=5)

536 (n=33)

4.70 (n=34)

Average

542 (n=28)

153 (n=11)

1,581 (n=17)568 (n=47)

4.70 (n=39)

The prices for ivory chopsticks and bangles were compared for both legal and illegal markets, and between
first-tier and second-tier cities. In general, this survey did not focus on third-tier cities and, as only 1.4% of thedata concerned such locations, comparison with the data from first- and second-tier cities in not possible. The
comparison of prices indicates considerable differences between those found in legal and illegal ivory markets
in China (Table 4).
The average price of new chopsticks in illegal markets was USD153/pair, which is only a fraction (28%) of
the price for the same product in legal markets (USD542/pair). The average price of new bangles in illegal
markets was USD568, which again is only 36% of the price for the same item in legal markets (USD1,581).

So even with the discounts being offered in legal retail shops, ivory prices for these commodities were stillseveral times greater than those found in China’s illegal market. This indicates that ivory trade profitability
is still possible with prices at much lower levels. Compared with survey results five years ago, the 2017 illegal
market average prices for these two popular items show a considerable decrease, with a 57% price decline inillegal ivory chopsticks (USD357/pair (n=7) in 2012) and 25% price decline for illegal ivory bangles (USD753(n=160)8 in 2012) (TRAFFIC, unpublished data).
Considering the price of non-carved pendants, where price data were only collected in the illegal market, there
appears to be only a modest difference between first-tier cities (average USD4.40/gram) and second-tier cities(average USD4.70/gram), and between 2016 (average USD4.30/gram) and 2017 (average USD4.70/gram).
Monitoring of seven very active social media users was also conducted over three one-day survey events on 24
April, 17 May and 11 June 2017. The average price for ivory bangles on offer was USD194, while ivory pendants
were being sold for USD3.30/gram. Generally, the prices on social media platforms were slightly lower thanthose in physical markets. The reason for this may reflect ivory processing that occurred in Africa rather than
within China where costs are greater. One pair of elephant tusk tips for sale on social media can cost USD3,483,
while a cut section of elephant tusk costs USD1.40/gram.
Based on over 50 ivory seizures and investigations from law enforcement agencies in Beijing, the price of raw
ivory tusks in the illegal market is shown below. Table 5 shows price information for (illegal) raw ivory tusks
from 2015–2017 in China9. In 2015, after elephant tusks were smuggled into China, the first-hand wholesale
price in two border provinces, Guangdong and Guangxi, was between USD870–1,450/kg; and the second-handwholesale price in Beijing (one of the most important end-use markets) was USD2,320–2,900/kg. The pricedifference is about two to three times greater between wholesale ivory markets in southern and northern China.
In addition, looking at the price series for the Beijing market, raw ivory prices dropped 20–25% between 2015
and 2016, and then dropped by 50% in 2017. In general, the price of raw ivory tusks has apparently declined
over the past three years.
Table 5. Illegal raw ivory tusk price from 2015–2017 in China

Unit: USD/kg

1st half year in 2015

1st half year in 2016

1st half year in 2017

Beijing

2,320–2,900

1,740–2,320

870–1,160

Guangdong/Guangxi

870–1,450

N/A

N/A

N/A = Not Available©TRAFFIC

This is TRAFFIC’s first assessment of China’s ivory markets since the formal announcement of the ban timetableby the Chinese government on 30 December 2016. The current report examines ivory markets in China during
a critical period of transformation, shortly after 55 legal ivory retail stores shut down their ivory businesses.
The physical ivory surveys conducted for this report found that the 50 retail outlets surveyed (out of the 55
retail outlets that had been scheduled to shut down ivory trade by March 2017), were all abiding by the new
regulations to end the sale of ivory products
completely with one exception: one outlet in
Beijing was found to offer illegal elephant ivory
products when such items were specificallyasked for. In addition, signage bearing slogans
such as “Nationally Appointed Ivory Specialist
Store” and “Ivory Specialty Store” were foundstill to be displayed in some accredited storesthat are already implementing the ban. Thissignage is clearly a legacy of the legal ivory trade8
9

The exchange rate used here is USD1=RMB6.3, as on June 2012.
Price information provided by an enforcement officer engaged in combating wildlife crime in China.

TRAF FIC BR IEFI NG PAPER

Conclusion

17

period but could now mislead consumers to believe that legal trade is still allowed and ivory is being sold.
Of the 60 retail outlets that were slated to be part of the second batch of legally operated ivory businesses to end
ivory sales by December 2017, the results were mixed. The survey found 17 out of 60 stores (28.3 %) in violationof the still in-force ivory registration and certification regulations to some degree, such as failing to show andprovide ivory product identification cards for purchases, while four stores were selling ivory in unauthorized
locations as defined by the State Forestry Administration, which is against the law (6.7% of total). Although theviolation rate in 2017 is much lower than what was observed in 2016 (Xu et al., 2016), the legal ivory market isstill in need of enhanced law enforcement.
Many of the accredited shops in the second batch of outlets (23 out of 60, or 38.3 %), which are due to close
down their ivory business at the end of December 2017 were offering discounts for ivory items. Four storesin Guangzhou (2), Tianjin and Dalian were offering more than 60% off listed prices, while the remaining 19
stores were offering discounts of between 10–40%, indicating a desire amongst the accredited ivory dealers toliquidate as much stock as possible before the ban takes hold. However, when asked what they were likely to dowith existing ivory stockpiles after the ban was fully implemented, the expectations amongst accredited dealers
was for the government to assist in finding alternative uses of the stocks. Government re-purchase (33%) andmuseum displays (24%) were stated by the majority of the accredited dealers as the two best ways to deal withivory stockpiles. Other dealers expected unsold ivory to be offered as part of a future ivory auction, whilst stillothers expected ivory trade to reopen in the future so they were content to hold on to existing stocks. Whether
any of these expectations will be met remains to be seen.

TRAF FIC BR IEFI NG PAPER

In 22 cities surveyed for illegal ivory in physical markets,
some 503 outlets were found to be offering a total of 2,307
ivory pieces for sale. The average number of ivory items
openly displayed per outlet (five) was at the lowest level
observed since 2007 when TRAFFIC began regular ivory
market surveys in China, indicating that the physicalmarkets for illegal ivory trade may be adapting to lessconspicuous, lower risk marketing strategies in the face of
persistent law enforcement. The greatest number of ivory
items per outlet were found in second-tier cities, which
may reflect a better regulation of ivory market availability
in first-tier cities than in the second-tier cities. On the other
hand, illegal physical market outlets in China are gaining
more traction in second-tier cities and future monitoringneeds to assess whether this is a consistent trend.

18

Ivory bangles and pendants in Chongqing
illegal market.

©TRAFFIC

What is absent at this point in time is a clear government policy with respect to future ivory stockpile management.
It is not clear if privately-owned ivory stocks will be required to be inventoried and declared to government,
marked, held securely and subject to periodical audits toprevent leakage into existing illegal markets or not. The
lack of clarity in terms of what happens next with regard
to unsold ivory stocks is a serious issue which needs to beaddressed.

Online trade appeared to have declined in 2017, with a
total of 1,687 new ivory advertisements found for sale in 31 websites between January to April 2017, which is adecrease of 19% compared to the same period in 2016. Despite this drop in new advertisements, the problemof illegal trade online still exists; an average of 400 new illegal ivory advertisements continue to be posted on
various websites every month. Most of these new advertisements are concentrated in five collectors’ websites(98% of new ivory advertisements), therefore vigilant actions by a few website companies in removing illegal
advertisements and preventing new postings through strengthened monitoring would be very effective.
Illegal ivory trade on social media has also witnessed improvements compared to the previous year, which was
likely due to the strengthened joint efforts by social media companies and law enforcement agencies to stampout postings by users for ivory products. The number of advertisements, pictures and videos showing andoffering illegal ivory on social media platforms in 2017 has declined compared to 2016 levels (decreases by 28%
of advertisements, 15% of pictures and 47% of videos). However, findings suggest that numerous ivory dealersin physical markets now prefer to appeal to new consumers and conduct ivory transactions on social media
platforms. These dealers might simply display two to three items in store, and post a much wider range of ivory
items in pictures and videos on their social media “Moments”, while new interested customers that are added,
or “friended”, can view these items privately. Financial transactions on social media could then occur via “Red
Packet” or “Money Transfer”, with products delivered through a courier company, with buyer and seller never
having to meet in person, and transactions entirely encrypted such that no trails are left. Understanding thismedium of trading remains difficult to assess accurately.
Finally, price comparisons for ivory products in the legal and illegal markets suggest that illegal markets offer
ivory items at a fraction of the price for a similar item offered through legal ivory trade channels, usually
between two or three times cheaper. These differences are especially pronounced in first-tier cities compared
to second-tier cities.
These findings together demonstrate a market in considerable flux. Various channels still exist for transactionsof ivory items to be made, and despite the best efforts of law enforcement, the private sector and nongovernmental organizations, illegal ivory trade continues to occur with regularity. The survey findings of thiscurrent monitoring effort suggest that ivory trade, both legal and illegal, has declined in some respects, but it
is difficult to interpret exactly what the results mean. For example, the drop in the number of ivory products at
individual illegal outlets in physical markets could represent adaptations and lower-risk marketing strategies in
the face of an intense law enforcement climate. Likewise, the movement of illegal ivory trade to second-tier cities
could also be motivated by perceptions of less law enforcement than what is occurring in first-tier cities. It isclear that the current situation is still far from the closure of China’s domestic ivory market that was envisioned
when an ivory ban was announced in December 2016. These findings should, of course, be tempered by the factthat only a few months have passed since the ban’s announcement, and that most accredited outlets that haveclosed appear to be abiding by the rules of the ban.
Yet, what continues to be alarming is the scale and persistence of illegal ivory trade in non-accredited physicalmarkets, as well as online markets and social media platforms. As much as the ban will put an end to thepresence of legal ivory outlets, and send a powerful message to many potential consumers, this is compromisedby the variety of alternative avenues through which illegal ivory purchase might still be accessible. The needto scale up efforts now, in conjunction with the full implementation of the ivory ban in December 2017, ispressingly clear. Collaborations between law enforcement, the private sector such as e-commerce and social
media companies, courier companies and auction houses, as well as non-governmental organizations have
proven effective in leading a change in curtailing the supply of, and demand for, illegal ivory. Such efforts need
to be enhanced, through the leadership of SFA and all relevant Chinese government departments, to engage
further additional stakeholders to counteract the persistence of illegal ivory trade.

1. One accredited ivory outlet included in the first batch to cease ivory trading was found to offer illegal
elephant ivory items when a potential customer specifically asked for such a product. To prevent such illegal
trade, the State Forestry Administration (SFA) should take the lead and issue a clear directive on future ivory
stock management policy, which could be a deciding factor in turning the ivory ban into a conservation
success. It is also important that SFA’s monitoring of stockpiles will continue even after the ban is being fully
implemented.
2. Those accredited ivory outlets that were amongst the first batch of stores to cease trading ivory, but which
continue to bear signage and slogans on their premises stating “Nationally Designated Ivory Specialist Store”
and “Ivory Specialty Store” require immediate action by relevant local government authorities to remove
such signage. For other accredited stores (in the second batch) listed as Category B and C for moderate orsevere violations of regulations, local management authorities should improve their management over theseoutlets to ensure that ivory products sold are of legal origin and in compliance with China’s ivory trading
regulations. Lastly, those failing to operate at designated venues should be investigated by the local Forest
Police and Commerce and Industry Department for possible prosecution for violation of existing regulations.

TRAF FIC BR IEFI NG PAPER

Recommendations19

3. The relative prevalence of illegal ivory market outlets has shifted from first-tier to second-tier cities.
Therefore, law enforcement and management need to respond to this trend with strengthened enforcement
in second-tier cities, particularly in antiques markets. Forest Police and the Commerce and Industry
Department should enhance their collaboration in public communications, e.g. public notifications on theprohibition of sale of illegal wildlife products, at key locations including market entrances, to warn of thelegal consequences of making illegal ivory purchases.
4. Internet administrators need to strengthen supervision of websites and e-commerce platforms, to ensurethat they take effective compliance measures and fulfill their legal obligations by timely removal of illegal
ivory sales information online, while actively co-operating with relevant government authorities in theinvestigation and collection of evidence.
5. Continued scrutiny and research needs to be carried out in order to counter traders opportunistically
exploring ways to move ivory out of China into neighboring markets with less scrutiny and continued legal
sales. Therefore, it is suggested that law enforcement agencies strengthen the crackdown on the illegal ivory
market and ivory movements, including trans-boundary co-operation, especially after 2018 (when the ivory
ban in China will be fully implemented).
6. During the physical market surveys, ivory dealers offering illegal ivory for sale were increasingly encouraging
new and potential customers to connect and make transactions on social media platforms. Ivory tradeon social media platforms is likely to become increasingly more prevalent in the future, therefore closemonitoring of platforms must continue, and go hand-in-hand with enforcement actions by platform
managers to remove illegal information and to shut down user accounts. Meanwhile, social media andthe courier industry, which are key facilitators of illegal ivory trade online, should increase their capacity
to identify illegal wildlife trade transactions. For the courier industry, real-name registration systems
could have tremendous benefit in efforts to intercept illegal ivory and other wildlife crimes, and should be
implemented swiftly. Real-name registration systems could dissuade traders from exploring illegal ways toliquidate their legal stocks, if the government was clear about how they will deal with remaining stocks.

20

8. Due to insufficient and distorted information
about the ivory ban, not all consumers areaware or fully understand the specifics of theban. Public awareness of fast-changing laws andregulations related to the ivory ban should be
increased, through different kinds of awarenessraising events to reach targeted consumer groups
and other segments of society. Many people do
not realize the threat that illegal ivory trade poses
to the survival of wild elephant populations,
therefore government authorities, privatesector enterprises and NGOs are encouraged todevelop additional targeted public campaigns.
Such targeted communications campaigns andbehavior change initiatives should be directed
at key ivory consumer market segments inorder to address any persistent demand forivory products.

©TRAFFIC

TRAF FIC BR IEFI NG PAPER

7. Prioritizing collaboration with prosecutors and the judiciary to establish evidence and increase theeffectiveness of case preparation would help
the settlement of illegal ivory cases. The aimof this effort should be to increase the rate ofprosecution, and potentially the transparencyof sentencing, thereby to increase the deterrent
effect of the law.

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to express thanks to the reviewers from WWF and TRAFFIC: Tom Milliken, Colman
O’Criodain, Yannick Kuehl, Fan Zhi Yong, Zhou Fei, and James Compton for their comments and advice on
improving draft versions of this report, as well as Richard Thomas, Julie Gray and Sammi Li for their great
support.
WWF UK, WWF US and GIZ on behalf of the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation andDevelopment (BMZ) and the German Federal Ministry for Environment, Nature Conservation, Building andNuclear Safety (BMUB) are gratefully thanked for financial support of this study.

References
CITES MA. (2014). China destroys 6.1 tons of ivory in public [in Chinese]. http://www.forestry.gov.cn/
bwwz/2788/content-651884.html. 07 January.
Guan, J. (2016). A report on endangered species online monitoring [in Chinese]. TRAFFIC. Unpublished.
Li, D.W. and Zheng, J.H. (2016). Ivory carving should be preserved. How can we survive if materials have to bechanged from ivory to bone? [In Chinese]. Southern Weekly. http://www.infzm.com/content/119174. 25 August.
SFA. (1993). A notice on verifying some endangered wild animals as China’s national protected species [inChinese]. http://www.arq.gov.cn/Article/flfg/jjf/nlzrzyhjbh/200701/8163.html. 14 April.
SFA. (2008). Notice on Strengthening the Management of Ivory and its Products [in Chinese]. http://www.forestry.
gov.cn/portal/main/govfile/13/govfile_1375.html. 16 December.
SFA. (2015). Document No.9. SFA-approved list on ivory processing and selling stores [in Chinese]. http://www.
forestry.gov.cn/main/444/content-764562.html. 29 April.
SFA. (2017). Document No.8. List of closed accredited ivory processing and selling outlets [in Chinese]. http://
www.forestry.gov.cn/main/4461/content-960596.html. 24 March.
The State Council. (2006). List of national intangible cultural heritage [in Chinese]. http://www.ihchina.
cn/3/10323.html. 20 May

Thouless, C., Dublin, H.T., Blanc, J., Skinner, D., Daniel, T., Taylor, R., Maisels, F., Frederick, H. and Bouche, P.
(2016). African Elephant Status Report 2016, Occasional Paper Series of the IUCN Species Survival Commission
60, IUCN/SSC Africa Elephant Specialist Group, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland 2016.
Xiao, Y., Guan, J. and Xu, L. (2017). Wildlife Cybercrime in China: E-commerce and social media monitoring in
2016. TRAFFIC Briefing paper. May 2017.
Xiao, Y. and Wang, J. (2015). Moving Target: tracking online sales of illegal wildlife products in China. TRAFFIC
Briefing Paper. March 2015.
Xu, Y., Xiao, Y., Guan, J. and Xu, L. (2016). An Act to Save African Elephants – A Ban on Commercial Ivory Tradein China. A Feasibility Study Briefing. September 2016.

TRAF FIC BR IEFI NG PAPER

The State Council Office. (2016). Circular of the General Office of the State Council on Phasing out the Commercial
Processing and Sales of Ivory and Ivory Products [in Chinese]. http://www.gov.cn/zhengce/content/2016-12/30/
content_5155017.htm. 30 December.

21

TRAFFIC, the wildlife trade monitoring network, is the leading non-governmental organization working globally on trade in wild
animals and plants in the context of both biodiversity conservation and sustainable development.

For further information contact:
TRAFFIC
Headquarters OfficeDavid Attenborough Building
Pembroke Street
Cambridge CB2 3QZ
UK
Telephone: (44) (0) 1223 277427
E-mail: traffic@traffic.org
Website: www.traffic.org
UK Registered Charity No. 1076722,
Registered Limited Company No. 3785518.

is a strategic alliance of