Trade and biodiversity conservation in Africa
Complementary roles of environmental provisions in preferential trade agreements and property rights
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 22355674 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Michael Tutu Boadu (0000-0003-2907-7717, University of Cape Coast, corresponding author), Camara Kwasi Obeng (0000-0003-2475-0300, University of Cape Coast) |
| Year | 2026 |
| Volume | 21 |
| Pages | 100419 |
| Publication date | 2026-05-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Cleaner and Responsible Consumption (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2666-7843 |
| Publisher | Elsevier BV (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1016/j.clrc.2026.100419 |
| OpenAlex | W7138972475 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 34 |
Biodiversity loss has become a major environmental concern in regions experiencing rapid trade integration, yet the role of trade agreements in shaping biodiversity outcomes remains insufficiently understood. This paper examines the effect of trade on biodiversity conservation in Africa and investigates whether environmental provisions in preferential trade agreements (PTAs) and property rights to natural resources jointly moderate this relationship. Using a novel dataset of 381 PTAs covering 46 African countries over the period 1995-2017 and a System-GMM framework. The results show that trade reduces biodiversity conservation in Africa. However, environmental provisions in preferential trade agreements (PTAs) help mitigate this effect and support biodiversity conservation. The impact of these provisions varies by design: restrictive provisions reduce biodiversity pressures, whereas liberal and aspirational provisions are associated with weaker outcomes. Domestic institutions also matter. Stronger property rights to natural resources significantly reinforce the biodiversity benefits of environmental provisions and shape the effects of different provision types. Biodiversity gains are most pronounced in countries with stronger property rights to natural resources and lower commodity dependence. The study therefore provides new evidence on how trade governance and domestic institutions can jointly support biodiversity conservation within a sustainable development framework. • Trade reduces biodiversity conservation in Africa • Environmental provisions in PTAs mitigate trade-related biodiversity loss • Restrictive provisions improve biodiversity outcomes more than liberal ones • Strong property rights strengthen biodiversity gains from PTA provisions • Biodiversity gains are larger in less commodity-dependent countries
Biodiversity · Biodiversity conservation · Commodity · Corporate governance · Measurement of biodiversity · Natural resource · Property rights · Sustainability · Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management · Energy, Environment, Economic Growth · Global trade, sustainability, and social impact
Biodiversity Loss Threatens Human Well-Being
Restoring natural forests is the best way to remove atmospheric carbon
International trade drives biodiversity threats in developing nations
The Struggle to Govern the Commons
Non-trade provisions in trade agreements and FDI
Decoupling for ecological sustainability
Unwelcome exchange
Does trade liberalization lead to environmental burden shifting in the global economy
Mapping the Trade and Environment Nexus
Diffusion Through Issue Linkage
When Do International Treaties Matter for Domestic Environmental Legislation
Hollow Ecology
The green side of protectionism
Property rights on genetic resources
Do environmental provisions in trade agreements make exports from developing countries greener
Property Rights Regimes and Natural Resources
Spatial analysis of selected biodiversity features in protected areas
The untapped potential of preferential trade agreements for climate governance
Greening up
Dilemma of Natural Resource Abundance
Institutional Failure in Resource Management
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |