ABSTRACT
In this chapter, I will discuss the ways in which the trafficking of animals should be addressed, as well as what can be done to improve the situation in Colombia and Norway. While criminalization may be an answer in some areas of the wild-life trade, in others, other preventative measures must be sought. There is a risk that criminalization of all wildlife trade may affect people differently, or even have adverse impact on some people. Criminalizing the poor may not be the right instrument to prevent them from hunting or abducting animals, whereas for people who engage in the trade for profit, the picture may look different, and the options must be there for more serious sanctioning. Depending on the risk of detection, the certainty of being punished quickly and the severity of penalties, punishment may have a deterrent effect. This could be the case in relation to organized crime. It should be noted, though, that given the multiplicity of offenders and consumers, there cannot be a single solution but many targeted to the specific groups. This is also the case in relation to other environmental crimes, as Wright (2011) observes:
Thus the perpetrators of TEC [Transnational Environmental Crime] include large-scale criminal organisations, loosely organised networks, small and ad hoc groups of associates, opportunistic criminals, corrupt officials and corporations. It is clear that this multiplicity of actors has a bearing upon the development of effective countermeasures, as a diverse range of perpetrators is likely to require a diverse range of policing methods and other policies.
(338) The different categories of offenders, whether opportunistic micro-abductors/traffickers (semi)professional organized middlemen/contractors, or those organizing/directing the trade, call for diverse responses.