Biological Conservation 243 (2020) 108431

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Biological Conservation
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/biocon

It's in the news: Characterising Indonesia's wild bird trade network from T
media-reported seizure incidents
⁎
Karlina Indraswaria, , Rachel S. Friedmanb, Richard Noskec, Chris R. Shepherdd, Duan Biggse,f,g,h,
Connie Susilawatia, Clevo Wilsona
a
School of Economics and Finance, QUT Business School, Brisbane 4000, Australia
b
School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Queensland, St. Lucia, Brisbane, Australia
c
Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation Science, University of Queensland, St. Lucia, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia
d
Monitor Conservation Research Society, Box 200, Big Lake Ranch, B.C., Canada
e
Environmental Futures Research Institute, Griffith University, Nathan, Brisbane, Queensland 4111, Australia
f
ARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, Centre for Biodiversity & Conservation Science, School of Biological Sciences, University of Queensland, St. Lucia,
Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia
g
Department of Conservation Ecology and Entomology, Stellenbosch University, Private Bag X1, Matieland 7602, South Africa
h
Centre for Complex Systems in Transition, School of Public Leadership, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch 7600, South Africa

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Devising strategic conservation plans to curb Indonesia's wild bird trade is pivotal to protect species. However,
Bird trade, Indonesia limited understanding of nation-wide trade network patterns could hinder this urgently necessary action.
Trade network Currently, available information either have restricted geographical scope or is focused on trans-national ana-
Songbirds lysis, limiting understanding of domestic-level nation-wide spatial movement and patterns of traded birds. In this
Parrots
paper, we use media-reported local seizures to understand patterns in a domestic-level wild bird trade network.
Cockatoos
Indonesia's bird trade network involved 18 countries (including Indonesia), all 34 provinces, and 132,945
confiscated birds from 157 species. Songbirds (Passeriformes) (83.8% of all birds) dominated the trade, with the
highest number of birds in demand for songbird competitions and listed as of conservation concern in the IUCN
Red List. The most important region and the main transit point was Jakarta, the most important source of birds
was Lampung and the most important destination for birds was West Java. Malaysia was the most important
international source of songbirds (mostly smuggled into Indonesia), while the Philippines was the main inter-
national destination for the smuggling of Parrots and Cockatoos. Seizures mostly occur near transit and desti-
nation regions, and fewer near source regions. Despite the identified patterns, it is likely a small portion of the
actual size of Indonesia's bird trade. This paper provided a low-cost approach for a rapid wildlife trade network
analysis and could be easily used to identify trade patterns of other taxa in other countries.

1. Introduction
The wildlife trade devastates species populations (Nijman et al.,
2018; Ribeiro et al., 2019; Ribeiro et al., 2019; Sodhi et al., 2016, 2008;
Symes et al., 2018). This is particularly apparent in countries where the
domestic market for wildlife is present due to high demand, high
profitability and cultural acceptance (Hinsley et al., 2018; Nyaki et al.,
2014; Ribeiro et al., 2019). Indonesia is an example of such a country
(Burivalova et al., 2017; Jepson and Ladle, 2011). Bird keeping has
made the bird trade highly lucrative, with the presence of active mar-
kets country-wide and the rise of economically profitable songbird
competitions (Burivalova et al., 2017; Eaton et al., 2015; Iskandar and
Iskandar, 2015). Most of the millions of birds traded in Indonesia an-
nually are predicted to have been harvested from the wild in an un-
sustainable manner causing a rapid population decline for many of
Indonesia's native bird species (Bergin et al., 2017; Harrison et al.,
2016; Jepson and Ladle, 2009; Rentschlar et al., 2018). In 2018, In-
donesia's government revised its list of protected species and, in the
case of songbirds, increased the number of protected species to 557
species. However, three months prior to the release of this law, pro-
tection over five highly harvested species was rescinded due to lobbying
by songbird communities (Chng et al., 2018a, 2018b; Leupen et al.,

⁎
Corresponding author at: Business School Queensland University of Technology, Z Block, QUT Gardens Point Campus, 2 George St, Brisbane 4000, Australia.
E-mail addresses: karlina.indraswari@hdr.qut.edu.au (K. Indraswari), r.friedman@uq.edu.au (R.S. Friedman), rnoske@tpg.com.au (R. Noske),
chris.shepherd@mcrsociety.org (C.R. Shepherd), d.biggs@griffith.edu.au (D. Biggs), c.susilawati@qut.edu.au (C. Susilawati), clevo.wilson@qut.edu.au (C. Wilson).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108431
Received 17 June 2019; Received in revised form 1 January 2020; Accepted 23 January 2020
0006-3207/ © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
K. Indraswari, et al.
2018; Mongabay, 2018). The communities believed that the population
of bird species currently owned and traded are not under threat due to
the presence of breeding practices. However, information on In-
donesia's bird populations in the wild and those that have entered the
trade are currently limited to certain locations and are not available
nation-wide (Chng and Eaton, 2016; Harris et al., 2015; Marshall et al.,
2019; Nijman et al., 2017). This restricts the ability to gauge the true
size of unsustainable trade. Evidence to assess whether Indonesia's
harvest of wild birds is bringing about a rapid population decline na-
tion-wide is therefore urgently required.
The bird trade trend in some countries is similar to that of
Indonesia, the domestic trade is potentially a larger contributor to bird
population declines compared to trans-national trade (Berkunsky et al.,
2017; Martin, 2018; Pires, 2012). Similarly, as for Indonesia, informa-
tion to support this assumption and understand the true extent of the
domestic bird trade is often lacking (Ribeiro et al., 2019). This hinders
strategic planning to deliver rapid and optimal response needed to
protect species. Commonly used to measure the extent of wildlife trade
and its trade routes are publicly available databases (Challender et al.,
2015; Heinrich et al., 2016; Patel et al., 2015; Ribeiro et al., 2019).
However, extractable information available from these databases are
usually heavily reliant on English-based sources and are focused on
trans-national trade (Patel et al., 2015; Ribeiro et al., 2019). Some
databases provide information limited to certain geographical regions.
Information from the Convention on International Trade in Endangered
Species (CITES) of Wild Fauna database for example, is limited to sig-
natory countries and is dependent on different levels of reporting efforts
of its members (Phelps et al., 2011; Ribeiro et al., 2019; Siriwat and
Nijman, 2018). Similarly, work done using the UN Office on Drugs and
Crime's World Wildlife Seizures Database (UNDOC WISE) and
HealthMap database provide an analysis at trans-national level, with
only limited domestic level data (Patel et al., 2015). Data could po-
tentially be acquired from non-government organisations (NGOs) and
government organisations (Challender et al., 2015): but these data are
often scattered and could entail complicated methods to organise in a
common data base as well as difficulties in obtaining multiple usage
permissions. These limitations potentially make data gathering to fa-
cilitate a crucially important understanding of the numerous inputs into
the domestic-level wildlife trade, a difficult task. Published work on
market surveys, interviews and assessment of expert opinions are al-
ternative approaches which can be used to understand a country's do-
mestic trade, yet for such approaches to be conducted for several taxa
and on a nation-wide level is likely to be a very costly process. More-
over, given countries with a high level of domestic trade tend to be
those with a high biodiversity but limited resources for research, spe-
cies protection and conservation is problematic. Therefore, to comple-
ment currently available information, a low-cost approach is needed
which can deliver a reasonably rapid acquisition of information which
covers several species and with a large spatial distribution.
There has been an increasing use of local news reports on wildlife
seizures to acquire the patterns of a country's domestic wildlife trade
and/or wild-harvested resources (Challender et al., 2015; Cheng et al.,
2017; Nijman, 2015; Rosen and Smith, 2010; Siriwat and Nijman,
2018). Local news on seizures - either written in the local language or in
English - commonly provides valuable information on trade routes and
traded species at domestic levels (Hansen et al., 2012; Nijman, 2015).
Some concerns arise from the usage of such sources for data analysis,
such as the dependency on reporting rates and the potential for in-
accuracy and bias in the reporting. Hence data extraction needs to be
carried out systematically and is coupled with cross-checking from
multiple reporting agencies, these risks can be reduced (Nijman, 2015;
Siriwat and Nijman, 2018). Seizure news reports have successfully
provided a deeper understanding of trade dynamics, mapped trade
routes and identified the source, transit and destination hotspots at
domestic level for tigers (Stoner et al., 2016), pangolins (Challender
et al., 2015; Cheng et al., 2017) and Siamese rosewood (Siriwat and
2
Biological Conservation 243 (2020) 108431
Nijman, 2018). Seizure news reports have also been used for a global
assessment of ivory trade, which resulted in conservation actions and
further demand reduction (Underwood et al., 2013).
In this study we explore the breadth of information that can be
provided by news reported seizures to assess: 1) patterns present in
Indonesia's bird trade routes, 2) identify hotspot regions of high priority
and 3) assess whether current confiscation efforts have optimally ad-
dressed areas of main concern. This research is then used to highlight
the urgency for conservation action in response to what is reported to
be a rampant bird trade in Indonesia. This research focuses on the bird
trade in Indonesia but could generally be applied to trade route analysis
of other countries given regular reporting in news sources on con-
fiscation of wildlife. Domestic level analysis of the bird trade that covers
several species and a wide spatial scope is pivotal to provide informa-
tion for policy formulation, program implementation and conservation
strategies aimed at protecting species and curbing illegal and un-
sustainable trade.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Study site
Indonesia consists of 34 provinces and has the fourth highest
number of bird species in the world, with 1777 recorded species, of
which 515 are endemic (BurungIndonesia, 2018). A total of 30 species
are listed by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)
Red list as critically endangered (CR), 48 species as endangered (EN),
93 species as vulnerable (VU), 243 species as near threatened (NT), and
11 species as data deficient (DD). Indonesia has the world's second
highest number of globally threatened species (Birdlife, 2019; IUCN,
2019), and currently, as many as 557 species are currently listed in
Indonesia's protected species list (KLHK, 2018).
2.2. Data collection
Data on media-reported bird seizures were obtained from online
news articles published over a 10-year period. Data collected were
seizures that occur between 1 January 2010 to 13 November 2019,
using the Google News search engine. Searches were carried out
iteratively in three-month periods, until the selected keywords (in both
English and Indonesian) detected several media reported seizures
during the search period. The keywords “Indonesia bird trade”
(Perdagangan Burung), “Indonesia bird smuggling” (Penyelundupan
Burung), “Indonesia bird seizure” (Penyitaan Burung/ Sita Burung),
“Confiscating bird” (Amankan burung) and “Indonesia bird police/
natural resources agency enforcement” (Polisi burung/BKSDA burung)
were most effective. A maximum of 20 Google search result pages per
three-month period were scanned, and items on bird seizures in
Indonesia were recorded. The news source that contained most details
was used as the main source and was cross-checked with at least two
other sources to ensure consistent reporting. When two sources con-
tained different information, the method that was used to obtain data
was listed in the “Data extraction” phase.
2.3. Data extraction
Extracted data were used to identify (1) the regions involved in the
trade route and (2) the volume of birds confiscated at, originating from,
transiting through or destined for each region. For regions involved in
the trade route, they were considered as part of the trade route when a
confiscation occurred in the region and/or when a media report men-
tioned it as an origin, destination or transit location of a bird seizure
incident involving Indonesia or its provinces. Regions identified were
categorised into national (i.e. Indonesian provinces) or trans-national
(i.e. other countries), and the transportation route for each seizure in-
cident was mapped. For each species confiscated, they were first
K. Indraswari, et al.
categorised into three main order groups: songbirds (Passeriformes),
parrots and cockatoos (Psittaciformes), and other orders. They were
then classified into the most specific taxa information available. When
articles did not mention a bird taxon, species were recorded as “birds”
only. Such recordings were included to identify the volume of con-
fiscated birds throughout the search period but were excluded from
order-based analyses.
The volume of birds traded were recorded according to the number
mentioned in identified articles. Occasionally there would be articles
mentioning confiscated birds but with only vague indications of value.
If the numbers of birds differed between articles on the same seizure,
the number was averaged and rounded down, while referring to the
main article for other details. If there was no mention of the number of
traded birds, the volume was listed as one. If an approximate number
was mentioned, the volume was listed as the lowest value of that ap-
proximation. For example, if the article mentioned “hundreds”, the
volume was listed as “100”, and thousands as “1000”. When the taxa
were mentioned but number of birds were not, to allow inclusion of
analysis the bird was listed as one. When only the total number of birds
was mentioned, and the group consisted of several taxa, the volume of
birds was divided equally among the identified birds in the group. This
number was then used for the analysis. However, the number is not
listed as the recorded volume of bird species listed in the supplementary
material.
All identified bird species were checked for their conservation status
and population status in the International Union of Conservation of
Nature (IUCN) Red List (IUCN, 2019) and in Indonesia's protection
status list based on the 2018 regulation by the Ministry of Environment
and Forestry (KLHK, 2018).
All data were recorded in English. In instances where the news ar-
ticle was in Indonesian only, the first author provided the translation
required for information extraction.
2.4. Data analysis
Data analysis was carried out in three phases:
1) Species accumulation curve phase which assessed the likelihood of
the addition of species along with the addition of seizure informa-
tion.
2) Analysis of the trade network: mapping of trade routes and de-
termining the role of each region.
3) assessment of whether current confiscation efforts have optimally
focused on regions at the start of the trade chain.
2.4.1. Species accumulation curve
The species accumulation curve was created by treating every sei-
zure incident as a separate observation and analysed as to whether an
increase in seizure incidents will cause an increase in the number of
species (Ugland et al., 2003). A species accumulation curve that nears
its asymptotic richness indicates that it is close to saturation and will
not increase number of observed species with increase in recorded
seizure incidents. The species accumulation curve was extrapolated
using the “random” method to achieve a closer approximation of the
curve and was fitted using a logistic approach.
2.4.2. Trade route mapping and hotspot measurement using social network
analysis
This study used social network analysis (Wasserman and Faust,
1994) to map Indonesia's current bird trade network. Social network
analysis maps a network based on the level of connectivity of each of its
nodes (Freeman and White, 1991; Patel et al., 2015; Wasserman and
Faust, 1994) and has been used to identify country roles in global trade
routes (Heinrich et al., 2016; Patel et al., 2015; Reino et al., 2017).
Social network connectivity identified in the analysis represents the
importance of a node in connecting one node to another within a
3
Biological Conservation 243 (2020) 108431
network (Faggini et al., 2019; Halkos and Tsilika, 2017). In this study, a
region was made equivalent to a node, and the node's connectivity was
measured through a region's centrality values (Borgatti et al., 2009).
Three centrality values were used: in-degree centrality (which measures
the number of incoming connections), out-degree centrality (the
number of outgoing connections) and betweenness centrality (the
number of transit connections).
Social network analysis maps networks from a single connection by
connecting two nodes with an incoming and outgoing connection.
Information on wildlife transportation routes may involve more than
one connection, therefore for this analysis, shipments were broken
down into single connections to allow connections to be measured se-
parately. For example, a shipment that travelled from Jambi to Jakarta
with a transit connection in Lampung, would be broken down into two
connections: one between Jambi (origin location with an outgoing
connection) and Lampung (a destination location with an incoming
connection), and one between Lampung (now the origin location with
an outgoing connection) and Jakarta (a destination location with an
incoming connection). A more detailed explanation of how shipment
connections were measured and mapped can be found in Patel et al.
(2015). After connectivity were identified and centrality values mea-
sured, patterns that emerge from identified connections between nodes
were clustered using the Walktrap algorithm (Pons and Latapy, 2006)
with a maximum of a 5-path connection between nodes. This meant
that nodes that had tendency to have a connection between each other
were clustered in a single group. However these connections did not
exceed five path connections, or exceed the presence of four transit
nodes within a single path.
2.4.3. Identification of hotspots and regions of trade network importance
For identification of hotspot regions, all centrality measures (in-
degree, out-degree and betweenness) were normalised with a range
from 0 to 1 to allow comparison and minimise variation. For each
measurement, the higher the centrality value, the higher number of
incoming, outgoing, or transit connections are present involving a node
(or in this case, a region). A region's activity level is based on combining
its normalised centrality measures with the normalised value for vo-
lume of birds that are shipped with each seizure incident (the volume of
birds seized was normalised to the range 0 to 1). The calculation of the
normalised values for the hotspot areas are as follows:
Source hotspot
= (In −degree centrality+destination volume) − betweenness centrality
Sink hotspot
= (Out−degree centrality+origin volume) − betweenness centrality
Transit hotspot = betweenness centrality
Total hotspot value = source hotspot + sink hotspot + transit hotspot
Regions with high activity levels are considered hotspot locations.
Measurement of the total hotspot value was carried out for all the birds
altogether (that is, not distinguishing order groups). The separate
analysis for each order group (songbirds, parrots and cockatoos, and
other orders) can be seen in this article's supplementary material. The
total of hotspot values may exceed 1.0, potentially creating a difficulty
for comparisons between regions. Therefore, values were once again
normalised to create weighted values for each variable that ranged from
0 to 1, to facilitate comparisons. The closer the sum value is to 1, the
more important it is for the flow of Indonesia's wild bird trade network.
2.4.4. Assessing efficacy of enforcement action
To easily understand whether seizures of identified bird families
have optimally been conducted in a source hotspot region, normalised
values of the volume of individuals categorised into the family-level
K. Indraswari, et al.
taxa for each seizure region were mapped out in a Non-Metric
Multidimensional Scaling (NMDS) ordination. An NMDS ordination
allows a clearer understanding of data through mapping it out so that
the patterns of distribution emerge. An efficient seizure would be car-
ried out at the location closest to its source. Therefore, regions were
labelled based on their source hotspot values on the NMDS ordination.
We iteratively performed the NMDS analysis and found that NMDS
performed with k = 2 and permutation = 100 was most descriptive. It
was then assessed whether bird families are most likely to be seized in
these source hotspot regions or further down the line of the transpor-
tation chain. The source hotspot values were distinguished as follows:
1) above 0.5: very high source hotspot region; 2) 0.1–0.5: high source
hotspot region; 3) 0.01–0.1: moderate source hotspot region; 4) below
00.1 low source hotspot region.
All analysis was performed using the R Studio version 3.2.3. Species
accumulation curve and NMDS analysis was done using package Vegan
(Oksanen et al., 2007). Measurement of centrality was done using the
network package (Butts, 2008) and mapping of the trade network was
done using the igraph package (Csárdi and Nepusz, 2006).
3. Results
3.1. Regions involved in the trade network
We recorded 321 seizure incidents in Indonesia that took place in 32
out of its 34 provinces with at least 132,945 birds confiscated. This
study did not find seizure records for provinces North Kalimantan and
West Sulawesi. The highest volume of birds confiscated was in
Lampung (Fig. 1), where 48,490 birds (36.5% of all birds) were seized,
followed by Banten (34,285 birds or 25.8%) and East Java (9080 birds
or 6.8%). The highest frequency of seizures was in East Java with 61
seizures (19% of all seizure incidents), followed by Lampung with 32
seizures (10%) and West Kalimantan with 23 seizures (7.2%). The
highest average proportion of birds confiscated per single seizure was in
Banten (1558 birds), followed by Lampung (1515 birds) and West Nusa
Tenggara (995 birds).
Fig. 1. Heat map of volume of birds that were confiscated in Indonesian provinces. Provinces with the top five highest volume of birds entering or exiting a region are
listed in bold with numbers written inside yellow squares. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version
of this article.)
4
Biological Conservation 243 (2020) 108431
The highest proportion of bird orders involved in the trade network
were songbirds, comprising 83.8% of all confiscated birds. Parrots and
cockatoos were the second most trafficked group, comprising around
5.4% of all confiscated birds and other orders comprised only 0.9% of
confiscated birds. Unidentified orders made up 9.9%. The specific
number of birds seized for each order can be seen in the supplementary
material.
The most frequently used routes and largest volume of birds trans-
ported on the routes were birds from Lampung (Table 1). Forty-two
routes that were recorded were used to transport birds more than once
and 82 routes recorded were used only once. The most frequently used
route was Lampung to Banten, followed by Lampung to Jakarta. The
largest volume of birds transported were from Lampung to Banten
followed by Lampung to West Java. Also frequently used import routes
were from Malaysia, either to Riau Islands or West Kalimantan; from
Kalimantan, Sulawesi and Papua into East Java and a route from West
Nusa Tenggara to Bali.
3.1.1. Important hotspot regions in Indonesia's bird trade network
From the top 20 hotspot regions, Jakarta was found to be the most
important and was also the top hotspot transit region for Indonesia's
bird trade network. Lampung was the top source hotspot region and
West Java the top sink region. East Java did not have the highest value
in any of the measurements of trade importance nor did it have high
source hotspot values. However, it is, nevertheless, an important des-
tination and transit region not only as an important trade route but also
as a region with the third highest hotspot value. Malaysia and Maluku
were identified as having negative hotspot sink values, which indicates
their role as origin and transit regions is more important that as a
destination region. Malaysia is also found to be only trans-national
region to be listed in the top hotspot regions. Other important regions
include Riau and Jambi as source regions; Banten and Central Java as
destination region and North Sumatra and South Sulawesi as hotspot
transit regions (Table 2).
Transportation routes for all three orders were found to have dis-
tinct patterns. First there has been an establishment of prominent
K. Indraswari, et al. Biological Conservation 243 (2020) 108431

Table 1
Most commonly encountered route throughout the study period alongside the volume of birds transported.
Rank Route Frequency of routes Volume transported Average volume in a route

1 Lampung - Banten 13 36,816 2832

2 Lampung - Jakarta 12 9053 754
3 Malaysia - West Kalimantan 12 3638 303
4 S. Kalimantan - East Java 9 5275 586
5 Papua - East Java 8 265 33
6 S. Sulawesi - East Java 8 1754 219
7 West Nusa Tenggara - Bali 8 11,145 1393
8 Banten - Jakarta 7 18,171 2596
9 East Java - Jakarta 7 3205 458
10 South Sumatra - Lampung 7 4443 635
11 Malaysia - Riau Islands 6 7096 1183
12 Lampung - West Java 4 23,030 5758

transportation route groups centred around Jakarta, East Java and
Lampung. Jakarta is found to be the main entry point from Sumatra and
East Java the entry point from other parts of Indonesia. West Java,
although having highest sink value for all regions, did not have high
source or transit values. Rather, West Java was frequently shown to be a
sink region and part of the transportation route centred around
Lampung or Jakarta (Fig. 2).
The regions identified as important differed between order groups.
For songbirds, there are two established routes with short transporta-
tion connections. The first is centred around western Indonesia, with
hotspots being Jakarta, Lampung, Banten and West Java (Lampung and
Jakarta have the same hotspot value). The second route is centred
around central and eastern Indonesia, with the main hotspot being East
Java. For songbirds, large volumes were found to have been transported
from Lampung into Java through Banten and West Java, West Nusa
Tenggara into Bali, South Kalimantan into East Java and Malaysia into
West Kalimantan and Riau Islands (Table 1 for additional information
on routes). Trans-national bird trade connections found in the form of
export from Indonesia to Hong Kong and Belgium through Singapore,
via imports from Malaysia, and from Jakarta to France, Bahrain and
Saudi Arabia (Fig. 2).
For parrots and cockatoos, the most established transportation route
involves source from Eastern Indonesia, transit involving Sulawesi and
trans-national export into the Philippines. Of the four hotspot provinces
- Jakarta, East Java, Lampung and West Java - the first three are mostly
are transit regions for transportation routes with short route connec-
tions. West Java and North Sumatra are the main sink regions, while
Jakarta, East Java and Yogyakarta are also found to be transit regions
for trans-national connections exporting birds outside of Indonesia.
Parrots and cockatoos have been recorded destined for Hong Kong
through Yogyakarta then Singapore; for Taiwan and Thailand through
Surabaya and for China and Kuwait through Jakarta. For other orders,
there were three main established groups of transportation, one centred
around Lampung and Jakarta, one around East Java and central and
eastern parts of Indonesia, and one around Central Java. The source
regions were mainly Lampung, Papua, West Papua and Maluku, with
the sink regions being West Java and Jakarta. Jakarta, East Java, South
Sulawesi and Central Java are the main transit regions (Fig. 2).
Transportation connection routes for other orders were smaller than the
other two order groups. Transportation connection routes for songbirds
were the largest in terms of use. As well, the number of routes and
volume of birds transported were also largest for songbirds. Details of
the centrality and hotspot values for each order group can be accessed
in the supplementary material.
3.2. Bird orders involved in the trade network
We identified 62,181 individuals to species level (46.8%), 6765
individuals (5.1%) to genus level, 80 individuals (0.1%) to sub-family
level and 15,305 individuals (11.5%) to family level, and 27,128 in-
dividuals (20.4%) to order level. However we could not identify some
21,486 birds (16.2%). As much as 157 bird species were identified from
the recorded seizures, although based on the species accumulation
curve this number would most likely increase with addition of recorded

Table 2
Top twenty regions with highest hotspot along with its source, sink and betweenness values.
Rank Region Source Sink Betweenness Hotspot value Normalised hotspot value

1 Jakarta 0.00 0.97 1.00 1.97 1.00

2 Lampung 1.00 0.37 0.15 1.51 0.77
3 East Java 0.01 0.45 0.62 1.08 0.55
4 West Java 0.06 1.00 0.00 1.07 0.54
5 Banten 0.27 0.68 0.01 0.96 0.49
6 Central Java 0.04 0.51 0.10 0.66 0.33
7 Malaysia 0.48 −0.12 0.25 0.61 0.31
8 Maluku 0.46 −0.09 0.16 0.53 0.27
9 North Sumatra 0.06 0.20 0.26 0.52 0.27
10 South Sulawesi 0.06 0.18 0.26 0.50 0.26
11 South Sumatra 0.30 0.13 0.05 0.48 0.25
12 West Nusa Tenggara 0.16 0.26 0.06 0.48 0.24
13 Bali 0.05 0.28 0.09 0.42 0.21
14 Riau 0.35 0.02 0.05 0.42 0.21
15 Jambi 0.35 0.06 0.00 0.41 0.21
16 West Kalimantan 0.16 0.15 0.00 0.32 0.16
17 Riau Islands 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.30 0.15
18 North Sulawesi 0.11 0.16 0.02 0.30 0.15
19 South Kalimantan 0.17 0.08 0.04 0.29 0.15
20 Yogyakarta 0.09 0.06 0.13 0.28 0.14

Bold text indicate the highest value for each measurement.

5
K. Indraswari, et al.
Fig. 2. Identified transportation route for (a) Songbirds (b) Parrots and cockatoos and (c) Other orders.
seizures (Fig. 3). From the identified species, 47 (29%) were listed in
the IUCN Red List as those of conservation concern; 15 (9.6%) were
identified as near threatened; 13 (8.3%) as vulnerable; 10 (6.4%) as
endangered; 8 (5.1%) as critically endangered and one as data defi-
cient. Seventy-three (46.5%) of the seized species are listed in In-
donesia's national protected list (KLHK, 2018). One species however
was listed under a different name. The silver-eared mesia (Leiothrix
argentauris) is listed under the scientific name of the Sumatran mesia
(Leiothrix laurinae).
From the seized order groups, songbirds had the highest number of
species of conservation concern, while parrots and cockatoos had the
highest number of species protected under Indonesia's protected species
list. The top five families in the songbird group had a higher number of
confiscated birds than the highest rated family for both cockatoos and
6
Biological Conservation 243 (2020) 108431
parrots and other order groups. The family with the highest number of
seized birds were old-world flycathcers (Muscicapidae). For parrots and
cockatoos, out of the three families identified, parrots (Psittaculidae)
had the highest seizure volume. For other orders Doves and Pigeons
(Columbidae) had the highest volume, followed by hawks and eagles
(Accipitride), pheasants (Phasianidae) and cassowaries (Casuaridae).
Not all bids that were identified up to family level could be identified
up to species level. Songbirds had the highest proportion of birds
identified to species level (68%), while the least were parrots and
cockatoos (42%) (Table 3).
3.3. Optimisation of seizure efforts for bird species
The likelihood of seizures of bird families are more prominent in
K. Indraswari, et al.
Fig. 3. Species accumulation curve for species recorded from identified seizure incidents showing a steady increase and not nearing an asymptote.
some regions than others. Birds that are most seized in source hotspots
and mainly in Lampung (Table 2), are songbirds, laughingthrushes
(Leiothrichidae), weavers (Ploceidae), pipits and wagtails (Mota-
cillidae), and finches (Estrildidae). Highest seizures in the second
highest source hotspot region of Banten, consisted of white-eyes (Zos-
teropidae). For Central Kalimantan top seizure rates were for pheasants
(Phasianidae), for South Sulawesi eagles and hawks (Accipitridae), for
West Papua cockatoos (Cacatuidae) and for West Kalimantan old-world
flycatchers (Muscicapidae). Birds such as true finches (Fringilidae),
shrikes (Laniidae), old world orioles (Oriolidae), and larks (Alaudidae)
are likely to be seized together but not in any one distinct region. While
sunbirds (Nectariniidae), pigeons and doves (Columibdae), Tits (Par-
idae), Wablers (Cisticolidae), bulbuls (Pycnonotidae), and songbirds
and birds (unidentified to family level) are also likely to be seized to-
gether, the incidence is low in source hotspot regions (Riau Islands and
West Sumatra). Seizure near locations most likely as destination regions
also occurs for thrushes (Turdidae), starlings (Sturnidae), leafbirds
(Chloropsidae), and parrots (Psittaculidae) (Fig. 4).
4. Discussion
The size and growth of Indonesia's bird trade and its role in the
global trade network is an emerging concern. Analysis of patterns and
trade routes acquired from seizure data can provide valuable insights
(UNODC, 2016) to an understanding of Indonesia's clandestine bird
7
Biological Conservation 243 (2020) 108431
market and network, both in terms of the domestic level trade and also
its role the regional and global trade. Previously known information
acquired from on the ground short term surveys (Chng et al., 2015;
Chng et al., 2018a, 2018b; Chng and Eaton, 2016; Shepherd, 2006)
recorded particularly higher numbers of bird species for sale in market
locations (up to more than 200 species). This study has recorded the
trade in 132,945 individual birds. However, less than half were iden-
tified up to species level, around 16.8% were unable to be identified at
all, and the remaining was identified up to order, family or genus level.
The species accumulation curve shown that the number of species re-
corded would most likely increase with an increase in seizure records
(Fig. 3), therefore, remains species that occur in the trade however is
yet to be detected. Information acquired from existing market survey
results, along with results from this study are most likely a gross un-
derstatement of the size of Indonesia's bird trade.
Known is that over the period which data was collected, 18 species
have undergone population declines causing up listing in the IUCN Red
List, and three species were not assessed until 2016, where post as-
sessment were instantly categorised as near threatened (Psittunus cya-
nurus), vulnerable (Acridotheres javanicus) and critically endangered
(Acridotheres melanopterus). Three species (Pycnonotus zeylanicus,
Garrulax ruffifrons and Chloropsis sonnerati) have even been up listed
twice in the past 3 years and the blue-winged leafbird (Chloropsis co-
chinchinensis) has been up listed from ‘near threated’ to ‘endangered’ in
a single year (IUCN, 2019). The consequence of Indonesia's bird trade
K. Indraswari, et al. Biological Conservation 243 (2020) 108431

Table 3
List of identified families with the highest volume of confiscated birds for each order group.
Rank Family Seized Identified birds IUCN Red List status Indonesia protection status

Number of species Proportion of seized birds CR EN VU NT Total

Passeriformes (Total) 111,431 87 68% 5 4 2 8 19 20a

1 Muscicapidae 11,940 5 99% – – – – – –
2 Cisticolidae 10,069 2 78% – – 1 1 3
3 Chloropseidae 8678 4 100% – 2 – – 2 –
4 Paridae 7353 1 1 – – – – – –
5 Nectariniidae 7298 4 4% – – – – – –
Other families 31,699 70 70% 5 2 2 7 16 13a
Mixed speciesb 27,708 –
Unidentified 6736
Psittaciformes (Total) 7149 30 42% 1 3 3 5 12 28
1 Psittaculidae 5823 20 35% – 2 1 4 7 21
2 Cacatuidae 1129 6 71% 1 1 1 1 4 6
3 Psittacidae 124 2 100% – – 1 – 1 1
Unidentified 73 – 1%
Other orders (Total) 1229 41 66% 2 3 8 2 15 26
1 Columbidae 479 5 87% 1 – 1 2 2
2 Accipitridae 213 10 76% – 1 – – 1 9
3 Phasianidae 189 7 82% – 1 1 2 4 3
4 Casuariidae 161 1 100% – – – – – 1
5 Bucerotidae 92 6 73% – – 4 4 5
Other families 95 12 53% 1 1 2 – 4 6
Mixed speciesb 8968 –
Unidentified birds 4167
Total sum 132,945

Note: Listed alongside is the number of identified bird species, the proportion of birds identified to species level for each family, its IUCN Red List status
(CR = Critically Endangered, EN = Endangered, VU = Vulnerable, NT = Near Threatened), and its national protected status (KLHK, 2018).
Bold text inidcate total birds of each of the measured order groups.
a
One species, the silver-eared mesia (Leiothrix argentauris) listed with the scientific name Leiotrix laurinae.
b
Birds recorded from seizures confiscating groups of birds without details of proportion.

are silent forests. The geographical scope of the trade (through the trade
network mapped in this work) and species identified as having been
involved in this trade shows the high level of conservation action that is
needed to combat Indonesia's rampant bird trade.
4.1. Birds involved in Indonesia's bird trade
Several of the most seized bird families in this work are those that
are in demand driven by presence of bird competition and communities
(Heikal, 2017; Turut, 2012). The records of most confiscated birds are
songbirds with five of the highest confiscated families those in high
demand for songbird competitions (Iskandar and Iskandar, 2015; Lee
et al., 2016; Sano et al., 2019; Turut, 2012). The old-world flycatcher
family (Muscacipiade) contains two species, the oriental magpie robin
and the white-rumped shama which are most in demand for songbird
competitions. Birds of this family have been smuggled in large numbers
from Malaysia to Indonesia (Table 1) and there have also been records
of smuggling between other south east Asian nations (Chng and Eaton,
2016; Leupen et al., 2018) (Fig. 2). The white-rumped shama was one
of the birds which had protection rescinded in 2018 due to lobbying
from songbird owner communities (Marshall et al., 2019; Mongabay,
2018). However, seizures, market and field survey information show a
rapid decline in this species caused by outsourcing and illegal smug-
gling. Two of the top five families - the leafbirds (Chloropsidae) and
Cistocolidae warblers (mainly the bar-winged prinia) – have members
listed in the IUCN Red List due to over harvesting (Chng et al., 2017;
IUCN, 2019). There are claims of presence of active captive bred op-
erations in Indonesia for both families. However, for the leafbirds, de-
spite presence of operations, captive breeding attempts has had a very
low success rate causing an ongoing need for parental restock of wild
harvested birds (Asosiasi Penangkar Burung Nusantara, Asosiasi Pe-
nangkar Burung dan Unggas Indonesia, Pers.Comm., 2019). Sunbirds
(Nectariniidae), the fifth highest confiscated species, has recently
emerged as a competition bird. Despite its singing ability not prized as
much as the white-rumped shama, sunbirds are said to be very attrac-
tive, unique-looking and relatively cheap to buy, facilitating the growth
in demand (Heikal, 2017; Turut, 2012). The interest in sunbirds started
within small communities and continues to grow into a competition
category of its own in songbird competitions. Similar threats exist for
members of the white-eye family (Chng et al., 2017; Heikal, 2017; Lee
et al., 2016). Said to be small, attractive and easy to care for, these birds
are frequently confiscated in seizures (see, supplementary material).
These newly emerging trends show that potential threat may be faced
by many bird families.
The trade in parrots and cockatoos – although known for many
years - continues to be rampant, with Eastern Indonesia as the main
source of birds (Cahill et al., 2006; Cottee-Jones et al., 2014; Morse,
2018; ProFauna, 2008). There is growing trend in the sale of the parrots
and cockatoos order group as well as the other orders group, via online
sale platforms (Gunawan et al., 2017; Iqbal, 2016, 2015; Krishnasamy
and Stoner, 2016a). For the species in the Hawk and Eagle family
(Accipitridae), emerging online communities has providing platforms
for the sharing of interests in these birds and thus creating further de-
mand for them (Gunawan et al., 2017; Iqbal, 2016). The demand for
hawks and eagles is not limited to Indonesia: sales have been recorded
outside the country with routes identified in this study showing the
presence of a trans-national trade (Krishnasamy and Stoner, 2016a,
2016b). While the confiscation level has not reached that of songbirds,
the volume is nevertheless at a level which generates considerable
concern.
4.2. Indonesia's bird trade transportation route: both a global and domestic
concern
Data sourced from this study identifies the presence of both global
and domestic level trade in birds. Despite a temporary decrease in de-
mand for birds after the 2005 European ban on bird trade (Nijman,
2010) and the decline of bird trade in Indonesia due to outbreak of

8
K. Indraswari, et al. Biological Conservation 243 (2020) 108431

Fig. 4. NMDS ordination plotting species and regions (provinces or countries) where species would most likely be seized. The different colour and shapes indicate
importance of a region as a source hotspot, red circles indicate source region of most importance, blue triangles regions of second source importance, green squares as
third importance and plus shapes as regions of least importance. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web
version of this article.)

avian influenza (Shepherd, 2006), there appears to be an increase in the
global supply of birds from countries in the Indo-Malay region (Reino
et al., 2017). This study has identified smuggling attempts to countries
in Europe, the middle east and east Asia and into south east Asian
countries (Fig. 3). Two transit countries were identified, first Singapore
that facilitates to Europe and East Asia, and second Malaysia that fa-
cilitates import into Indonesia from Vietnam and Thailand, and even
from Malaysia itself, through Riau Island and West Kalimantan
(Table 1). Singapore and Malaysia plays an important role as a transit
region for global illegal wildlife (Heinrich et al., 2016; Krishnasamy,
2016; Leupen et al., 2018; Lin, 2005). The families of wild birds iden-
tified on sale in South East Asian countries are identical to those being
confiscated and in demand in Indonesia (Eaton et al., 2017; Edmunds
et al., 2011; Su et al., 2014). Given the similarity in demand and
identification of important transit countries in Indonesia's bird trade
network, there is potential that smuggling of birds to and from In-
donesia is commonly done to meet local demand and demand in these
countries. Smuggling route into the Philippines, mainly for parrots and
cockatoos (Cottee-Jones et al., 2014; ProFauna, 2008), involved central
and eastern Indonesia and was less connected to other South East Asian
countries. This route was relatively more direct and concerningly in-
volved parrots and cockatoos protected by Indonesian law.
This analysis shows that Jakarta remains the most important hot-
spot. Jakarta has been known as an important destination market for
Indonesia (Bergin et al., 2017; Chng et al., 2015; Nijman et al., 2018),
and in this work also has a transit hub for both domestic and interna-
tional trade. Second to Jakarta, East Java has also been known to hold
the role as a transit hub (Chng and Eaton, 2016; Jepson and Ladle,
2005), facilitating movement of birds, mostly by sea, into Java from
regions outside of Sumatra. Movement of birds into Java from Sumatra

9
K. Indraswari, et al.
is facilitated by Lampung. The largest proportion of seizures (19%)
occurred in East Java while the largest volume of confiscated birds was
in Lampung (36.5%). High levels of seizures do not indicate culpability,
rather may indicate the opposite (UNODC, 2016). Therefore, the high
proportion of seizures in East Java's and high volume of confiscated
birds in Lampung, along with both region's important role connecting
regions all over Indonesia with Java, indicate that birds moving un-
detected through these regions is most likely to be much larger than
what has been identified.
The source of birds, especially those commonly used in competi-
tions, may likely shift from Sumatra. The decline of commercially im-
portant birds populations in Sumatra due to the trade (Harris et al.,
2017) may shift supply of birds to originate from Kalimantan, West
Nusa Tenggara and Malaysia (Leupen et al., 2018; Rentschlar et al.,
2018). This has been the case for white-rumped shama,oriental magpie
robins and leafbirds, where, because the supplies from Java and Su-
matra are declining, white-rumped shama and oriental magpie robins
are being imported from Malaysia and leafbirds are increasingly
sourced from the forest in Kalimantan (Chng et al., 2017; Leupen et al.,
2018).
4.3. Optimisation of seizure: are seizures done near locations of origin?
Based on the NMDS Analysis (Fig. 3), seizures in Indonesia com-
monly occur in transit and destination locations. Some birds were
seized in Lampung, a region identified a hotspot source region. How-
ever, identification of Lampung as a source region warrants some
caution and indicates slight limitations of using news reports to un-
derstand wildlife trade patterns. Data extracted from news reports is
dependent on reporting efforts of the news source outlet. Most sources
list Lampung as the origin of shipments; yet of the birds seized in
Lampung most are likely not to have originated from the province
(Harris et al., 2017). These birds are most from neighbouring provinces,
such as Riau, Jambi and South Sumatra (Fig. 2). Riau and Jambi
themselves were found as one of the source hotspots (Table 2).
Enforcement efforts for wildlife trade are often strongest at transit
regions (UNODC, 2016), however, the further the bird is seized from its
habitat, the more it is of concern. Seizure of birds far from a bird's
natural habitat and distribution range may cause difficulties for re-in-
troduction. Birds are more likely to be subjected to stress due to long
travels, consequently increasing their mortality rate. For Indonesia in
particular, the country's geographic form as an Archipelago further
complicates the situation, as travel stress is greatly increased in the long
trips between islands. Release of confiscated birds is often done by
authorities in forests near seizure locations to prevent high mortality
rates (Bakauheni Quarantine, Pers. Comm, 2018). However, un-
calculated release efforts may risk species invasion and increase risk of
spread of disease rate (Collar et al., 2015). Conservation efforts to re-
locate species back to their natural habitats is complex and requires
substantial resources to carry out. Moreover, the locality of where a
bird is harvested is unlikely to be known as from harvest to transpor-
tation undergoes several middlemen and paid couriers (Wyatt, 2013).
4.4. Call for monitoring increased enforcement and action
This study provides a methodology which can be used to analyse
trends in the seizure of a bird taxa, covering multiple species and sev-
eral families. Despite some limitations in the collection and extraction
of data (such as limitation of information on a bird's harvest location
and inability to identify all birds up to species level), this work provides
the data required to highlight trends in bird trade of great concern.
Continuous monitoring of patterns using seizures and other approaches
such as market surveys and regular interviews is crucial to identify
shifts in the patterns of trade routes of traded species and the emer-
gence of new ones. Online surveys and interviews towards communities
of bird keepers is also crucial in detecting emerging trends in demand.
10
Biological Conservation 243 (2020) 108431
Those such as demand for sunbirds, white-eyes and hawks and eagles
that emerged due to presence of active communities (Gunawan et al.,
2017; Iqbal, 2016; Jepson and Ladle, 2011).
Domestically, actions to support bird conservation is pivotal.
Applicaton of conservation strategies, such as habitat protection and
market-based conservation, should be seriously considered in countries
with a highly active bird economy such as Indonesia. Additionally,
actions to increase border enforcement to prevent wildlife trade is of
paramount importance. This action requires support from external
parties because resource available for wildlife protection in developing
countries are often limited. Support in resources creates positive change
in prevention of wildlife trade (Lee et al., 2005). Internationally, a call
for collaborative action is pivotal. Bodies such as the IUCN songbird
group work closely in monitoring changes in regional trade patterns
and help to develop collaboration in cross-boundary conservation ac-
tions. Other species, such as parrots and cockatoos also warrant at-
tention from local government and specialists' groups to monitor trends
and take action. Finally, information provided in this study can provide
data and parameters required for much needed strategic planning,
conservation actions and program implementation to protect traded
bird species. At the rate at which Indonesia's bird trade is expanding,
pressure is being exerted not only on Indonesia's own biodiversity but
also global biodiversity.
Role of funding source
The Indonesian Endowment Fund for Education (LPDP Indonesia)
provided funding for this study.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influ-
ence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Jeremy Webb for assistance in the editing of
this manuscript. We thank Riga Anggarendra, Wilterza Nazabban,
Andhie Jaya Saputra, Franmuda Agung, Rizka Astari, and Lisa Nurfalah
for assistance in data collection and extraction. The authors declare no
conflict of interest in this study. Chris Shepherd's work on unsustainable
songbird trade in Asia is supported by Fondation Segré and Duan Biggs
is supported by an Australian Research Council Discovery Early Career
Researcher Grant (DE 160101182).
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary material for this report comprises (1) a complete list
of volume of outgoing bird shipments, incoming bird shipments, con-
fiscated birds, frequency of seizures, and average number of birds per
seizure for each region and bird families, (2) centrality measures for
each region and bird order groups, (3) a complete list of identified
species, and (4) a list of seized bird families during the study period. A
list of the articles used for this study is available online http://dx.doi.
org/10.17632/k7z85dv53m.1. Supplementary data to this article can
be found online at doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108431.
References
Bergin, D., Chng, S.C.L., Eaton, J.A., Shepherd, C.R., 2017. The final straw? An overview
of straw-headed bulbul Pycnonotus zeylanicus trade in Indonesia. Bird Conserv. Int.
1–7. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0959270917000302.
Berkunsky, I., Quillfeldt, P., Brightsmith, D.J., Abbud, M.C., Aguilar, J.M.R.E., Alemán-
Zelaya, U., Aramburú, R.M., Arce Arias, A., Balas McNab, R., Balsby, T.J.S., Barredo
Barberena, J.M., Beissinger, S.R., Rosales, M., Berg, K.S., Bianchi, C.A., Blanco, E.,
Bodrati, A., Bonilla-Ruz, C., Botero-Delgadillo, E., Canavelli, S.B., Caparroz, R.,
K. Indraswari, et al.
Cepeda, R.E., Chassot, O., Cinta-Magallón, C., Cockle, K.L., Daniele, G., de Araujo,
C.B., de Barbosa, A.E., de Moura, L.N., Del Castillo, H., Díaz, S., Díaz-Luque, J.A.,
Douglas, L., Figueroa Rodríguez, A., García-Anleu, R.A., Gilardi, J.D., Grilli, P.G.,
Guix, J.C., Hernández, M., Hernández-Muñoz, A., Hiraldo, F., Horstman, E., Ibarra
Portillo, R., Isacch, J.P., Jiménez, J.E., Joyner, L., Juarez, M., Kacoliris, F.P., Kanaan,
V.T., Klemann-Júnior, L., Latta, S.C., Lee, A.T.K., Lesterhuis, A., Lezama-López, M.,
Lugarini, C., Marateo, G., Marinelli, C.B., Martínez, J., McReynolds, M.S., Mejia
Urbina, C.R., Monge-Arias, G., Monterrubio-Rico, T.C., Nunes, A.P., Nunes, F.P.,
Olaciregui, C., Ortega-Arguelles, J., Pacifico, E., Pagano, L., Politi, N., Ponce-Santizo,
G., Portillo Reyes, H.O., Prestes, N.P., Presti, F., Renton, K., Reyes-Macedo, G.,
Ringler, E., Rivera, L., Rodríguez-Ferraro, A., Rojas-Valverde, A.M., Rojas-Llanos,
R.E., Rubio-Rocha, Y.G., Saidenberg, A.B.S., Salinas-Melgoza, A., Sanz, V., Schaefer,
H.M., Scherer-Neto, P., Seixas, G.H.F., Serafini, P., Silveira, L.F., Sipinski, E.A.B.,
Somenzari, M., Susanibar, D., Tella, J.L., Torres-Sovero, C., Trofino-Falasco, C.,
Vargas-Rodríguez, R., Vázquez-Reyes, L.D., White, T.H., Williams, S., Zarza, R.,
Masello, J.F., 2017. Current threats faced by Neotropical parrot populations. Biol.
Conserv. 214, 278–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2017.08.016.
Birdlife, 2019. Country profile: Indonesia [WWW document]. http://www.birdlife.org/
datazone/country/indonesia, Accessed date: 20 March 2019.
Borgatti, S., Mehra, A., Brass, D., Labianca, G., 2009. Network analysis in the social
sciences. Science (80-. ) 323, 892–896. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1165821.
Burivalova, Z., Lee, T.M., Hua, F., Lee, J.S.H., Prawiradilaga, D.M., Wilcove, D.S., 2017.
Understanding consumer preferences and demography in order to reduce the do-
mestic trade in wild-caught birds. Biol. Conserv. 209, 423–431.
BurungIndonesia, 2018. Status burung di Indonesia 2018. [WWW Document]. URL.
http://www.burung.org/infografis/, Accessed date: 1 November 2018.
Butts, C.T., 2008. Network: a package for managing relational data in R. J. Stat. Softw. 24.
https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v024.i02.
Cahill, A.J., Walker, J.S., Marsden, S.J., 2006. Recovery within a population of the cri-
tically endangered citron-crested cockatoo Cacatua sulphurea citrinocristata in
Indonesia after 10 years of international trade control. Oryx 40, 161–167. https://
doi.org/10.1017/S0030605306000366.
Challender, D.W.S., Harrop, S.R., MacMillan, D.C., 2015. Understanding markets to
conserve trade-threatened species in CITES. Biol. Conserv. 187, 249–259. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.biocon.2015.04.015.
Cheng, W., Xing, S., Bonebrake, T.C., 2017. Recent pangolin seizures in China reveal
priority areas for intervention. Conserv. Lett. 10, 757–764. https://doi.org/10.1111/
conl.12339.
Chng, S.C.L., Eaton, J.A., 2016. In the Market for Extinction: Eastern and Central Java.
TRAFFIC South East Asia, Petailing Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia.
Chng, S.C.L., Eaton, J.A., Krishnasamy, K., Shepherd, C.R., Nijman, V., 2015. In the
Market for Extinction: An Inventory of Jakarta’s Bird Markets. TRAFFIC South East
Asia, Petailing Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia.
Chng, S.C.L., Eaton, J.A., Miller, A.E., 2017. Greater green: the trade in Southeast Asia.
TRAFFIC Bull 29, 3–4.
Chng, S.C.L., Krishnasamy, K., Eaton, J.A., 2018a. In the market for extinction: the cage
bird trade in Bali. Forktail 34, 35–41.
Chng, S.C.L., Shepherd, C.R., Eaton, J.A., 2018b. In the market for extinction: birds for
sale at selected outlets in Sumatra. TRAFFIC Bull 30, 15–22.
Collar, N.J., Lierz, M., Stanley Price, M.R., Wirth, R.Z., 2015. Release of confiscated and
captive-bred parrots: is it ever acceptable? Oryx 49, 202–203. https://doi.org/10.
1017/s0030605314001136.
Cottee-Jones, H.E., Mittermeier, J.C., Purba, E.C., Ashuri, N.M., Hesdianti, E., 2014. An
Assessment of the Parrot Trade on Obi Island ( North Moluccas ) Reveals Heavy
Exploitation of the Vulnerable Chattering Lory Lorius Garrulus.
Csárdi, G., Nepusz, T., 2006. The igraph software package for complex network research.
InterJournal, Complex Syst. 1695, 1–9.
Eaton, J.A., Shepherd, C.R., Rheindt, F.E., Harris, J.B.C., Balen, S.B. Van, Wilcove, D.S.,
Collar, N.J., 2015. Trade-driven extinctions and near-extinctions of avian taxa in
Sundaic Indonesia. Forktail 31, 1–12.
Eaton, J.A., Leupen, B.T.C., Krishnasamy, K., 2017. Songsters of Singapore: An Overview
of the Bird Species in Singapore Pet Shops. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.11507.
43041.
Edmunds, K., Roberton, S.I., Few, R., Mahood, S., Bui, P.L., Hunter, P.R., Bell, D.J., 2011.
Investigating Vietnam’s ornamental bird trade: implications for transmission of
zoonoses. Ecohealth 8, 63–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10393-011-0691-0.
Faggini, M., Bruno, B., Parziale, A., 2019. Crises in economic complex networks: black
swans or dragon kings? Econ. Anal. Policy 62, 105–115.
Freeman, L.C., White, D.R., 1991. Centrality in valued graphs: a measure of betweenness
based on network flow. Soc. Networks 13, 141–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-
8733(91)90017-N.
Gunawan, Paridi, A., Noske, R.A., 2017. The use of social media in the illegal trade in
Indonesian raptors. Kukila 20, 1–11.
Halkos, G.E., Tsilika, K.D., 2017. Climate change effects and their interactions: an analysis
aiming at policy implications. Econ. Anal. Policy 53, 140–146.
Hansen, A.L.S., Li, A., Joly, D., Mekaru, S., Brownstein, J.S., 2012. Digital surveillance: a
novel approach to monitoring the illegal wildlife trade. PLoS One 7, e51156. https://
doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0051156.
Harris, J.B.C., Green, J.M.H., Prawiradilaga, D.M., Giam, X., Giyanto, Hikmatullah, D.,
Putra, C.A., Wilcove, D.S., 2015. Using market data and expert opinion to identify
overexploited species in the wild bird trade. Biol. Conserv. 187, 51–60. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.biocon.2015.04.009.
Harris, J.B.C., Tingley, M.W., Hua, F., Yong, D.L., Adeney, J.M., Lee, T.M., Marthy, W.,
Prawiradilaga, D.M., Sekercioglu, C.H., Suyadi, C.H., Winarni, N., Wilcove, D.S.,
2017. Measuring the impact of the pet trade on Indonesian birds. Conserv. Biol. 31,
394–405. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12729.
11
Biological Conservation 243 (2020) 108431
Harrison, R.D., Sreekar, R., Brodie, J.F., Brook, S., Luskin, M., O’Kelly, H., Rao, M.,
Scheffers, B., Velho, N., 2016. Impacts of hunting on tropical forests in Southeast
Asia. Conserv. Biol. 30, 972–981. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12785.
Heikal, 2017. Lomba kicau burung sebagai atraksi pariwisata untuk meningkatkan kun-
jungan wisatawan di kota Bekasi. J. Pesona Hosp. 10, 1–19.
Heinrich, S., Wittmann, T.A., Prowse, T.A.A., Ross, J.V., Delean, S., Shepherd, C.R.,
Cassey, P., 2016. Where did all the pangolins go? International CITES trade in pan-
golin species. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 8, 241–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.
2016.09.007.
Hinsley, A., De Boer, H.J., Fay, M.F., Gale, S.W., Gardiner, L.M., Gunasekara, R.S., Kumar,
P., Masters, S., Metusala, D., Roberts, D.L., Veldman, S., Wong, S., Phelps, J., 2018. A
review of the trade in orchids and its implications for conservation. Bot. J. Linn. Soc.
186, 435–455. https://doi.org/10.1093/botlinnean/box083.
Iqbal, M., 2015. Looking at online bird trading in Indonesia: a case study from South
Sumatra. BirdingASIA 24, 132–135.
Iqbal, M., 2016. Predators become prey! Can Indonesian raptors survive online bird
trading? In: BirdingASIA. 25. pp. 30–35.
Iskandar, J., Iskandar, B.S., 2015. Pemanfaatan anekaragam burung dalam kontes burung
kicau dan dampaknya terhadap konservasi burung di alam: Studi kasus Kota
Bandung, Jawa Barat. Pros. Semin. Nas. Masy. Biodiversitas Indones. 1, 747–752.
https://doi.org/10.13057/psnmbi/m010411.
IUCN, 2019. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2019–3. [WWW
Document]. URL. http://www.iucnredlist.org, Accessed date: 10 December 2019.
Jepson, P., Ladle, R.J., 2005. Bird-keeping in Indonesia: conservation impacts and the
potential for substitution-based conservation responses. Oryx 39, 442–448. https://
doi.org/10.1017/S0030605305001110.
Jepson, P., Ladle, R.J., 2009. Governing bird-keeping in Java and Bali: evidence from a
household survey. Oryx 43, 364–374. https://doi.org/10.1017/
S0030605309990251.
Jepson, P., Ladle, R.J., Sujatnika, 2011. Assessing market-based conservation governance
approaches: a socio-economic profile of Indonesian markets for wild birds. Oryx 45,
482–491. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/S003060531100038X.
KLHK, 2018. Peraturan Mentru Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan Republik Indonesia
Nomor P.92/MENLHK/SETJEN/KUM.1/8/2018 Tentang Jenis Tumbuhan dan Satwa
yang Dilindungi. Jakarta.
Krishnasamy, K., 2016. Malaysia’s Invisible Ivory Channel: An Assessment of Ivory
Seizures Involving Malaysia from January 2003–May 2014. (Petaling Jaya, Selangor,
Malaysia).
Krishnasamy, K., Stoner, S., 2016a. Trading Faces: A Rapid Assessment on the Use of
Facebook to Trade Wildlife in Peninsular Malaysia. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.
1.4728.5362.
Krishnasamy, K., Stoner, S., 2016b. Trading faces: A rapid assessment on the use of
Facebook to trade wildlife in peninsular Malaysia. In: Traffic Southeaast Asia,
https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.4728.5362.
Lee, J., Chng, S.C.L., Eaton, J.A., 2016. Conservation strategy for Southeast Asian song-
birds in trade. In: Recommendations from the First Asian Songbird Trade Crisis
Summit 2015 Held in Jurong Bird Park, Singapore, 27–29 September 2015. Wildlife
Reserves Singapore. TRAFFIC Southeast Asia. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.
12805.96483.
Lee, R.J., Gorog, A.J., Dwiyahreni, A., Siwu, S., Riley, J., Alexander, H., Paoli, G.D.,
Ramono, W., 2005. Wildlife trade and implications for law enforcement in Indonesia:
a case study from North Sulawesi. Biol. Conserv. 123, 477–488. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.biocon.2005.01.009.
Leupen, B.T.C., Krishnasamy, K., Shepherd, C.R., Chng, S.C.L., Bergin, D., Eaton, J.A.,
Yukin, D.A., Hue, S.K.P., Miller, A., Nekaris, K.A.I., Nijman, V., Saaban, S., Imron,
M.A., 2018. Trade in White-rumped Shama Kittacincla malabarica demands strong
national and international responses. Forktail 2018, 1–8.
Lin, J., 2005. Tackling Southeast Asia’s illegal wildlife trade. Sybil 9, 191–208. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jaci.2012.05.050.
Marshall, H., Collar, N.J., Lees, A.C., Moss, A., Yuda, P., Marsden, S.J., 2019. Spatio-
temporal dynamics of consumer demand driving the Asian songbird crisis. Biol.
Conserv., 108237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.108237.
Martin, R.O., 2018. The wild bird trade and African parrots: past, present and future
challenges. Ostrich 89, 139–143. https://doi.org/10.2989/00306525.2017.1397787.
Mongabay, 2018. 5 bird species lose protections, more at risk in new Indonesia decree
[WWW document]. URL. https://news.mongabay.com/2018/10/5-bird-species-lose-
protections-more-at-risk-in-new-indonesia-decree/, Accessed date: 20 February 2019.
Morse, I., 2018. Eastern Indonesia, A Bird-trafficking Hotspot Flies Under the Radar.
Mongabay.
Nijman, V., 2010. An overview of international wildlife trade from Southeast Asia.
Biodivers. Conserv. 19, 1101–1114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-009-9758-4.
Nijman, V., 2015. Pangolin seizures data reported. TRAFFIC Bull 27, 44–47.
Nijman, V., Sari, S.L., Siriwat, P., Sigaud, M., Nekaris, A.-I., 2017. Records of four criti-
cally endangered songbirds in the markets of Java suggest domestic trade is a major
impediment to their conservation. BirdingASIA 27, 20–25.
Nijman, V., Langgeng, A., Birot, H., Imron, M.A., Nekaris, K.A.I., 2018. Wildlife trade,
captive breeding and the imminent extinction of a songbird. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 15.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2018.e00425.
Nyaki, A., Gray, S.A., Lepczyk, C.A., Skibins, J.C., Rentsch, D., 2014. Local-scale dynamics
and local drivers of bushmeat trade. Conserv. Biol. 28, 1403–1414. https://doi.org/
10.1111/cobi.12316.
Oksanen, J., Kindt, R., Legendre, P., O’Hara, B., Stevens, M.H.H., Oksanen, M.J., Suggests,
M.A.S.S., 2007. The vegan package. Community Ecol. Packag. 10, 631–637.
Patel, N.G., Rorres, C., Joly, D.O., Brownstein, J.S., Boston, R., Levy, M.Z., Smith, G.,
2015. Quantitative methods of identifying the key nodes in the illegal wildlife trade
network. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 112, 7948–7953. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.
K. Indraswari, et al.
1500862112.
Phelps, J., Webb, E.L., Bickford, D., Nijman, V., Sodhi, N.S., 2011. Boosting CITES 330.
Pires, S.F., 2012. The illegal parrot trade: a literature review. Glob. Crime 13, 176–190.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17440572.2012.700180.
Pons, P., Latapy, M., 2006. Computing communities in large networks using random
walks. J. Graph Algorithms Appl. 10, 191–218. https://doi.org/10.7155/jgaa.00124.
ProFauna, 2008. Pirated Parrots: Profauna’s Investigation of the Indonesian Parrot
Smuggling to the Phillipines.
Reino, L., Figueira, R., Beja, P., Araújo, M.B., Capinha, C., Strubbe, D., 2017. Networks of
global bird invasion altered by regional trade ban. Sci. Adv. 3, 1–9. https://doi.org/
10.1126/sciadv.1700783.
Rentschlar, K.A., Miller, A.E., Lauck, K.S., Rodiansyah, M., Bobby, Muflihati, K., 2018. A
silent morning: the songbird trade in Kalimantan, Indonesia. Trop. Conserv. Sci. 11,
1–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940082917753909.
Ribeiro, J., Reino, L., Schindler, S., Strubbe, D., Vall-llosera, M., Araújo, M.B., Capinha,
C., Carrete, M., Mazzoni, S., Monteiro, M., Moreira, F., Rocha, R., Tella, J.L., Vaz,
A.S., Vicente, J., Nuno, A., 2019. Trends in legal and illegal trade of wild birds: a
global assessment based on expert knowledge. Biodivers. Conserv. 28, 3343–3369.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-019-01825-5.
Rosen, G.E., Smith, K.F., 2010. Summarizing the evidence on the international trade in
illegal wildlife. Ecohealth 7, 24–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10393-010-0317-y.
Sano, A.V.D., Muhammad, B.F., Mangare, E.K., Jason, J., Hidayah, T., 2019.
PERANCANGAN APLIKASI BERBASIS ANDROID UNTUK KOMUNITAS PENGGEMAR
BURUNG KICAU. Infotech 5, 48–54.
Shepherd, C.R., 2006. The bird trade in Medan, North Sumatra: an overview. BirdingASIA
5, 16–24.
Siriwat, P., Nijman, V., 2018. Using online media-sourced seizure data to assess the illegal
wildlife trade in Siamese rosewood. Environ. Conserv. 45, 419–424. https://doi.org/
10.1017/S037689291800005X.
12
Biological Conservation 243 (2020) 108431
Sodhi, N.S., Bickford, D., Diesmos, A.C., Lee, T.M., Koh, L.P., Brook, B.W., Sekercioglu,
C.H., Bradshaw, C.J.A., 2008. Measuring the meltdown: drivers of global amphibian
extinction and decline. PLoS One 3, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.
0001636.
Sodhi, N.S., Brook, B.W., Bradshaw, C.J.A., 2016. Causes and consequences of species
extinctions. Princet. Guid. to Ecol. 1, 514–520. https://doi.org/10.1145/2889160.
2892656.
Stoner, S., Krishnasamy, K., Wittmann, T., Delean, S., Cassey, P., 2016. Reduced to Skin
and Bones Re-examined: Full Analysis. TRAFFIC South East Asia, Petailing Jaya,
Selangor, Malaysia.
Su, S., Cassey, P., Blackburn, T.M., 2014. Patterns of non-randomness in the composition
and characteristics of the Taiwanese bird trade. Biol. Invasions 16, 2563–2575.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-014-0686-1.
Symes, W.S., Edwards, D.P., Miettinen, J., Rheindt, F.E., Carrasco, L.R., 2018. Combined
impacts of deforestation and wildlife trade on tropical biodiversity are severely un-
derestimated. Nat. Commun. 9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-06579-2.
Turut, R., 2012. Burung Ocehan Juara Kontes. Penebar Swadaya Grup, Jakarta.
Ugland, K.I., Gray, J.S., Ellingsen, K.E., 2003. The species–accumulation curve and esti-
mation of species richness. J. Anim. Ecol. 72, 888–897.
Underwood, F.M., Burn, R.W., Milliken, T., 2013. Dissecting the illegal ivory trade: an
analysis of ivory seizures data. PLoS One 8. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.
0076539.
UNODC, 2016. World Wildlife Crime Report.
Wasserman, S., Faust, K., 1994. Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. vol
8. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. https://doi.org/doi:https://doi.org/10.
1017/CBO9780511815478.001.
Wyatt, T., 2013. Wildlife Trafficking a Deconstruction of the Crime, the Victims, and the
Offenders.