f species requires a global response, which can only be achieved through increased collaboration. To improve cross-border cooperation at a wider level, the Liaison Group of Biodiversity-related Conventions was created. The secretariats of each convention meet regularly to collaborate in implementing actions at national and international level. The group ensures that the common aims of conservation and sustainable use are being met. A single convention is unable to confront such great challenges, therefore requiring “all hands on deck.” The establishment of this Group demonstrates the necessity of collaboration in achieving the vast aims of biological diversity, not just between states regarding CITES itself, but also within the authorities. Further, the involvement of CITES, a wildlife related convention, in this Group demonstrates the success it has had in largely contributing to realising broader instruments of biological diversity. d. Non-Compliance: Non-compliance with CITES is dealt with both at international and national levels. When Parties fail to comply, the issue is handled by the Convention. Instead, when individuals breach trade regulations, national legislation is used, as Parties implement regulations through domestic law. i. Non-Compliance with CITES: Overtime, a unique compliance system has evolved under the Convention. The Standing Committee is the main responsible body for issuing specific measures in cases of non-compliance. This usually concerns Parties either failing to implement national legislation that transposes the desired effects of the Convention or not complying with reporting requirements. The obvious method used to increase enforcement is sanctions, of which the most severe form consists of a recommended suspension of trade in all species listed under CITES. However, this is the most extreme measure, only used when Parties continuously fail to comply. The most supported method for addressing non-compliance consists of the Standing Committee providing a service of assisting Parties in finding solutions for effective compliance. Relying on this proactive method of implementation, rather than uniquely on a punitive mechanism, enhances the effectiveness of compliance. Although sanctions are ultimately more forceful, most situations of non-compliance stem from the country’s inability to nationally implement CITES. Therefore, providing assistance results in a better outcome, both internationally and domestically, as the number of compliant parties is steadily rising. Even though compliance procedures may be more effective in theory than in actual practice, there is evidence of a positive trend in domestic enforcement.>