What Is the Future for Zoos and Aquariums?
Open accessAbstract
Animal welfare concerns have plagued the professional zoo and aquarium field for decades. Societal differences remain concerning the well-being of animals, but it appears a shift is emerging. Scientific studies of animal welfare have dramatically increased, establishing that many previous concerns were not misguided public empathy or anthropomorphism. As a result, both zoo and aquarium animal welfare policy and science are now at the center of attention within the world's professional zoos and aquariums. It is now possible to view a future that embraces the well-being of individual captive exotic animals, as well as that of their species, and one in which professional zoos and aquariums are dedicated equally to advancing both. Though the ethics of keeping exotic animals and animals from the wild in captivity are still a contentious subject both outside and even within the profession, this study argues. We argue that this path forward will substantially improve most zoo and aquarium animals' welfare and could significantly reduce societal concerns. If animal welfare science and policy are strongly rooted in compassion and embedded in robust accreditation systems, the basic zoo/aquarium paradigm will move toward a more thoughtful approach to the interface between visitors and animals. It starts with a fundamental commitment to the welfare of individual animals.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Kagan et al. (2018) concluded that zoos and aquaria often pose a reluctance in publishing gaps in zoo science as it could be considered as a 'failure' within that collection due to public pressures, indicating a limitation on MSE published literature.
“Kagan et al., (2018) concluded that zoos and aquaria often pose a reluctance in publishing gaps in zoo science as it could be considered as a 'failure' within that collection due to public pressures, indicating a limitation on MSE published literature.”
From An Investigation into the Perception and Prevalence of Mixed-Species Exhibits in Zoos and Aquaria (2022) · cites this paper as Kagan et al., (2018)
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
How Monkeys See the World: Inside the Mind of Another Species
Cheney, D. L., & Seyfarth, R. M. (1990) · doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226218526.001.0001 · Cited by 2,268 · see citing works
Ozella, L., Anfossi, L., Di Nardo, F., & Pessani, D. (2017) · General and Comparative Endocrinology · doi:10.1016/j.ygcen.2015.12.002 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 12
- Campbell-Palmer, R., & Rosell, F. (2017). olfactory behavior in zoo animals. In B. L. Nielsen (Ed.), Olfaction in animal behaviour and welfare (pp. 176–188). Boston, MA: CABI.
- Carter, S., & Kagan, R. (2010). Management of ‘surplus’ animals. In D. G. Kleinman, K. V. Thompson, & C. Kirk Baer (Eds.), Wild mammals in captivity: Principles and techniques for zoo management (2nd ed., pp. 263–267). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
- Cheney, D., & Seyfarth, R. (1992). How monkeys see the world. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
- Gruen, L. (2014). Dignity, captivity, and an ethics of sight. In L. Gruen (Ed.), The ehics of captivity (pp. 231–247). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
- Hosey, G., Melfi, V., Formella, I., Ward, S. J., Tokarski, M., Brunger, D., … Hill, S. P. (2016). Is wounding aggression in zoo-housed chimpanzees and ring tailed lemurs related to zoo visitor numbers? Zoo Biology, 35(3), 205–209.
- Kagan, R. (2017). Sanctuaries: Zoos of the future. In J. Donahue (Ed.), Increasing legal rights for zoo animals: Justice on the ark (pp. 140–150). Lanham, Md: Lexington Books.
- Kagan, R., Carter, S., & Allard, S. (2015). A universal framework for exotic animal welfare. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 18(Suppl 1), S1–S10.
- Kagan, R., & Veasey, J. (2010). Challenges of zoo animal welfare. In D. G. Kleinman, K. V. Thompson, & C. Kirk Baer (Eds.), Wild mammals in captivity: Principles and techniques for zoo management (2nd ed., pp. 11–21). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
- Malamud, R. (1998). Reading zoos: Representations of animals and captivity. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
- Morgan, K. N., & Tromborg, C. T. (2007). Sources of stress in captivity. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 102(3–4), 262–302.
- Orban, D. A., Soltis, J., Perkins, L., & Mellen, J. D. (2017). Sound at the zoo: Using animal monitoring, sound measurement, and noise reduction in zoo animal management. Zoo Biology, 36(3), 231–236.
- Young, T., Finegan, E., & Brown, R. D. (2013). Effects of summer microclimates on behavior of lions and tigers in zoos. International Journal of Biometeorology, 57(3), 381–390.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Welfare assessment tools in zoos: from theory to practice
Jones, N., Sherwen, S. L., Robbins, R., McLelland, D. J., & Whittaker, A. L. (2022) · Veterinary Sciences · doi:10.3390/vetsci9040170 · Cited by 62 · see citing works
Putative neural consequences of captivity for elephants and cetaceans
Jacobs, B., Rally, H., Doyle, C., O’Brien, L., Tennison, M., & Marino, L. (2022) · Reviews in the Neurosciences · doi:10.1515/revneuro-2021-0100 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Why are enrichment practices in zoos difficult to implement effectively?
Tuite, E. K., Moss, S. A., Phillips, C. J., & Ward, S. J. (2022) · Animals · doi:10.3390/ani12050554 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
An Investigation into the Perception and Prevalence of Mixed-Species Exhibits in Zoos and Aquaria
Green, H., Palmer, G. A., & Brereton, J. E. (2022) · Journal of Research in Social Science and Humanities · doi:10.56397/jrssh.2022.12.02 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
“Kagan et al., (2018) concluded that zoos and aquaria often pose a reluctance in publishing gaps in zoo science as it could be considered as a ‘failure’ within that collection due to public pressures, indicating a limitation on MSE published literature.”
Background
- Authors
- Kagan, R., Allard, S., & Carter, S.
- Affiliations
- Detroit Zoological Society, Royal Oak, Michigan, USA
- Corresponding author
- Kagan, Ron
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2018-08-31
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- sup1
- Pages
- 59-70
- ISSN
- 1088-8705 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7604
- OpenAlex
- W2896166388
- Cited by
- 24
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 2
- FWCI
- 2.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-nd
- Locations
- Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
- Social Sciences › Law › Animal Law and Welfare
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Conservation, Ecology, Wildlife Education
- Keywords
- zoos, aquariums, animal welfare, animal welfare policy, accreditation, anthropomorphism
- MeSH terms
- Accreditation, Animals, Animal Husbandry, Animal Welfare, Animals, Zoo, Conservation of Natural Resources
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review