As concern for the welfare of captive animals grows, zoos face increasing pressure to provide high standards of care. This systematic review explores public perceptions of zoo animal welfare. The authors analyzed both qualitative and quantitative data from 115 peer-reviewed journal articles published between 1993 and 2023. They identified three main categories that influence public perceptions of zoo animal welfare.

Human Factors 

Public opinions about zoos are shaped by ethical considerations about captivity, such as the acceptability of keeping rescued animals versus those captured from the wild. Negative perceptions typically stem from concerns about the treatment and living conditions of animals in zoos. These negative perceptions can also result in decreased financial support from the public and a lack of trust in the zoo’s commitment to animal welfare.

Direct interactions with animals, such as close contact or training, are positively viewed when they provide physical or psychological enrichment, but are seen negatively if they cause stress or seem unnatural. Inappropriate visitor behaviors, such as feeding or teasing animals, also negatively influence visitors’ perceptions.

Animal Factors 

People are influenced by the apparent suffering of zoo animals. Species that are perceived as intelligent, sentient, or large in size are more often perceived as having poor welfare in captivity. Visitor perceptions are also shaped by animal behavior, with active and natural behaviors viewed positively and abnormal or inactive behaviors seen as signs of poor welfare. The animals’ apparent health status, such as signs of injury or disease, also affects perceptions. 

Environmental Factors 

The zoo’s stated purpose, such as education or conservation versus entertainment, and its advertising influence visitor perceptions. Zoos that emphasize education and conservation over entertainment tend to be viewed more positively. Exhibit features, like naturalistic design, size, and the presence of enrichment, as well as the condition of the enclosure and the provision of appropriate diets, also play a role. Welfare interpretation, such as signs explaining the zoo’s welfare accreditation, can impact perceptions, although the effectiveness of such interpretation varies.

Overall, the review found that negative perceptions of animal welfare resulted in less favorable visitor attitudes towards zoos, detrimental impacts on visitor experiences, and a reduced likelihood of visiting zoos or engaging in conservation efforts. However, it also revealed gaps and inconsistencies in the research, such as limited geographic representation, a focus on mammals, and varying definitions of key terms. These limitations make it challenging to generalize findings and develop targeted strategies for improving public perceptions of zoo animal welfare. To address these issues, the authors recommend that future studies define key terms consistently, consider the multidimensional nature of welfare when measuring perceptions, account for potential confounding factors, include the emotional impact on visitors, and expand research to encompass a wider range of facility types, geographical locations, and animal species.

This systematic review provides valuable insights for zoos and animal rights advocates to effectively communicate with visitors about animal welfare and highlights areas for further research to advance the field. While most animal advocates generally do not support animal captivity, they can use these findings to push for improvements in zoo animal welfare. Advocating for more naturalistic enclosures, the provision of appropriate enrichment, and the implementation of effective welfare interpretation are key ways to do so. They can also work with zoos to develop educational campaigns that address common misconceptions and promote positive visitor behaviors. 

More broadly, this research identifies areas where additional public outreach and education may be needed to build support for animal welfare and conservation initiatives. By understanding public perceptions and addressing visitor concerns, advocates can better inform their efforts to promote zoo animal welfare and advocate for systemic changes in wildlife conservation.