Watching how animals behave in captive settings is one of the best ways to understand their welfare. Zoos and aquariums can spot changes that signal stress or well-being by tracking everyday activities, such as feeding, resting, or playing. But collecting behavior data is only the first step. The data also needs to be analyzed, interpreted, and acted upon. Otherwise, animals may continue experiencing poor welfare when timely interventions using available data could have made a world of difference for them.

Accordingly, this study examines why many facilities struggle to move from observation to meaningful action, revealing clear patterns of where zoos and aquariums succeed and where they could use help. By identifying the biggest barriers, the author highlights opportunities to ensure behavioral data is used effectively for improving animal lives.

Study Design

The author conducted three separate surveys targeting the following groups:

1. Staff from facilities accredited by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA);
2. General users of ZooMonitor, a popular app for recording animal behavior used by zoos and aquariums around the world; and
3. Experienced users of ZooMonitor (referred to as “power users”) who were part of an advisory group providing feedback on the app.

Survey participants were asked to rank how challenging each step of the behavior monitoring process was. These steps included:

• Designing the project
• Training staff on data collection protocols
• Recording data and managing data collection
• Analyzing the data and sharing the findings
• Using the findings to drive actions
• Evaluating the success of the data-driven actions

Participants also assessed common barriers to behavior observations, including:

• Staff knowledge and training to create projects and analyze data
• Staff and leadership buy-in
• Trust in behavior data
• Past experience with gaining actionable insights from data
• Availability of equipment

After removing incomplete responses, the final sample consisted of 178 participants from AZA-accredited facilities (with some questions having 188 participants), 29 app general users, and 20 app power users.

Not Much Formal Monitoring Is Happening

The results showed that only about half (51%) of AZA-accredited facilities formally track behavior. Smaller facilities, especially those with fewer than 50 staff, are least likely to have monitoring programs.

Among facilities conducting formal observations, the most common activities are:

• Targeted monitoring (watching for a specific behavior such as pacing): 79%
• General monitoring (ongoing observation of a broad set of behaviors): 73%
• Evaluative observations (monitoring the effect of a specific event such as new enrichment or an enclosure move): 73%
• Internal research (projects designed and carried out by the facility itself): 50%
• External research (studies done in partnership with universities or other institutions): 38%

The high percentage of general monitoring indicates that facilities are making an effort to gather behavior data on a regular basis, which the author suggests is a good start to inform decision-making.

Gathering Data Is Easier Than Acting On It

The study found that designing the project, training staff, and collecting data — the primary steps of a behavior monitoring program — are generally manageable. However, the secondary steps of analyzing and acting on the data and evaluating those actions create the biggest bottleneck. Participants find these later stages far more challenging.

Even when facilities do use data to make changes, the results are mixed. On average, only about 58% of behavior monitoring projects lead to care improvements, with success rates ranging from as low as 4% to as high as 100%.

Participants rated all barriers to behavior observations as similarly challenging. The fact that no broad trends emerged suggests that the particular difficulties faced by each facility depend on its own internal structure.

However, in search of models for putting data into practice, the author turns to lessons from other industries such as business, healthcare, and education. For example, healthcare incorporates evidence-based treatments into practice to improve health outcomes, schools use specialized “data teams” to answer questions and guide instruction, and businesses use business intelligence tools such as real-time dashboards to support decision-making. The author argues that zoos and aquariums could use similar strategies to help bridge the gap between data collection and welfare improvement outcomes.

Limitations

This was a pilot study that relied on self‑reported surveys. Thus, the findings show what staff think and experience rather than direct observation of every facility’s practices. Only one person per institution responded, which may not reflect the views of other team members and there remains a risk of selection bias. In addition, participants were asked to select from a fixed set of choices. It’s therefore possible that other organizational challenges exist that were overlooked in this study.

What Advocates Can Do

Animal advocates can play a direct role in improving how zoos and aquariums use behavior data by:

• Promoting data literacy: Support workshops or partnerships that teach staff how to analyze patterns and link them to welfare outcomes.
• Pushing for leadership buy-in: Encourage zoo and aquarium leaders and boards to prioritize welfare metrics in decision-making. Advocates can spotlight facilities that successfully use data to create positive change.
• Encouraging fast-feedback tools: Campaign for accessible dashboards or automated reports that help staff make timely, informed decisions.
• Assisting smaller facilities: Advocate for shared training resources, pooled software licenses, or collaborative research projects to close resource gaps.
• Focusing on measurable welfare outcomes: Help facilities track how many projects actually improve welfare and identify what blocks progress.

Undoubtedly, behavior monitoring has enormous potential, and zoos and aquariums need staff with stronger analytical skills, appropriate tools, and leadership support to ensure observations lead to meaningful welfare gains for the animals. Advocates can help champion a future where these facilities unite science, ethics, and compassion to let animal welfare take center stage.