Animal tourism is a massive industry that includes petting zoos, horse-drawn carriage rides, selfies with sloths, and hundreds of other types of up-close experiences with animals. People’s love of animals often makes them want to participate in these activities. However, some tourists are either trying to choose the most reputable, high-welfare sites or simply forgoing them altogether. This study explores the intellectual, emotional, and social drivers that influence a traveler’s intentions toward ethical animal tourism.

Pulling from three well-established theories, the Norm Activation Model, Value-Belief-Norm, and the Theory of Planned Behavior, researchers developed a novel decision-making framework. The framework included eight drivers of behavioral intentions:

• Cognitive drivers such as ethical beliefs, ethical concern, altruistic values, and the perceived image of animal-related tourism as a whole;
• Affective drivers such as feelings of guilt and emotional involvement; and
• Normative drivers such as social and moral norms.

Data was collected via an online survey distributed by a South Korean research company in the last few months of 2022. To be included in the study, individuals had to have participated in animal-related travel activities within the last five years. The final sample consisted of 416 respondents. The researchers then ran the data through several analyses to understand the influence of the eight different drivers on tourist intentions to make ethical decisions relative to animal tourism.

The study found that both moral norms and ethical concern play the largest role in decision-making toward ethical animal tourism. This suggests that an individual’s emotional connection to animals and their perception of the moral rightness or wrongness of an action have a significant influence on their intent to visit animal sites. While previous studies have found that feelings of guilt influence people’s intention toward responsible practices, such as environmentally friendly behavior, this was not the case here.

The authors note that broadening the scope beyond South Korean respondents to include other cultural contexts would be a crucial next step. They also suggest that assessing more variables outside of the cognitive, affective, and normative realms could provide further insight. Lastly, they propose that future research should investigate how tourists behave on-site in comparison to their intentions, as intentions don’t always translate to actual behavior.

Advice For Advocates

Based on the results of this study, travelers are more likely to make ethical choices due to their sense of moral responsibility and emotional involvement with animals. Thus, advocates can consider:

• Tapping into a tourist’s perceptions of moral rightness or wrongness when planning vacations or excursions;
• Emphasizing that people who “love animals” shouldn’t engage in activities that perpetuate their suffering; and
• Using positive and meaningful messages around skipping animal sites altogether.

Applying these findings to advocacy campaigns can help sway travelers toward decision-making that protects animals.