Animal research nexus: a new approach to the connections between science, health and animal welfare.

Animals used in biological research and testing have become integrated into the trajectories of modern biomedicine, generating increased expectations for and connections between human and animal health. Animal research also remains controversial and its acceptability is contingent on a complex network of relations and assurances across science and society, which are both formally constituted through law and informal or assumed. In this paper, we propose these entanglements can be studied through an approach that understands animal research as a nexus spanning the domains of science, health and animal welfare. We introduce this argument through, first, outlining some key challenges in UK debates around animal research, and second, reviewing the way nexus concepts have been used to connect issues in environmental research. Third, we explore how existing social sciences and humanities scholarship on animal research tends to focus on different aspects of the connections between scientific research, human health and animal welfare, which we suggest can be combined in a nexus approach. In the fourth section, we introduce our collaborative research on the animal research nexus, indicating how this approach can be used to study the history, governance and changing sensibilities around UK laboratory animal research. We suggest the attention to complex connections in nexus approaches can be enriched through conversations with the social sciences and medical humanities in ways that deepen appreciation of the importance of path-dependency and contingency, inclusion and exclusion in governance and the affective dimension to research. In conclusion, we reflect on the value of nexus thinking for developing research that is interdisciplinary, interactive and reflexive in understanding how accounts of the histories and current relations of animal research have significant implications for how scientific practices, policy debates and broad social contracts around animal research are being remade today.

When research animals become pets and pets become research animals: care, death, and animal classification.

This paper explores what happens to care, and decisions about ending and extending life, when research animals become pets and pets become research animals. To do this, we draw on in-depth qualitative research on (i) rehoming of laboratory animals, (ii) veterinary clinical research, and (iii) the role of the Named Veterinary Surgeon (NVS) in UK animal research. We begin by exploring how (in theory and practice) the ethical, affective, and practical elements of care are split in the research laboratory. We then investigate arguments for and against ending and extending animal life via clinical research and rehoming, highlighting how these activities bring norms and dilemmas around animal death in the laboratory and veterinary clinic to the fore. We conclude by demonstrating the value of investigating borders between animal categories for understanding dilemmas around care and death, and for contributing to emerging literatures within geography around animal care, death, and categorisation. Key contributions of our work include highlighting: how care roles can be split; the importance of considering speculative and in-practice elements of care; the context-dependency and multiplicity of practices of killing in the veterinary clinic and laboratory; and the flexibility and changing nature of animal categories.

Este artículo explora lo que sucede con el cuidado y las decisiones sobre el final y la extensión de la vida cuando los animales de investigación se convierten en mascotas y las mascotas se convierten en animales de investigación. Para hacer esto, nos basamos en una investigación cualitativa a profundidad sobre (i) el realojamiento de animales de laboratorio, (ii) la investigación clínica veterinaria y (iii) el papel del Cirujano Veterinario Designado (CVD o NVS por sus siglas en inglés) en la investigación con animales en el Reino Unido. Comenzamos explorando cómo (en la teoría y la práctica) los elementos éticos, afectivos y prácticos del cuidado se dividen en el laboratorio de investigación. Luego investigamos los argumentos a favor y en contra de terminar y extender la vida animal a través de la investigación clínica y el realojamiento, destacando cómo estas actividades ponen de manifiesto las normas y los dilemas en torno a la muerte animal en el laboratorio y la clínica veterinaria. Concluimos demostrando el valor de investigar las fronteras entre las categorías de animales para comprender los dilemas sobre el cuidado y la muerte, y para contribuir a las literaturas emergentes dentro de la geografía sobre el cuidado, la muerte y la categorización de los animales. Las contribuciones clave de nuestro trabajo incluyen destacar: cómo se pueden dividir los roles de cuidado; la importancia de considerar elementos especulativos y de práctica de la atención; la dependencia del contexto y la multiplicidad de prácticas de matanza en la clínica veterinaria y el laboratorio; y la flexibilidad y naturaleza cambiante de las categorías de animales.

Cet article étudie ce qu'il advient du care et des décisions concernant l'arrêt ou l'extension de la vie, quand les animaux de recherche deviennent animaux de compagnie et que les animaux de compagnie deviennent animaux de recherche. Pour ce faire, nous nous appuyons sur une recherche qualitative approfondie sur (i) l'adoption d'animaux de laboratoire (ii) la recherche clinique vétérinaire, et (iii) le rôle du chirurgien vétérinaire nommé (NVS - Named Veterinary Surgeon) dans la recherche animale au Royaume-Uni. Nous commençons en explorant la manière dont, en théorie et en pratique, les éléments éthiques, affectifs et pratiques du care sont divisés dans le laboratoire de recherche. Nous passons ensuite en revue les arguments pour ou contre l'arrêt ou l'extension de la vie animale par le biais de la recherche clinique et l'adoption, en soulignant la façon dont ces activités amènent au premier plan les normes et les dilemmes autour de la mort animal en laboratoire et dans les cliniques vétérinaires. Nous concluons en démontrant la valeur de l'étude des frontières entre les catégories d'animaux pour comprendre les problèmes entourant le care et la mort, et pour contribuer aux recherches naissantes dans la géographie concernant le care, la mort et la catégorisation des animaux. Les contributions majeures de nos travaux comprennent la mise en évidence de: la manière dont les rôles de care peuvent être divisés; l'importance de la prise en compte d'éléments de care spéculatifs et dans la pratique ; le rapport au contexte et la multiplicité des pratiques de mise à mort dans les cliniques et les laboratoires vétérinaires ; et la flexibilité et la nature changeante des catégories d'animaux.

A semi-structured questionnaire survey of laboratory animal rehoming practice across 41 UK animal research facilities.

If a laboratory animal survives an experiment without lasting compromised welfare, its future must be negotiated. Rehoming may be a consideration. This paper reports on research findings that provide an indication of the uptake of animal rehoming by UK facilities and the associated moral, ethical, practical and regulatory considerations that inform decisions to rehome or not. This research addresses a widely acknowledged gap in the literature to understand both the numbers, and types of animals rehomed from UK research facilities, as well as the main motivations for engaging in the practice, and the barriers for those facilities not currently rehoming. From the ~160 UK research facilities in the UK, 41 facilities completed the questionnaire, giving a response rate of approximately 25%. Results suggest rehoming occurs routinely, yet the numbers are small; just 2322 animals are known to have been rehomed between 2015-2017. At least 1 in 10 facilities are rehoming. There exists a clear preference for the rehoming of some species (mainly cats, dogs and horses) over others (rodents, agricultural animals and primates). Indeed, although 94.15% of species kept in laboratories are rodents, they make up under a fifth (19.14%) of all animals known to be rehomed between 2015-2017. The primary motivation for rehoming is to boost staff morale and promote a positive ethical profile for the facility. Barriers include concern for the animal's welfare following rehoming, high scientific demand for animals that leaves few to be rehomed, and, finally, certain animals (mainly those genetically modified) are simply unsuited to rehoming. The findings of this research will support facilities choosing to rehome, as well as those that are not currently engaging in the practice. By promoting the practice, the benefits to rehoming in terms of improving laboratory animal's quality of life, helping facility staff to overcome the moral stress of killing, and addressing public concern regarding the fate of laboratory animals, can be attained. It is only once an understanding of rehoming from the perspective of UK research facilities has been ascertained, that appropriate policy and support can be provided.