Editor’s Note: After reading Doctor Andrew Mooney’s 2020 research article titled “A system wide approach to managing zoo collections for visitor attendance and in situ conservation” (Nature Communications, 11, Article number 584), Zoo Advisors invited Dr. Mooney to guest-author the following article sharing his work. As fellow travelers at the intersection of mission and margin, we were intrigued by his work and are pleased to provide a platform for him to share his ideas.
The reliance of zoos and aquariums on visitor-generated revenue is clear from the numerous fundraising campaigns, governmental supplements and even zoo closures seen during the COVID-19 pandemic. Consequently, as zoos and aquariums start to navigate a post-COVID landscape, they must be more strategic with their living collections in order to both remain economically viable and meet their conservation objectives. In reality people visit zoos and aquariums to see wild animals, but what species do they want to see? This very simple question is the foundation of the zoo and aquarium visitor experience but is often overlooked when planning both zoo collections and business strategies.
This issue is exemplified by recent high-profile controversies over the keeping of certain large charismatic species in zoos and aquariums, which has resulted in some institutions making the decision to phase out these species from their collections entirely. However, the commercial and conservation consequences of such decisions have not been adequately discussed, as there is clear evidence that such species are the most popular with visitors, potentially increasing visitor attendance and subsequently the financial resources available from zoos and aquariums for conservation efforts in the wild (in situ). This debate, and its far-reaching consequences, became a central part of my PhD research in Zoology at Trinity College Dublin (Ireland). Working with Species360, the international zoo records keeping organisation, I wanted to take a global and analytical approach to better understand what species people want to see in zoos, and what this means for visitor attendance and conservation investments.
Using data from nearly 500 zoos around the world we show that zoos which are commercially successful are also those which contribute a greater amount to conservation efforts in the wild. We found that zoos with lots of large and unique animals attract more visitors and contribute to more conservation projects in situ. Although alternative strategies were also identified, this study suggests that the recent removals of large charismatic species from zoos may be both premature and potentially harmful for the commercial viability of institutions and their in situ conservation efforts.
Billy the elephant at Los Angeles Zoo by David Achilles / unsplash.com
Ultimately each institution must make value-driven decisions regarding their collection in order to fulfil their own institution-specific goals, and to ensure the sustainability of the species within the global zoo network. However, we believe that if the space and welfare needs of large, charismatic species can be met in zoos, then their presence within a collection may represent an optimal conservation strategy, not only contributing to conservation through captive breeding and public education, but also by generating greater financial resources for conservation activities in the wild.
What did we do? We used zoo species composition data from Species360 member institutions, and visitor attendance data from the International Zoo Yearbook, to assess how the species within zoos, and socio-economic factors, influence visitor attendance. We then used in situ conservation investment data from AZA Conservation and Science Reports to see how visitor attendance was related to in situ conservation contributions, using structural equation modelling to look at both direct and indirect relationships. This allowed us to test for the first time whether zoos must exhibit large charismatic species in order to attract visitors and fund conservation activities in the wild.
Which institutions did we include? Our sample group for this study included 458 zoos spanning 58 countries around the world. To prevent potential bias we removed theme parks and conservation/science centers from our analysis. Safari parks and similar drive-through animal parks were treated the same as other institutions. Due to a lack of readily available data we were unable to include aquariums, however as Species360 membership continues to grow broader analyses will be possible.
What did we find? We found that zoos with lots of animals (and particularly mammal species), large animals, and which have different animals to other zoos achieve higher visitor numbers and subsequently contribute to more conservation projects in the wild (Figure 1). We also show that zoos in rich countries, and zoos which are close to densely populated areas, both get higher numbers of visitors, but we found no evidence that the physical size of the zoo influenced visitor attendance.
Figure 1: The relationship between zoo species composition, socio-economic factors, visitor attendance and in situ conservation investment. All relationships were positive and line width representing the standardised relative effect sizes, i.e. thicker arrows mean stronger effects.
We see a direct link between visitor attendance and conservation investment, where zoos with higher numbers of visitors invest in more conservation projects in the wild than zoos with lower visitor numbers, likely as a direct result of an increase in disposable income (Figure 2). We also see a direct positive relationship between the number of in situ projects being invested in and the total in situ financial expenditure per institution, meaning that zoos with higher visitor numbers are not just investing in more in situ conservation projects, they are also contributing more financially to these projects overall.
Figure 2: The relationship between visitor attendance and the number of in situ conservation projects zoos invest in. Both variables are log transformed.
These results can help zoo managers to plan their collections to increase visitor numbers and conservation investment. However, the direct and indirect relationships revealed within the system are not that simple, and we found clear trade-offs between attendance enhancing strategies that can complicate things.
-
Animal Size: Although we find that zoos with big animals attract more visitors, we also find that zoos with lots of animals in general attract more visitors. This is important as we reveal a very clear trade-off between the number of animals in a zoo and their body size, which makes sense, you can have a lot more penguins in a zoo than elephants. This result indicates that there are alternative composition strategies, such as including many small, unique animals in your zoo, which may also be effective at increasing visitor numbers.
-
Unique Zoo Collections: Perhaps the most surprising result from this work was that zoos which have more unique species in their collection have higher visitor numbers compared to zoos which all have the same species, revealing potentially new marketing avenues that can be used to increase visitor attendance. Although having lots of unique species might be good for your visitor numbers, cooperative population management and conservation breeding recommendations encourage zoos to consolidate their collections to enhance management efficacy, which results in more similar zoo collections. This again is a clear trade-off, this time between conservation planning and commercial success.
-
Threatened Species: Contrary to expectations we found no evidence that the number of threatened species within a zoo increased visitor attendance, despite previous suggestions that visitors prefer to see threatened species. However, we did see a positive relationship between the number of threatened species in a zoo and the in situ conservation investment. This suggests that zoos which have a greater focus on threatened species within their own collection also invest a greater amount in conservation in the wild, but that this does nothing to increase visitor numbers.
What does all this mean for zoos and aquariums moving forward?
Although the space and financial resources required to maintain large charismatic species in zoos are both enormous, our results show that by housing such species zoos and aquariums both attract more visitors and contribute more to conservation projects in the wild, protecting not only individual species but also their habitats. This suggests that the presence of large charismatic species in zoo collections may represent an optimal business and conservation strategy, and should be embraced rather than avoided.
In reality the continued inclusion of large charismatic species as part of zoo collections is unlikely to change, not only due to their public appeal, but also because these are often long-lived species with no prospects of being returned to the wild. As a result, the clear ethical and welfare concerns surrounding charismatic species already in captivity must be addressed and solutions implemented. Although this could potentially result in the removal of certain species from individual collections which are unable to appropriately provide for them, this decision should not be made prematurely and should be based on sound scientific evidence, with clear consideration given to the commercial and conservation consequences of such actions.
If you’d like to know more about this work please get in touch with the lead-author, Dr. Andrew Mooney at mooneya2@tcd.ie. He would like to thank all the zoos and aquariums who provided data for this study, and particularly the >1,200 Species360 member institutions for their continued support and data input. Additionally, we would like to thank AZA and BIAZA for their contribution of in situ contribution data to this project. The full research article, which was published in Nature Communications can be found here.
Dr. Andrew Mooney has just completed a PhD in the School of Natural Sciences (Zoology) at Trinity College Dublin and is a former Guest PhD Researcher with the zoo records keeping service Species360. His research focuses on zoo conservation planning and population management using globally shared zoological records. He is a Fulbright Commission alumnus to the San Diego Zoo Institute for Conservation Research and currently sits on the Tayto Theme Park and Zoo Ethics Committee.
Email: mooneya2@tcd.ie
Twitter: @andymooney13
Editor’s Note: We found Doctor Mooney’s work to be both provocative and fascinating. How do his findings resonate with you? We would be pleased to hear your thoughts, so drop them in the comments bellow, or send us an email!
