## e ANIMAL PRIVACY: Historical and Conceptual approaches

Edited by: Natacha Klein Käfer, Bre � Mills, and Kaori Nagai

ISSN: 2794-3941

Privacy Studies Journal Special Issue: Animal Privacy (2026)

## The Ethics of Privacy and Consent in Anthrozoological Investigations

Michelle Szydlowski, Jes Hooper, Sarah Oxley Heaney, and Kristine Hill

Privacy Studies Journal

## Special Issue - ANIMAL PRIVACY: Historical and Conceptual Approaches

## Table of Contents

Introduction to ANIMAL PRIVACY: Historical and Conceptual Approaches by Natacha Klein Käfer, Brett Mills, and Kaori Nagai ...... pp. 1-13

Here's Looking at You, Kid: Nonhuman and Human Privacy Entanglements in the Surveillant Assemblage by Delia Langstone ...... pp. 14-35

The Ethics of Privacy and Consent in Anthrozoological Investigations by  Michelle Szydlowski, Jes Hooper, Sarah Oxley Heaney, and Kristine Hill ....... pp. 36-59

Baby Watch: Capitalism, Technology, and the History of Maternal Privacy and Livestreamed Surveillance in Captive Animal Spaces by Andrea Ringer ...... pp. 60-81

The Constitutional Monarch and his Mini Zoo: The Case of Sultan Abdul Halim Mu'adzam Shah by Zahid Zamri ...... pp. 82-100

Settler Colonial Intrusion, Tasmanian Tiger Extinction, and Animal Privacy in Walton Ford's The Undead by Matthew Whittle ...... pp. 101-118

Animal Soundscapes and Early Modern Privacy at the Danish Court , Christine Jeanneret ...... pp. 119-145

## Abstract

Protecting the safety and privacy of participants seems to be an obvious goal for social science researchers. Vital to this protection is the oversight of ethical or institutional review committees tasked with ensuring the safety and privacy of both researcher and participant. However, otherthanhuman animals are often overlooked or entirely absent from official institutional or ethics board considerations. How, then, can researchers ethically proceed with fieldwork while still ensuring their participants are protected? Is it up to the researcher alone to decide what is 'ethical' and how to protect the privacy of informants? This paper problematizes research ethics procedures through an examination of the review process, fieldwork, and dissemination practices of several anthrozoologists. Rather than approaching privacy through a human-otherthanhuman binary lens, the authors suggest that privacy and consent should instead be considered at the level of each individual being.

## Keywords

Anthrozoology - consent - otherthanhuman animals - privacy - research ethics

## Introduction

Anthrozoology is an emergent field concerned with the interactions and relationships between humans ( Homo sapiens ) and otherthanhuman animals. 1 Anthrozoology remains an interand trans-disciplinary practice, rather than a distinct discipline, incorporating methods and  theories  from  anthropology,  human-animal  studies,  history,  psychology,  socio -logy, feminism, biology, veterinary medicine, and many more. 2 While humans are clas -sified biologically as  animals, in the vernacular 'animal' is commonly applied only to non-humans. Because the term 'non-human' implies that these animals are 'less than' in some way, those practicing anthrozoology (especially those using post-colonial and post-feminist lenses), instead prefer the term 'otherthanhuman'. This term allows parti -cipants of multiple species to be viewed as equally important agents, each worthy of the same ethical consideration, within biological, sociological, and anthropological research or ethnographic (roughly defined as cultural )  investigation. 3 For similar reasons, many anthrozoologists adopt a post-humanist lens through which to view these relationships, in  order  to  challenge  dated notions of human exceptionalism. 4 Humans are not, after all,  unique amongst animals in their possession of language, culture, and society, but rather in their desire to separate themselves from other species. 5 Post-humanism is about overcoming the need to be in control, to be objective, and to subdue that which is 'nonhuman'. 6 As Cary Wolfe says, post-humanist theory has ' nothing to do with whether you like animals ' (emphasis in original), but everything to do with how one treats any 'social other'. 7

Concerned with the ethical implications of researching these social others, we are faced with  navigating  how  to  protect  their  interests.  As  we  will  discuss  below,  to  varying degrees our current understanding of otherthanhuman animal lives has been achieved only through intrusive research, especially in biological and behavioural laboratories. 8 Even research into otherthanhuman animal culture in situ requires some degree of inf -ringement upon otherthanhuman animal privacy. 9 Otherthanhumans are active participants in both research and the creation of shared meaning yet are often entirely absent from ethical review and approval processes. 10 The current paper emerged from a larger undertaking which problematized the social sciences ethical review process considering these omissions. Here we examine several ethical considerations related to otherthanhuman participant privacy and consent and consider several dilemmas researchers may encounter while planning or conducting fieldwork and disseminating findings.

1 Samantha Hurn, 'Anthrozoology: An Important Subfield in Anthropology,' in Interdisziplinäre Anthropologie: Jahrbuch 2/2014: Gewalt Und Aggression 25, ed. Gerald Hartung and Matthias Herrgen, (2015): 179-88,  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-07410-4\_13;  Molly  Mullin,  ' Animals  and  Anthropology,'' Society and Animals 10, no. 4 (2002): 387 , https://doi.org/10.1163/156853002320936854.

2 Kenneth Shapiro, 'Human-animal studies: Remembering the past, celebrating the present, troubling the future' Society & Animals , 28, vol. 7 (2020):.797-833.

3 Marianne  Elisabeth  Lien  and  Gisli  Pálsson,  'Ethnography  Beyond  the  Human:  The  'Other-thanHuma' in Ethnographic Work,' Ethnos 86, no. 1 (2021): 1-20, https://doi.org/10.1080/00141844.2019.1628 796; S. Eben Kirksey and Stefan Helmreich, 'The Emergence of Multispecies Ethnography', Cultural Anthropology 25, no. 4 (2010): 545-76, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1360.2010.01069.x.

4 Cary Wolfe, Animal Rites: American Culture, the Discourse of Species, and Posthumanist Theory (University of Chicago Press, 2003).

5 Nathan J. Emery Wolfe and Nicola S. Clayton, 'The Mentality of Crows: Convergent Evolution of Intelli -gence in Corvids and Apes,' Science 306, no. 5703 (2004): 1903-7, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1098410; Kevin N Laland and William Hoppitt, 'Do Animals Have Culture?,' Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews 12, no. 3 (2003): 150-59, https://doi.org/10.1002/evan.10111; Caroline Schuppli and Carel P.Van Schaik, 'Animal Cultures: How We've Only Seen the Tip of the Iceberg,' Evolutionary Human Sciences 1 (2019): 1-13, https://doi.org/10.1017/ehs.2019.1; Donna J Haraway, ' A Manifesto for Cyborgs: Science, Technology, and Socialist Feminism in the 1980s,' Socialist Review 80 (1985): 65-107; Jennifer Botting, Erica van de Waal, and Luke Rendell, 'Comparing and Contrasting Primate and Cetacean Culture,' in The Handbook of Culture and Biology: One , ed. José M. Causadias, Eva H. Telzer, and Nancy A. Gonzales (Wiley, 2017), 105-28.

6 N. Katherine Hayles, How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature, and Informatics (The University of Chicago Press, 1999), 288.

7 Wolfe, Animal Rites: American Culture, the Discourse of Species, and Posthumanist Theory , 7 .

## Considering privacy and consent

What do we mean by privacy, and why might it be important in relation to otherthanhu -man animals involved in anthrozoological research? Adam Moore describes two types of privacy - bodily and informational. 11 The former refers to the moral right of a 'person' to control access to their own body, capacities, and powers. The latter relates to personal information about oneself. While privacy is generally recognized as being essential to human liberty, the precise definition, legality, and ethics of such privacy are highly con -tested. 12 Speaking exclusively for humans, Moore claims, 'Privacy, whether physical or informational, is valuable for beings like us.' 13 But what about the value of privacy for animals not 'like us'? We believe that respecting the privacy of all animal bodies is one more step towards recognizing otherthanhuman animals as ethically significant beings with agency, involved in the joint creation of meaning. This approach echoes the senti -ments of Thom Van Dooren and Deborah Bird Rose, who state that 'animals, sites, and stories all shape, and are shaped by, entangled and circulating patterns of intra-action.' 14 Thus, the principle of viewing otherthanhuman animals as both actant and participant in research should allow an extension to their own informational privacy; for example, data obtained from participant observations (for instance, the behaviour of pseudonymised tourism elephants towards their mahouts as outlined by Szydlowski, 2024). 15 Elisa Aaltola asserts that the concept of privacy is closely tied to that of dignity, which is why the private details of humans are considered worthy of protection even once deceased. 16 Brett Mills claims that granting this right to privacy to humans while disavowing other species such rights is a form of speciesism intended to maintain human dominance. 17 As both co-creators of meaning and sources of valuable data, however, we believe otherthan -human animals should merit the same consideration offered our human interlocutors. At minimum, the authors suggest anonymization of data to prevent easy identification of (or ability by bad actors to geo-locate) otherthanhuman participants. In addition, there is a need to develop methods for garnering consent (or assent) from all participating species.

8 Terry  J.  Ord  et  al.,  'Trends  in  Animal  Behaviour  Research  (1968-2002):  Ethoinformatics  and  the Mining of Library Databases,' Animal Behaviour 69, no. 6 (2005): 1399-1413, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. anbehav.2004.08.020;  Gordon  M.  Burghardt,  'Insights  Found  in  Century-Old  Writings  on  Animal Behaviour and Some Cautions for Today,' Animal Behaviour 164 (2020): 241-49, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. anbehav.2020.02.010.

9 Alexis J. Breen, ' Animal Culture Research Should Include Avian Nest Construction,' Biology Letters 17, no. 7 (2021), https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2021.0327.

10 J.  Hooper, Civets in Society: Disappearance Amidst Global Connection (Sydney University Press, forthcoming);  Michelle  Szydlowski, Elephant  Tourism  in  Nepal:  Historical  Perspectives,  Current  Health  and Welfare Challenges, and Future Directions (CAB International, 2024); Catherine Oliver, 'Beyond-Human Ethics: The Animal Question in Institutional Ethical Reviews,' Area (2021): 1-8, https://doi.org/10.1111/ area.12738.

11 Adam D. Moore, 'Privacy: Its Meaning and Value,' American Philosophical Quarterly 40, no. 3 (2003): 215-27, https://doi.org/10.2307/20010117.

12 Karolina Andersdotter 'The Right to Read Without Being Read: Research Ethics in the Study of Digi -tal Reading Behaviour,' Privacy Studies Journal 4  (2025); Deirdre K. Mulligan, Colin Koopman, and Nick Doty, 'Privacy Is an Essentially Contested Concept: A Multi-Dimensional Analytic for Mapping Privacy,' Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 374, no. 2083 (2016), https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2016.0118.

13 Moore, 'Privacy: Its Meaning and Value,' 215.

14 Thom Van Dooren and Deborah Bird Rose, 'Storied-Places in a Multispecies City,' Humanimalia 3, no. 2 (2012): 1, https://doi.org/10.52537/humanimalia.10046.

There are, of course, some areas in which offering equal consideration to otherthanhuman animals is particularly fraught. For example, there exist barriers to obtaining informed consent from species with whom we cannot easily communicate our intentions. How then, might we justify research involving otherthanhuman animals without reverting to a position of human exceptionalism? One argument supporting the invasion of human privacy involves doing so when serving the best interests of the individual (e.g., suicide watch) or society (e.g., criminal investigations). 18 Scenarios where an invasion of privacy might be in the otherthanhuman animal's best interest might include veterinary surveil -lance or protection of endangered populations (see below). In other cases, this invasion of privacy is harder to justify.

## Failure of the university ethical review process

It is during the ethics review process within university departments and research insti -tutions  where  otherthanhuman research participants are initially  overlooked. 19 In  the social sciences and humanities, researchers affiliated with universities and research faci -lities around the world are expected to seek ethical approval from their peers, often by way of a formalized internal process. In addition, funding bodies and academic journals insist that the research they finance or disseminate be subjected to some level of ethical scrutiny. This review process asks researchers to justify their project, demonstrate that they have considered any possible harm to themselves, participants, or bystanders, and have implemented measures to minimize any physical or mental health risk. 20 However, the definition of participant in this process is ambiguous at best and human-centric at worst. In the sciences, when physical and psychological harm to otherthanhuman ani -mals is discussed within ethics applications, it is regulated by oversight agencies predo -minantly concerned with the use of otherthanhuman animals in biological research or medical experimentation. 21 However, because these forms of research allow for a 'justifia -ble' level of discomfort or pain, 22 such standards are far below what might be suitable for sociological or anthropological research. Thus, the health and wellbeing of otherthanhu -man animals are instead left to the moral judgement of individual researchers.

15 Szydlowski, Elephant Tourism in Nepal.

16 Elisa Aaltola, ' Animal Suffering: Representations and the Act of Looking,' Anthrozoos 27, no. 1 (2014): 19-31,  https://doi.org/10.2752/175303714X13837396326297;  Damien  McCallig, Facebook  after  Death:  An Evolving  Policy  in  a  Social  Network,  International  Journal  of  Law  and  Information  Technology 22,  (2014), https://doi.org/10.1093/ijlit/eat012; J. C. Buitelaar, 'Post-Mortem Privacy and Informational Self-Deter -mination,' Ethics and Information Technology 19, no. 2 (2017): 129-42, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-0179421-9.

17 Brett Mills, 'Television Wildlife Documentaries and Animals' Right to Privacy,' Continuum 24, no. 2 (2010): 193-202, https://doi.org/10.1080/10304310903362726.

18 Richard J. Arneson, 'Egalitarian Justice versus the Right to Privacy?' Social Philosophy and Policy 17 , no. 2 (2000): 91-118, https://doi.org/10.1017/s0265052500002120.

19 Oliver, 'Beyond-Human Ethics.'

Like the physical and psychological harm mentioned above, the protection or violation of individual privacy also falls under the purview of these review boards when humans are the intended subjects. However, consideration of otherthanhuman participant privacy is often entirely missing from the process. To what extent, then, are researchers obliged to protect the privacy of otherthanhuman research participants? If the protection of pri -vacy and garnering of consent from otherthanhuman animals is left up to individual researchers, can it be assumed that all researchers can justly decide whose privacy is worth respecting?

Using our own research experiences to reflect on ways in which anthrozoologists can respect and protect the privacy of their otherthanhuman participants, we will discuss how the  ethics  review  process,  research  methodologies,  and  dissemination  of  results might better consider 1) observational intrusions on otherthanhuman animal lives, 2) gaining consent from or on behalf of otherthanhuman participants, 3) respecting private spaces, and 4) protecting private information about otherthanhuman populations and individuals.

## Methods

The following analysis is the result of a series of scholarly discussions and conference workshops with researchers engaged within the field of anthrozoology. Each author feels bound by an intrinsic commitment to promote symbiotic ethics, an approach that insists on the recognition of otherthanhuman animals as ethically significant beings worthy of respect. 23 During research and when disseminating findings concerning humans and other animals, it became clear that otherthanhuman animal privacy was an issue which had yet to be sufficiently addressed within the remit of social science research. Our discus - sion here is therefore a qualitative exploration of common themes surrounding othert -hanhuman animal privacy, those which have been encountered through various stages of anthrozoological research. Presented here is a reflexive analysis of otherthanhuman animal privacy within the context of social science research. According to John Michael Roberts and Teela Sanders, 24 reflexivity in social research is not one phenomenon, but a series of temporary states of dilemma which the researcher must address in all stages of the research process: before, during and after. The analysis here therefore aims to adopt reflexivity in what Charlotte Aull Davies calls 'its most transparent guise,' 25 the utility of personal experience to further philosophical evaluation (in this case, the common themes concerning animal privacy that are encountered when researching human-animal rela -tions within the remit of the social sciences). Although this paper draws upon privacy scholarship that has primarily been concerned with humans (scholarship on issues surrounding small children and the deceased have been especially helpful), the aim of this paper is to illustrate the complexities involved when attempting to ensure otherthanhu -man animal privacy during research and when disseminating results. Overall, this paper serves to corroborate Lynda Birke's stance that considering the perspectives and experi -ences of all animals under scholarly investigation should offer some benefit to them. 26 Where direct benefit is not possible, we argue, researchers should at the very least afford them protection.

20 UKRC (UK Research Council), 'Frameworks for Research Ethics,' UKRC, 2021.

21 Aurora Brønstad et al., 'Current Concepts of Harm-Benefit Analysis of Animal Experiments - Report from the AALAS-FELASA Working Group on Harm-Benefit Analysis - Part 1,' Laboratory Animals 50, no. 1 (2016): 1-20, https://doi.org/10.1177/0023677216642398; Hope Ferdowsian, 'Human and Animal Research Guidelines: Aligning Ethical Constructs with New Scientific Developments,' Bioethics 25, no. 8 (2011): 472-78, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8519.2011.01923.x; Adrian J. Smith et al., 'PREPARE: Guidelines for Planning Animal Research and Testing,' Laboratory Animals 52, no. 2 (2018): 135-41, https://doi.org/10.1177/0023677217724823.

22 Brønstad et al., 'Current Concepts of Harm-Benefit Analysis of Animal Experiments,' 1-20.

23 EASE, 'About Us,' University of Exeter, 2021. https://www.exeter.ac.uk/research/centres/ease/about/

As the authors navigated the ethics process for their individual projects, several themes repeatedly appeared. These included a general lack of inclusion of otherthanhuman ani -mals in the ethics approval process, a lack of institutional concern for otherthanhuman animal bodily or psychological safety, and no regard for consent-seeking. For example, researcher one's (R1) work focused on cat-human relations and perspectives surrounding free-roaming cats ( Felis catus ). The research involved, among other things, collecting field -notes and photographs of cats encountered in urban neighbourhoods. R1 noted that these cats were often aware of the researcher's presence, sometimes hiding and observing from under cars and bushes. For case studies involving both cats and humans, informed con -sent was sought from the humans on behalf of themselves and the cats they lived with. Ethical  committee  approval  was  contingent  upon  ensuring  human  identity  was  pro -tected. Although not mandatory, R1 considered the potential harm that could be caused by revealing the identity of a cat engaged in what might be considered nuisance beha -viours (such as sitting on a car or defecating in a backyard). However, the intrusion upon feline lives was not problematized until after the data collection began and it became apparent to the researcher that some cats did not appear to consent to being stalked. Alt -hough some feline participants did initiate contact, R1 did not approach others and took care not to disturb them.

Researcher two (R2) is examining an unconventional set of shark - human relationships, by drawing upon the experiences of an expert 'shark-listener'. These relationships are co-created through mutual trust, care, and understanding between the shark-listener, the free-living Caribbean Reef sharks ( Carcharhinus perezii ) and Nurse sharks ( Ginglymostoma cirratum ). As these sharks are non-captive and autonomous agents, able to disengage at any time, the notion of consent by both the listener and the sharks may seem self-evident. While R2 openly advocates for the shark-human relationships that have developed bet -ween the sharks and shark-listener, R2 problematizes the role of physical contact in the evolution and maintenance of these relationships. Touch can be crucial in forming relati -onships, but potentially destructive if consent lacks mutuality. Therefore, the concept of ' consent to touch' that occurs between sharks and humans will be examined within the frameworks of scuba-diving institutional and marine-tourism guidelines (which gene -rally promote principles of avoiding touching marine-life). 27 Minimizing harm to ensure the protection of both sharks and humans is emphasized throughout. While R2 seeks to problematize these aspects of consent for physical contact, they also strive to give equal weight to the informed, agentic nature of consent as expressed by shark participants.

24 John Michael Roberts and Teela Sanders, 'Before, during and after: Realism, Reflexivity and Ethno -graphy,' Sociological Review 53, no. 2 (2005): 295, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.2005.00515.x.

25 Charlotte Aull Davies, Reflexive Ethnography: Guide to Researching Selves and Others (Routledge, 2008), 7.

26 Lynda Birke, 'Naming Names - or, What's in It for the Animals?,' Humanimalia 1, no. 1 (2009): 1-9, https://doi.org/10.52537/humanimalia.10113.

Researcher three (R3) works with elephants ( Elephas maximus ) and elephant caregivers in areas of nature-based tourism focus. While considering the well-being of the caregivers and other human stakeholders (thanks to their membership in marginalized communi -ties) was deemed crucial by a university ethics review committee, they did not request any  consideration  of  the  pachyderm  participants  who  find  themselves  captive,  with limited agency, living outside their familial herds, as internally displaced persons (i.e., a marginalised community in their own right). R3 chose to address the ethical concerns with research involving captives in a variety of ways. For example, R3 sought consent from her participants by first developing a greater understanding of their umwelt (essentially, their way of 'being in' and understanding their environment) , 28 building an embodied and academic understanding of their biological and psychological needs and then asking their consent by approaching in the same ways they might approach conspecifics or any other species (see below).

Researcher four's (R4) research focuses on human-animal relations within the trade in exotic wildlife, through a transspecies lens whereby humans, animals, and plants inter -act as equal participants in worldly creation. Using the understudied carnivora family Viverridae (small, feliform mammals, such as civets) as a focus of the trade in wildlife for tourism, pet, food, and zoo industries, R4 follows a multi-method approach including virtual ethnography, participant interviews, and in-person observations of humanViverrid encounters. While researching trades which span legal, poorly regulated, and illegal paradigms, it became clear that while privacy was advocated for human research participants, otherthanhuman participants lacked protection, despite their vulnerability to anthropocentric manipulation and exploitation.

Each of these researchers concluded that the main issues surrounding  otherthanhuman animal privacy included the need for careful reflection on the ways in which observatio - nal data collection might infringe upon participant privacy or agency; the need to consi -der if, when, and how we might garner consent for observation and proximity; and how to reduce harm and maximize benefits for participants during research and the dissemi -nation of results.

27 A. Keaveny, 'Responsible Shark and Ray Tourism: A Guide to Best Practice,'. 2023. PADI website. https://blog.padi.com/responsible-shark-and-ray-tourism-a-guide-to-best-practice/PADI

28 Jakob Von Uexküll and Geoffrey Winthrop-Young, A Foray into the Worlds of Animals and Humans: With a Theory of Meaning (University of Minnesota Press, 2010).

## Discussion

Ethical considerations surrounding observations and data collection

Researching  otherthanhuman  animals  is  not  a  new  phenomenon.  From  prehistoric cave paintings to contemporary advances in the scientific understanding of behaviour, humans have observed otherthanhuman animals and involved them as research participants throughout human history. Observational studies of otherthanhuman animals have aided in the shaping of post-human futures as discoveries such as otherthanhuman animal tool use, culture, language, and emotions, 29 have started to unravel the Cartesian ideals of the past (animals as unthinking automatons). And while observational research of otherthanhuman animals has dampened the idea of human exceptionalism, advanced  understanding  of  otherthanhuman  animal  experience  has  led  to  more  symbiotic ways of living. From the companion animals in human homes, to wildlife that share resources with human communities, 30 mutualistic multi-species existence is built upon initial  observation  of  humans  and  otherthanhuman animals. Such observations often rely on the invasion of otherthanhuman animal privacy. As explained above, the ethics review process, the starting point for scholarly investigations, continues to fall short of fully including otherthanhuman animals as ethically significant beings. While the physi -cal health and minimization of suffering of these experimental otherthanhuman animal subjects are covered by institutional review boards, the fact that any suffering, pain, or invasion of privacy is considered acceptable reinforces the argument that otherthanhu -man animals are not considered as ethically significant as humans. Of course, observation can too be considered as invasive and may also cause suffering. The gaze of the onloo -ker is an effective communication strategy for the exertion of domination and control, and surveillance of animals can be likened to the state control of human bodily proces- ses described by Foucault. 31 Overall, as research participants of observational research, otherthanhuman animals have their right to privacy revoked, and as such observational methods should be an issue worthy of further scholarly reflection.

29 Jane Goodall, 'Feeding Behaviour of Wild Chimpanzees: A Preliminary Report,' Symposium of the Zoological Society of London 10 (1963): 39-48; Jackie Chappell and Alex Kacelnik, 'Tool Selectivity in a Non-Primate, the New Caledonian Crow (Corvus Moneduloides),' Animal Cognition 5, no. 2 (2002): 71-78, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-002-0130-2; A. Whiten et al., 'Cultures in Chimpanzees,' Nature 399,  no.  6737  (1999):  682-85,  https://doi.org/10.1038/21415;  Deborah  Fripp  et  al.,  'Bottlenose  Dolphin (Tursiops Truncatus) Calves Appear to Model Their Signature Whistles on the Signature Whistles of Community Members,' Animal Cognition 8, no. 1 (2005): 17-26, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-0040225-z;   Joseph Soltis, Tracy E. Blowers, and Anne Savage, 'Measuring Positive and Negative Affect in the Voiced Sounds of African Elephants ( Loxodonta Africana ),' The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 129, no. 2 (2011): 1059-66, https://doi.org/10.1121/1.3531798.

30 Krisztina Kovács et al., 'Dog-Owner Attachment Is Associated With Oxytocin Receptor Gene Poly -morphisms in Both Parties. A Comparative Study on Austrian and Hungarian Border Collies,' Frontiers in Psychology 9, no. APR (2018): 1-15, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00435; Hannes J. König et al., 'Human-Wildlife Coexistence in a Changing World,' Conservation Biology 34, no. 4 (2020): 786-94, https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13513;  Dooren,  Thom  Van,  and  Deborah  Bird  Rose,  'Storied-Places  in  a Multispecies City,' Humanimalia 3, no. 2 (2012): 1-27 . https://doi.org/10.52537/humanimalia.10046.

Today, observational research in both in  situ and ex  situ environments is widely supported by academics and conservationists alike for the promotion of species survival. Nonetheless, the omission of the right to privacy for otherthanhuman animals enrolled in conservation efforts is a common-albeit overlooked-issue. The systemic surveillance of wildlife, both of their physiology and behaviour, is easily evidenced by the wealth of published academic literature and the millions of data entries held within global databa -ses of zoological record systems whereby an animal's every movement, familial relation, and even defecation is systematically recorded. 32 Be it within in situ contexts or within captive settings such as research centres and zoos, animal health and behaviour is obser -ved without informed consent, and it is upon observational data that management deci -sions are made. Thus, the surveillance of otherthanhuman animals by humans not only provides humans with knowledge, but such knowledge has real world implications for the lived experiences of the individuals and groups of otherthanhuman animals. Indeed, whilst Foucauldian biopolitics (disciplinary, political, or regulatory strategies which con -trol 'life itself' through the manipulation of biological processes such as birth rates) can more readily be applied to the panoptic enclosure designs of zoos in the Victorian era, those which resembled early prison architecture for the constant gaze of the onlooker, 33 the frequent monitoring of free-roaming (non-captive) otherthanhuman animal popula -tions continues to wield political control of otherthanhuman communities. Translocation or eradication programs of 'pest species' , just like the transfer of otherthanhuman ani -mals between zoological collections, are common management strategies, the decisions of which are based upon research which relies upon the observation of otherthanhuman animals.

Where some otherthanhuman animals may regain their privacy by electing to leave the view of onlookers, for many the inability to escape observation can result in what Katja M. Guenther describes as 'animal resistance': the expression of abnormal or stereoty -pical behaviour to cope with the stress which can be induced by the onlookers' gaze. 34 Although  the  research  ethics  processes  of  many  institutions  have  yet  to  sufficiently problematize the issue of otherthanhuman animal privacy, other industries within the otherthanhuman animal sector have made advances towards assuring that some level of privacy can be maintained. In recognition of the importance of privacy for otherthanhu -man animal health and welfare, modern zoological collections have shifted their focus from prioritizing the visibility of residents for the satisfaction of visitors to immersive exhibits that replicate natural environments and provide opportunities for otherthanhuman animals to hide from the view of visitors. Such strategies have been effective in reducing otherthanhuman animal stress and increasing natural behaviours-results which have been well received by visitors. 35 Zoo proponents, on the other hand, consider the lack of total privacy for captive otherthanhuman animals an issue which cannot be alleviated through the objective of ex situ conservation, research, or education. Authors such as Randy Malamud condemn zoos as a form of spectatorship, describing them as a  'macabre opportunity to see the last surviving specimens,' 36 and while views such as  these  are  directed  more  generally  towards zoological entertainment, they do serve to encourage greater awareness of the implications of limiting otherthanhuman animal privacy during other activities such as research. Even when our efforts intend to advocate for more ethical interspecies relations, research which involves observations of otherthanhuman animals still comes at the expense of their privacy. There may, however, be ways to lessen the negative impacts of these privacy violations, such as discovering ways to garner otherthanhuman consent for participation.

31 Elise Holland et al., 'Visual Attention to Powerful Postures: People Avert Their Gaze from Nonverbal Dominance Displays,' Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 68 (2017): 60-67, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jesp.2016.05.001;  Michel  Foucault, The  Birth  of  Biopolitics:  Lectures  at  the  Collège  de  France,  1978-1979 (Michel Foucault, Lectures at the Collège de France) , trans. Graham Burchell, ed. Arnold I. Davidson and Graham Burchell (Springer, 2008).

32 Irus Braverman, Zooland: The Institution of Captivity (Stanford University Press, 2012).

33  Braverman, Zooland , 87 .

34 Katja M Guenther, The Lives and Deaths of Shelter Animals , (Stanford University Press, 2020); Holland et al., 'Visual Attention to Powerful Postures: People Avert Their Gaze from Nonverbal Dominance Displays.'

## Ethical considerations surrounding the garnering of consent

Anthropological societies and universities maintain strict guidelines for ethical review applications, insisting that researchers provide participant information forms and obtain either written or verbal informed consent from all human participants. There are sce -narios where covert research and proxy consent may be deemed acceptable, but these require justifications in terms of necessity and benefit. 37 As previously mentioned, otherthanhuman  animal  research  participants  are  commonly  overlooked  or  absent  during the review process, and, thus, consideration of their ability to consent to participation in research is lacking.

For humans unable to provide consent, there are clear guidelines on obtaining proxy consent. 38 The basic idea behind proxy consent is that if the person is deemed unable to make an informed decision, then someone close to that person should make the decision on their behalf.

35 Eduardo J.  Fernandez  et  al.,  ' Animal-Visitor  Interactions  in  the  Modern  Zoo:  Conflicts  and  Inter -ventions,' Applied  Animal  Behaviour  Science 120,  no.  1-2  (2009):  1-8,  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appla -nim.2009.06.002.

36  Randy Malamud, 'The Problem with Zoos,' in The Oxford Handbook of Animal Studies , ed. Linda Kalof (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press., 2017), 397.

37 Paul Spicker, 'Ethical Covert Research,' Sociology 45, no. 1 (2011): 118-33, https://doi. org/10.1177/0038038510387195.

38 Victoria  Shepherd,  Mark  Sheehan,  Kerenza  Hood,  Richard  Griffith,  and  Fiona  Wood.  'Construc -ting Authentic Decisions: Proxy Decision Making for Research Involving Adults Who Lack Capa -city  to  Consent,'' Journal  of  Medical  Ethics ,  2020,  medethics-2019-106042.  https://doi.org/10.1136/ medethics-2019-106042.

This should lead to a choice that would align with that person's value system and desi -res. 39 In the case of humans involved in medical research, that decision is typically never left to the researchers. Furthermore, in exceptional circumstances where proxy consent is not possible, research involving critically ill humans must demonstrate minimal risk and the potential to specifically benefit other critically ill patients. 40 Similarly, covert research on human groups must demonstrate reasonable necessity and benefit to human interest groups. 41 Following these examples of the ways in which human animals are considered during the ethical review process, the issue of gaining consent from otherthanhuman animals could be navigated in one of three ways:

1. Gain consent directly from the otherthanhuman animals themselves. 42
2. Seek proxy consent from someone with an understanding of the otherthanhuman indi -vidual or group and who has their best interests at heart.
3. Show a clear benefit to the otherthanhuman animals and a methodology that treats all participants respectfully.

## Gaining consent directly from otherthanhuman participants

Martijn de Koning et al. argue against the imposition of written consent on the basis that it is potentially deceptive and may have negative consequences 'because relations with interlocutors change in the course of research, for instance under the influence of changing political circumstances, this transfer of knowledge is never fully concluded.' 43 These authors stress that 'ethnographic relationships are built on trust and researchers have a responsibility to protect the privacy and the safety of their interlocutors' , which they assert is best achieved with oral forms of consent. 44 This approach is feasible and adaptable to research involving multispecies ethnography because the principle of trust building and mutual understanding does not require a shared language. However, the burden of responsibility falls heavily upon the researcher to ensure otherthanhuman consent to the encroachment upon their private lives, and to ensure that the safety, wellbeing, and dignity of these participants are protected.

39 R. M.G. Berg, K. Møller, and P. J.H. Rossel, ' An Ethical Analysis of Proxy and Waiver of Consent in Cri -tical Care Research,' Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica 57, no. 4 (2013): 408-16, https://doi.org/10.1111/ aas.12083.

40 Berg, Møller, and Rossel, ' An Ethical Analysis of Proxy and Waiver'; Victoria Shepherd et al., 'Con -structing  Authentic  Decisions:  Proxy  Decision  Making  for  Research  Involving  Adults  Who  Lack Capacity to  Consent,' Journal  of  Medical  Ethics ,  2020,  medethics-2019-106042,  https://doi.org/10.1136/ medethics-2019-106042.

41 Thomas J. Roulet et al., 'Reconsidering the Value of Covert Research: The Role of Ambiguous Con -sent in Participant Observation,' Organizational Research Methods 20, no. 3 (2017): 487-517 , https://doi. org/10.1177/1094428117698745.

42 Michelle Szydlowski, 'Asking Consent from Pachyderm Persons: Facing Ethical Complexities in Mul -tispecies Research,' In Animal Life and Human Culture: Anthrozoology Studies eds. I. Frasin, G. Bodi, S. Bulei, C.D. Vasiliu (Presa Universitara Clujeana, 2022).

43 Martijn de Koning et al., 'Guidelines for Anthropological Research: Data Management, Ethics, and Integrity,' Ethnography 20, no. 2 (2019): 171, https://doi.org/10.1177/1466138119843312.

44 De Koning et al., 'Guidelines for Anthropological Research,' 171.

Negotiating consent with those with whom we do not share a common language is dif -ficult enough, but how can we gain permission to enter the homes and lives of otherthan -human animals? Researchers attempting to interact with species other than their own should consider the need to first gain a working knowledge of the biology, needs, and communication preferences of their target species. Some species-such as reptiles-may prove harder for humans to understand, thanks to their taxonomic distance from Homo sapiens . 45 However, there certainly must be ways to seek consent from otherthanhuman animals who share similar social lives to ours, such as elephants, cats, or primates. 46

Frans B.M. De Waal suggests that we begin by watching how individuals interact with their environment, which may offer insights into their personal drives and desires. By observing body language, we may gain insight into signifiers of emotion as individuals respond to social situations, stressors, and  pleasurable experiences. How these individuals retain control of their emotions, or fail to do so, may be indicative of their cognitive  state. 47 Therefore, it appears that gaining embodied knowledge of one's otherthanhuman infor -mants, much as one might during participant observations with humans, is an important first step in gaining their consent. For example, to obtain consent from captive elephants, especially with regards to their right to 'bodily privacy' as noted above, one first needs knowledge of how individuals perceive their environment or incursions into their per -sonal  space.  Captive  elephants  in  some  tourism  facilities,  for  instance,  regularly  have their bodily privacy interfered with through the human imposition of saddles, chains, and ropes. Rather than worrying about crossing human-made boundaries such as stable fences  with  the  permission  of  only  the  human  resident,  perhaps  researchers  should instead concern themselves with seeking consent from the elephants themselves. 48

How might this request for consent proceed, especially when approaching an elephant with little control over her daily activities? One way to do so may be by allowing these elephants to first experience the researcher via sound, then smell, followed by sight and physical contact. It is unlikely that researchers would approach a human participant wit -hout first announcing themselves and therefore it seems reasonable to follow suit with otherthanhuman  participants.  Research  by  Karen  McComb  et  al.  demonstrates  that elephants use infrasonic sounds to communicate across distances and recognise another's voice over a kilometre away. 49 It is not unrealistic, then, that they also have experience sensing human communications upon approach. Elephants also have an excellent sense of smell which can detect water over 19 kilometres away and can likely detect the presence of human researchers at a distance. Furthermore, elephants are extremely tactile beings. They use their entire bodily surface to interact with their environment and conspecifics, and  their  trunk  is  sensitive  enough  to  identify  differences  of  0.25mm  of  pressure. 50 Seeking pachyderm consent, therefore, might involve speaking upon approach, standing outside an elephant's 'private' stable area, and waiting for the elephant to approach and initiate physical contact. Of course, this type of consent-seeking is not without physical risks to the researcher if consent is not given (working with human participants is not free of this risk, either), and as such a strong background in elephant behaviour and body language is vital.

45 Clifford Warwick, 'The Morality of the Reptile 'Pet' Trade,' Journal of Animal Ethics 4, no. 1 (2014): 74.

46 Frans B.M. de Waal, 'What Is an Animal Emotion?' Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1224, no. 1 (2011): 191-206.

47 De Waal, 'What Is an Animal Emotion?'

48 Szydlowski, 'Asking Consent'.

49 Karen McComb et al., 'Unusually Extensive Networks of Vocal Recognition in African Elephants,' Animal Behaviour 59, no. 6 (2000): 1103-9, https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.2000.1406.

While we have used elephants as an example above, the same type of embodied know -ledge is needed for a wide variety of species. Researchers seeking consent from spiders, for example, might be well-advised to understand arachnids' hypersensitivity to vibra -tion or touch. Those hoping to observe whales should certainly consider the impacts of engines on infrasound receptors, and those seeking consent from rats might be wise to avoid chemical or fragrance-laced hygiene products which might overwhelm such sen -sitive noses.

## Proxy consent

Research involving companion animals typically seeks informed consent from the  otherthanhuman animal's guardian. 51 This  could  be  viewed  as  similar  to  human parents or guardians providing permission for the involvement of very young children or babies in any kind of research. 52 However, the assent of the minor is typically required in addition to parental consent. 53 While companion-animal guardians arguably have their companions' best interests at heart, the agency of an adult otherthanhuman animal may be overlooked by an inexperienced or insensitive researcher. Can we ensure a hissing cat is given the same space as a screaming child who is clearly not happy with the situa -tion or the researcher's presence? Seeking proxy consent for 'owned' cats but not freeliving cats is problematic because it reinforces the domination of human interests over otherthanhuman animal agency. Contrast this to proxy consent for humans, where all children are afforded the same level of protection regardless of their family circumstan -ces.  Furthermore, when it comes to participant anonymization, the emphasis tends to focus  on  the  protection  of  the human's  identity.  Even  when  otherthanhuman  animal identities are anonymized, this is primarily to prevent the identification of the human participants associated with them.

Minimal harm and maximal benefit to at-risk research participants

It is important to note that the elephants and zoo inhabitants discussed above are captively held. Nevertheless, research involving captively held humans, such as prisoners, requires an even greater degree of oversight from review boards as an at-risk group. 54 Captive humans are considered at higher research-related risk, thanks to the restriction of their autonomy, inherent power differentials and lack of privacy. 55 Some captive individuals may be willing to participate but are restricted from doing so by their captivity itself. For example, a human prisoner may be called into court or a required meeting with prison staff and be unable to comply with the conditions of the study. In addition, there is concern surrounding a prisoner's ability to give true informed consent or feel empowe -red to decline participation without facing retribution. 56

50 Guido Dehnhardt, Christina Friese, and N. Sachser, 'Sensitivity of the Trunk of Asian Elephants for Texture Differences of Actively Touched Objects,' Zeitschrift Fuer Saeugetierkunde 62, no. 2 (1997): 37-39.

51 Oliver, 'Beyond-Human Ethics.'

52 Michelle Roth-Cline and Robert M. Nelson, 'Parental Permission and Child Assent in Research on Children,' Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine 86, no. 3 (2013): 291-301.

53 Roth-Cline and Nelson, 'Parental Permission.' Roth-Cline and Nelson 2013.

Perhaps  captively-held  undomesticated  species  should  be  offered  similarly  protected status in the ethical review process (e.g., the civets in R4's example in the methods sec -tion  above).  In  research  involving  captively  held  species,  the  potential  for  both  harm and benefit must be carefully weighed. In studies of captive animals in wildlife tourism attractions (such as in R3's elephant research above), for example, there is the risk of incre -ased use of dominance-based control methods, retributory beatings for 'misbehaviour' under the researcher's gaze, and even the risk of physical damage or death from a refusal to perform. 57

## Ethical considerations surrounding consent to enter private spaces

For contemporary human societies, the idea of privacy is embedded in the notion of private and public spaces, with the home typically being a private place. 58 However, the homes of wild otherthanhuman animals are rarely afforded privacy from humans who wish to study or observe them. Zoo residents are subject to the gaze of visitors and keeper surveillance. Likewise, working otherthanhuman animals and even companion species are rarely afforded agency regarding their spatial privacy.

Further consideration could be given to the research-encounter-space itself. For example, in  R2's shark study, relationships unfold within a non-captive environment, where the shark and human participants engage consentually, and both retain  the autonomy to withdraw consent at any time. Hence, key questions for researchers could include consi -deration of whether captivity itself constrains the otherthanhuman research participant, leaving them with limited options to consent or refuse? Alternatively, is the research (or could it be) conducted with otherthanhuman participants dwelling within their own umwelt ? 59 In  the  latter,  consent  to  participation  may  be  more  obvious,  especially  if  the researcher  is  apparent  to  the  otherthanhuman  participant  rather  than  attempting  to unobtrusively observe.

54 'UK Research Council. 2021. Framework for Research Ethics,' UKRC, 2021, https://www.ukri.org/ councils/esrc/guidance-for-applicants/research-ethics-guidance/framework-for-research-ethics/;  USDHHS, 'United  States  Department  of  Health  and  Human  Services.  Requirements  for  the  Use  of Human Subjects in Research,' 2018, https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/regulations/45cfr-46/index.html#46.101.

55 L.O. Gostin, C. Vanchieri, and A. Pope, 'Introduction,' in Ethical Considerations for Research Involving Prisoners , ed. L.O. Gostin, C. Vanchieri, and A. Pope (National Academies Press, 2007).

56 Gostin, Vanchieri, and Pope, 'Introduction,' 2007.

57 Kendra Coulter, Animals, Work, and the Promise of Interspecies Solidarity (Palgrave Macmillan, 2016); Michelle Szydlowski, Framing Conservation, Colonialism and Care: Captive Endangered Asian Elephants (Elephas Maximus) in Nepal (University of Exeter, 2021).

58 Stuart Shapiro, 'Places and Spaces: The Historical Interaction of Technology, Home, and Privacy,' Information Society 14, no. 4 (1998): 275-84, https://doi.org/10.1080/019722498128728.

## Ethical considerations surrounding the dissemination of results

While the collection of data brings into question ethical considerations such as how to gain informed consent from otherthanhuman animals, it is perhaps the dissemination of data where the greatest unintentional harm can be created.

Traditionally,  when biologists publish research results, they include geolocation infor -mation to authenticate these results. However, this kind of publishing culture dissemi -nates otherthanhuman animal locations without their consent which, as noted by David Lindenmayer and Ben Scheele, 60 exposes otherthanhuman animal individuals to being rapidly targeted and harvested by those wishing to benefit from the discovery of new spe -cies. Lindenmayer and Scheele also warn that wildlife smugglers, traders, poachers, and collectors are known to track academic publications for location information and examples of rapidly harvested and depleted populations have been reported following newly discovered species geolocation data being published in academic journals.

Lindenmayer and Scheele further discuss the trust broken between researchers and landowners of the geolocations given. Furthermore, questions are raised as to why this tra -dition, which affects living otherthanhuman animals remains, when researchers such as palaeontologists and archaeologists withhold geolocation data for the remains of dece -ased otherthanhumans (for example, fossils). As authors remain predominantly silent concerning such dissemination, perhaps it could be argued that living otherthanhuman animals are thus not considered as true research participants, interlocutors, or subjective participants, but rather as objects of research.

Equally  problematic  is  the  way  in  which  researchers  represent themselves within  the dissemination of their  findings.  John  Pearce  and  Gianna  Moscardo  stress  how  selfies with wild individuals are known to cause significant ethical issues for otherthanhuman animal welfare and conservation and Stephen R. Ross et al. show how images of wild -life shown in the company of humans can lead to viewers believing such otherthanhu -man animals make suitable 'pets'. 61 Thus, researchers can unwittingly promote the exotic pet trade by sharing images of attractive or otherwise interesting species that can invoke the 'I want one' response by viewers. 62 Perhaps provision of information regarding the species general behavioural traits, suitability to captive lifestyles, and potential to spread zoonotic diseases could counteract desires to seek out and acquire members of said species as pets. 63

59 Uexküll and Winthrop-Young, A Foray into the Worlds of Animals and Humans: With a Theory of Meaning , trans. Joseph D. O'Neil (University of Minnesota Press, 2010).

60 David Lindenmayer and Ben Scheele, 'Do Not Publish,' Science 356, no. 6340 (2017): 800-801, https:// doi.org/10.1126/science.aan1362.

61 John Pearce and Gianna Moscardo, 'Social Representations of Tourist Selfies: New Challenges for Sustainable Tourism,' BEST EN Think Tank XV. The Environment-People Nexus in Sustainable Tourism: Finding the Balance , 2015, 59-73; Stephen R. Ross, Vivian M. Vreeman, and Elizabeth V. Lonsdorf, 'Spe -cific  Image Characteristics Influence Attitudes about Chimpanzee Conservation and Use as Pets,' PLoS ONE 6, no. 7 (2011), https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0022050.

Conversely, frank information surrounding the exotic pet trade has been shown to deter potential consumers and promote greater empathy for exploited otherthan human ani -mals. 64 However,  social  media  platforms,  such  as  Facebook,  have  begun  to  cover  up photos by algorithms that are deemed to violate community standards. Such violations include imagery of otherthanhuman animals in various states of physical wounding, but the value of imagery showing such suffering is being contested. Some argue that images of otherthanhuman animal suffering represents a form of privacy invasion described as misery pimping. Misery pimping is when images of sad, abandoned, injured, suffering or deceased otherthanhuman animals are used to promote feelings of worry and guilt in humans. These feelings often result in higher monetary donations and greater levels of support for otherthanhuman animal-related causes, making them widely used (and generally accepted) in causes related to otherthanhuman animal welfare. As an alterna -tive to these emotional appeals, environmental campaigns could encourage an objective (i.e., emotionally detached) approach.

Alternatively, it may be argued that such images are a form of witnessing. The lens of witnessing has been engaged by various authors to highlight the normalized and unre -pentant  violence  brought  to  bear  upon  otherthanhuman  animals.  Kathryn  Gillespie, for example, exposes the embodied experiences of the emotional and physical world of farmed cows, while Alex Lockwood discusses how bearing witness can be a form of aca -demic activism. 65 In these circumstances, privacy functions clandestinely to shield perpetrators rather than to protect victims, offering no benefit to otherthanhuman animals, whose  experiences  remain unexposed, undiscussed, and unexamined. Any privacy violation  in  such  circumstances  might  be  described  as  what  Kathryn  Gillespie terms 'witnessing-as-politics' , or as Naisargi N. Dave refers to as a means of 'giving voice' to those bearing violence. 66 There is a  space for discourse regarding the nuances of confiden -tiality, privacy, and witnessing for otherthanhuman animals, which needs to be explo -red. However, researchers must remain vigilant that their attempts to give voice are not simply humans speaking for others and reinforcing power imbalances.

62 Georgia Kate Moloney et al., 'Is YouTube Promoting the Exotic Pet Trade? Analysis of the Global Public Perception of Popular YouTube Videos Featuring Threatened Exotic Animals,' PLoS One 16, no. 4 (2021): e0235451.

63 Tom P. Moorhouse et al., 'Information Could Reduce Consumer Demand for Exotic Pets,' Conservation Letters 10, no. 3 (2017): 337-45, https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12270.

64 Moorhouse et al., 'Information Could Reduce'.

65 Kathryn  Gillespie, The  Cow  with  Ear  Tag  #1389 (University  of  Chicago  Press,  2018),  https://doi. org/10.7208/chicago/9780226582993.001.0001;  Alex  Lockwood,  'Bodily  Encounter,  Bearing  Witness and the Engaged Activism of the Global Save Movement,' Animal Studies Journal 7 , no. 1 (2018): 104-26.

66 Kathryn Gillespie, 'Witnessing Animal Others: Bearing Witness, Grief, and the Political Function of Emotion,' Hypatia 31, no. 3 (2016): 572; Naisargi N. Dave, 'Witness: Humans, Animals, and the Politics of Becoming,' Cultural Anthropology 29, no. 3 (2014): 452, https://doi.org/10.14506/ca29.3.01.

## Conclusion

Numerous species now serve as active participants within both biological and sociolo -gical research, greatly enriching the data being collected. However, as we have demon -strated, the research ethics review process has not kept pace with privacy or consensual concerns surrounding otherthanhuman animals. Of the four key examples of anthrozoo -logical research discussed in this paper, all involved ethical issues pertinent to respecting and navigating otherthanhuman animal privacy within the research process. All, howe -ver, were issues that were not identified, or even considered important, by the university research ethics committees responsible for reviewing ethical standards and procedures purported to protect participants. It was only upon reflection by the researchers during the data collection processes that these issues surrounding otherthanhuman animal pri -vacy came into focus. It is our hope that by highlighting the ethical issues associated with otherthanhuman animal privacy during research, we will encourage researchers-and, by extension, ethics committees-to consider both the bodily and informational privacy needs of otherthanhuman research participants at varying stages of the research pro -cess. Even if no bodily, psychological, or emotional harm result from research practices, not affording otherthanhuman animals the same level of respect and dignity offered to human beings construes their lives as less ethically significant. When social others are deemed 'lesser-than' , they are in danger of being used or abused. As anthrozoologists who advocate for otherthanhuman research participants to be considered as ethically significant beings, we believe we should attempt to respect the consent and privacy of all individuals involved in, and affected by, our research. This is no easy feat, and resear -chers  are  faced  with  multiple  challenges  when  it  comes  to  formulating  practices  that respect both bodily privacy and the private spaces of otherthanhuman animals.

One problem is that 'otherthanhuman animal' itself is a broad label that cannot account for species-specific, societal, or cultural differences in levels of understanding, needs, or desires for privacy. 67 For example, an individual belonging to a primarily solitary-living species may be less tolerant to human presence than an individual who seeks out human company. In addition, such a broad label cannot account for differences between indivi -duals of the same species, such as an independent, free-living cat versus a companion cat who has always resided inside a human home. Therefore, we propose moving beyond 'human' and 'otherthanhuman' notions of privacy and towards thinking in terms of individual human, feline, pachyderm, or insect privacy.

Disclosure statement : The authors declare there are no conflicts of interests.

Funding statement: This study received no outside funding.

67 Brett Mills, 'Television Wildlife Documentaries and Animals' Right to Privacy.' Continuum 24, no. 2 (2010): 193-202. https://doi.org/10.1080/10304310903362726.

## References

- Aaltola, Elisa. ' Animal Suffering: Representations and the Act of Looking.' Anthrozoos 27 , no. 1 (2014): 19-31. https://doi.org/10.2752/175303714X13837396326297 .
- Andersdotter, Karolina. 'The Right to Read Without Being Read: Research Ethics in the Study of Digital Reading Behaviour.' Privacy Studies Journal 4 (2025): 1-24. https:// doi.org/10.7146/psj.v4i.150182.
- Arneson, Richard J. 'Egalitarian Justice versus the Right to Privacy?' Social Philosophy and Policy 17 , no. 2 (2000): 91-118. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0265052500002120.
- Berg, R. M.G., K. Møller, and P . J.H. Rossel. ' An Ethical Analysis of Proxy and Waiver of Consent in Critical Care Research.' Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica 57 , no. 4 (2013): 408-16. https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.12083.
- Birke, Lynda. 'Naming Names - or, What's in It for the Animals?' Humanimalia 1, no. 1 (2009): 1-9. https://doi.org/10.52537/humanimalia.10113.
- Botting, Jennifer, Erica van de Waal, and Luke Rendell. 'Comparing and Contrasting Pri -mate and Cetacean Culture.' In The Handbook of Culture and Biology: One , edited by José M. Causadias, Eva H. Telzer, and Nancy A. Gonzales. Wiley, 2017.
- Braverman, Irus. Zooland: The Institution of Captivity . Stanford University Press, 2012.
- Breen, Alexis J. ' Animal Culture Research Should Include Avian Nest Construction.' Biology Letters 17 , no. 7 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2021.0327 .
- Brønstad, Aurora, Christiane Newcomer, Thierry Decelle, Jeffrey I. Everitt, Javier Guil -len,  and  Kathy  Laber.  'Current  Concepts  of  Harm-Benefit  Analysis  of  Animal Experiments  -  Report  from  the  AALAS-FELASA  Working  Group  on  HarmBenefit  Analysis  -  Part  1.' Laboratory  Animals 50, no. 1 (2016): 1-20. https://doi. org/10.1177/0023677216642398.
- Buitelaar, J. C. 'Post-Mortem Privacy and Informational Self-Determination.' Ethics and Information Technology 19, no. 2 (2017): 129-42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-017-94219.
- Burghardt, Gordon M. 'Insights Found in Century-Old Writings on Animal Behaviour and  Some  Cautions  for  Today.' Animal  Behaviour 164 (2020): 241-49. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2020.02.010.
- Chappell, Jackie, and Alex Kacelnik. 'Tool Selectivity in a Non-Primate, the New Caledo -nian Crow (Corvus Moneduloides).' Animal Cognition 5, no. 2 (2002): 71-78. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s10071-002-0130-2.
- Coulter, Kendra. Animals, Work, and the Promise of Interspecies Solidarity . Palgrave Macmil -lan, 2016.
- Dave, Naisargi N. 'Witness: Humans, Animals, and the Politics of Becoming.' Cultural Anthropology 29, no. 3 (2014): 433-56. https://doi.org/10.14506/ca29.3.01.
- Davies, Charlotte Aull. Reflexive Ethnography: Guide to Researching Selves and Others . Rout -ledge, 2008.
- Dehnhardt, Guido, Christina Friese, and N Sachser. 'Sensitivity of the Trunk of Asian Elephants  for  Texture  Differences  of  Actively  Touched  Objects.' Zeitschrift  Fuer Saeugetierkunde 62, no. 2 (1997): 37-39.
- Dooren,  Thom  Van,  and  Deborah  Bird  Rose.  'Storied-Places  in  a  Multispecies  City.' Humanimalia 3, no. 2 (2012): 1-27 . https://doi.org/10.52537/humanimalia.10046.

- Emery, Nathan J., and Nicola S. Clayton. 'The Mentality of Crows: Convergent Evolution of Intelligence in Corvids and Apes.' Science 306, no. 5703 (2004): 1903-7 . https://doi. org/10.1126/science.1098410.
- EASE. Exeter Anthrozoology as Symbiotic Ethics Working Group. ' About Us,' University of Exeter. 2025. https://www.exeter.ac.uk/research/centres/ease/about/
- Ferdowsian, Hope. 'Human and Animal Research Guidelines: Aligning Ethical Con -structs with New Scientific Developments.' Bioethics 25, no. 8 (2011): 472-78. https:// doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8519.2011.01923.x.
- Fernandez, Eduardo J., Michael A. Tamborski, Sarah R. Pickens, and William Timber -lake. ' Animal-Visitor Interactions in the Modern Zoo: Conflicts and Interventions.' Applied  Animal  Behaviour  Science 120, no. 1-2 (2009): 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. applanim.2009.06.002.
- Foucault, Michel. The Birth of Biopolitics: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1978-1979 (Michel Foucault, Lectures at the Collège de France) . Translated by Graham Burchell. Edited by Arnold I. Davidson and Graham Burchell. Springer, 2008.
- Fripp, Deborah, Caryn Owen, Ester Quintana-Rizzo, Ari Shapiro, Kara Buckstaff, Kri -stine  Jankowski,  Randall  Wells,  and  Peter  Tyack.  'Bottlenose  Dolphin  (Tursiops Truncatus)  Calves  Appear  to  Model  Their  Signature  Whistles  on  the  Signature Whistles of Community Members.' Animal Cognition 8, no. 1 (2005): 17-26. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s10071-004-0225-z.
- Gillespie, Kathryn. The Cow  with Ear Tag  #1389 . 2018. https://doi.org/10.7208/chi -cago/9780226582993.001.0001.
- \_\_\_\_\_\_\_. 'Witnessing Animal Others: Bearing Witness, Grief, and the Political Function of Emotion.' Hypatia 31, no. 3 (2016): 572-88.
- Goodall, Jane. 'Feeding Behaviour of Wild Chimpanzees: A Preliminary Report.' Symposium of the Zoological Society of London 10 (1963): 39-48.
- Gostin, L.O., C. Vanchieri, and A. Pope. 'Introduction.' In Ethical Considerations for Research Involving Prisoners , edited by L.O. Gostin, C. Vanchieri, and A. Pope. National Aca -demies Press, 2007.
- Guenther, Katja M. The Lives and Deaths of Shelter Animals . Stanford University Press, 2020.
- Haraway, Donna J. 'A Manifesto for Cyborgs: Science, Technology, and Socialist Femi -nism in the 1980s.' Socialist Review 80 (1985): 65-107 .
- Hayles, N. Katherine. How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature, and Informatics . The University of Chicago Press, 1999.
- Haynes, M., J. Thornton, and S. C. Jones. ' An Exploratory Study on the Effect of Posi -tive  (Warmth  Appeal)  and  Negative  (Guilt  Appeal)  Print  Imagery  on  Donation Behaviour in Animal Welfare.' Faculty of Health & Behavioural Sciences-Papers , 2004, https://ro.uow.edu.au/hbspapers/80.
- Holland, Elise, Elizabeth Baily Wolf, Christine Looser, and Amy Cuddy. 'Visual Atten -tion  to  Powerful  Postures:  People  Avert  Their  Gaze  from  Nonverbal Dominance Displays.' Journal  of  Experimental  Social  Psychology 68 (2017): 60-67 . https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jesp.2016.05.001.
- Hooper,  J. Civets  in  Society:  Disappearance  Amidst  Global  Connection .  Sydney  University Press, in press.
- Hurn,  Samantha.  ' Anthrozoology:  An  Important  Subfield  in  Anthropology.'  Edited by Gerald Hartung and Matthias Herrgen. Interdisziplinäre Anthropologie: Jahrbuch

- 2/2014:  Gewalt  Und  Aggression 25 (2015): 179-88. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-65807410-4\_13.
- Keaveny, A. 'Responsible Shark and Ray Tourism: A Guide to Best Practice.' 2023. PADI. https://blog.padi.com/responsible-shark-and-ray-tourism-a-guide-to-best-practice/ PADI
- Kirksey, S. Eben, and S. Helmreich. 'The Emergence of Multispecies Ethnography.' Cultural Anthropology 25, no. 4 (2010): 545-76. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1360.2010.01069.x.
- König, Hannes J., Christian Kiffner, Stephanie Kramer-Schadt, Christine Fürst, Oliver Keuling, and Adam T. Ford. 'Human-Wildlife Coexistence in a Changing World.' Conservation Biology 34, no. 4 (2020): 786-94. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13513.
- Koning, Martijn de, Birgit Meyer, Annelies Moors, and Peter Pels. 'Guidelines for Anthro -pological Research: Data Management, Ethics, and Integrity.' Ethnography 20, no. 2 (2019): 170-74. https://doi.org/10.1177/1466138119843312.
- Kovács, Krisztina, Zsófia Virányi, Anna Kis, Borbála Turcsán, Ágnes Hudecz, Maria T. Marmota, Dóra Koller, Zsolt Rónai, Márta Gácsi, and József Topál. 'Dog-Owner Attachment Is Associated With Oxytocin Receptor Gene Polymorphisms in Both Parties. A Comparative Study on Austrian and Hungarian Border Collies.' Frontiers in Psychology 9, no. APR (2018): 1-15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00435.
- Laland,  Kevin  N,  and  William  Hoppitt.  'Do  Animals  Have  Culture?' Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews 12, no. 3 (2003): 150-59. https://doi.org/10.1002/ evan.10111.
- Lien,  Marianne  Elisabeth,  and  Gisli  Pálsson.  'Ethnography  Beyond  the  Human:  The 'Other-than-Human' in Ethnographic Work.' Ethnos 86, no. 1 (2021): 1-20. https://doi. org/10.1080/00141844.2019.1628796.
- Lindenmayer, David, and Ben Scheele. 'Do Not Publish.' Science 356, no. 6340 (2017): 800-801. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aan1362.
- Lockwood, Alex. 'Bodily Encounter, Bearing Witness and the Engaged Activism of the Global Save Movement.' Animal Studies Journal 7 , no. 1 (2018): 104-26.
- Malamud, Randy. 'The Problem with Zoos.' In The Oxford Handbook of Animal Studies , edited by Linda Kalof. Oxford University Press, 2017.
- McCallig, Damien. Facebook after Death: An Evolving Policy in a Social Network . International Journal of Law and Information Technology . Vol. 22, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijlit/ eat012.
- McComb, Karen, Cynthia Moss, Soila Sayialel, and Lucy Baker. 'Unusually Extensive Networks of Vocal Recognition in African Elephants.' Animal Behaviour 59, no. 6 (2000): 1103-9. https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.2000.1406.
- Mills, Brett. 'Television Wildlife Documentaries and Animals' Right to Privacy.' Continuum 24, no. 2 (2010): 193-202. https://doi.org/10.1080/10304310903362726.
- Moloney, Georgia Kate, Jonathan Tuke, Eleonora Dal Grande, Torben Nielsen, and AnneLise Chaber. 'Is YouTube Promoting the Exotic Pet Trade? Analysis of the Global Public  Perception  of  Popular  YouTube  Videos  Featuring  Threatened  Exotic  Ani -mals.' PLoS One 16, no. 4 (2021): e0235451.
- Moore, Adam D. 'Privacy: Its Meaning and Value.' American Philosophical Quarterly 40, no. 3 (2003): 215-27 . https://doi.org/10.2307/20010117 .

- Moorhouse,  Tom  P.,  Margaret  Balaskas,  Neil  C.  D'Cruze,  and  David  W.  Macdonald. 'Information Could Reduce Consumer Demand for Exotic Pets.' Conservation Letters 10, no. 3 (2017): 337-45. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12270.
- Mulligan, Deirdre K., Colin Koopman, and Nick Doty. 'Privacy Is an Essentially Con -tested Concept: A Multi-Dimensional Analytic for Mapping Privacy.' Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 374, no. 2083 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2016.0118.
- Mullin,  Molly.  ' Animals  and  Anthropology,' Society  and  Animals 10, no. 4 (2002): 387 . https://doi.org/10.1163/156853002320936854.
- Oliver, Catherine. 'Beyond-Human Ethics: The Animal Question in Institutional Ethical Reviews.' Area , 2021, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/area.12738.
- Ord,  Terry  J.,  Emília  P .  Martins,  Sidharth  Thakur,  Ketan  K.  Mane,  and  Katy  Börner. 'Trends  in  Animal  Behaviour  Research  (1968-2002):  Ethoinformatics  and  the Mining of Library Databases.' Animal Behaviour 69, no. 6 (2005): 1399-1413. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2004.08.020.
- Pearce, John, and Gianna Moscardo. 'Social Representations of Tourist Selfies: New Chal -lenges for Sustainable Tourism.' BEST EN Think Tank XV. The Environment-People Nexus in Sustainable Tourism: Finding the Balance , 2015, 59-73.
- Roberts, John Michael, and Teela Sanders. 'Before, during and after: Realism, Reflexivity and Ethnography.' Sociological Review 53, no. 2 (2005): 294-313. https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.1467-954X.2005.00515.x.
- Ross, Stephen R., Vivian M. Vreeman, and Elizabeth V. Lonsdorf. 'Specific Image Cha -racteristics Influence Attitudes about Chimpanzee Conservation and Use as Pets.' PLoS ONE 6, no. 7 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0022050.
- Roth-Cline, Michelle, and Robert M. Nelson. 'Parental Permission and Child Assent in Research on Children.' Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine 86, no. 3 (2013): 291-301.
- Roulet, Thomas J., Michael J. Gill, Sebastien Stenger, and David James Gill. 'Reconside -ring the Value of Covert Research: The Role of Ambiguous Consent in Participant Observation.' Organizational Research Methods 20, no. 3 (2017): 487-517 . https://doi. org/10.1177/1094428117698745.
- Schuppli, Caroline, and Carel P . Van Schaik. ' Animal Cultures: How We've Only Seen the Tip of the Iceberg.' Evolutionary Human Sciences 1 (2019): 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1017/ ehs.2019.1.
- Shapiro, Stuart. 'Places and Spaces: The Historical Interaction of Technology, Home,  and  Privacy.' Information  Society 14, no. 4 (1998): 275-84. https://doi. org/10.1080/019722498128728.
- Shepherd, Victoria, Mark Sheehan, Kerenza Hood, Richard Griffith, and Fiona Wood. 'Constructing  Authentic  Decisions:  Proxy  Decision  Making  for  Research  Invol -ving  Adults  Who  Lack  Capacity  to  Consent.' Journal  of  Medical  Ethics ,  2020, medethics-2019-106042. https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2019-106042.
- Smith, Adrian J., R. Eddie Clutton, Elliot Lilley, Kristine E.A Hansen, and Trond Brattelid. 'PREPARE: Guidelines for Planning Animal Research and Testing.' Laboratory Animals 52, no. 2 (2018): 135-41. https://doi.org/10.1177/0023677217724823.
- Soltis,  Joseph,  Tracy  E.  Blowers,  and  Anne  Savage.  'Measuring  Positive  and  Nega -tive  Affect  in  the  Voiced  Sounds  of  African  Elephants  (  Loxodonta  Africana  ).'

- The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 129, no. 2 (2011): 1059-66. https://doi. org/10.1121/1.3531798.
- Spicker,  Paul.  'Ethical  Covert  Research.' Sociology 45, no. 1 (2011): 118-33. https://doi. org/10.1177/0038038510387195.
- Swim, Janet K., and Brittany Bloodhart. 'Portraying the Perils to Polar Bears: The Role of Empathic and Objective Perspective-Taking Toward Animals in Climate Change Communication.' Environmental Communication 9, no. 4 (2015): 446-68. https://doi. org/10.1080/17524032.2014.987304.
- Szydlowski,  Michelle.  ' Framing  Conservation,  Colonialism  and  Care:  Captive  Endangered Asian Elephants (Elephas Maximus) in Nepal .' University of Exeter, 2021.
- \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_.  ' Asking  Consent  from  Pachyderm  Persons:  Facing  Ethical  Complexities  in Multispecies  Research.'  In Animal  Life  and  Human  Culture:  Anthrozoology  Studies , edited by I. Frasin, G. Bodi, S. Bulei, and C.D. Vasiliu. Presa Universitara Clujeana, 2022.
- \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_. Elephant  Tourism  in  Nepal:  Historical  Perspectives,  Current  Health  and  Welfare Challenges, and Future Directions. CAB International, 2024.
- Uexküll, Jakob Von, and Geoffrey Winthrop-Young. A Foray into the Worlds of Animals and Humans: With a Theory of Meaning . University of Minnesota Press, 2010.
- UKRC. 'UK Research Council. 2021. Framework for Research Ethics,' UKRC. 2021. https:// www.ukri.org/councils/esrc/guidance-for-applicants/research-ethics-guidance/fra -mework-for-research-ethics/.
- US-DHHS. 'United States Department of Health and Human Services. Requirements for the Use of Human Subjects in Research,' 2018. https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulati -ons-and-policy/regulations/45-cfr-46/index.html#46.101.
- Waal, Frans B.M. De. 'What Is an Animal Emotion?' Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1224, no. 1 (2011): 191-206. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2010.05912.x.
- Warwick, Clifford. 'The Morality of the Reptile 'Pet' Trade.' Journal of Animal Ethics 4, no. 1 (2014): 74. https://doi.org/10.5406/janimalethics.4.1.0074.
- Whiten, A, J Goodall, W C McGrew, T Nishida, V Reynolds, Y Sugiyama, C E G Tutin, R W Wrangham, and C Boesch. 'Cultures in Chimpanzees.' Nature 399, no. 6737 (1999): 682-85. https://doi.org/10.1038/21415.
- Wolfe, Cary. Animal Rites: American Culture, the Discourse of Species, and Posthumanist Theory . University of Chicago Press, 2003.