Contemporary Perspectives on the Development of Australia’s Animal Research Regulation

Abstract

This thesis considers historical and current practices in Australian animal research. I address: (i) considerations in animal model choice; (ii) Australian regulatory structures in animal research; (iii) transparency in Australian animal research; and (iv) transnational comparisons of these themes. I review the literature on Australian animal research regulation from historical and contemporary perspectives and then situate my research questions within their global and historical context by reviewing the history of animal use in experimentation. In a case study considering animal model choice, I review research in psychology using Australian marsupials in the place of standard model organisms. The primary aim is to evaluate the nature of studies choosing to use marsupial species. I am interested in how animal model choice is influenced by different factors such as the research question, the suitability of the animal to a research environment, and how the animal is framed in broader society. This discussion demonstrates that there are useful experimental models amongst Australia’s marsupial species. I address changes in Australian regulatory structures around animal research through the framework of The Code1, which guides Australian legislation on animal research. Replacement as a construct is considered here as a vehicle of change, with regulation and practice moving away from traditional animal models and exploring alternatives, motivated by ethical concerns and the need for better translation to human clinical outcomes. I emphasise the importance of the Australian Government and public supporting the development of alternatives to animal models. I argue that transparency is a vital element of the scientific process, and this is particularly true for research that makes instrumental use of animals. I appraise the processes Animal Ethics Committees (AECs) undertake in reviewing and approving applications for animal research. I respond to a claim that these committees do not reject projects by conducting a quantitative analysis of application outcomes in a sample of Australian AECs. I conclude, based on this research, that changes relating to transparency should be implemented within the AEC process to ensure public trust. A transnational comparison of the themes that emerged through the discussion of historical and current practices in Australian animal research frames the discussion around how Australia may be different. I discuss the state of transparency in the US, the UK, Canada and Europe, comparing the extent to which this has been made a priority. I then evaluate and compare the processes and structures in place for the review and approval of animal research in these jurisdictions. Australia has fallen behind other countries in implementing transparency within the regulatory structures of animal research, and in supporting the development and validation of alternative non-animal models. I present concluding statements in relation to Australia’s current regulation of animal research and the state of animal research transparency. I also discuss the future of animal research in light of claims that the translation of animal research to human outcomes is poor; emerging non-animal research models become crucial from a practical standpoint, and there is a need for greater government investment.