Open Access
Research (Published online: 05-09-2017)
3. Zoo agent's measure in applying the five freedoms principles for animal welfare
Argyo Demartoto, Robertus Bellarminus Soemanto and Siti Zunariyah
Veterinary World, 10(9): 1026-1034

Argyo Demartoto: Department of Sociology, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Indonesia.
Robertus Bellarminus Soemanto: Department of Sociology, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Indonesia.
Siti Zunariyah: Department of Sociology, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Indonesia.

doi: 10.14202/vetworld.2017.1026-1034

Share this article on [Facebook] [LinkedIn]

Article history: Received: 04-04-2017, Accepted: 04-08-2017, Published online: 05-09-2017

Corresponding author: Argyo Demartoto


Citation: Demartoto A, Soemanto RB, Zunariyah S (2017) Zoo agent's measure in applying the five freedoms principles for animal welfare, Veterinary World, 10(9): 1026-1034.

Background: Animal welfare should be prioritized not only for the animal's life sustainability but also for supporting the sustainability of living organism's life on the earth. However, Indonesian people have not understood it yet, thereby still treating animals arbitrarily and not appreciating either domesticated or wild animals.

Aim: This research aimed to analyze the zoo agent's action in applying the five freedoms principle for animal welfare in Taman Satwa Taru Jurug (thereafter called TSTJ) or Surakarta Zoo and Gembira Loka Zoo (GLZ) of Yogyakarta Indonesia using Giddens structuration theory.

Materials and Methods: The informants in this comparative study with explorative were organizers, visitors, and stakeholders of zoos selected using purposive sampling technique. The informants consisted of 19 persons: 8 from TSTJ (Code T) and 10 from GLZ (Code G) and representatives from Natural Resource Conservation Center of Central Java (Code B). Data were collected through observation, in-depth interview, and Focus Group Discussion and Documentation. Data were analyzed using an interactive model of analysis consisting of three components: Data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing. Data validation was carried out using method and data source triangulations.

Results: Food, nutrition, and nutrition level have been given consistent with the animals' habit and natural behavior. Animal keepers always maintain their self-cleanliness. GLZ has provided cages according to the technical instruction of constructing ideal cages, but the cages in TSTJ are worrying as they are not consistent with standard, rusty, and damaged, and animals have no partner. Some animals in GLZ are often sick, whereas some animals in TSTJ are dead due to poor maintenance. The iron pillars of cages restrict animal behavior in TSTJ so that they have not had freedom to behave normally yet, whereas, in GLZ, they can move freely in original habitat. The animals in the two zoos have not been free from disruption, stress, and pressure due to the passing over vehicles.

Conclusion: There should be strategic communication, information, and education, community development, and law enforcement for the animal welfare.

Keywords: agent, animal welfare, structure, the five freedoms, zoo.


1. Beck, B.B. (1995) Reintroduction, zoos, conservation and animal welfare. In: Norton, B.G., Hutchins, M. and Maple, T.L., editors. Ethics on the Ark: Zoos, Animal Welfare and Wildlife Conservation. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington. p155-163.

2. Patrick, P.G., Matthews, C.E., Ayers, D.F. and Tunnicliffe, S.D. (2007) Conservation and education: Prominent themes in zoo mission statement. J. Environ. Educ.,38(3): 53-60. [Crossref]

3. United Nations. (2016) The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2016. United Nations, New York.

4. D'Eath, R.B., Tolkamp, B.J., Kynazakis, L. and Lawrence, A.B. (2009) Freedom from hunger and prevent obesity: The animal welfare implications of reducing food quantity or quality. Anim. Behav., 77: 275-288. [Crossref]

5. McCulloch, S.P. (2013) A critique of FAWC's five freedoms as a framework for the analysis of animal welfare. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics, 26: 959-975. [Crossref]

6. de Vries, M., Bokkers, E.A.M., van Schaik, G., Botreau, R., Engel, B., Dijkstra, T. and de Boer, J.M. (2013) Evaluating the results of the welfare quality multi-criteria evaluation model for classification of dairy cattle welfare at the herd level. Int. J. Dairy Sci., 96: 6264-6273. [Crossref]

7. Anonymous. (2014) The Five Freedoms; Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals: Australia. Available from: Accessed on 15-01-2016.

8. Mellor, D.J. (2016) Updating animal welfare thinking: Moving beyond the "five freedoms" towards "a life worth living". Animals, 6(3): 21. [Crossref]

9. Haynes, R.P. (2008) Animal Welfare: Competing Conceptions and their Ethical Implications. Springer, London. [Crossref]

10. Beaver, B.V. (2010) Welfare of animals: Introduction. In: Breed, M.D. and Moore, J., editors. Encyclopedia of Animal Behavior. Vol. 1. Academic Press, Oxford. p585-589. [Crossref]

11. Kagan, R. and Vease, J. (2010) Challenges of zoo animal welfare. In: Kleiman, D.G., Thompson, K.V. and Baer, C.K., editors. Wild Mammals in Captivity Principles and Techniques for Zoo Management. 2nd ed. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, London. p11-21.

12. Appleby, M.C., Mench, J.A., Olsson, J.A.S. and Hughes, B.A., editors. (2011) Animal Welfare. 2nd ed. CAB International Publishing, Wallingford, Oxfordshire, UK.

13. Ingenbleek, P.T.M., Immink, V.M., Spoolder, H.A.M., Bokma, M.H. and Keeling, L.J. (2012) EU animal welfare policy: Developing a comprehensive policy framework. Food Polish, 37(6): 690-699. [Crossref]

14. Jacques, S. (2014) Science and animal welfare in France and European union: Rules, constraints, achievements. Meat Sci., 98(3): 484-489. [Crossref] [PubMed]

15. Bradfield, J.F., Bennett, B.T. and Gillett, C.S. (2014) Oversight of research animal welfare in the United States. Laboratory Animals Regulations and Recommendations for Global Collaborative Research. Ch. 2. Academic Press, Waltham, MA. p5-59. [Crossref]

16. Tribe, A. (2001) Wildlife Tourism Research Report Series: No. 14. Status Assessment of Wildlife Tourism in Australia Series.

17. Catibog-Sinha, C. (2008) Zoo tourism: Biodiversity conservation through tourism. J. Ecotourism, 7(2-3): 155. [Crossref]

18. Patrick, P.G. and Tunnicliffe, S.D. (2013) Zoo Talk. Springer, Netherlands. [Crossref]

19. Swaisgood, R.R. and Shepherdson, D.J. (2005) Scientific approaches to enrichment and stereotypies in zoo animals: What's been done and where should we go next? Zoo. Biol., 24: 499-518. [Crossref]

20. WAZA (World Association of Zoos and Aquariums). (2005) Building a Future for Wildlife: The World Zoo and Aquarium Conservation Strategy. Bern, Switzerland: World Association of Zoos and Aquariums.

21. Rabb, G.B. and Saunders, C.D. (2005) The future of zoos and aquariums: Conservation and caring. Int. Zoo. Yearb., 39(1): 1-26. [Crossref]

22. Hosey, G., Melfi, V. and Pankhurst, S. (2013) Zoo Animals: Behavior, Management and Welfare. 2nd ed. Oxford University Press, United Kingdom.

23. Stevens, P.M.C. and McAlister, E. (2003) Ethics in zoos. Int. Zoo Yearb., 38: 98-101. [Crossref]

24. Giddens, A. (1984) The Constitution of Society: Outline of The Theory of Structuration. Polity Press, Cambridge.

25. Stones, R. (2005) Structuration Theory. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, NY. [Crossref]

26. Craib, I. (2011) Anthony Giddens (Routledge Revivals). Routledge, London.

27. Bell, C.E. (2001) Encyclopedia of the World's Zoos. Routledge, Lincoln, United Kingdom.

28. Club, R. and Mason, G. (2002) A Review of the Welfare of Zoo Elephants in Europe. University of Oxford and Royal Society for the Protection and Care of Animal, Oxford.

29. Hewson, C.J. (2003) Can we assess welfare? Can. Vet. J., 44: 749-753. [PubMed] [PMC]

30. Grandin, T. (2014) Animal welfare and society concerns finding the missing link. Meat Sci., 98: 461-469. [Crossref] [PubMed]

31. Kumar, H.B.C., Lokesha, K.M., Madhavaprasad, C.B., Shilpa, V.T., Karabasanavar, N.S. and Kumar, A. (2013) Occupational zoonoses in zoo and wildlife veterinarians in India. Vet. World, 6(9): 605-613. [Crossref]

32. Emmanuel, J., Awosanya, H.O. and Akande, H.O. (2015) Animal health care seeking behavior of pets or livestock owners and knowledge and awareness on zoonoses in a university community. Vet. World, 8(7): 841-847. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]

33. World Health Organization. (2015) Zoonoses. Available from: Accessed on 18-10-2016.

34. Velarde, A. and Dalmau, A. (2012) Animal welfare assessment at slaughter in Europe: Moving from inputs to outputs. Meat Sci., 92: 244-251. [Crossref]

35. Andreasen, S.N., Sandoe, P. and Forkman, B. (2014) Can animal-based welfare assessment be simplified? A comparison of welfare quality protocol for dairy cattle and the simpler and less time consuming protocol developed by the Danish Cattle Federation. Anim. Welf., 23: 81-94.

36. Hemsworth, P.H., Rice, M., Karlen, M.G., Calleja, L., Barnett, J.L., Nash, J. and Coleman, G.J. (2011) Human animal interactions at abattoirs: Relationships between handling and animal stress in sheep and cattle. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 135: 24-33. [Crossref]

37. Munoz, D., Strappini, A. and Gallo, C. (2012) Animal welfare indicators to detect problems in cattle stunning box. Arch. Med. Vet., 44: 297-302.

38. Schwartzkopf-Genswein, K.S., Faucitano, L., Dodger, S., Shand, P., Gonzales, L.A. and Crowe, T.G. (2012) Road transport of cattle, swine and poultry in North America, and its impact on animal welfare and meat quality: A review. Meat. Sci., 92: 227-243. [Crossref]

39. Webster, J. (2005) Animal Welfare Limping Towards Eden: A Practical Approach to Redressing the Problem of Our Dominion over the Animals. Blackwell Publ., Oxford, UK. [Crossref]

40. Fraser, D. (2008) Understanding Animal Welfare: The Science in Its Cultural Context. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford, UK.

41. Ohl, F. and van der Staay, F.J. (2012) Animal welfare: At the interface between science and society. Vet. J., 192(1): 13-19. [Crossref] [PubMed]

42. Spinka, M. (2012) Social dimension of emotions and its implication for animal welfare. Anim. Behav. Sci., 138(3-4): 170-181. [Crossref]

43. Patton, M.Q. (2015) Integrating theory and practice. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. 4th ed. Sage Publications Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA.

44. Creswell, J.W. (2008) Educational research planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Pearson Merril Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

45. Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M. and Saldana, J. (2014) Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook. Sage Publication Inc., California.

46. Koknaroglu, H. and Akunal, T. (2013) Animal welfare: An animal science approach. Meat Sci., 95(4): 821-827. [Crossref] [PubMed]

47. Grandin, T. (2010b) Improving animal welfare: A practical approach. CAB International Publishing, Wallingford, Oxfordshire, UK.

48. Kagan, R., Carter, S. and Allard, S. (2015) A universal animal welfare framework for zoos. J. Appl. Anim. Welfare Sci., 18: S1-S10. [Crossref]

49. Spencer, T.E. (2013) Early pregnancy: Concepts, challenges and potential solutions. Anim. Front., 3: 48-55. [Crossref]

50. Hanson, E. (2002) Animal Attractions: Nature on Display in American Zoos. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.

51. Broom, D.M. (2010) Animal welfare: An aspect of care, sustainability, and food quality required by the public. J. Vet. Med. Educ., 37: 83-88. [Crossref] [PubMed]

52. Wells, D.L. (2005) A note on the influence of visitors on the behavior and welfare of zoo-housed gorillas. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 93(1-2): 13-17. [Crossref]

53. Grandin, T. (2012) Developing measures to audit welfare of cattle and pigs at slaughter. Anim. Welf., 21: 351-356. [Crossref]

54. Grandin, T. (2005) Maintenance of good animal welfare standards in beef plants by use of auditing programs. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc., 225: 370-373. [Crossref]

55. Swai, E.S., Schoonman, L. and Daborn, C.J. (2010) Knowledge and attitude towards zoonose among animal health workers and livestock keepers in Arusha and Tanga, Tanzania. Tanzan. J. Health Res., 12(4): 282-288. [Crossref]

56. Gregory, N.G. (2004) Physiology and Behavior of Animal Suffering. Blackwell Science, Oxford, UK. [Crossref]

57. Koene, P. (2013) Behavioral ecology of captive species: Using behavioral adaptations to assess and enhance welfare of nonhuman zoo animals. J. Appl. Anim. Welf. Sci., 16: 360-380. [Crossref] [PubMed]

58. Mellor, D.J. (2015) Positive welfare states and promoting environment-focused and animal-to-animal interactive behaviors. N. Z. Vet. J., 63: 9-16. [Crossref] [PubMed]

59. Jhon, K., Kazwala, R. and Mfinanga, G.S. (2007) Knowledge of causes, clinical features and diagnosis of common zoo-noses among medical practitioners in Tanzania. BMC. Infect. Dis., 8: 162. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]

60. Grandin, T. (1997) Assessment of stress during handling and transport. J. Anim. Sci., 75: 249-257. [Crossref] [PubMed]

61. Mader, T.L., Davis, M.S. and Brown-Brandl, T. (2005) Environmental factors influencing heat stress in feedlot cattle. J. Anim. Sci., 84: 712-719. [Crossref]

62. Moss, A. and Esson, M. (2010) Visitor interest in zoo animals and the implications for collection planning and zoo education programmes. Zoo Biol., 29(6): 715. [Crossref]

63. Choo, Y., Todd, P.A. and Li, D. (2011) Visitor effects on zoo orangutan in two novel, naturalistic enclosure. Anim. Behav. Sci., 133(1-2): 78-86. [Crossref]