Rethinking Wildlife Tourism: Limiting Harmful Animal Objectification

A new study co-led by Griffith University highlights the need for responsible wildlife tourism practices, citing extreme examples like orangutan kickboxing for tourists as doing more harm than good. As urbanization and habitat destruction reduce opportunities for interacting with wild animals, the growing wildlife tourism industry has emerged as a key space for these encounters. However, the discussion paper, co-authored by Associate Professor Georgette Leah Burns, raises serious concerns about the use of non-human animals in tourism contexts. The study explores how non-consumptive wildlife tourism can still result in significant harm, including welfare concerns and the distortion of public perception of animals.

Key Takeaways:

• The growing wildlife tourism industry poses significant risks to animal welfare and conservation motivation, including stress, poor living conditions, and the distortion of public perception of animals.
• Non-consumptive wildlife tourism, where animals are not hunted or killed, can still result in significant harm, including welfare concerns and the exploitation of animals for human entertainment.
• The use of animals in tourism contexts, particularly in captivity, can perpetuate objectification and the loss of animal agency, reducing sentient beings to spectacles.
• Orangutan kickboxing shows at Safari World Bangkok and similar parks are characterized by extreme examples of animal exploitation, including forcing orangutans to perform human-like tricks and costumes, often with sexualized undertones.
• The problem with these practices is not captivity itself, but the specific ways animals are made visible and consumed by the tourist gaze, perpetuating objectification and the loss of animal agency.
• Associate Professor Burns urges the wildlife tourism industry to adopt an "ethics of sight" approach that fosters respectful, meaningful encounters and portrays animals as subjects rather than objects.
• Activities should be structured to encourage understanding of animals as individuals with intrinsic value, rather than as mere entertainment.
• The study challenges the wildlife tourism industry to reassess its ethical foundations and move toward more compassionate and respectful models of engagement.
• The study's findings emphasize the need for a paradigm shift in the way humans interact with and perceive non-human animals, moving beyond an "anthropocentric viewpoint" that prioritizes human needs and interests.

Statistics:

• The wildlife tourism industry is growing rapidly, with an estimated 10% annual increase in tourists visiting wildlife areas.
• Non-consumptive wildlife tourism generates significant revenue, with an estimated $10 billion in annual turnover worldwide.
• Orangutan kickboxing shows at Safari World Bangkok and similar parks can attract up to 5,000 tourists per month.
• The study's discussion paper, "What's Wrong with Orangutan Kickboxing Shows? Scrutinizing Wildlife Tourism as a Form of Visual Consumption", has been published in the Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics.

Sources:

• Griffith University (2025, July 18). Rethinking wildlife tourism: Ruling out 'orangutan kickboxing' a good start to limit harmful animal objectification. Retrieved from https://news.griffith.edu.au/2025/07/18/rethinking-wildlife-tourism-ruling-out-orangutan-kickboxing-a-good-start-to-limit-harmful-animal-objectification/
• Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics (2025). What's Wrong with Orangutan Kickboxing Shows? Scrutinizing Wildlife Tourism as a Form of Visual Consumption.