Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Evaluating the ethical acceptability of animal research


The ethical acceptability of animal research is typically evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Legislation such as Directive 2010/63/EU on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes provides guidance for ethical evaluation of animal use proposals but does not dictate the outcome, leaving this determination to the ethical review committees of individual institutions. The authors assess different ethics models and how these are reflected in the guidelines of Directive 2010/63/EU. They also describe a matrix for carrying out harm–benefit analyses of animal use proposals, which they identified by examining the practices of three ethical review committees in the Netherlands. Finally, they discuss how this matrix can be applied by ethical review committees at other institutions.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type



Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: A harm–benefit analysis matrix, illustrating the balance between harm to the animals involved in a study and potential scientific and societal benefits of the study.


  1. Franco, N.H. Animal experiments in biomedical research: a historical perspective. Animals 3, 238–273 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. European Union. Directive 2010/63/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2010 on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes. Official Journal of the European Union L276, 33–79 (2010).

  3. Brown, M.T. Working Ethics: Strategies for Decision Making and Organizational Responsibility (Jossey-Bass Inc., San Francisco, 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Toulmin, S. The tyranny of principles. The Hastings Center Report 11, 31–39 (1981).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Wet op de dierproeven 12 September 2014.

  6. Russell, W.M.S. & Burch, R.L. The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique (Methuen, London, 1959).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bateson, P. When to experiment on animals. New Scientist 109, 30–32 (1986).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Theune, E. & de Cock Buning, T. Grenzen aan dierexperimenteel onderzoek: toetsingsprocedure. Proefdier en Wetenschap vol. 4 (Rijksuniversiteit Leiden, Leiden, the Netherlands, 1991).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Porter, D.G. Ethical scores for animal experiments. Nature 356, 101–102 (1992).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Stafleu, F.R., Tramper, R., Vorstenbosch, J. & Joles, J.A. The ethical acceptability of animal experiments: proposal for a system to support decision-making. Lab. Anim. 33, 295–303 (1999).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Voipio, H-M., Hirsjarvi, P., Ritskes-Hoitinga, M. & Nevalainen, T. in Proceedings of 9th FELASA Symposium: 4–17 June 2004, Nantes, France (eds. Gamble, M.R. & Millington, S.) 60–62 (Laboratory Animals Ltd., London, 2004).

    Google Scholar 

  12. European Union. National Competent Authorities for the implementation of Directive 2010/63/EU on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes. A working document on Project Evaluation and Retrospective Assessment. 18–19 September 2013, Brussels, Belgium.

  13. Innes, C.C. Ethical regulation and animal science: why animal behaviour is not so special. Anim. Behav. 74, 15e22 (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Bout, H.J. in De Weging Gewogen: Beschouwingen Over Ethiek en Dierproeven (eds. Swart, J., Jonker, M. & Tramper, R.) 79–87 (DAMON, Budel, the Netherlands, 2009).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Directive 2010/63 Annex VIII; COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING DECISION of 14 November 2012: establishing a common format for the submission of the information pursuant to Directive 2010/63/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes (2012/707/EU).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Henriëtte J. Bout.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bout, H., van Vlissingen, J. & Karssing, E. Evaluating the ethical acceptability of animal research. Lab Anim 43, 411–414 (2014).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing