Animal ambassador encounters (AAE), where visitors come into close-contact with animals, are popular in zoos and are advocated as promoting connection to wild species. However, educational and animal-welfare implications are relatively unknown. We conducted a systematic literature review (PRISMA) to investigate visitor and animal outcomes of AAE. We identified 19 peer reviewed articles and 13 other records focused on AAEs. Although we found net positive or neutral impacts overall, several studies indicated that high-intensity visitor contact and long-term exposure may be detrimental to animal welfare. Most studies lacked rigour and claims were based on an absence of negative impacts rather than evidence of benefits. Multiple publications were derived from the same datasets and there were no standardised measures for either welfare or education impacts. Of the peer-reviewed articles, just two considered both education and welfare. Education studies often used perceived learning or only post-experience testing. Welfare studies used small samples (median n = 4; range 1–59), and limited measures of welfare. In order to justify the continued use of AAEs in modern zoos, animal welfare costs must be proven to be minimal whilst having demonstrable and substantial visitor educational value. Large-scale, standardised impact assessments of both education and welfare impacts are needed.

Live animal shows, which combine animal facts with trained behaviours, are commonly used to engage zoo visitors globally. However, such shows have been criticised for portraying a potentially unhelpful image of ‘performing animals’ and have raised issues of animal welfare ethics. Little is known about the educational effectiveness of these shows. Furthermore, the impact of ‘tricks’, used as attention-grabbing hooks, has received limited research attention. We evaluated the impact of a sea lion and a mixed species bird show on audience knowledge of animal facts. Over a quarter of zoo visitors attended some form of live animal show, demonstrating quantitatively that they are a major potential source of knowledge transfer. Show audiences were questioned immediately before (n = 299) or after (n = 265) each performance about relevant show content knowledge. Additionally, a general zoo visitor survey (n = 160) investigated post-visit knowledge recall. Audiences demonstrated significantly higher animal knowledge post-show compared to pre-show. Conservation action awareness showed weak positive change post-show. Audience education levels and weather conditions also had a weak positive effect on correct responses. However, animals performing trick-type behaviours were found to cause confusion regarding natural adaptations. We conclude that live animal shows should prioritise natural behaviours with a focus on conservation action.

The experience of visiting a zoo as a child can be remembered decades later and potentially influences future environmental attitudes. In light of steadily growing criticism of the ethics and value of live animal shows, some zoos are seeking alternative means of delivering ‘edutainment’ to a broad audience. One such alternative is through theatre. We examine whether a family-orientated zoo theatre performance achieved animal knowledge and conservation awareness impacts. Impact was demonstrated if individuals correctly stated more animal and conservation facts post-performance compared to pre-performance. The theatre production was seen to have a very strong positive effect on both children’s (pre-performance s.d.=1.69, post-performance s.d.=1.79 effect size (d)=0.70, w = 4403.5, p ≤ 0.001) and adults’ (pre-performance s.d.=1.88, post-performance s.d.=2.14, effect size (d)=0.71, w = 1931.5, p ≤ 0.001) learning. Significantly more correct answers were given post-performance compared to pre-performance. We conclude that educational, family theatre can effectively deliver animal information and raise awareness of conservation efforts within a leisure setting. Further studies are needed to investigate the impact of theatre on conservation actions. Comparative studies between live animal shows and theatre could establish the best methods for conveying conservation information to zoo visitors.

Images containing both animals and humans (two‐shot images) are popular across social media and zoo advertising. However, these images, even when taken in ethical and conservation settings, have the potential for misinterpretation and may inadvertently promote the illegal wildlife trade, exotic pet trade or photo‐prop industries. We examined whether zoo visitors' (n = 531) attitudes and stated Willingness to Donate (WTD) altered depending on whether they viewed a two‐shot image set in a photo‐prop setting (typically associated with negative welfare) or in a zoo or wild setting. All images, including photo‐prop, were generally viewed positively regardless of context. Zoo‐based images received a greater number of comments relating to concern for the animal's environment or welfare compared to other images, although numbers were still relatively low. This indicates a lack of awareness about the photo‐prop industry and misconceptions about modern welfare practices in zoos, thus reflecting a need for improved education in these areas. Two‐shot images in zoo settings elicited significantly higher stated WTD than images in wild or photo‐prop settings or when an animal was pictured alone. Suggesting zoo‐based images may be more effective for conservation campaigns than traditional images of an animal in its environment. Furthermore, images featuring a uniformed keeper plus an animal do not appear to increasing desire for pet ownership, indicating that they can be used in zoo advertising with minimal negative consequences.

It is now well established that human-induced species extinctions and habitat degradation are currently occurring at unprecedented rates. To halt and reverse this decline, the international community adopted the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), as part of the Kunming–Montreal Biodiversity Package, in December 2022. We clarify what this new framework means for conservation zoos and aquariums in their mission to prevent species extinction by highlighting areas of focus. We explain why it is necessary that conservation zoos and aquariums establish the appropriate mechanisms for contributing towards such a framework to help validate their role in the 21st Century. Conservation zoos and aquariums should be reassured that much of their work already fits within the GBF. However, the current mechanisms for individual zoos and aquariums to directly contribute to the implementation of the GBF mostly rely on close collaboration with individual national governments and/or are only possible at a national level. It is therefore critical that national, regional, and global zoo membership organisations take a leading role in championing the work of their members. Equally, adequately linking the efforts of zoos and aquariums to the national implementation of international instruments, such as the GBF, is imperative to ensure that these organizations’ contributions feed into the understanding we have of global progress towards the implementation of international instruments.