Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41463833›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2025

Understanding Tourists' Perceptions of Animal Welfare, Governance, and Conservation: Evidence from the Panda Base.

David Fennell, Yulei Guo, Richard Butler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

David FennellDepartment of Geography and Tourism Studies, Brock University, St. Catharines, ON L2S 3A1, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-7256-1152
Yulei GuoChengdu Research Base of Giant Panda Breeding, Chengdu 510081, China.ORCID 0000-0002-2115-5752
Richard ButlerStrathclyde Business School, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow G1 1XQ, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4701-5253

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Wildlife viewing has long been a central feature of tourism. However, growing concerns over the welfare of animals involved have raised critical questions about human management and the use of wildlife. In response, scholars have developed frameworks to assess and guide the operations of animal-based attractions. This paper applies such a framework to the Chengdu Research Base of Giant Panda Breeding in China, empirically examining visitor perceptions of animal welfare management practices. Drawing on survey data from over 1000 visitors, the study finds that, overall, tourists hold positive evaluations of the Base's governance, welfare, and conservation practices. However, these perceptions are influenced by factors such as prior exposure to panda-related social media and individual knowledge of animal welfare, highlighting the role of mediated experiences in shaping visitor judgments. The findings underscore the need for further research on ethical wildlife tourism practices and suggest that engaging and empowering tourists-through education, participatory evaluation, and digital platforms-can enhance both public awareness and the effectiveness of conservation and welfare initiatives.

Indexed as

conservationgovernancePanda Basevisitor perceptionwelfarewildlife tourist attraction

Identifiers

PMID41463833
PMCPMC12729735

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.