Naturalness and the Legitimacy of Thoroughbred Racing: A Photo-Elicitation Study with Industry and Animal Advocacy Informants.
Authors: Bergmann Iris M
Journal: Animals : an open access journal from MDPI
Summary
# Editorial Summary How industry stakeholders and animal advocates conceptualise "naturalness" in thoroughbred racing has profound implications for breeding regulations, training practices and ultimately horse welfare—yet these two groups rarely agree on what constitutes natural behaviour in racehorses. Bergmann's qualitative study used semi-structured interviews and photo-elicitation with key informants from the US, Australia and the UK, presenting images of racehorses on race day to explore how different stakeholder groups framed common racing practices through the lens of naturalness. Industry representatives consistently defended current racing practices by characterising them as natural or normal, downplaying welfare concerns, whilst animal advocates questioned whether these practices aligned with horses' intrinsic behavioural needs. This fundamental divergence is problematic: the racing industry's tendency to naturalise practices—potentially misrepresenting what horses naturally require—risks undermining the sport's legitimacy as public understanding of equine welfare science advances. For farriers, vets and other equine professionals engaged with racing, recognising this conceptual divide is essential; applying welfare science rather than appeals to "naturalness" may offer a more defensible framework for justifying or questioning specific management and training approaches.
Read the full abstract on PubMed
Practical Takeaways
- •Be aware that industry stakeholders and welfare advocates use different definitions of 'natural' when justifying or critiquing racing practices—this gap in understanding hinders welfare improvements
- •Recognise that common racing practices defended as 'natural' may actually conflict with horses' welfare needs; practitioners should evaluate practices based on evidence rather than tradition
- •Understand that public perception of racing legitimacy increasingly depends on transparent, science-based justification of practices rather than appeals to naturalness or tradition
Key Findings
- •Industry informants tend to naturalise and normalise common racing practices while downplaying their welfare impacts, contrasting with animal advocacy perspectives
- •Conceptualisations of naturalness differ significantly between industry and animal advocacy groups in thoroughbred racing discourse
- •Misrepresentations of what is natural pose risks to thoroughbred welfare and may undermine the legitimacy of racing as public understanding of welfare practices grows
- •The notion of naturalness could be leveraged as a tool for improved thoroughbred protection if reframed away from industry normalization