Jose-Carlos Garcia-Rosell ¹ Valerie A. Sheppard ^2* David A. Fennell ³

• ¹ University of Lapland, Rovaniemi, Lapland, Finland
• ² Independent researcher, British Columbia, Canada
• ³ Brock University, St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada

Only recently has the scope expanded to include animals as a subject of dark tourism. This can also be viewed as a consequence of the growing debate surrounding the darker side of animal-based tourism. For instance, documentaries like "Blackfish" and "Sled Dogs" have sparked public discussions and ethical concerns regarding the use of animals for entertainment. Similarly, the case of Marius the giraffe, who was euthanized and dissected publicly at the Copenhagen Zoo, as well as the sad story of Pizza, the polar bear displayed in a Chinese shopping mall, are examples of cases which have intensified the ethical scrutiny of such attractions. There are currently a series of recent works confirming the link between animals, tourists, and the darker side of the tourism industry (e.g., Fennell et al., 2021;Fennell et al., 2020;García-Rosell & Hancock, 2024;López López & Quintero Venegas, 2021;Panko & George, 2018). This emerging body of literature attempts to frame the exploitation and use of animals within the context of dark tourism, allowing for the further exploration of ethical and moral issues related to the status of animals in the tourism industry. In particular, the work of Fennell et al. (2021) has contributed to advancing dark tourism research by developing a typology used to classify animals as dark tourism attractions. This typology consists of three key categories: the characteristics of animal suffering and death, the subjective/normative nature of the animal-human relationship leading to such suffering or death, and the role of the tourism industry and supply. It offers valuable directions for dark tourism research from an animal-centric perspective, which are also explored in the three articles included in the special issue at hand. In this special edition, the article by David A. Fennell and Valerie A. Sheppard problematize the instrumental and utilitarian arguments used to justify and legitimize the exploitation of animals in tourism. Relying upon the case of bullfighting, they critically examine the attitudes of tourists toward this highly controversial form of animal-based tourism. By conducting a thematic analysis of 74 TripAdvisor posts published between the years 2012 and 2022, they examine both the negative and positive perceptions associated with bullfighting as a tourist attraction and a component of the Spanish destination brand. While the majority of posts describe bullfighting in terms of cruelty, unfairness, and torture, a minority associate it with culture, ceremony, and history. The paper also explores the bullfighting-as-culture versus animals-for-human-consumption debate, as one of the more poignant and thought-provoking discussions amongst the various participant posts. Fennell and Sheppard's study not only situates bullfighting within the context of dark tourism, but also highlights the ethical implications of similar animal-based tourism attractions where animal suffering and death are integral to the visitor experience.The article by Yulei Guo, David A. Fennell and Sam Fennell approach the giant panda as a dark tourism attraction embodying a process of making and remaking Chinese national identities over the past two centuries. Using "virtual curating" to analyse the Giant Panda Museum located at the Chengdu Research Base of Giant Panda Breeding, the authors reveal how the death of the first giant panda and his history has come to symbolize an embodiment of complex interactions between the East and West, where science, colonial expansion, and the construction of national identities are intricately intertwined. By exploring these dynamics, the authors demonstrate how China's cultural attachment towards the giant panda can be framed within a dark tourism narrative. As they argue, understanding the giant panda's history through a dark tourism lens offers an ethical perspective from which to assess the relationship between tourists and pandas.The article by Rachel M. Yerbury seeks to extend the discussion about animals as dark tourism objects, by focusing on the examples of zoos and aquaria. To achieve this, she adopts a post-humanistic perspective and draws upon the typology of animals as dark tourism attractions developed by Fennell et al. (2021). Her study illustrates how zoos and aquaria align with the dark tourism framework by embodying animal suffering through impeded well-being. Animals in these artificial environments experience injustice and are subjected to dominant narratives of human superiority and control (Fennell & Sheppard, 2020). Considering this, she concludes that zoos and aquaria qualify as dark tourism attractions that can never embody deep justice, as they intrinsically undermine animal freedom and agency.The papers in this special issue examine three types of attractions: bullfighting; the Giant Panda Museum; and, zoos and aquariums. Each paper not only expands the notion of what constitutes a dark tourism experience, but also draws attention to the importance of recognizing animals as sentient, suffering beings rather than mere objects of human entertainment and/or consumption. Such recognition is crucial for the moral transformation of an industry where the exploitation, enslavement, and killing of animals have been normalized and widely accepted as part of the tourism experience. These studies present the tip of the research iceberg, in terms of evaluating the human-animal relationship from a tourism ethics perspective.