Zoos and Exhibition Animal Ethics in Taiwan

From iron cages to the glow of Xpark’s jellyfish walls—Taiwan is redefining how humans relate to animals on display.

30-Second Overview

Taiwan’s zoos and animal exhibition venues are undergoing their deepest ethical shift in a century. From Japanese‑era cage displays at the original Taipei Zoo to the “cage‑free” philosophy of the renovated Hsinchu Zoo (新竹動物園), and the controversy around the urban aquarium Xpark, the island is asking a difficult question: Should animals be displayed for human learning and entertainment at all—and if so, under what conditions?

This debate is no longer limited to zoos. It now extends to marine parks, circus acts, pet cafés, and social‑media‑driven animal interactions. In Taiwan, the ethics of exhibition animals has become a mirror for how society values non‑human life.

Why It Matters

In a highly urbanized society, zoos may be the only place many people encounter wildlife. They can inspire curiosity and conservation awareness. But when educational value collides with animal welfare—or commercial interests—Taiwanese society is increasingly unwilling to accept “tradition” as justification.

This debate reflects a broader cultural shift: from animals as spectacle to animals as fellow beings with needs, agency, and limits that humans must respect.

Taipei Zoo: A Century of Changing Philosophy

Taipei Zoo began in 1914 during Japanese rule as a classic colonial menagerie—concrete floors, iron bars, and animals treated as exotic objects. The 1986 relocation to Muzha marked a turning point. Larger enclosures, habitat simulation, enrichment, and conservation breeding began to replace the cage‑first logic.

The cultural impact of Yuan‑Zai (圓仔)—the first giant panda born in Taiwan in 2013—was enormous. The baby panda drew massive crowds and made the zoo a national obsession. Yet Yuan‑Zai also forced a question: do we love pandas for themselves, or for the entertainment and soft‑power symbolism they bring?

Even the panda parents Tuan‑Tuan (團團) and Yuan‑Yuan (圓圓) carried political weight as gifts from China. When Tuan‑Tuan died in 2022, the public grief was real, but it was entangled with geopolitical meaning. The emotional power of such animals highlights the ethical stakes of captivity.

Hsinchu Zoo: “No Cages” as a Statement

The 2019 reopening of Hsinchu Zoo declared a “no cages” philosophy. It wasn’t just design—it was a moral repositioning. The zoo reduced its species count from more than 400 to about 80, keeping only animals that could realistically live well within available space. The message was clear: this is a home, not a showroom.

Critics point out that space is still limited and captivity remains captivity. Yet Hsinchu’s transformation is significant because it signals Taiwan’s willingness to shift the goal from “display as many species as possible” to “care deeply for fewer.”

Xpark: The Urban Aquarium Controversy

Xpark, a Japanese‑style urban aquarium in Taoyuan, opened in 2020 with immersive lighting, minimalist architecture, and visually stunning exhibits. It quickly became “the most beautiful aquarium in Taiwan.” But its beauty sparked backlash.

Reports emerged of:

• rays with injuries, possibly from confined spaces
• penguins showing repetitive stress behaviors
• constant bright lighting, disrupting nocturnal species
• noise levels that put marine animals under chronic stress

Investigative reporting by Wuo‑Wuo (窩窩媒體) catalyzed a national debate: Can a commercial, immersive aquarium truly meet animal welfare needs? The tension between aesthetic spectacle and animal well‑being remains unresolved.

The Disappearing Circus

Animal circus acts—tigers jumping through hoops, seals balancing balls—once toured Taiwan in the 1990s. But they have largely vanished. Changes to the Animal Protection Act in 2017 tightened regulations and made such performances economically and ethically difficult to sustain.

In their place, Taiwan has embraced human‑centered circuses like FOCA (福爾摩沙馬戲團) and international acts such as Cirque du Soleil. The public has learned that wonder does not require animal performance.

Marine Parks at a Crossroads

Taiwan’s remaining dolphin‑show operators—Hualien Farglory Ocean Park and Yehliu Ocean World—face expiring exhibition permits in 2026. A national “cetacean exhibition transition taskforce” has signaled a shift away from entertainment toward education and sanctuary‑style care.

The controversy peaked in 2024 when Yehliu Ocean World bred a calf despite the pending phase‑out, triggering public outrage and a penalty of only NT$10,000. The fine itself became symbolic: if the law values a dolphin’s life at such a low cost, does it truly recognize animal welfare as a moral issue?

Operators argue for a “dolphin refuge” model—no performance, but no release—because captive dolphins often cannot survive in the wild. Critics respond that breeding new captives undermines any claimed transition.

Law vs. Reality

Taiwan introduced the Animal Exhibition Management Regulations (動物展演管理辦法) in 2017. It was a breakthrough: legal standards for enclosure size, veterinary care, and welfare inspections. But enforcement is weak. With fewer than 20 welfare inspectors nationwide, compliance often depends on public pressure rather than routine oversight.

More fundamentally, animals are still legally classified as “property,” not rights‑bearing beings. That classification shapes how far regulation can go.

The Social‑Media Era: Micro‑Exhibitions

Instagram, TikTok, and influencer culture created a new phenomenon: pet cafés, capybara interactions, and “photo‑friendly” animal encounters. These venues often operate in regulatory grey zones.

The Bali pet café incident in 2025—where multiple rabbits died from stress and poor care—exposed how social‑media‑driven demand can produce a quiet cruelty. Unlike zoos, these businesses often lack supervision, yet they shape public attitudes just as strongly.

A Spectrum of Public Opinion

Taiwan’s debate over zoos and exhibition animals spans a wide ethical spectrum:

• Traditional supporters value zoos for education and family experience.
• Reformists want modernized facilities focused on conservation and animal welfare.
• Animal rights advocates reject captivity entirely, arguing no enclosure can substitute for freedom.
• Pragmatists accept gradual improvement as the only realistic path.

There is no consensus—only a growing awareness that “business as usual” is not enough.

Looking Ahead

In the coming decade, Taiwan may see:

• More zoos transition into rescue and conservation centers
• Expanded use of digital or virtual reality to reduce physical display
• Stronger animal welfare law and enforcement capacity
• Greater emphasis on rehabilitation and rewilding
• Social‑media platforms pressured to restrict exploitative animal content

The deeper shift, however, is cultural: from viewing animals as objects of entertainment to recognizing them as lives that demand ethical responsibility.

Taiwan’s conversation about exhibition animals is not just about zoos. It is about what kind of society we want to be.

Further Reading

• Wuo‑Wuo Media — Taiwan’s leading independent animal‑issues outlet
• Taiwan SPCA (EAST) — Long‑running advocacy group on exhibition animal ethics
• Animal Contemporary — Cross‑disciplinary animal rights platform
• Hsinchu Zoo — The “no cages” experiment
• Taipei Zoo — Taiwan’s oldest zoo