The (re)turn of the 3Rs: an inquiry into the normative nature of Russell and Burch's principles of humane experimental technique - their misunderstanding, reform and implementation through an ethics tool.

Abstract

The 3Rs strongly shape the practice of laboratory animal use, as well as related policies worldwide. This success should not obscure the fact that implementing the 3Rs comes with challenges. A major problem is that it is fundamentally unclear under which conditions the 3Rs may be considered fulfilled in specific contexts. We argue that this lack of clarity is largely a result of the fact that the normative nature of the 3Rs has so far been disregarded. Hence, this paper seeks to answer the following research question: how is the normative nature of the 3Rs to be understood, and how can this understanding transparently guide their implementation? Based on a distinction between different types of norms, we show that the 3Rs, which have been called 'principles' since their origin, are indeed to be understood as principles in a substantive (norm-theoretical) sense. That is, they are norms that command the highest possible realization of their content. This understanding of the normative nature of the 3Rs has a significant effect on their implementation in practical contexts. As we will argue, it turns the orthodox idea of implementation strategies upside down. Building on this theoretical claim, we propose an ethics tool designed to help applicants, review committee members and authorities to apply the 3Rs transparently and, above all, in accordance with a reflected understanding of the relevant EU Directive's intention (Directive 2010/63/EU) and of the work of Russell and Burch, the pioneers of this milestone in the promotion of animal welfare in research.