Most of the research carried out in Spain is funded through national or international public calls for proposals. Transparency in the methodology used should be an integral part of our projects, both in terms of justifying the objective of our research, as well as in the accountability and presentation of results, especially when we use other living beings, animals, as experimental models. However, in the past, transparency was not valued and passive or active secrecy favoured possible malpractice and fuelled misunderstandings and mistrust in society. This is why this COSCE report, produced by the Confederation of Spanish Scientific Societies, is so important, as it presents the annual actions promoted within the Transparency Agreement, demonstrating how the member institutions promote the exchange of knowledge with society, explaining how research is carried out on animals, why it is still necessary to experiment with animal models and what alternative models can be developed.

It is a report that is easy to read, that provides the name of all the public and private institutions involved, that reflects the number of animals and species used each year in Spain, as well as all those actions aimed at increasing the social perception of biomedical and biotechnological research.

I believe that this transparency agreement was absolutely necessary. Anyone interested can have open access to data and actions, building bridges of understanding and respect between researchers and the general public. That is why, although there are already 168 Spanish institutions, universities and research centres adhering to this Agreement, it is so relevant and so advisable that its number increases every year, until it includes all research groups using experimental animals and institutions with an interest in biomedical research. It is the best way to demonstrate to society when and why research is carried out on animal models, and in which cases alternative methods can or will be developed that are equally informative and useful for scientific progress and the development of new therapies.

The report is correct and says a lot about research activity in Spain. Spanish institutions are undoubtedly at the forefront of commitments to transparency regarding the use of nonhuman animals in research, communicating data, numbers, species, project details, information on animal welfare, ‘three Rs’, etc., and carrying out various actions to raise public awareness of the importance of their activity. However, it is curious to note how, in this rhetoric of transparency and animal welfare, ‘animals’ are both present and absent from it: present in numbers, statistics, eventually shown to us through a photograph or a video. Animals are instruments or inputs to scientific procedures, and also ‘economic assets’ that value research work, which results in profits in a society based on the knowledge economy.

The limitation would be that such rhetoric empties animals of a more transcendental meaning, of a meaning that gives them moral relevance. I explain: the activities and statistics highlighted and ‘made transparent’ in the report empty animals of further moral consideration and uncritically accept that research is a necessary activity because it brings great benefits to humanity. Here there is a failure to consider the risks and benefits that research entails, at the same time, for the animal in which such procedures are applied. Animals used in research, like most other animals, are complex, sentient beings, endowed with the neurological basis for consciousness (see Cambridge Declaration, 2012). Many animals, including vertebrates and many invertebrates, are conscious and capable of subjectively experiencing the world (see New York Declaration, 2024). But we continue to treat them as tools in a society and economy based on species prejudice (speciesism). All this is a huge challenge, because it is not enough to treat animals well in order to have good research results. It would be, among other things, a matter of achieving a more equitable balance of risks and benefits when we consider the animal as a sentient and conscious being, rather than a tool. This is a challenge for animal research ethics committees, for researchers' training in ethics, bioethics and research integrity, among others.

This is already the seventh report of the COSCE Agreement, which lists transparency activities carried out in 2023 by the adhering institutions. And I would highlight:

1. That transparency and communication, fundamental pillars of the Agreement, have been consolidated in Spain and that our country is one of the most advanced in the world in being transparent about the activities it carries out with experimental animals, a fact that is serving as a mirror in which to look at several other countries, including the United States, which has recently begun to implement this transparency process.
2. The high degree of commitment and participation of the member institutions: of the 168 institutions that have signed the Agreement, 95% of them have responded to this seventh survey, fulfilling the fourth commitment of the Agreement, which refers to reporting annually precisely to be able to evaluate their commitment and prepare this report.
3. That, as was its objective, the Agreement has encouraged many institutions to implement transparency activities on a routine basis and to include informative material on their websites. In fact, the report by EARA, the entity in charge of preparing it, highlights that Spain is the country with the highest percentage of institutional declarations on websites, which reflects the direct impact of the Agreement.

As I said, the report was drawn up by staff from EARA (European Animal Research Association), which is independent of both the Spanish institutions that signed the Transparency Agreement and COSCE itself. This was a requirement that was specifically spelled out in the Agreement document and is very important to emphasise. The Agreement required a great deal of willingness on the part of the signatory parties to succeed and we felt that this should be evaluated annually. We established in that agreement that this should be done by EARA and it is clear that they have acted professionally by collecting the necessary information and indexing it as proof of total transparency. In my opinion, EARA is to be congratulated for this report which, as in previous years, faithfully reflects the activity of the vast majority of the institutions subscribing to the Agreement, and I would also like to thank them for their commitment to transparency by providing most of the information requested.

[In terms of limitations] The document is written in great detail and with reference to activities and initiatives implemented around the four points mandated by the Agreement, which are useful for framing this report in a general frame of reference. If anything, it should be mentioned that, albeit in a minority, some of the signatory entities have not been able to submit sufficient data due to lack of dedicated staff or time. This should be remedied in the future and it would be desirable that 100 % of the institutions involved are able to submit their data.

The seventh monitoring report on the COSCE Agreement on Transparency in the Use of Animals for Scientific Experimentation in Spain is, in summary, a summary of the transparency activities carried out by the 168 institutions adhering to this commitment. It is therefore an instrument that enables COSCE to monitor the state of play on this issue.

However, the following limitations of the document should be noted:

1. It is not useful for citizens or institutions. The document allows COSCE to determine the degree of transparency of each of the adherents according to the criteria of the agreement. However, from its reading the general public cannot directly obtain information on the type of animals used for experimentation, the type of harm they are subjected to, the percentage of failed versus successful experiments, the expected benefit for the successful ones, the living conditions of the animals used or the ethical assumptions guiding the research. To get an overview of all this would require reviewing the websites of each of the 168 member organisations, which is impossible in practical terms. Real transparency requires providing all relevant data in a way that is understandable, accessible and public for the average citizen. Under the circumstances, the Agreement and its monitoring report are a necessary but insufficient step towards this goal.
2. Incorrect transparency in figures. In the previous paragraph I pointed out how from reading the report it is not even possible to know the type of animals used in experimentation. This is because the figures in it are incorrect. The authors rightly state that ‘what is fundamental [...] is not so much legal requirements, but voluntary actions and the desire to share information’ (p.13). They act in the opposite way, however, by reporting the number and type of animals used, limiting themselves to mentioning vertebrate animals and cephalopods used in experimentation, which are those that fall under the scope of the European Directive and the Royal Decree on animal experimentation. A real exercise in transparency would give figures for absolutely all invertebrate animals actually used.

The advancement of scientific knowledge, which is essential for the prevention and development of new treatments for multiple diseases, continues to require the use of animals in experimentation. It is crucial to convey to society that, in the absence of alternative methods, animal experimentation remains indispensable to find solutions to medical challenges such as brain and heart disease, cancer, infectious and metabolic diseases. As a scientific community, we are fully committed and obliged to ensure that this research is conducted under the highest standards of animal welfare, in strict compliance with current legislation.

The Seventh Report of the ‘COSCE Transparency Agreement on the use of animals in scientific experimentation in Spain’ represents an excellent example of the increasing openness and efforts of the scientific community since 2016 to inform society about the details of this research in Spanish scientific institutions. This report provides a detailed, rigorous and critical analysis of the progress made in 2023, highlighting the steps taken to increase society's understanding of the responsible and necessary use of animals in research. A highlight is the participation, among the 168 institutions adhering to the Agreement, of entities that do not directly conduct animal experimentation, such as patients' associations, but recognise its importance for scientific progress. This initiative is a valuable tool to provide citizens with a reliable and transparent view on the responsible use of animals in research.

‘The ‘Transparency Agreement on the Use of Animals in Scientific Experimentation in Spain’ proposed by the Confederation of Spanish Scientific Societies (COSCE) in 2016 and to which -to date- 168 institutions have adhered was a milestone in the scientific community and in its communication with society, and is now a global benchmark for its acceptance and monitoring. Since then, COSCE has issued annual reports to assess the fulfilment of its fundamental objective, which is none other than to promote greater understanding by society of the benefits, harms and limitations associated with animal experimentation.

The key commitments of the COSCE Agreement are:

1. To be transparent about when, how and why animals are used in research.
2. Improve communication with the media and society.
3. Be proactive in promoting events to raise public awareness of animal research.
4. Report annually on activities carried out and share them.

The 2024 report contains the results of a survey of member institutions and details the actions carried out to advance in the fulfilment of these four commitments. More than 90% of the institutions surveyed responded to the survey, and it is noted that all of them have an institutional statement on their policy and conditions on the use of animals in research available on their website and are carrying out activities to promote transparency, including general public and media access to the facilities. However, the Agreement still has some way to go, both in terms of including institutions that have not yet signed up, and in terms of implementing actions to fully comply with it, as 10% state that they do not have sufficient support’.

What would you highlight from the report?

‘It is a very exhaustive report that collects data from a survey of more than 150 scientific institutions of different categories and distributed throughout the country, which makes it a global benchmark.

The report confirms the upward trend in the policies, initiatives and activities developed by the member institutions since the signing of the Agreement in 2016’.

Does it have any notable limitations?

‘Although the COSCE Agreement is exceptional in terms of the number of member institutions it brings together, its growth must continue to be promoted in order to include all of them, including private companies, so that all agents carrying out activities with experimental animals in our country are committed to complying with the four points. In addition, it is necessary to consider the diversity of signatory institutions and the limitations of some of them to implement transparency actions, promoting the sharing of resources and experiences among all of them’.

Transparency in the use of experimental animals is an ethical and moral necessity. Fortunately, this field has advanced enormously in all developed countries, and particularly in Spain, in recent decades. Involving the general public in the rules of transparency in the use of animals in laboratories is not only a democratic obligation but also promotes citizens' interest in and support for science.

The ‘COSCE transparency agreement on the use of animals in scientific experiments in Spain’ sets out three initial commitments, which are well explained in the 2024 annual report now presented. These commitments relate to the establishment and enforcement of transparency rules and their clear communication to society. In addition, it is intended that the research centres carry out initiatives to promote greater knowledge and understanding in society about the use of animals in research. The institutions that signed the agreement approved a ‘fourth commitment’, which is to report in detail on a regular basis on the fulfilment of the three previous commitments.

The ‘seventh annual report 2024’ now presented shows data from a survey conducted to determine the degree of institutional compliance with these commitments. The high number of scientific institutions committed to the COSCE report is remarkable. The report is of a very high quality in its design and presentation. I believe it is a document that should be disseminated as widely as possible and discussed in all schools. It clearly shows the progress and modernisation of biomedical research in Spain. I personally congratulate the people involved in the preparation of the report.

The 7th COSCE report is based on the analysis of a comprehensive survey on the implementation in 2023 of the commitments made by the signature of the Transparency Agreement. This survey has been answered by 90% of the adhering institutions, demonstrating their firm commitment to transparency in the use of animals in research. The survey, which responds to the 4th commitment to report annually on progress in the field, acts as a key self-assessment mechanism, encouraging institutions to strengthen and expand their activities to improve transparency and promote good practice.

Although the report could be conditioned by possible response biases, it remains a very useful tool that provides an up-to-date snapshot of the state of transparency in Spain and shows positive developments. It also serves to identify areas for improvement, among which I would highlight the need for the institutions' management to increase staff training and to develop institutional policies for the mention of animal models used in press releases and communiqués. In this sense, the annual report is an indispensable resource to guide future efforts.

Some of the highlights of the seventh report include the high involvement of institutions or the increase in activities to fulfil the first commitment. However, only 23% of institutions claim to offer in-house training for this type of outreach, or only 43% of institutions mention the use of animal models in their research in the recruitment process.

The results of the report are very thorough and show the reality of the situation.

[In terms of limitations] Although there are comments that their institutions do not prioritise or do not see the need to talk about the use of animals in their research, perhaps not all institutions in the same situation mention this.