The book began as a very different project. All three authors recall how they were first approached.
Andrew Fenton:
“I was already engaged with Ken [Kandaras, former executive director of NAVS] and Juliane [Pearson, former deputy executive director of NAVS] — NAVS had me working on something that was scientific animal use and science-related, and then the panel superseded that for all sorts of good and obvious reasons. They approached me in early 2020, and the kickoff was September 11, 2020. We were already involved in something, so it was quite a natural transition.”
Mary Lee Jensvold:
“Ken just approached me… The original project was for a panel, I guess, or to work on a white paper. It really wasn’t about a book at all… perhaps because of my association with Fauna Foundation, and because I work with apes that were part of biomedical research… but really to provide kind of a scientific context.”
Syd Johnson:
“I got an email from Ken… sometime in the summer of 2020. After the first meeting, he asked me if I was interested in being the moderator for this primate project. At that point it was not clear what the product would be. We had in mind perhaps writing a report… but there was not yet a notion there was going to be a book.”
From White Paper to Book
The pivot to a book came gradually.
Mary Lee Jensvold:
“It was a bigger group to begin with… and then it really was a slow process before… the white paper started to really gain traction. At that point I think it was really just Syd and Andrew and I.”
Andrew Fenton:
“The content for the book… Syd drew up notes in early October of 2020, and lots of that content in those notes then enters into the element. I can’t remember when the actual notion of an Element (a series published by Cambridge University) came to the fore… but you can see the direction in Syd’s notes.”
Syd Johnson:
“Once we had finished [the report], Ken wanted to explore getting it published. It was too long to be a paper, too short to be a small book… I approached the editor of the Cambridge Elements Series… We worked on it for several months to polish it into a manuscript, and submitted it August 31, 2023.”
Finding the Three Pillars
The central framework came early in their discussions.
Syd Johnson:
“It came about organically… three foundational ideas: the harmonization of human research guidelines… the replacement of nonhuman primates… and justice as a guiding principle. These are our three pillars… they work together to hold up the structure and are dependent on each other for strength.”
Andrew Fenton:
“They gave us options… a Belmont (Report) approach… the Institute of Medicine chimpanzee report… or a more reflective engagement with the Three Rs (Replacement, Refinement, Reduction). The three pillars actually take bits and pieces from all of those… The Belmont Report’s superpower is recognizable and defensible ethics principles… The Three Rs were never intended as ethics… so we asked: what can’t it do? Where is its superpower? Replacement.”
Collaboration and Writing
They worked through regular meetings and shared documents, despite busy schedules.
Mary Lee Jensvold:
“It felt like we had regular meetings… For me, it was such a different document than I’d ever worked on because I’m not a philosopher… I ended up learning so much… There were certain things I could definitely speak to… The vignettes were great because they grounded it in real-life examples.”
Andrew Fenton:
“I learned a lot from this process, too… It’s a privilege to work with any like-minded animal scientists… The Internet’s superpower here is sharing documents in real time — it becomes conversational.”
Syd Johnson:
“We all have different styles of writing, so the editing process involved making the seams invisible… My co-authors… we were all busy doing different things in different places, so finding deadlines was a challenge.”
Challenges
They faced both practical and philosophical challenges.
Syd Johnson:
“One of our biggest challenges was… our mandate was to write about research with nonhuman primates, but we knew… everything we were saying was also true of other animals. In the end, we led the reader to that same conclusion, while making a strong case for why nonhuman primates warrant special attention.”
Andrew Fenton:
“We may have taken different directions if the other original members had remained… but I enjoyed this journey… Some of my work in this book reflects what I learned on the Canadian Council on Animal Care subcommittee.”
Impact and Audience
The authors have clear hopes for the book’s reach.
Mary Lee Jensvold:
“All scientists should read it… I see it as a useful tool in graduate seminars and advanced undergraduate classes.”
Andrew Fenton:
“This is a perfect book for any of our students… anyone on animal care subcommittees should read it… I hope it adds to the ethics competency of anyone — it’s enriched mine as a part of this process.”
Syd Johnson:
“Our goal was to protect all primates, human and nonhuman… We make suggestions for improving research guidelines for both… It’s also strategic — we can’t be accused of caring more about nonhuman primates at the expense of humans.”
The Three Pillars of Ethical Research with Nonhuman Primates is exactly the kind of work we need at this crossroads moment: grounded in science, uncompromising in its ethics, and aligned with a concrete advocacy agenda. NAVS’ partnership ensures that the book doesn’t simply describe injustice but points toward ending it, and the authors’ combined expertise makes the case both philosophically rigorous and emotionally compelling.
If you care about animals in science, about trustworthy and truly human-relevant research, or about what justice looks like when we include other species in our moral circle, this is not just a book to read—it’s a framework to work from. We encourage you to purchase or download your copy here and explore how the principles of harmonization, replacement, and justice can transform science for the better.
