Chapter 12 
Public and Private Funding Toward 
the Development of Alternatives 
Attempts to find alternatives to using animals 
in research, testing, and education are so diverse 
that it is difficult to cite firm figures on funding 
levels . An investigation of public and private fund- 
ing practices does make it clear, however, that no 
single policy covers such research and develop- 
ment (R&D). Much of the work that could lead to 
the replacement, reduction, or refinement of ani- 
mal use is not even considered R&D of alterna- 
tives by the body that funds it. 
Research is seldom targeted toward alternatives 
as ends in themselves. Few projects are initiated 
with this specific goal. Consequently, confining the 
inquiry to only those cases where development 
of an alternative method is the desired result, such 
as programs to find in vitro substitutes for the 
Draize eye irritancy test, drastically narrows the 
category of funding classified as supporting alter- 
natives. In addition, it is especially difficult to ex- 
amine funding policies related to reductions and 
refinements, because these considerations gener- 
ally enter into the construction of any protocol. 
This chapter covers targeted as well as inciden- 
tal cases of research into alternatives— investiga- 
tions directed toward the development of alter- 
natives as well as those pursued for other reasons 
but that lead to or use alternatives. Also consid- 
ered are research into laboratory -animal health 
and some types of pain research that may increase 
knowledge about the mechanisms of pain and im- 
prove methods of alleviating distress. Resources 
allocated to upgrading animal facilities are closely 
related, since inadequate facilities may skew ex- 
perimental results, thereby requiring that more 
animals be used. 
FUNDING TOWARD ALTERNATIVES IN RESEARCH 
Developing replacements for the use of animals 
in research is far more likely to be incidental than 
targeted. Refinements and reductions may be in- 
cidental developments as well, but they are more 
likely to result from conscious efforts on the part 
of the investigator. Areas in which alternatives, 
especially replacements, are discovered will often 
be those in which animals are not used at all. This 
type of development is exemplified by basic re- 
search in cell biology that resulted in improved 
cell culture capabilities, and work in basic physics 
that led to noninvasive imaging techniques. Iden- 
tifying funding in this area is particularly difficult: 
Few agencies view these projects as alternatives 
to animal use or label them as such, even though 
the methods may yield techniques and systems that 
could replace animals, reduce the numbers used, 
or refine the protocols. (Most testing -related re- 
search has been deliberately excluded from this 
category.) 
In an attempt to obtain a rough indication of ex- 
penditures on alternatives, OTA examined the 
range of models in use, identifying the number 
of projects and amount of research money in each 
system area. Of course, not every nonanimal meth- 
od evolves into an alternative to animal use. Yet 
research in specific techniques, such as biostatis- 
tics, may have broad or unanticipated applications 
across many areas of research and testing. 
Public Funding 
Two major granting agencies, the National In- 
stitutes of Health (NIH) and the National Science 
Foundation (NSF), account for most of the basic 
biomedical research sponsored by the Federal Gov- 
ernment. Neither agency currently funds alterna- 
tives as a targeted goal. In few cases is the devel- 
opment of a replacement a major objective of the 
research that produces one. However, considera- 
259 
