Rivals or Teammates: A Comparative Analysis of Corporate and Legislative Policy Progress in Banning Cosmetic Animal Testing

Public opposition to cosmetic animal testing (CAT) has grown significantly, yet little research compares how corporate and legislative sectors have responded to this shift. This study addresses this gap, analyzing which sector—corporate or legislative—has responded more rapidly to rising public controversy and what explains their differing trajectories. I conducted a timeline analysis of CAT bans across 200 global companies and 200 countries from 1994 to 2024, alongside interviews with advocacy leaders. My findings show that corporations have been quicker to adopt CAT bans, driven by consumer pressure, internal incentives, and policymaking autonomy. In contrast, governments faced structural and political obstacles that slowed progress. These findings challenge the application of Dahl’s Responsiveness Theory by showing that public opinion is not the only force in reform. I recommend policymakers focus on requiring greater corporate transparency, eliminating legal barriers to cruelty-free practices, and collaborating with the corporate sector to end CAT.