In partnership with the Earth Species Project (ESP), the Collective Intelligence Project (CIP) conducted the first global dialogue on AI-enabled interspecies understanding. This initiative engaged 1,057 participants across 67 countries to explore how people view the possibility of communicating with other species through artificial intelligence.
Majorities Believe Animals Possess Emotions, Languages, and Even Cultures
Large majorities believe animals have complex inner lives. Two-thirds of respondents (66.7%) strongly affirm that animals possess emotions. Most (60%) strongly believe animals have their own languages, and more than one in four (28.6%) strongly believe animals have cultures.
Public curiosity reflects these beliefs: 70.1% of respondents say they are very interested in knowing what animals think and feel. The dominant emotions associated with this technology are curiosity (60.5%) and hope (47.7%), though some note concern (19.8%), particularly among women and AI skeptics.
Attitudes Toward AI Drive Differences in Views of Interspecies Communication
People’s general attitudes toward AI strongly shape their perceptions of its role in interspecies understanding. Among AI optimists, 56.8% describe this as a “good use” of AI technology and 63.4% say they would trust AI’s interpretations of animal communication. Among AI skeptics, those numbers fall to 34.3% and 29.6%, respectively.
While curiosity and hope dominate across groups, skeptics are far more likely to report concern (32.4%) than optimists (12.2%). Respondents often frame their judgments as a trade-off: AI may bring objectivity, but could lack the instincts and contextual awareness that human interpreters bring.
Strong Support for Animals Having a Voice in Decisions that Affect Them
A majority of respondents support animals having some role in human democratic processes. Options included direct voting on issues that affect them, proxy representation, or advisory roles. Nearly half also endorse legal representation for animals, such as a lawyer or human guardian to defend their rights.
When asked what kinds of decisions should be informed by animal voices, 77.4% cite environmental laws and protections, 61.5% cite agriculture, and 47.3% cite urban planning. Smaller shares emphasize areas such as human health (40.3%) and education (36.3%).
Respondents show no consensus on how far this should go. While some envision animals as a formal constituency in government, 37.1% believe animals should not participate in democratic processes at all.
Overwhelming Public Support for Regulation of AI-Assisted Interspecies Communication
Across all regions and groups, there is strong consensus on the need for regulation. 84.9% of respondents agree that companies profiting from animals—such as farms, zoos, or entertainment industries—should be strictly regulated in how they communicate with them.
Majorities also support banning specific uses of AI: 68.3% say deception for commercial gain should be prohibited, 62.7% oppose communication that incites violence, and 62.5% oppose commands that override an animal’s natural instincts for human benefit.
Respondents widely see the main risk not as the technology itself, but its potential misuse by humans. Exploitation, manipulation, and harm to animals for commercial gain are cited as the most significant concerns.
No Consensus on Who Should Own Animal-Generated Data
The question of who owns data generated by animals—such as a whale’s song or a bird’s call—divides the public. The most common response (39.7%) is that the community protecting those animals should hold ownership. Another 32.8% say ownership should go to the human who records it, while 17.3% say the animal itself should own its data.
This lack of consensus underscores the novelty and complexity of data rights when animals are the source. Respondents acknowledge this as an area likely to provoke future legal disputes.
This joint research with Earth Species Project reveals a world that recognizes animals as beings with inner lives and expresses eagerness to understand them more deeply through AI. Respondents also emphasize a strong desire for regulation, accountability, and safeguards to prevent misuse.
Together, these findings highlight both opportunity and responsibility: AI has the potential to illuminate hidden dimensions of the natural world and reshape humanity’s relationship with other species, but must be guided by governance structures that prioritize transparency, ethics, and care.
Explore what the world is really saying about AI. Access our complete dataset to conduct your own analysis and contribute to the growing body of research on global AI perspectives.
