Cat abandonment and adoption associated with socioeconomic, veterinary, and trap–neuter–return factors in the Republic of Korea


Abstract

Background. Cat abandonment is a major global animal welfare and public health issue, with millions of cats entering shelters each year, and many never reclaimed or adopted. In the Republic of Korea, research on factors driving abandonment and adoption is scarce. Cats differ behaviorally and ecologically from dogs—often living as stray or community cats—posing unique management challenges. This study examines how socioeconomic indicators, veterinary costs, and trap–neuter–return (TNR) activity influenced cat abandonment and adoption outcomes between 2021 and 2023.

Methods. Publicly available data from 250 Korean jurisdictions were compiled, including records on abandonment and adoption, unemployment benefit counts, income indicators, veterinary fees, and TNR activity. Ordinary least squares regression identified predictors for two dependent variables: (1) cat abandonments per 100,000 residents and (2) the percentage of abandoned cats adopted. Spatial regression diagnostics assessed potential spatial dependence.

Results. Across all three years, unemployment benefit recipients were negatively associated with cat abandonment rates (β = –0.22 to –0.24), indicating that stronger welfare safety nets correspond with fewer abandonments. In contrast, community cats managed through TNR per 100,000 residents were positively associated with abandonment counts (β = 0.29 to 0.31), likely reflecting reactive TNR targeting in high-abandonment areas or increased detection of abandoned cats. For adoption, rabies vaccination fees were consistently negatively associated (β = –0.19 to –0.25), with revisit consultation fees also showing negative links. In contrast, consultation and hospitalisation fees were positively associated with adoption rates in 2022–2023 (β up to 0.33 for consultation fees), suggesting that better-developed veterinary infrastructure may foster adoption. No spatial dependence was detected for abandonment or adoption, implying that patterns were shaped by local rather than regional effects.

Conclusions. This study delivers the first nationwide, multi-year analysis of cat abandonment and adoption in Korea by integrating socioeconomic, veterinary, and TNR data. Findings show that welfare programs like unemployment benefits may reduce abandonment, while TNR counts may reflect underlying abandonment pressures rather than directly increasing them. Veterinary costs influenced adoption: preventive care costs could deter adopters, while higher consultation and hospitalisation fees reflected stronger veterinary capacity and a culture supportive of adoption. These results broaden understanding of the drivers of cat welfare outcomes and highlight the need for longitudinal and mixed-method studies to clarify causality and guide evidence-based policies to reduce abandonment and improve adoption.

Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].