Building Australia’s non-animal technologies ecosystem: a national cross-sector mapping and strategic insights from the non-animal technologies network (NAT-Net)

Background Non-animal technologies (NATs; also termed new approach methodologies, NAMs) are rapidly reshaping biomedical research, safety testing and drug development by improving human relevance and reducing reliance on animal models. In Australia, substantial expertise exists across organoids, microphysiological systems and in silico approaches; however, national visibility of capabilities, infrastructure access and system-level needs has been limited. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional, online baseline survey (February–October 2025; https://redcap.ohmr.health.nsw.gov.au/surveys/?s=3EWRM48PEXWLFJC7 .) integrated into NAT-Net registration and implemented using REDCap. The survey captured organisational characteristics, roles within the NAT ecosystem, research domains, model types, development stage, supporting services and infrastructure access, engagement preferences, and perceived challenges. Quantitative data were summarised descriptively, and free-text responses were analysed thematically. Results Of 135 submitted records, incomplete entries (n = 2) and duplicates (n = 9) were removed, yielding 124 unique respondents. Respondents were predominantly based in New South Wales (71.0%), followed by Victoria (18.5%) and Queensland (7.3%). Most organisations reported involvement in research and development (79.0%), education and training (41.9%), ethics and the 3Rs (39.5%), and provision of supporting services or facilities (32.3%). Among respondents engaged in NAT R&D (n = 102), commonly reported approaches included in vitro 3D models (64.7%), in vitro 2D culture (56.9%), microphysiological systems/organ-on-chip platforms (35.3%), and in silico methods (30.4%). Among service providers answering the access item (n = 40), 60.0% offered external access. The most frequently identified challenges were the absence of standards and validation processes (75.8%), limited access to resources and infrastructure (74.2%), and difficulty in establishing collaborations or partnerships (71.7%). Conclusion This NAT-Net baseline survey provides an initial cross-sector ecosystem mapping centred on NAT-Net participants, revealing broad cross-sectoral activity alongside persistent system-level barriers to standardisation, infrastructure access and coordination. These findings provide a critical evidence base to inform coordinated national strategy, investment, policy development and longitudinal monitoring.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Frontiers in Toxicology
Published
2026-03-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3389/ftox.2026.1790806
Primary Topic
Animal testing and alternatives
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Building Australia’s non-animal technologies ecosystem: a national cross-sector mapping and strategic insights from the non-animal technologies network (NAT-Net)

E.S. Pronker, Gerard E. Kaiko, Adam P. Hill, Laura Collie et al.
Frontiers in Toxicology
Animal testing and alternatives
article

Building Australia’s non-animal technologies ecosystem: a national cross-sector mapping and strategic insights from the non-animal technologies network (NAT-Net)

E.S. Pronker, Gerard E. Kaiko, Adam P. Hill, Laura Collie, Wojciech Chrzanowski, Simon Keely, Shafagh A. Waters, Anai Gonzalez-Cordero, Gungun Lin
article en

Abstract

Background Non-animal technologies (NATs; also termed new approach methodologies, NAMs) are rapidly reshaping biomedical research, safety testing and drug development by improving human relevance and reducing reliance on animal models. In Australia, substantial expertise exists across organoids, microphysiological systems and in silico approaches; however, national visibility of capabilities, infrastructure access and system-level needs has been limited. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional, online baseline survey (February–October 2025; https://redcap.ohmr.health.nsw.gov.au/surveys/?s=3EWRM48PEXWLFJC7 .) integrated into NAT-Net registration and implemented using REDCap. The survey captured organisational characteristics, roles within the NAT ecosystem, research domains, model types, development stage, supporting services and infrastructure access, engagement preferences, and perceived challenges. Quantitative data were summarised descriptively, and free-text responses were analysed thematically. Results Of 135 submitted records, incomplete entries (n = 2) and duplicates (n = 9) were removed, yielding 124 unique respondents. Respondents were predominantly based in New South Wales (71.0%), followed by Victoria (18.5%) and Queensland (7.3%). Most organisations reported involvement in research and development (79.0%), education and training (41.9%), ethics and the 3Rs (39.5%), and provision of supporting services or facilities (32.3%). Among respondents engaged in NAT R&D (n = 102), commonly reported approaches included in vitro 3D models (64.7%), in vitro 2D culture (56.9%), microphysiological systems/organ-on-chip platforms (35.3%), and in silico methods (30.4%). Among service providers answering the access item (n = 40), 60.0% offered external access. The most frequently identified challenges were the absence of standards and validation processes (75.8%), limited access to resources and infrastructure (74.2%), and difficulty in establishing collaborations or partnerships (71.7%). Conclusion This NAT-Net baseline survey provides an initial cross-sector ecosystem mapping centred on NAT-Net participants, revealing broad cross-sectoral activity alongside persistent system-level barriers to standardisation, infrastructure access and coordination. These findings provide a critical evidence base to inform coordinated national strategy, investment, policy development and longitudinal monitoring.

Frontiers in ToxicologyVol. 8
Uppsala University (SE), The University of Sydney (AU), New South Wales Department of Health (AU), Children's Medical Research Institute (AU), Victor Chang Cardiac Research Institute (AU), UNSW Sydney (AU), Hunter Medical Research Institute (AU), Sydney Children's Hospital (AU), Division of Materials Science and Engineering (AU), Stem Cell Institute (PA), Advanced Materials and Devices (United States) (US), Network Technologies (United States) (US), University of Newcastle Australia (AU)
Industry, innovation and infrastructure
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Animal testing and alternatives
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.