What Is a Working Equid? Analysis of Current Terminology and a Suggested Definition

Simple Summary Equids, such as horses, donkeys, and mules, play vital roles in various types of work globally, with their use differing significantly across countries of different income levels. We conducted a thorough review of research literature to examine if and how terms related to working equids are used in high-, middle-, and low-income countries. Our findings indicate that studies focusing on higher-income countries tend to produce more research papers on equids, except for when using the terms "working equid" and "draft equid", which are more common in studies focusing on lower-income countries, and these terms often refer to animals in low-resource rural settings and marginalised communities. We suggest that "working equid" should be defined as "any equid engaged in physical labour that provides a significant or direct contribution to the economic livelihood, sustenance or support of the owner/user's family, typically within a low resource setting". The lack of a standard definition complicates policy making and welfare legislation, especially in lower-income countries where equids are crucial for livelihoods but are often overlooked by policy. This study highlights the need for more inclusive and culturally aware terminology to improve welfare standards and policies for working equids worldwide.Abstract Equids are engaged in myriad types of work across the world, with contexts and industries varying widely between high-, middle- and low-income countries as classified by the World Bank. Through a comprehensive abstract search and literature review, we examined the usage and context of terms associated with working equids in high-income countries (HICs), upper-middle-income countries (UMICs), lower-middle-income countries (LMICs), and low-income countries (LICs). Analysis showed that the search term used was significantly associated with World Bank country income classification. All search terms except two returned a significantly higher number of papers for higher-income countries compared to lower-income countries. The two exceptions were "working equid" and "draft equid", which returned significantly more papers for lower-income countries than higher-income countries. Both terms also returned papers from high-income and upper-middle-income countries, but these were always in the context of low-resource settings and rural or marginalised communities, of which we provide examples in the discussion. We propose that the term "working equid" should be used to describe "any equid engaged in physical labour that provides a significant or direct contribution to the economic livelihood, sustenance or support of the owner/user's family, typically within a low resource setting". Our review highlights the intricate interplay between socioeconomic factors and examines how equids are described in the literature. The lack of a universally accepted definition leads to challenges in policy formulation, resource allocation, and welfare standards development, particularly in LMICs and LICs where working equids are crucial to livelihoods. This study underscores the need for a more inclusive and comprehensive approach to terminology, advocating for future research to bridge linguistic and cultural gaps in understanding working equids globally. Such efforts are vital for equitable and effective welfare standards and policy development for these animals.