Abstract: In June 2019, a landmark court decision (San Antonio Bay Estuarine Waterkeeper, et al. v. Formosa Plastics Corporation, et al., hereafter referred to as the Formosa ruling) was issued in Texas, where a judge found a petrochemical company liable for violating the United States Clean Water Act. The case—initiated by a civic group—was mostly built on citizen-collected evidence involving volunteer observations of plastic pellets, powder and flakes in the water over a considerable time span. The contamination could not be proven through existing data held by competent authorities because the company never filed any record of pollution (Formosa ruling, XI.A, p. 17).1 In contrast to the majority of environmental pollution cases to date, the monitoring and data collection for this case was conducted by local residents who gathered a wealth of evidence of plastic pollution in water. Through a traditional case law and text analysis of the Formosa ruling, complemented by the analysis of surrounding communications, we explore why and how citizen-collected evidence was admitted and influenced the judge’s ruling. Although the case has some unique features, we identify possible arguments and lessons learned for other citizen-run monitoring initiatives, to strengthen their voice within environmental litigation. We close by suggesting an avenue for future research—especially in the European context, where the discussion is still in its infancy. Published on 2021-06-11 13:16:22
Abstract: As biomedical citizen science initiatives become more prevalent, the unique ethical issues that they raise are attracting policy attention. One issue identified as a significant concern is the ethical oversight of bottom-up biomedical citizen science projects that are designed and executed primarily or solely by members of the public. That is because the federal rules that require ethical oversight of research by institutional review boards generally do not apply to such projects, creating what has been called an ethics gap.Working to close this gap, practitioners and scholars have considered new mechanisms of ethical oversight for biomedical citizen science. To date, however, participants’ attitudes about ethics and oversight preferences have not been systematically examined. This information is useful to efforts to develop ethical oversight mechanisms because it provides a basis for evaluating the likely effectiveness of specific features of such mechanisms and their acceptability from the perspective of biomedical citizen scientists.Here, we report data from qualitative interviews with 35 stakeholders in bottom-up biomedical citizen science about their general ethics attitudes and preferences regarding ethical oversight. Interviewees described ten ethical priorities and endorsed oversight mechanisms that are voluntary, community-driven, and offer guidance. Conversely, interviewees rejected mechanisms that are mandatory, hierarchical, and inflexible. Applying these findings, we conclude that expert consultation and community review models appear to align well with ethical priorities and oversight preferences of many biomedical citizen scientists, although local conditions should guide the development and use of mechanisms in specific communities. Published on 2021-05-20 10:32:52
Abstract: Understanding motivations is important because appealing to and fulfilling motivations helps citizen science projects recruit and retain participants. We summarise the literature around motivations, drawing on key theories from volunteering more broadly and building on this with additional motivations identified in studies of citizen scientists. We also examine what is known about differences in motivations between demographic groups. We then report on a survey of 613 environmental citizen scientists in Great Britain; they were asked to select from a list of motivations derived from the literature. We used hierarchical cluster analysis to group respondents by types of motivations held. Two clusters were dominated by people holding Values motivations (concern for others or the environment), both of which had high proportions of older people and people identifying as from white ethnic groups. A third cluster included people with Egoism motivations (participating to learn something or further one’s career) and Values motivations. This cluster had a higher proportion of some commonly underrepresented groups than the overall sample, including younger people, people identifying as from minority ethnic groups and people in lower socioeconomic groups. Two further clusters also had higher proportions of people from minority ethnic groups than the overall sample, one dominated by those who participated because they were asked to, and the other by people who held other motivations not in our list. We use insights on participant motivations from the literature and survey to make recommendations to those wishing to recruit and retain citizen scientists, particularly those from underrepresented groups. Published on 2021-05-05 10:24:26
Abstract: Grassroots, bottom-up citizen science is a burgeoning form of public engagement with science, in which citizens mobilize scientific data to address local and global concerns. Contrary to top-down citizen science projects in which citizens collect data for experts, these grassroots initiatives typically unfold in do-it-ourselves fashion, thereby challenging formally-sanctioned, expert-centric citizen science approaches. This article illustrates these points through a comparative analysis of two potentially paradigmatic sites for environmental grassroots citizen science: Safecast (radiation pollution; Japan) and CuriousNoses (air pollution; Flanders, Belgium). These cases are selected on the basis of their anchors in local self-organized communities, with each case initiated by citizens instead of by formal institutions. Adopting a relational account of these sites as being shaped through both top-down and bottom-up imperatives, we draw out key features (defining moments, key actors, discourses, devices) in the constitution of these networks as credible, potentially influential actors in affairs of environmental governance. We introduce the notion of “citizen sciencization” as a way of understanding and exploring these processes against the backdrop of changing science-society relationships in Japan and Europe. Published on 2021-04-14 11:23:10
Abstract: Citizen science schemes enable ecological data collection over very large spatial and temporal scales, producing datasets of high value for both pure and applied research. However, the accuracy of citizen science data is often questioned, owing to issues surrounding data quality and verification, the process by which records are checked after submission for correctness. Verification is a critical process for ensuring data quality and for increasing trust in such datasets, but verification approaches vary considerably between schemes. Here, we systematically review approaches to verification across ecological citizen science schemes that feature in published research, aiming to identify the options available for verification, and to examine factors that influence the approaches used. We reviewed 259 schemes and were able to locate verification information for 142 of those. Expert verification was most widely used, especially among longer-running schemes, followed by community consensus and automated approaches. Expert verification has been the default approach for schemes in the past, but as the volume of data collected through citizen science schemes grows and the potential of automated approaches develops, many schemes might be able to implement approaches that verify data more efficiently. We present an idealised system for data verification, identifying schemes where this system could be applied and the requirements for implementation. We propose a hierarchical approach in which the bulk of records are verified by automation or community consensus, and any flagged records can then undergo additional levels of verification by experts. Published on 2021-04-13 10:55:10
Abstract: This study was conducted in a museum-based lab setting where scientists research the genetics of taste. Unlike academic labs with graduate students, the museum lab model trains volunteers (community scientists) who are (in true citizen science fashion) primarily responsible for enrolling museum guests into clinical studies; thus, they collect the bulk of the data for the research. Like most public participation in science research, the non-professional contributions have historically been largely limited to data collection; however, this study shows the power of invitations and structured opportunities for expanded participation among citizen scientists in a wider range of science practices. Through interpretive case study research, we examine how community scientists exercise agency and respond to opportunities for expanded participation in scientific practices including study design, data analysis, and dissemination of scientific findings through work on scientific articles. The case study research findings show that providing opportunities for involvement is only part of what accounts for community scientists’ expanded participation. Dialogic negotiation of participation is also necessary, through bids and responses to bids, and through proffered guidance and scaffolding. Committed involvement thus entails deep cultivation and nurturing by both the museum staff, and at times, other more knowledgeable volunteers. Expanded participation is also bolstered by one’s capacity, motives for, and satisfactions from pursuing those opportunities that align with past, present, or future interests and identifications. Such interests and identifications contribute to community scientists’ willingness to overcome barriers and time constraints when they arise. Published on 2021-04-13 10:42:09
Abstract: Many citizen science (CS) programs aim to grow and sustain a pool of enthusiastic participants who consistently contribute their efforts to a specific scientific endeavor. Consequently, much research has explored CS participants’ motivations and their relationship to participant recruitment and retention. However, much of this research has focused on actively participating citizen scientists. If researchers want to elucidate the relationship between participant factors (such as demographics and motivations) and participant retention, it is necessary to develop a more comprehensive picture of the different degrees of participation in CS. This paper presents a framework for classifying participation throughout the participant’s engagement in a CS project/program. We suggest a CS participation model that captures the dynamic nature of participation across an arc of volunteering. Called the Nibble-and-Drop Framework, the model describes multiple exit points and stages of contribution typical of participation in a CS program. Applying the framework to the NASA GLOBE Observer (GO) CS program, we found that it captured the dynamics of participation in a global-scale, mobile, app-based, contributory-style CS project. The framework guided our analysis of how different participant factors correlate with degrees of participation. We found that participants were motivated to initially participate because they wanted to contribute to NASA research and science. Participants who dropped out of the program at various points often initially engaged through specific collection events and did not feel the need to continue contributing beyond the event; other drop-outs doubted whether their contributions were meaningful, showing again the need to ensure that participants understand the value of their engagement in a CS project. Published on 2021-03-31 10:11:17
Abstract: Reported benefits of environmental citizen science include the collection of large volumes of data, knowledge and skills gained by participants, local action, and policy influence. However, it is unclear how diverse citizen science participants are, raising concerns about representativeness of data and whether individual, societal, and environmental benefits are evenly distributed. We surveyed 8,220 people representing a cross section of the population in Great Britain to ask whether they had participated in environmental citizen science, allowing us to examine who is and who is not participating. Using logistic regression, we examined relationships between demographic variables, and crucially the interactions between these variables, and the likelihood of participation and whether participation was repeated. Men were more likely to participate than women. People identifying as from white ethnic groups were more likely to participate than those identifying as from minority ethnic groups; participation by women from minority ethnic groups was particularly low. Participation by those from white ethnic groups declined with socio-economic status, but this was not the case for those from minority ethnic groups. Participation was highest amongst those in education (studying at school, college, or university) and lowest amongst the unemployed. We recommend citizen science practitioners carefully consider the aims of projects and thus the diversity of participants they wish to attract. We discuss potential mechanisms for widening participation, for example, engaging participants through third parties already embedded in communities and providing a variety of tasks for people with different amounts of time and types of skills to offer. Finally, we encourage practitioners to document and publish participant demographics to monitor diversity in citizen science. Published on 2021-03-19 09:07:48
Abstract: Avalanches represent the primary risk of death to backcountry skiers and snowmobilers in North American and European alpine countries. The best strategy for evading dangerous snowpack conditions that may result in an avalanche event requires skiers and snowmobilers to avoid or mitigate their use of hazardous terrain. Therefore, understanding terrain use is critical to understanding the causes of avalanche accidents. Secondary, post-event examination of accident data is inadequate for this understanding, and the logistical costs of user intercept surveys are problematic. Learning more about the behaviors and practices skiers and snowmobilers use to avoid avalanche fatalities or near misses is the primary concern of the avalanche education and research community. However, the topographical data required for analysis of skier and snowmobiler behavior with respect to terrain use is beyond the capacity of most backcountry skiers to provide via traditional surveys. This paper presents the use of a novel combination of user surveys and Global Positioning System (GPS) tracking to collect detailed terrain-use data from recreationists who voluntarily engage with researchers via active participation in citizen science research projects. We describe the methodology for these observations and present why they represent an effective approach to understand avalanche accidents. Published on 2021-03-16 08:07:52
Abstract: Over the past fifteen years, infectious disease surveillance has evolved to include online citizen science projects that implement active digital data collection. Flu Near You (FNY) is an online participatory surveillance system in the United States that collects weekly health reports from its volunteers. Because high engagement levels and consistent participation of users are essential to accurately track disease and estimate burden, FNY implemented three measures: (1) adding a new feature in that allows website visitors to submit a health report without registering, (2) administering user surveys at the end of each influenza season, and (3) partnering with Science Friday (SciFri) (a weekly public radio program that discusses topics relevant to science, nature, and technology) with the goals of increasing the number of weekly participant reports, improving the frequency of user reporting, and understanding user motivation. In this paper, we evaluate the impact of these three measures. The number of registered users who submitted only one report decreased after allowing users to submit reports without registering. The survey indicated that respondents were primarily motivated by the importance of disease tracking and by a desire to participate in a citizen science project. Finally, users who registered from SciFri were highly engaged and also motivated by a desire to participate in a citizen science project. Published on 2021-03-08 09:37:30
Open Access journal
