Citizen Science and Biodiversity

Abstract

Citizen science can be understood as an approach to scientific research in which volunteer contributors undertake work in one or more phases of the research process. Citizen science projects can be initiated by volunteers or institutional actors (e.g., scientists in academia), and volunteers often work together with professional researchers. In citizen science, participants are not just objects of research (e.g., interviewee or survey respondent) but also research subjects—that is, taking an active role in collecting data, analyzing data sets, contributing to study design, or disseminating results (or combinations of these tasks). Participants may have little background knowledge on the topic under study, or they might be amateur enthusiasts with a great deal of existing expertise. Citizen science projects aim for genuine science outcomes, which can include scientific data sets and publications, new discoveries, or policy or management action. Although citizen science projects are currently being developed and carried out in a wide variety of scientific fields, including medical biology (e.g., self-monitoring of disease symptoms), environmental science (e.g., monitoring air or water quality), history (e.g., archive transcription), and “citizen social science,” the field of biology especially has a long history of amateur involvement in research. Citizen science in this field often takes the form of collecting data on the natural world and submitting these data to biodiversity databases (e.g., reporting bird observations). In addition to collecting data, citizen scientists take up a large part of taxonomy, describing new species and rearranging, merging, and splitting species groups. Furthermore, citizen scientists are heavily involved in the verification process, checking on observations done by other citizen scientists and giving feedback, acting not only as gatekeepers toward data quality but also as authorities, educating the community. Biodiversity citizen science projects may involve monitoring of the natural world initiated by communities of natural history enthusiasts, but research institutes in the field of biology and ecology also increasingly mobilize volunteers to collect data about the natural environment. Compared to many other domains in which citizen science is being applied, biodiversity monitoring especially stands out for its long history of amateur involvement in natural history. Because initiating biodiversity citizen science projects will thus often mean that research and policy actors engage with volunteer-driven networks, understanding these networks aids effective and just design of biodiversity citizen science. Although engaging with these long-standing networks of natural history offers many opportunities, perspectives of professional ecological research and communities of practice can differ markedly. In the current state of affairs, scientific literature shows tensions between volunteers operating in their communities of practice and scientists operating in theirs. Among others, these differences involve the meaning of observations: Whereas in research these are given meaning by gathering them up and statistically analyzing the resulting data sets, within a community of practice observations predominantly reflect human–nature relationships and are shared with expectations of respectful use for the protection of nature. Not only can the meaning of observations differ but also the act of validation can refer to very different activities as well as to different aspects of quality of information. In the community of practice of observers in the field, validation plays an important role in establishing relations of trust and authority within the network, with a strong emphasis on correct observations and volunteers’ motivation for learning and belonging. Conversely, validation in the scientific practice of research concerns the structure of the monitoring protocol and the statistical demands placed on the data. For scientists and policymakers, respectful cooperation with networks of amateur biodiversity recorders requires taking their perspectives seriously and respecting their way of working and the communities they have built. It also requires citizen science organizers to think carefully about whose questions are being answered. For citizen scientists, understanding the (statistical) needs of scientists and the relevance for policy allows their network to grow through funding and training.