Abstract
The concept of boundary work (Gieryn 1983, 1999) has been developed to capture theways in which scientists collectively defend and demarcate their intellectual territories.This article applies the concept of boundary work to the ethical realm and investigates theethical boundary work performed by researchers in the field of citizen science (CS) througha literature review and by analysing accounts of ethics presented in CS literature.Results show that ethical boundary work in the CS literature is, to a large extent, a matterof managing ambiguities and paradoxes without any clear boundaries drawn between theunethical and ethical. Scientists are negotiating ethical positions, which might, occasionally,enhance the ethical authority of ‘non-science’ and non-scientists, as well as maintainalready established research ethics. The main ethical boundary work in CS displaysvariations towards perceived insufficiencies of conventional research ethics to accommodate“outsiders”, addressing issues of distribution, relevance, and expulsion as science includevolunteer contributors in the scientific process.
Highlights
Introduction & backgroundThe participation of non-professional contributors in the production of scientific knowledge has been undergoing a process of institutionalisation during the last decade (Macq et al, 2020)
Some argue that CS is “redefining or even disassembling boundaries”, and that “a baseline of mutual understanding of what is meant by the term ‘citizen science’” is necessary for the development of the field (Hecker et al, 2019, p. 1)
We can conclude that CS researchers are concerned with three overlapping themes of ethical issues: (1) distribution, (2) relevance, and (3) expulsion
Summary
Introduction & backgroundThe participation of non-professional contributors in the production of scientific knowledge has been undergoing a process of institutionalisation during the last decade (Macq et al, 2020). CS has been recognised by national and international institutions such as the United Nations (UN) as important for complementing and improving data for monitoring the sustainable development goals (Fritz et al, 2019; Fraisl et al, 2020). This process inevitably involves discussions and controversies over what can be regarded as CS in struggles over credibility, resources, participation, and truth While CS is held to dissolve boundaries between professional scientists and volunteer contributors, the structuring of participation in CS has been shown to limit inclusion, recreating borders between scientists and volunteer contributors (Hagen, 2020)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
