Citizen science has expanded globally in recent decades, yet its institutionalization in Israel has been relatively recent. In recognition of the potential of citizen science to advance biodiversity conservation, public engagement, and scientific research, the Israel Center for Citizen Science (ICCS) was formally launched in February 2025 after a five-year planning and preparation phase. Herein, we share the journey from concept to reality, highlighting how the unique setting of a natural history museum has fostered nationwide partnerships and collaborations spanning conservation organizations, youth groups, and local initiatives. This process extends beyond its local context, situating ICCS as a model for institutionalizing citizen science within museums and informal science institutions. We describe the principles that guided ICCS’s establishment, organized around five components that together capture the institutional, social, and scientific mechanisms needed to sustain citizen science: (1) institutional embedding and governance, (2) co-creation and stakeholder engagement, (3) infrastructure and resource integration, (4) capacity building and facilitation, and (5) research-informed practice. We illustrate the contribution of this model to both individual projects and the broader citizen science community through case studies of three initiatives of different scale and magnitude: The Big Backyard Bird Count, the School Nature Challenge, and the Snail Tales project. We conclude with a discussion on the opportunities and challenges ahead, and emphasize the contribution of this process as a model for other countries and institutions seeking to develop citizen science capacity.

Biodiversity-focused contributory science platforms generate massive quantities of opportunistic records for research, but data are spatially, temporally, and taxonomically biased. While research attempting to quantify these biases abounds, less is known about how varied user motivations and behavior shapes how data accrue. Here, we compare how different iNaturalist user groups prioritize where and when they sample in the southeastern United States. We categorized users by participation level and traveler status, and examined how these groups differentially sample across land cover categories, urban and rural areas, protected land, urban parks, low-income urban neighborhoods, and weekends versus weekdays. We found that highly active users prioritize sampling in biodiversity-rich locations, filling data gaps in natural green spaces and rural areas while perpetuating biases toward protected areas and parks within urban areas. In contrast, casual users tend to primarily incorporate sampling into their daily lives, filling gaps within urban neighborhoods and on non-protected land while perpetuating biases toward developed areas. Local iNaturalist users, especially casual users, were the most likely to sample in low-income census tracts compared with travelers and are important for gap-filling in these underrepresented areas. Understanding how participants with different motivations shape opportunistic biodiversity data can inform contributory project planning and downstream data use. Our results emphasize the importance of recruiting new participants, retaining current participants, and engaging locals in contributory science programs. Further efforts to derive insight from opportunistic biodiversity data may benefit from accounting for variation in motivations of participants and resulting heterogeneity in biases across space and time.

Web-accessible biodiversity databases accept and openly share species observations from the public, which benefits research, conservation, and education. However, public data sharing can also bring harm, for example by facilitating poaching. Databases may mitigate potential harms associated with data sharing by designating certain species as “sensitive” and restricting access to those species data. Herein, we explore how databases explain those restrictions through rationales. We analyzed rationale communication in 43 biodiversity databases that automatically restrict access to certain participatory science species data. We found a small set of commonly used rationales, wide variation in the number of rationales provided, and a surprising number of databases citing few rationales. We distinguish between general theme rationales that can apply to many species and specific theme rationales that apply to fewer species, and between low- and high-context rationales. Most databases provided general theme rationales at the database level, and a smaller group provided rationales (general or specific theme) unique to each species. Most databases explained restrictions in formal policies, but some did not. We discuss implications of rationale communication for data accessibility, risk management, and informed participation in participatory science, and link our findings to ongoing metadata standardization efforts. We suggest seven best practices for data restriction communication that account for differences in project values, obligations, and resources. Our primary recommendations are that databases provide rationales for data restrictions, ideally unique to each species, and make these rationales publicly accessible and easy to locate when doing so does not increase threats.

Citizen science (CS) has gained recognition as a useful tool for monitoring and facilitating sustainable development transitions. However, CS initiatives are only emerging in the Global South, leaving many unknowns, like the factors influencing participation. This article contributes to the literature by examining the factors driving and limiting participation in two CS networks established in Uganda: Action Towards Reducing Aquatic Parasitic diseases (ATRAP), which monitored freshwater snails; and the Geo-observer (GO), which monitored natural hazards. Building on the theory of planned behaviour and the volunteer functions inventory, a questionnaire was administered to the participating individuals or citizen scientists and a control group that consisted of candidate citizen scientists, through group and individual interview settings. Motivations for participation were strikingly similar across the CS networks, respondent groups, and interview settings. The main drivers for participation were the desire to gain new skills and knowledge (understanding) and contribute to the community’s well-being (values), while the influence of others (social) and opinions or expectations of significant others (subjective norms) played lesser roles. Although the control group in both networks consistently expressed higher levels of positive responses, the importance of the motivational factors generally declined in both respondent groups over time. Financial compensation and favorable working conditions, like flexibility, contributed to sustained participation among the citizen scientists, while the major barriers to participation embodied external and internal factors, like bad weather and sickness. This study provides valuable insights to guide future CS recruitment initiatives toward alignment with the aspirations of individuals in similar contexts.

The benefits of participatory science (PS) engagement for participants are not equally distributed. Currently, people who identify as white, highly educated, and wealthy largely constitute contributory PS projects, and little is known about what motivates or impedes participation of people from underrepresented groups. We investigated how Project FeederWatch (PFW), a PS project focused on people who feed and watch birds, could be made more inclusive for people identifying as 1) Black, Indigenous, or a person of color and/or 2) disabled and/or neurodivergent using focus groups of people who already feed birds but do not currently participate in PFW. We explored how PFW could better align with people’s existing interests and address perceived systemic barriers to participation. The motivations and barriers that attendees identified reflected their associations with PS as a whole. Attendees indicated that PFW already matched their interests and had several accessible aspects. However, attendees noted substantial systemic barriers to participation, including the participation fee, economic barriers, accessibility barriers, and a pervasive lack of belonging. Attendees suggested that PFW could be more inclusive by addressing these barriers, improving accessibility, and further supporting participant interests. Based on our research, we share recommendations for designing both inclusive focus groups and inclusive PS projects. These findings have relevance for other projects seeking to distribute the benefits of PS to all.

In addition to relevant and reliable data, sustainability governance depends on the ability of the data to foster shared understanding. Drawing on critical data studies, this study investigates the process of sensemaking embedded in the data practises of digital citizen science (CS), focusing on the Finnish platform Lake-Sea Wiki. Originally developed in response to citizen initiatives and maintained by a research institute responsible for official national water monitoring, the platform integrates data on water bodies from both citizen observers and authorities. Through qualitative analysis of two surveys and a workshop for citizen observers and water monitoring experts, as well as media content and collaborative observations, the study investigates how actors involved in water monitoring perceive the meanings and usability of CS and the data it produces. The results indicate that the case information system fosters communication among actors, but mostly indirectly, limiting the development of shared understanding. A central inconsistency in sensemaking lies in experts perceiving CS producing more valuable information when citizens are solely involved as observers, whereas active citizen observers emphasise the value of more engaged forms of collaboration, allowing their knowledge of data practises to be utilised. Furthermore, while significant sources of motivation for citizen observers are internal factors, such as benefitting scientific understanding and environmental decision-making, experts rely on external means of motivation. This study highlights the need for transparent, inclusive, and context-sensitive formulation of data practises to enhance the quality, usability, and actionability of CS.

The open-ocean’s surface is host to a community of strange creatures adapted for life at the air-sea interface (neustonic zone). One species, the by-the-wind sailor (Velella velella), occasionally washes ashore in high numbers, and its appearance makes the news. By-the-wind sailors may play a key role in the ecology of the neustonic zone, but we know very little about their biology. Due to their conspicuous nature and rare occurrence, the study of by-the-wind sailors can be achieved only with a community of scientists. Here we introduce The Living Sailor Zooniverse project, which leveraged 11,115 iNaturalist observations to answer fundamental life history questions. A total of 1,169 volunteers classified cumulatively 67,926 subjects to determine three variables: count, condition, and direction of sail. Using a super-majority threshold of agreement among six volunteers per subject, volunteers were able to identify 10,105 by-the-wind sailors for at least one endpoint including 6,377 for sail direction. Subjects on which volunteer consensus proved difficult offered valuable information, and we provide insight for the development of Zooniverse training materials and best practice for shore-based photography for iNaturalist projects. Our results reveal community (citizen) science can support the often-difficult task of studying high seas biology. By unlocking a new avenue for high seas research, we will be better equipped to understand the biodiversity of this largely unexplored habitat for management and conservation. The Living Sailor data in particular will inform ongoing efforts for mapping sea-surface biodiversity hotspots and testing a decades-old hypothesis that sail direction influences by-the-wind sailor global distribution.

Assessing the impact of citizen science participation on volunteers is increasingly important. However, traditional methods for evaluating volunteer experiences—such as quantitative surveying—have drawbacks. Response rates are often low, pre- and post-tests provide a coarse metric for assessing learning, and static evaluation techniques have failed to align with the participatory spirit of citizen science, where volunteers are involved in understanding their role in scientific inquiry. In response to these problems, we developed a more engaging type of longitudinal survey aimed at achieving higher response rates and better involving volunteers in understanding the scientific value of their survey efforts. We first reviewed the literature on “fun” and found that fun activities embody six characteristics: autonomy, social connection, playfulness, challenge, transport, and curiosity. We used this “fun heuristic” to design “SciQuest,” an exploratory survey tool that evaluated volunteers’ pro-environmental attitudes and behaviors across citizen science projects hosted on the platform SciStarter.org. SciQuest proved to be a reliable instrument that captured common learning outcome–related constructs measured by conventional, validated instruments. Although most beta-testers had no preference between SciQuest and a conventional survey, among those expressing a preference, nearly twice as many favored SciQuest. SciQuest also achieved much higher retention rates (49–67%) than past conventional surveys on SciStarter (19%). Embedded, creative approaches to citizen science evaluation are thus a viable, and perhaps preferable, complement to traditional surveys, particularly on citizen science platforms. Citizen science facilitators should extend their volunteer-centric perspectives to include participant evaluation and seek evidence-based strategies for enriching the citizen science experience.

In May 2024, a workshop was held as part of the European Citizen Science Association (ECSA) 2024 conference in Vienna to explore the creation of transnational communities to upscale citizen science, to address global issues as outlined by the European Union Horizon Missions and their objectives. This report summarises the discussions and issues that were raised during the workshop, from the point of view of a range of different actors in the citizen science discipline. This includes success stories of projects that have upscaled to an international scope, their methodologies for doing so, and the challenges citizen science initiatives face when attempting to contribute to global-scale challenges. The examples shared demonstrate a range of approaches when upscaling citizen science projects, giving rise to discussions regarding project management, shared learning and practice, citizen science tools and resources, scalability and context, and data interoperability. The success and challenges revealed will provide a clear roadmap for current and future citizen science practitioners, especially those with the ambition of upscaling their efforts to tackle challenges at national, regional, or global levels.