Citizen science has advanced science for hundreds of years, contributed to many peer-reviewed articles, and informed land management decisions and policies across the United States. Over the last 10 years, citizen science has grown immensely in the United States and many other countries. Here, we show how citizen science is a powerful tool for tackling many of the challenges faced in the field of conservation biology. We describe the two interwoven paths by which citizen science can improve conservation efforts, natural resource management, and environmental protection. The first path includes building scientific knowledge, while the other path involves informing policy and encouraging public action. We explore how citizen science is currently used and describe the investments needed to create a citizen science program. We find that:1. Citizen science already contributes substantially to many domains of science, including conservation, natural resource, and environmental science. Citizen science informs natural resource management, environmental protection, and policymaking and fosters public input and engagement. 2. Many types of projects can benefit from citizen science, but one must be careful to match the needs for science and public involvement with the right type of citizen science project and the right method of public participation. 3. Citizen science is a rigorous process of scientific discovery, indistinguishable from conventional science apart from the participation of volunteers. When properly designed, carried out, and evaluated, citizen science can provide sound science, efficiently generate high-quality data, and help solve problems.
Macroinvertebrates were used to assess the impact of urbanization on stream quality across a gradient of watershed imperviousness in 43 southeastern Wisconsin streams. The percentage of watershed connected imperviousness was chosen as the urbanization indicator to examine impact of urban land uses on macroinvertebrate communities. Most urban land uses were negatively correlated with the Shannon diversity index, percent of pollution intolerant Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera individuals, and generic richness. Nonurban land uses were positively correlated with these same metrics. The Hilsenhoff biotic index indicated that stream quality declined with increased urbanization. Functional feeding group metrics varied across a gradient of urbanization, suggesting changes in stream quality. Proportions of collectors and gatherers increased, while proportions of filterers, scrapers, and shredders decreased with increased watershed imperviousness. This study demonstrated that urbanization severely degraded stream macroinvertebrate communities, hence stream quality. Good stream quality existed where imperviousness was less than 8 percent, but less favorable assessments were inevitable where imperviousness exceeded 12 to 20 percent. Levels of imperviousness between 8 and 12 percent represented a threshold where minor increases in urbanization were associated with sharp declines in stream quality. (KEY TERMS: aquatic ecosystems; nonpoint source pollution; urban landuse; imperviousness; urban runoff; stream quality; macroinvertebrates; biotic index; functional feeding groups.)
ABSTRACT. Citizens have long contributed to scientific research about the environment through volunteer environmental monitoring programs. Their participation has also resulted in outcomes for themselves, their communities, and the environment. This research synthesizes 35 peer-reviewed journal articles that reported such outcomes through 2012. This collection of articles was derived from a pool of 436 peer-reviewed journal articles about participatory environmental monitoring. Reported outcomes for participants and communities ranged from increasing personal knowledge and community awareness to changing attitudes and behaviors, building social capital, and ultimately, influencing change in natural resource management and policies. Mixed results were reported in regard to citizen participation in natural resource decision-making processes and in terms of participant knowledge gain. Future research recommendations that address identified knowledge gaps include the following: (1) assessing knowledge beyond the basic content of the subject of monitoring to better address the value of volunteer environmental monitoring as a public participation tool; (2) conducting independent research across programs to enable null or negative outcome reporting, understand commonalities of outcomes across programs, and make linkages between outcomes and program characteristics; (3) carrying out rigorous research that includes data collection and statistical analysis focused on the effectiveness of citizen participation in decision making; (4) assessing the time component of outcome achievement to inform the volunteer monitoring community; and (5) conducting additional research to identify changes in attitudes and behaviors, particularly geared toward minimizing losses in biodiversity and impacts of climate change.
Citizen science-based approaches to monitor the natural environment tend to be bimodal in maturity. Older and established programs such as the Audubon's Christmas bird count and Community Collaborative Rain, Hail, and Snow Network (CoCoRaHS) have thousands of participants across decades of observations, while less mature citizen science projects have shorter lifespans often focused on local or regional observations with tens or hundreds of participants. For the latter, it can be difficult to transition into a more mature and sustainable citizen science-based research program. This paper focuses on this transition by evaluating CrowdHydrology (ca. 2010), a citizen science project that has transitioned from a regional to national network. It evaluates the data accuracy, citizen participation, and station popularity. The CrowdHydrology network asks citizens to send in text messages of water levels in streams and lakes, which has resulted in 16,294 observations submitted by over 8,000 unique participants at 120 unique locations. Using water level data and participation records from CrowdHydrology, we analyze the expansion and citizen participation from a regional to national citizen science network. We identify barriers to participation and evaluate why some citizen science observation stations are popular while others are not. We explore our chosen contributory program model for CrowdHydrology and the influence this model has had on long-term participation. Results demonstrate a highly variable rate of contributions of citizen scientists. This paper proposes hypotheses on why many of our observations are from one-time participants and why some monitoring stations are more popular than others. Finally, we address the future expansion of the CrowdHydrology network by evaluating successful monitoring locations and growing interest of watershed groups to expand the network of gauges.
Fecal contamination of water is a public health concern for those using the water for drinking or recreation. The EPA recommends using Escherichia coli to evaluate recreational freshwaters for fecal contamination. With limited resources available, states have recently focused on training volunteers to expand data collection and resource assessment. Several bacteria testing methods are available for use by the public; however, few studies have comprehensively evaluated their use by volunteers. This study evaluated two E. coli monitoring methods used by volunteers: Coliscan Easygel® and 3M(TM) Petrifilm(TM), incubated for 24 and 48 hours. The methods were assessed to determine how closely each matched results with EPA-approved laboratory analyses. Analysis of covariance results indicated that when used by volunteers to monitor surface water, 3M(TM) Petrifilm(TM) results were more similar to laboratory analyses than Coliscan Easygel®. Both test methods had similar overall accuracy of predicting if a sample exceeded or fell below the 235 cfu/100 mL EPA body contact standard for recreational surface waters. Two-thirds of volunteers preferred 3M(TM) Petrifilm(TM).
A survey of 345 volunteer water monitoring programs in the United States was conducted to document their characteristics, and perceived level of support for data to inform natural resource management or policy decisions. The response rate of 86% provided information from 46 states. Programs represented a range of ages, budgets, objectives, scopes, and level of quality assurance, which influenced data uses and perceived support by sponsoring agency administrators and external decision makers. Most programs focused on rivers, streams, and lakes. Programs had not made substantial progress to develop EPA or state-approved quality assurance plans since 1998, with only 48% reporting such plans. Program coordinators reported feeling slightly more support for data to be used for management as compared to policy decisions. Programs with smaller budgets may be at particular risk of being perceived to lack credibility due to failure to develop quality assurance plans. Over half of programs identified as collaborative, in that volunteers assisted scientists in program design, data analysis and/or dissemination of results. Just under a third were contributory, in which volunteers primarily collected data in a scientist-defined program. Recommendations to improve perceived data credibility, and to augment limited budgets include developing quality assurance plans and gaining agency approval, and developing partnerships with other organizations conducting monitoring in the area to share resources and knowledge. Funding agencies should support development of quality assurance plans to help ensure data credibility. Service providers can aid in plan development by providing training to program staff over time to address high staff turnover rates.
Climate change poses increased risks to coastal communities and the interconnected infrastructure they rely on, including food, energy, water, and transportation (FEWT) systems. Most coastal communities in the US are ill-prepared to address these risks, and resilience planning is inconsistently prioritized and not federally mandated. This study examined the resilience plans of 11 coastal US cities to understand 1. How FEWT systems were considered within resilience plans and, 2. How nexus principles or elements critical to a nexus approach were incorporated within resilience plans. A “Nexus Index” was created to examine the incorporation of nexus principles, which included partnerships and collaborations, reference to other plans or reports, discussion of co-benefits, cascading impacts, and inclusion of interdisciplinary or cross-silo principles. These principles were used to score each action within the resilience plans. Results showed that only eight actions (1% of all actions across the 11 plans) focused on the connections among FEWT systems within the resilience plans. The transportation system was associated with the most actions, followed by the energy system, water system, and the food system. While FEWT systems were not consistently included, there was evidence from the Nexus Index that the plans included elements critical to a nexus approach, such as the inclusion of partnerships and reference to co-benefits with the actions they designed to build resilience. The heterogeneity among the systems that each plan emphasized reflects the heterogeneity among the challenges that each city faces. While context-specific differences in resilience plans across cities are expected, some consistency in addressing certain infrastructural needs and their nexus interactions may greatly benefit and improve the implementation of resilience planning.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.