The number of collaborative initiatives between scientists and volunteers (i.e., citizen science)is increasing across many research fields. The promise of societal transformation together with scientific breakthroughs contributes to the current popularity of citizen science (CS)

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

By analyzing a 2015 Finnish court case on wolf poaching, we discuss how wild animals are categorized, gain legal status based on their species identification, and affect the categorization of humans either as poachers or hunters concerned about the genetic purity of the species. The court had to evaluate the reliability, accuracy, and relevance of scientific knowledge to distinguish “pure” wolves from hybrids. Dealing with complicated questions of canid species identification, the court decision took a position in the debate on what to conserve in a world which escapes simple categorizations. Hence, we interpret the case as an example of biopolitics, addressing the challenges and tensions of governing life by differentiating between valued and less valued, killable and threatened lifeforms, and human responsibilities towards them.