From inequalities to epistemic innovation: Insights from open science hardware projects in Latin America

Arancio, Julieta

doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2023.103576

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, as emphasized in the UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science [ 133 ], open source technologies—defined as those with freedoms for users to use, study, modify and share them without restrictions [ 134 , 135 ]—are essential for not only economic savings [ 136 ] but also more inclusive and equitable research, especially outside the Global North (e.g. [ 137 , 138 ]). Successful examples of open innovation in citizen science include the source code of the iNaturalist mobile apps or hardware designs for the EnviroDIY water quality sensors, while successful business models have been developed to support them, such as the company Open Acoustic Devices for acoustic ecological monitoring [ 139 ].…”

Section: Technology As An Inhibitor—complicating Methods and Excludin...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Emerging technologies in citizen science and potential for insect monitoring

Sheard,

Adriaens,

Bowler

et al. 2024

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Emerging technologies are increasingly employed in environmental citizen science projects. This integration offers benefits and opportunities for scientists and participants alike. Citizen science can support large-scale, long-term monitoring of species occurrences, behaviour and interactions. At the same time, technologies can foster participant engagement, regardless of pre-existing taxonomic expertise or experience, and permit new types of data to be collected. Yet, technologies may also create challenges by potentially increasing financial costs, necessitating technological expertise or demanding training of participants. Technology could also reduce people's direct involvement and engagement with nature. In this perspective, we discuss how current technologies have spurred an increase in citizen science projects and how the implementation of emerging technologies in citizen science may enhance scientific impact and public engagement. We show how technology can act as (i) a facilitator of current citizen science and monitoring efforts, (ii) an enabler of new research opportunities, and (iii) a transformer of science, policy and public participation, but could also become (iv) an inhibitor of participation, equity and scientific rigour. Technology is developing fast and promises to provide many exciting opportunities for citizen science and insect monitoring, but while we seize these opportunities, we must remain vigilant against potential risks. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Towards a toolkit for global insect biodiversity monitoring’.

show abstract

Section: Technology As An Inhibitor—complicating Methods and Excludin...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Emerging technologies in citizen science and potential for insect monitoring

Sheard,

Adriaens,

Bowler

et al. 2024

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Within CZ science specifically, other possibilities for broadening participation include open science software and hardware, which may reduce inequalities in research (Arancio, 2023). Developing codes and hardware and sharing those broadly opens up doors for knowledge production in CZ science to be truly global.…”

Section: Knowledge Sharing Is Importantmentioning

confidence: 99%

Expanding the Spatial Reach and Human Impacts of Critical Zone Science

Singha,

Sullivan,

Billings

et al. 2024

Earth's Future

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two major barriers hinder the holistic understanding of subsurface critical zone (CZ) evolution and its impacts: (a) an inability to measure, define, and share information and (b) a societal structure that inhibits inclusivity and creativity. In contrast to the aboveground portion of the CZ, which is visible and measurable, the bottom boundary is difficult to access and quantify. In the context of these barriers, we aim to expand the spatial reach of the CZ by highlighting existing and effective tools for research as well as the “human reach” of CZ science by expanding who performs such science and who it benefits. We do so by exploring the diversity of vocabularies and techniques used in relevant disciplines, defining terminology, and prioritizing research questions that can be addressed. Specifically, we explore geochemical, geomorphological, geophysical, and ecological measurements and modeling tools to estimate CZ base and thickness. We also outline the importance of and approaches to developing a diverse CZ workforce that looks like and harnesses the creativity of the society it serves, addressing historical legacies of exclusion. Looking forward, we suggest that to grow CZ science, we must broaden the physical spaces studied and their relationships with inhabitants, measure the “deep” CZ and make data accessible, and address the bottlenecks of scaling and data‐model integration. What is needed—and what we have tried to outline—are common and fundamental structures that can be applied anywhere and used by the diversity of researchers involved in investigating and recording CZ processes from a myriad of perspectives.

show abstract

“…The ROIs for open hardware are formidable and if there are FOSH that target particular social causes they would appear to be a good match for funding both the development and testing. This is particularly true for scientific hardware, and offers the potential to transition all of science towards more plural and democratic sociotechnical systems (Arancio, 2019;Arancio et al, 2022) as well as appropriate technology for developing countries and resource constrained communities (Omer et al, 2022). Thus, one of the primary functions of the FOSH database-related business model would be determining appropriate validation tests for FOSH, developing open standards for those tests, and then either performing or arranging for the outsourcing of such tests.…”

Section: Key Insightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Business Models for Open Source Hardware Repositories

Pearce

2023

JBM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Free and open source hardware repositories provide massive public good, but funding their operation has proven tenuous with conventional business models. This study evaluates business models to foster that public good. Business models for online design repositories are reviewed and a new model is conceptualized to fund repository operations. The greatest added value an open hardware repository brings to the user-developer community is validation and vetting of the designs. A business model was proposed that uses revenue from the vetting process to fund validation studies and sustainable operations of the open hardware repository itself. As the return on investment of laterally-scaled open hardware that can leverage distributed manufacturing has the potential for creating enormous value, maintaining repositories for this hardware enables vast wealth generation for everyone. This is the first study specifically focused on ways to ensure economic sustainability of open hardware repositories.

show abstract

From inequalities to epistemic innovation: Insights from open science hardware projects in Latin America

Cited by 6 publications

References 42 publications

Emerging technologies in citizen science and potential for insect monitoring

Emerging technologies in citizen science and potential for insect monitoring

Expanding the Spatial Reach and Human Impacts of Critical Zone Science

Business Models for Open Source Hardware Repositories

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About