Volunteer Environmental Monitoring and the Role of the Universities: The Case of Citizens' Environment Watch

Savan, Beth; Morgan, Alexis; Gore, Christopher

doi:10.1007/s00267-002-2897-y

Cited by 102 publications

(76 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Kremen et al (2011) found that volunteers' confidence in identifying insects was higher when identifying to a more general taxon level than when asked to identify to species level. Additionally, volunteers increased their confidence over time, after training, or after repeated monitoring opportunities (Finn et al 2010;Savan et al 2003). These findings suggest that the low levels of confidence in performing citizen science tasks found in this study might not be completely different from confidence levels of existing volunteers, and that those confidence levels can increase over time.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 48%

Public Perceptions of Citizen Science

Lewandowski

Caldwell

Elmquist

et al. 2017

CSTP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Members of the public are the foundation and the backbone of citizen science, but much remains unknown about how the public views citizen science. We conducted a survey of public familiarity with, and perceptions of, citizen science. We found that less than half of respondents were familiar with the term "citizen science," but over 70% were familiar with the concept by another name. Most respondents were more confident in hypothetical citizen science findings when professional scientists were involved to some degree, compared to situations in which only citizen scientists were involved. Confidence in citizen science findings tended to increase with age, despite the fact that self-confidence in respondents' own abilities to perform citizen science tasks decreased with age. Fewer than half of respondents (31-47%), and more men than women, were confident in their own ability to perform science process tasks, with the exception of collecting data (53% confident), and only slightly more predicted they would enjoy such activities. Based on our findings, we suggest ways in which leaders of citizen science projects can better promote recruitment, retention, and engagement on the part of volunteers and the public as a whole.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 48%

Public Perceptions of Citizen Science

Lewandowski

Caldwell

Elmquist

et al. 2017

CSTP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Still others secured funds to build a cabin for use by tourists and developed jewelry to sell to visitors. Other researchers reported increased social capital outcomes related to aspects of social capital such as increased size of personal networks (Overdevest et al 2004, Gooch 2005, Pollock and Whitelaw 2005, Jones et al 2006, Measham and Barnett 2008, Koss and Kingsley 2010, development of partnerships (Sharpe et al 2000, Savan et al 2003, and community influence (Pollock andWhitelaw 2005, Jones et al 2006).…”

Section: Increase In Social Capitalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Individual- and community-level impacts of volunteer environmental monitoring: a synthesis of peer-reviewed literature

Stepenuck¹,

Green²

2015

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

“…CBR is "conducted by, for [,] or with the participation of community members" (Chopyak 2001, page 377). Examples emerging from the nascent literature on CBR report success in fostering a learning environment that leads to direct action and behavioral change in participating communities (Trumbell et al 2000, Robertson and McGee 2003, Savan et al 2003, Evans et al 2005. Road Watch was developed with an ultimate goal of linking researchers and citizens in a learning process that strengthens the information base and the number of individuals informed about wildlife movement across Highway 3.…”

Section: Evolution Into Community-based Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Citizen, Science, Highways, and Wildlife: Using a Web-based GIS to Engage Citizens in Collecting Wildlife Information

Lee¹,

Quinn²,

Duke³

2006

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Road Watch in the Pass is a citizen-science project that engages local citizens in reporting wildlife observations along a 44-km stretch of Highway 3 through Crowsnest Pass in southwestern Alberta, Canada. The numbers of wildlife vehicle collisions and a recent proposal to expand the highway have raised concerns from both human safety and wildlife conservation perspectives. Through the use of a web-based GIS, interested citizens can contribute information that will be instrumental in making final decisions concerning measures to mitigate the effects of highway expansion. Currently, 58 people have contributed over 713 observations to Road Watch. We performed a preliminary comparison of 11 months of Road Watch observations and wildlife mortality data for the same time period to demonstrate that the use of citizen science not only augments more conventional approaches, but also results in the emergence of new knowledge and insights. A Kappa index of agreement of 14% indicates poor agreement between the data sets, highlighting that wildlife successfully cross the highway in areas not identified by the wildlife mortality data. This has important implications for design and mitigation efforts for Highway 3 and other roadways.

show abstract

Volunteer Environmental Monitoring and the Role of the Universities: The Case of Citizens' Environment Watch

Cited by 102 publications

References 11 publications

Public Perceptions of Citizen Science

Public Perceptions of Citizen Science

Individual- and community-level impacts of volunteer environmental monitoring: a synthesis of peer-reviewed literature

Citizen, Science, Highways, and Wildlife: Using a Web-based GIS to Engage Citizens in Collecting Wildlife Information

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About