Opinion: Toward an international definition of citizen science

Public participation in scientific projects is flourishing globally as part of projects labeled “citizen science” (CS). Already, a number of professional networks for CS stakeholders have been founded, for example, the US-based Citizen Science Association, the European Citizen Science Association, and the Australian Citizen Science Association. As citizen science (CS) continues to grow, researchers and participants should move toward a shared understanding of what the practice is, what it is not, and what criteria CS projects must fulfill to ensure high-quality participatory research. Image credit: David Cutler (artist). But what exactly qualifies as CS? It is interpreted in various ways (1) and takes different forms with different degrees of participation (2). In fact, the label CS is currently assigned to research activities either by project principal investigators (PIs) themselves or by research funding agencies. Against this backdrop, critical observers of CS, such as Guerrini et al. (3), have drawn attention to important legal and ethical issues including intellectual property and scientific integrity. Similarly, Vayena and Tasioulas (4) note the importance of protecting the interests of research participants in biomedical participant-led research, and Buyx et al. (5) note the need for a solidarity-based practice of CS to fully exploit its potential, making “every participant a PI.” In light of the rapid growth of CS, present concerns, and calls for further improving the value of CS, we see several issues for policymakers, funding agencies, and citizens. Specifically, we believe that researchers and participants should move toward a shared understanding of what CS is, what it is not, and what criteria CS projects must fulfill to ensure high-quality participatory research (6). Establishing criteria will help ensure that CS projects are rigorous, help the field flourish, and where applicable encourage policymakers to take CS project data and results seriously. Politicians throughout Europe understand CS … [↵][1]1To whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: florian.heigl{at}boku.ac.at. [1]: #xref-corresp-1-1

[1]  Jessica L. Cappadonna,et al.  Citizen Science Terminology Matters: Exploring Key Terms , 2017, Citizen Science: Theory and Practice.

[2]  Barbara Kieslinger,et al.  Supporting emerging forms of citizen science: a plea for diversity, creativity and social innovation , 2016 .

[3]  Peter Kraker,et al.  The Vienna Principles: A Vision for Scholarly Communication in the 21st Century , 2016, Mitteilungen der Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare.

[4]  A. Irwin Citizen Science: A Study of People, Expertise and Sustainable Development , 1995 .

[5]  E. Vayena,et al.  Adapting Standards: Ethical Oversight of Participant-Led Health Research , 2013, PLoS medicine.

[6]  P. Achterberg,et al.  Science to the people: A 32-nation survey , 2018, Public understanding of science.

[7]  Matthew P. Motta The enduring effect of scientific interest on trust in climate scientists in the United States , 2018, Nature Climate Change.

[8]  S. Rynes,et al.  When the “Best Available Evidence” Doesn’t Win: How Doubts About Science and Scientists Threaten the Future of Evidence-Based Management , 2018, Journal of Management.

[9]  Jose Miguel Rubio Iglesias,et al.  Innovation in citizen science – perspectives on science-policy advances , 2018 .

[10]  H. Völzke,et al.  Every participant is a PI. Citizen science and participatory governance in population studies. , 2017, International journal of epidemiology.

[11]  J. Baudry,et al.  “Citizen Science”? Rethinking Science and Public Participation , 2018, Science & Technology Studies.

[12]  Amy L. McGuire,et al.  Citizen science, public policy , 2018, Science.

[13]  Caren B. Cooper,et al.  Links and Distinctions among Citizenship, Science, and Citizen Science. , 2012 .

[14]  Kevin Crowston,et al.  From Conservation to Crowdsourcing: A Typology of Citizen Science , 2011, 2011 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[15]  Florian Heigl,et al.  The threefold potential of environmental citizen science - Generating knowledge, creating learning opportunities and enabling civic participation , 2018, Biological Conservation.