Global change and local solutions: Tapping the unrealized potential of citizen science for biodiversity research

Abstract The collective impact of humans on biodiversity rivals mass extinction events defining Earth’s history, but does our large population also present opportunities to document and contend with this crisis? We provide the first quantitative review of biodiversity-related citizen science to determine whether data collected by these projects can be, and are currently being, effectively used in biodiversity research. We find strong evidence of the potential of citizen science: within projects we sampled (n = 388), ∼1.3 million volunteers participate, contributing up to $2.5 billion in-kind annually. These projects exceed most federally-funded studies in spatial and temporal extent, and collectively they sample a breadth of taxonomic diversity. However, only 12% of the 388 projects surveyed obviously provide data to peer-reviewed scientific articles, despite the fact that a third of these projects have verifiable, standardized data that are accessible online. Factors influencing publication included project spatial scale and longevity and having publically available data, as well as one measure of scientific rigor (taxonomic identification training). Because of the low rate at which citizen science data reach publication, the large and growing citizen science movement is likely only realizing a small portion of its potential impact on the scientific research community. Strengthening connections between professional and non-professional participants in the scientific process will enable this large data resource to be better harnessed to understand and address global change impacts on biodiversity.

[1]  Kim Bartel Sheehan,et al.  E-mail Survey Response Rates: A Review , 2006, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[2]  Eugene Kolker,et al.  Designing a post-genomics knowledge ecosystem to translate pharmacogenomics into public health action , 2012, Genome Medicine.

[3]  A. Budden,et al.  Big data and the future of ecology , 2013 .

[4]  L. Salamon,et al.  Volunteering in cross-national perspective: initial comparisons , 1999 .

[5]  J. L. Gittleman,et al.  The biodiversity of species and their rates of extinction, distribution, and protection , 2014, Science.

[6]  R. Bonney,et al.  Citizen Science: A Developing Tool for Expanding Science Knowledge and Scientific Literacy , 2009 .

[7]  C. Kremen,et al.  Evaluating the Quality of Citizen‐Scientist Data on Pollinator Communities , 2011, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[8]  C. Lintott,et al.  Galaxy Zoo: morphologies derived from visual inspection of galaxies from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey , 2008, 0804.4483.

[9]  Walter Jetz,et al.  Integrating biodiversity distribution knowledge: toward a global map of life. , 2012, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[10]  Tomas J. Bird,et al.  Statistical solutions for error and bias in global citizen science datasets , 2014 .

[11]  Corey J A Bradshaw,et al.  Synergies among extinction drivers under global change. , 2008, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[12]  Jennifer Shirk,et al.  The Invisible Prevalence of Citizen Science in Global Research: Migratory Birds and Climate Change , 2014, PloS one.

[13]  Rick Bonney,et al.  The current state of citizen science as a tool for ecological research and public engagement , 2012 .

[14]  Andrew Gelman,et al.  General methods for monitoring convergence of iterative simulations , 1998 .

[15]  Caren B. Cooper,et al.  Data validation in citizen science: a case study from Project FeederWatch , 2012 .

[16]  Erle C. Ellis,et al.  Mapping where ecologists work: biases in the global distribution of terrestrial ecological observations , 2012, Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment.

[17]  Candie C. Wilderman,et al.  Public Participation in Scientific Research: a Framework for Deliberate Design , 2012 .

[18]  Ross H. Arnett,et al.  NAMING SPECIES , A NEW PARADIGM FOR CRISIS MANAGEMENT IN TAXONOMY : RAPID JOURNAL VALIDATION OF SCIENTIFIC NAMES ENHANCED WITH MORE COMPLETE DESCRIPTIONS ON THE INTERNET , 2008 .

[19]  Public Science 2.0—Back to the Future , 2013, Science.

[20]  Henry P. Huntington,et al.  USING TRADITIONAL ECOLOGICAL KNOWLEDGE IN SCIENCE: METHODS AND APPLICATIONS , 2000 .

[21]  J. Lamarque,et al.  Global Biodiversity: Indicators of Recent Declines , 2010, Science.

[22]  Karin Pirhofer-Walzl,et al.  Linking Public Participation in Scientific Research to the Indicators and Needs of International Environmental Agreements , 2014 .

[23]  R. Whittaker,et al.  Beyond scarcity: citizen science programmes as useful tools for conservation biogeography , 2010 .

[24]  Rick Bonney,et al.  The history of public participation in ecological research , 2012 .

[25]  P. Marra,et al.  West Nile virus emergence and large-scale declines of North American bird populations , 2007, Nature.

[26]  C. Lintott,et al.  Galaxy Zoo Green Peas: discovery of a class of compact extremely star-forming galaxies , 2009, 0907.4155.

[27]  Adrien Treuille,et al.  Predicting protein structures with a multiplayer online game , 2010, Nature.

[28]  R. Bonney,et al.  Next Steps for Citizen Science , 2014, Science.

[29]  J. Clobert,et al.  Advantages of Volunteer‐Based Biodiversity Monitoring in Europe , 2009, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[30]  H. Lotze,et al.  Spatial and temporal trends in yellow stingray abundance: evidence from diver surveys , 2011, Environmental Biology of Fishes.

[31]  S. Andelman.  Conservation science outside the comfort zone , 2011, Nature.

[32]  S. White,et al.  Volunteering in the United States, 2005 , 2006 .

[33]  Peter M. Vitousek,et al.  GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE: An Introduction , 1992 .

[34]  H. Lotze,et al.  Assessing the Value of Recreational Divers for Censusing Elasmobranchs , 2011, PloS one.

[35]  C. Parmesan,et al.  Poleward shifts in geographical ranges of butterfly species associated with regional warming , 1999, Nature.

[36]  Roger M. Macfarlane,et al.  Reaching the magnetic anisotropy limit of a 3d metal atom , 2014, Science.

[37]  Karin Pirhofer-Walzl,et al.  Environmental monitoring: the scale and speed of implementation varies according to the degree of peoples involvement , 2010 .

[38]  J. Silvertown.  A new dawn for citizen science. , 2009, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[39]  S. T. Buckland,et al.  Long-term datasets in biodiversity research and monitoring: assessing change in ecological communities through time. , 2010, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[40]  R. Scholes,et al.  Ecosystems and human well-being: current state and trends , 2005 .

[41]  Rodolfo Dirzo,et al.  Global State of Biodiversity and Loss , 2003 .

[42]  Hugh P. Possingham,et al.  Realising the full potential of citizen science monitoring programs , 2013 .

[43]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[44]  David N. Bonter,et al.  Citizen Science as an Ecological Research Tool: Challenges and Benefits , 2010 .

[45]  Steve Kelling,et al.  Data-intensive science applied to broad-scale citizen science. , 2012, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[46]  M. G. Pittau,et al.  A weakly informative default prior distribution for logistic and other regression models , 2008, 0901.4011.

[47]  Carsten Rahbek,et al.  Comparing diversity data collected using a protocol designed for volunteers with results from a professional alternative , 2013 .

[48]  Barry Meatyard,et al.  World Atlas of Biodiversity: Earth's Living Resources in the 21st Century , 2003 .

[49]  P. Leadley,et al.  Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity. , 2012, Ecology letters.