BookPDF Available

Green Paper on Citizen Science



This Green Paper aims to foster the interaction between the Citizen Science stakeholders and the EU policy officers, reinforcing the culture of consultation and dialogue in the EU. Interaction between the European Institutions and society takes various forms, primarily via the European Parliament, via institutionalised advisory bodies of the EU and via less formalised direct contacts with interested parties. In this later approach, this document is delivered by the SOCIENTIZE Project to the European Commission’s Digital Science Unit as part of the activities carried out under contract number RI-312902.
Citizen Science for Europe
Towards a better society of empowered
citizens and enhanced research
Green Paper
on Citizen Science
Citizen Science for Europe
Towards a better society of empowered
citizens and enhanced research
Green Paper
on Citizen Science
Annex I. Contributors
Annex II. References
1. Purpose and scope of the Green Paper
2. Citizen Science in the European policy context
2.1. Citizen Science alignment within Europe 2020 strategy
2.2. Citizen Science in European funding programmes
2.3. Citizen Science as an element of Digital Science and Responsible Research
and Innovation
3. SOCIENTIZE approach to developing a common roadmap for Citizen Science
in Europe
4. Proposed focus points for Citizen Science roadmap
4.1. Definition and scope of Citizen Science
4.2. Deployment, facilitation and sustainability models
4.3. Awareness and motivation for active involvement
4.4. Drivers and barriers for Citizen Science
4.5. Impact measurement and evaluation
5. Proposed actions and policy recommendations for Citizen Science roadmap
Policy level. European and national policy actors
Science level. Research funders and Research institutions
Society level. Public institutions, organizations and citizen associations
6. Roadmap for next steps
This open and participatory approach is gaining a renewed impulse thanks to the digital revolution.
It represents an eective scenario for many of the values of the Europe 2020 strategy and becomes
relevant across many of the topics of the imminent Horizon 2020 programme, presenting potential
links with other EU programmes. Outcomes vary in a wide range of values in scientific, social,
economic, educational, environmental and inspirational levels.
06 Introduction / Green Paper on Citizen Science
Citizen Science refers to the general public engagement in scientific research activities when
citizens actively contribute to science either with their intellectual eort or surrounding
knowledge or with their tools and resources.
Participants provide experimental data and facilities for researchers, raise new questions
and co-create a new scientific culture. While adding value, volunteers acquire new learning
and skills, and deeper understanding of the scientific work in an appealing way. As a result of
this open, networked and trans-disciplinary scenario, science-society-policy interactions are
improved leading to a more democratic research based on evidence-informed decision making.
Citizen Science
The SOCIENTIZE Consortium is coordinating an ongoing public consultation and debate about the
potential role of Citizen Science in Europe. As an intermediate result, this Green Paper presents the
major themes of discussion and some of the policy recommendations that will be refined within the
further White Paper on Citizen Science.
SECTION 1: Presents the background, purpose and scope of this Green Paper.
SECTION 2: Presents the related European policy context and the opportunities for
strengthening citizen involvement in research in Europe. We analyse and align Citizen Science
within Europe 2020 strategy, and the EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation.
SECTION 3: Presents the SOCIENTIZE activities carried out and methodology followed for
the development of the common roadmap for Citizen Science in Europe.
SECTION 4: Analyses key elements of Citizen Science which are the major discussion
themes among the interested parties. Those major themes are the following:
Definition and scope of citizen science which support dierent engagement models
understanding the potential, suitability, risks and linked policies implications.
Deployment, facilitation and sustainability for citizen science projects and coordinated
activities at local, national and European scale
Awareness and motivation for active involvement of researchers and volunteers,
developing understanding of the related challenges, drivers and barriers
Drivers and barriers for success, dealing with technologies that allow distributed
intelligence and introducing cultural shift for opening
Impact measurement and evaluation of the dierent values based on trusted indicators
and emerging public debate upon eciency and excellence in science
Each section provides a description of the topics and relates these to a set of open questions. A number
of success stories are interwoven to exemplify good practices.
SECTION 5: Presents a general recommendations for aspects which SOCIENTIZE
Consortium and consulted stakeholders see in need of change i.e. in need of a policy action.
Grouped under dierent policy levels, these possible measures include strategic and operational
improvements forming the starting point for further discussion and refinement.
SECTION 6: Explains the plan and roadmap for the next steps in the consultation process.
It will include further online open consultations and public events, like endorsement and debate
workshops based on this Green Paper. The final goal is to create a White Paper on Citizen Science
in Europe by September 2014.
Finally, ANNEX I presents the list of contributors and ANNEX II references and literature.
Green Paper on Citizen Science / Introduction
This Green Paper aims to foster the interaction between the Citizen
Science stakeholders and the EU policy ocers, reinforcing the culture
of consultation and dialogue in the EU. Interaction between the European
Institutions and society takes various forms, primarily via the European
Parliament, via institutionalised advisory bodies of the EU and via less formalised
direct contacts with interested parties. In this later approach, this document
is delivered by the SOCIENTIZE Project to the European Commission’s Digital
Science Unit as part of the activities carried out under contract number
Wide consultation is not a new phenomenon and the EU Commission has a long tradition consulting
interested parties from outside when formulating its policies. Thus, the benefits of being open to
outside input are already recognised. SOCIENTIZE is gathering and consolidating contributions of
European stakeholders for Citizen Science, and based on them proposing recommendations for
European, national and institutional policies. This Green Paper channels a public debate on the key
issues to be taken into account about Citizen Science role in the European policies and funding
programmes by performing open consultations in a meaningful and systematic way.
This report is the result of the coordination, support and networking activities carried out during
the first year of execution of the SOCIENTIZE Project. This document serves as a facilitator of further
debate, discussions and feedback, community endorsement, mutual learning and exchange of good
practices within the stakeholders. Initially conceived as a draft White Paper, many organisations
expressed a desire to supply more detailed comments and country-specific recommendations.
Purpose and scope
of the Green Paper
08 Purpose and scope of the Green Paper / Green Paper on Citizen Science
SOCIENTIZE Consortium, 2013
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons
Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
The SOCIENTIZE Consortium, therefore, decided to publish this Green Paper in the form of a
consultation document, encouraging all interested parties to submit their experiences on citizen
engagement in science and get wider discussion and endorsement during the second year of
execution of the SOCIENTIZE Project. As a result, the White Paper on Citizen Science will be created,
published and distributed by September 2014.
The SOCIENTIZE Consortium would like to express its gratitude to the large number of people who
gave their time freely to contribute information, endorsement, and insight to this Green Paper. Both
the quantity and the high quality of the various contributions show the clear interest of outside parties
in scientific strategy and policies realted with Citizen Science. There is a list of all contributors in the
Annex II.
This work is still in progress without producing any direct impact. Neither the European Commission
nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission or the SOCIENTIZE Consortium is responsible for
the use which might be made of the following information.
More information
on the SOCIENTIZE Project website
Green Paper on Citizen Science / Purpose and scope of the Green Paper
Citizen Science
in the European
policy context
2.1. Citizen Science alignment within
Europe 2020 strategy
Europe has traditionally a clear leadership role at the vanguard of democracy and research advances,
and Europe is nowadays facing social, scientific and policy challenges. In the last years, the economic
and social context has changed and Europe is now urged to stabilise the economic situation in the short
term while also taking measures to ensure growth opportunities of tomorrow.
10 Citizen Science in the European policy context / Green Paper on Citizen Science
- José Manuel Barroso, President of the European Commission
to the European Parliament, 11 September 2013
In the debate that is ongoing all across
Europe, the bottom-line question is: Do we want
to improve Europe or give it up? My answer is
clear: let’s engage! If you don’t like Europe as it is:
improve it!”.
aims to re-boost Europe’s economy and help
citizens and businesses to get the most out of digital
technologies and information.
recognises European unique set of values and
strengths in design, creativity, services and the
importance of social innovation.
highlights that learning isn’t limited to schools
and plenty of learning happens also outside the
supports the shift towards a sustainable growth
based on using existing resources more eciently
involving governments, stakeholders and the
European public.
volunteers develop new skills, scientific-
technological knowledge, STEM background and
aims to remove barriers in education between other
policies. Citizen Science puts a hook on self-learning
for risk-of-exclusion citizens.
Green Paper on Citizen Science / Citizen Science in the European policy context
While this Green Paper focuses on research and innovation, there are important links to other EU
programmes, notably to the structural funds for cohesion policy and education programmes.
In 2014, Europe will adopt the new Europe 2020 strategy with three key priorities: smart growth
sustainable growth and inclusive growth.
Europe 2020 Flagship initiatives and Citizen Science alignment
2.2. Citizen Science in European funding
In the 7th Framework Programme several Citizen Science initiatives have been supported.
12 Citizen Science in the European policy context / Green Paper on Citizen Science
Science Talk
Voices for Innovation
Citizen Cyberlab
EU Funded projects related
with Citizen Science
The proposed Horizon 2020 funding programme for research and innovation is a core part
of Europe 2020 strategy: responding to the economic crisis to invest in future jobs and growth;
addressing people’s concerns about their livelihoods, safety and environment; and strengthening the
EU’s global position in research, innovation and technology. It sets three priorities: excellent science,
industrial leadership and societal challenges; based on motivations including:
World class science is the foundation of tomorrow’s technologies, jobs and wellbeing
Researchers need access to the best infrastructures
Concerns of citizens and society/EU policy objectives (climate, environment, energy,
transport, etc) cannot be achieved without innovation
Breakthrough solutions come from multi-disciplinary collaborations, including social
sciences and humanities
Promising solutions need to be tested, demonstrated and scaled up
These cross-cutting dimensions could be applied to:
E-infrastructures policy
Responsible research and innovation
Digital science (development of research methods)
European research area
Policies on specific fields of science/research
Policies on other fields, based on scientific evidence
Supporting these through national and European funding
- Ocial EC for Horizon 2020
With the aim of deepening the relationship
between science and society and reinforcing public
confidence in science, Horizon 2020 should favour an
informed engagement of citizens and civil society on
research and innovation matters by promoting science
education, by making scientific knowledge more
accessible, by developing responsible research and
innovation agendas that meet citizens' and civil society's
concerns and expectations and by facilitating their
participation in Horizon 2020 activities”.
Green Paper on Citizen Science / Citizen Science in the European policy context
2.3. Citizen science as an element of
Digital Science and Responsible Research
and Innovation
The Digital Agenda of the EU is managed by the European Commission Directorate General for
Communications Networks, Content and Technology (DG CONNECT). In DG CONNECT, a new term
“Digital Science” has been adopted in order to promote excellent science in the context of the Digital
Agenda, Digital ERA and Horizon 2020.
ICT facilitates a shift of paradigm, with a more open research process sharing good and bad
experiences through digital media and collaboration eorts. These new participative and networked
relationships promote the transformation of the scientific system, allowing collective intelligence
and new collaborative knowledge creation, democratizing research and leading into emergence of
new disciplines and connections to study emerging research questions and topics. While doing this,
participatory approaches contribute to long-term inclusive education, digital competences, technology
skills and wider sense of initiative and ownership.
The Directorate General for Research and Innovation (DG Research and Innovation) is also
determined to bridge the gap between the scientific community and society at large. The current
“Science in Society” programme is transformed in “Science with and for Society” sustaining a two-way
dialogue between researchers and civil society. One of the challenges is the Responsible Research and
Innovation (RRI). With the focus on products and services to achieve a social environmental benefit, it
includes areas of activities related with public understanding of and engagement in science, formal
and informal education, ethics governance or open and free access to publicly funded research
results among others. RRI issues include science education, governance for RRI, or integrating society
in science and innovation with aspects such as Citizen Science, collaborative scenario building or
knowledge sharing support.
14 Citizen Science in the European policy context / Green Paper on Citizen Science
This new term refers to the ICT-enabled radical transformation of science and innovation
within a culture of openness and sharing. Digital Science is more open, global,
collaborative, creative and closer to society. One of its basis are the e-infrastructures,
services and tools for data and computing intensive research in virtual and collaborative
environments. Within the Digital Science in Horizon 2020 Concept Paper, Citizen Science
is recognised as trend in the research cycle. Horizon 2020 aims to mainstream Digital
Science and Citizen Science will be promoted as part of its objectives.
Digital Science
Besides environmental sciences where experiments produce the necessary data, social
systems constitute a major challenge because of the heterogeneous approaches of
dierent science disciplines. Progress can be done by combining computational and
experimental approaches and open data is crucial for reproducibility of results.
Examples of Science-Society-Policy systems related with Citizen Science:
Citizen observatories, developing community-based environmental monitoring
and information systems using innovative and novel earth observation applications
Global systems science, combining advanced ICT and citizens dialogues to
understand and shape global systems. GSS produces evidence, concepts and
doubts needed for eective and responsible policies dealing with global systems.
Green Paper on Citizen Science / Citizen Science in the European policy context
Environmental Sciences and Computational Social Science
Success criteria
Analysing topics
Working sessions
Target groups
Online questionnarie
SOCIENTIZE approach to
developing a common
roadmap for Citizen Science
in Europe
Citizen Science has gained wider institutional, political and public attention
only rather recently. However, the concept of civic participation and the
involving of citizens in the scientific process has a long tradition. In order to
capture the current state of aairs and diagnose the most urgent issues a mixed-
method approach has been chosen.
The following image gives a broad overview of creation process:
16 SOCIENTIZE approach to developing a common roadmap for citizen science in Europe / Green Paper on Citizen Science
As the image shows the methodology followed the SOCIENTIZE consortium is a combination of
dierent phases:
1. Exploration, observation and analysis: identification of current state from literature
and in dialogue with consortium members, External Advisory Board (EAB), subcontractors,
external experts and other stakeholders. Aim of this phase: identification of common features,
crosscutting concerns, shared issues, correlations, patterns.
2. Mapping and prioritization: identification of common elements, key factors and
challenges, as well as open issues.
3. Policy recommendations: Definition of a first set of possible policy recommendations at
strategic and operational level based on the previous step
4. Consultation, feedback, review and endorsement: first round of consultation with
specific stakeholders and revision of open issues
5. Publication of Green Paper: the publication of the Green paper initiates the next step of
wider consultation
6. Next steps: wider consultation, endorsement, complete issues, countries specific issues,
white paper
Applied methods and main sources of information
As a first step a traditional approach of state-of-the-art analysis in the form of desktop research was
performed in order to synthesize the current knowledge based on Citizen Science. A complete version
of this document is available on the SOCIENTIZE website:
The elaboration of this document depended also heavily on the contribution of dierent stakeholders
and key informants on the topic. Collecting input from the experts has been organised in dierent steps.
Semi-structured interviews were conducted remotely with a first set of key experts.
In parallel, an open consultation process has been launched online. The call for contributions is
still open and is accessible for any interested citizen. With this completely open approach, we intend
to collect experiences and suggestions from the diverse stakeholders involved in Citizen Science, like
volunteers, researchers, infrastructure providers, scientific organizations, communicators, innovators,
journalists, educational experts and artists.
In a second step, after having analysed and summarized the main outcomes from the interviews, the
state-of-the-art analysis and the open consultation contributions, a first interactive session has been
organised with an extended group of experts. Experts met during a 2 h online workshop to reflect on
the identified open issues.
Additional input for the current state of aairs has come from a continuous monitoring of Citizen
Science projects, own participation and execution of Citizen Science projects, the screening of a
wide range of position papers on the future of EU research and innovation and additional informal
discussions with interested parties.
Green Paper on Citizen Science / SOCIENTIZE approach to developing a common roadmap for citizen science in Europe
18 SOCIENTIZE approach to developing a common roadmap for citizen science in Europe / Green Paper on Citizen Science
Involved Stakeholders
In order to cover the broad spectrum of Citizen Science and allow for a diversity of opinions and
approaches, the group of targeted stakeholders during the process so far has been defined very broadly.
It includes especially the following groups:
Science and technology
Policy makers
Academia, Research Institutions, Public Organizations, Digital
Communities, Museums, Infrastructure providers
Civil Society Organisations, Local Associations, NGOs, Scholar
networks, Media, Communicators, Companies, Living Labs
European policy actors, National Funders, Research Agencies
Stakeholders groups
Topics covered
Cultural change
Engagement of citizens
and scientists
Motivational aspects
Organisational and
structural challenges
Definition and scope
Collective intelligence
Business responsibility
Educational responsibility
Responsible research and
Quality assurance
Evaluation and impact
Green Paper on Citizen Science / SOCIENTIZE approach to developing a common roadmap for citizen science in Europe
Proposed focus
for Citizen Science
Leading questions - Focus points
1. What is Citizen Science and where it works?
Definition and scope of Citizen Science
which support dierent engagement models,
understanding the potential, suitability, risks and
linked policies implications
2. How to support Citizen Science takeup?
Deployment, facilitation and sustainability
for Citizen Science projects and coordinated
activities at local, national and European scale
3. What are the drivers and barriers for Citizen
Awareness and motivation for active involvement
of researchers and volunteers, developing
understanding of the related challenges
4. How to use Citizen Science successfully?
Drivers and barriers for success, including
technologies and cultural shift for sharing
among stakeholders amplifying collective
5. How to measure and appreciate the value of
Citizen Science?
Impact measurement and evaluation of the
dierent outcomes based on trusted indicators
and new public debates upon eciency and
excellence in science
SOCIENTIZE has detected five major themes of discussions and defined the
following focus points around them. In this section we introduce the findings
and open issues for each issue.
20 Proposed focus points for Citizen Science roadmap / Green Paper on Citizen Science
4.1. Definition and scope of Citizen Science
The term Citizen Science has been used to define a series of activities that link the general public
with scientific research. Volunteers and non-professionals contribute collectively in a diverse range
of scientific projects to answer real-world questions. Both citizens’ contributions and researchers’
attitudes encompass a wide set of activities at multiple scales. We find massive occasional interactions
at global scale virtually but also regular proactive involvement in local environments identifying new
research questions.
Dierent definitions can be found for Citizen Science, where some take up more traditional aspects,
understanding Citizen Science as an approach, which involves volunteers from the general public in
scientific investigations during data collection and analysis. Others define it more broadly, as the public
participating in scientific research, which includes also scientific activities like the asking of questions,
formulation of hypotheses, interpretation of results. Current discussions around the definition of citizen
science not only focus on the scope of activities but also what to understand under “volunteers”
and how to composite citizen science teams. What we cannot find is one generally accepted definition
of citizen science yet.
Cross-cutting aspects of Citizen Science
Problem definition
Social value
Scientific impact
Motivation for engagement
Digital resources
Quality assurance
Results sharing
Privacy and IPR
Education and training
Interaction and
Unpredictable group
Emotional aspects
Green Paper on Citizen Science / Proposed focus points for Citizen Science roadmap
Should there be a specific definition of Citizen Science ocially adopted by the EU?
If yes, how broad should it be? Should it support all levels of Citizen Science?
What kind of balance should be reached between the support for research-driven
systematic projects and citizen-driven projects within funding programmes?
Are there common values among the European Citizen Science projects?
Open questions
Many classifications provide categories for dierent degrees of participations, approaches and goals,
where the level of engagement vary widely from person to person and may also change over time.
However, the majority of projects adopt similar methodologies, and consider the data gathering
and interpretation as the most important aspect, allowing reality-mining used to verify or improve
their models more eciently. There is a demand for more involvement of the volunteers and the
establishment of partnerships on equal terms between scientists and citizens, addressing relevant
issues of today's society. Digital sharing, online projects and social networks oer new ways to gain
acceptance among scientific community and society.
Citizen Science actors must be aware of its potential and risks when determining the engagement
level and suitability of this participatory approach for any given scientific problem. When designing a
Dierent categories Dierent levels
Collaborative science
Participatory experiments
Collective intelligence
Volunteer thinking
Volunteer sensing
Volunteer computing
Human sensing
22 Proposed focus points for Citizen Science roadmap / Green Paper on Citizen Science
new Citizen Science project or participatory
experiment potential risks must be
addressed as well as the challenges in
marketing and funding mechanisms.
Does Citizen Science make a clear impact on the life of citizens?
What is the role of Citizen Science enhancing excellent science?
How can it contribute in policy decisions?
How may the level of volunteer involvement change over time and what does this mean
for Citizen Science projects and programmes?
How to promote private partnerships / industry innovations?
How to include non scientific disciplines approaches (politics, arts, amateurs…)?
How could Citizen Science decrease the perceived distances between policymakers
and volunteers?
What are the possible risks, security issues and constraints of Citizen Science?
Open questions
4.2. Deployment, facilitation and
sustainability models
Citizen Science has a long history and tradition, but experiences considerable expansion in the
last years due to changing science paradigms and the increased usage of innovative technologies,
eectively utilizing crowdsourcing for data collection over large geographic regions and bridging
volunteers’ and researchers’ world. To facilitate this growing movement Europe requires both
top-down and bottom-up approaches allowing local groups and international networks to deploy and
support new initiatives.
In order to underpin European structural problem drivers, policy programmes must ensure
sucient contribution for research and innovation to tackle societal challenges, promoting
technological leadership and innovation capability. There is a need to strengthen the science base
and critical sense. Education at universities for scientists and students in advanced statistical
techniques and computational models, providing students with insights on how to collect, validate and
handle huge Citizen Science data sets and how to set up and conduct Citizen Science projects, was
identified as another facilitation aspect.
Green Paper on Citizen Science / Proposed focus points for Citizen Science roadmap
How to convince European and national funding mechanisms to support new Citizen
Science projects? How to coordinate them in this issue?
Should the EC launch specific calls for Citizen Science support?
How to eciently support both local and European initiatives?
What is the role of cluster initiatives and Citizen Science associations? How to balance
the visibility and funding to the end-users?
What are the most important services these organisations should provide (e.g. practical
support and guidance for setting up Citizen Science projects, etc
On which level do we need these initiatives (European, national, regional)? How could
they best cooperate?
How to share services (e.g. log accounts, workflows, collaborative tools,
communication…) among dierent Citizen Science initiatives?
Open questions
Open questions
24 Proposed focus points for Citizen Science roadmap / Green Paper on Citizen Science
Despite the general notion of low-cost research, Citizen Science projects require a wide set of profiles
in the organizations. Professionalization may increase the productivity but individuals may provide
excellent ideas. Networked initiatives need dedicated teams for Citizen Science dissemination,
organization of events but also to provide technical support even when adapting scientific models or
managing data, and even understanding the volunteer dynamics.
Green Paper on Citizen Science / Proposed focus points for Citizen Science roadmap
The long-time sustainability and funding of Citizen Science projects is a challenge for all types
of Citizen Science projects. Issues of prioritization and sustainability raise the question of how
government funding and partnerships might help sustain public interest in doing science for society.
Most of the Citizen Science projects stand on public funding. Crowdfunding Citizen Science projects
is currently considered as an alternative funding strategy. There is however a fear associated with
this approach in terms of who is deciding on what research should be funded. Such an open approach
might intervene too much in the scientific process. The challenge here is to find the balance between
openness and involvement on the one hand and keeping the original idea of the specific research
project on the other hand. Selling advertising space on Citizen Science websites is considered another
funding model, but there is strong worry that this would devaluate the project.
- David Anderson (Space Science Laboratory, University of California,
Berkeley; project director of BOINC)
An economic analysis of the relative costs of
dierent forms of computing is needed. With volunteer
computing you can do more computing for less money”.
There are also economic factors in favour of externalizing resources but it still requires a deeper
economic analysis of relative costs of dierent forms of Citizen Science compared with other
Is there a need for new sustainability and funding models? Are there good practices to
follow within the EU?
How to scale up successful local experiments?
How to fund in the long term large infrastructures for huge, dispersed and persistent
data sets?
Open questions
26 Proposed focus points for Citizen Science roadmap / Green Paper on Citizen Science
4.3. Awareness and motivation for active
Engaging new citizens
Attracting and retaining people who would be willing to contribute their skills, time, and eort for a
scientific cause is an important pillar of Citizen Science work. Media coverage, approaching existing
institutions, using social networking features, but also collecting first positive hands-on-experiences
with science are potential drivers.
The initial phase of involvement, when volunteers need to understand the projects’ objectives and
opportunities for contribution, has been identified as the most critical one. The majority of volunteers
only perform activities one day and do not return to execute more tasks, so the regular minority
contribute for the larger proportion of tasks carried out in the project. Once volunteers are involved the
next challenge is keeping them engaged. This requires finding out what motivates them in the long run,
but also continuous personal information flows between the involved stakeholders and well adapted
and interesting tasks are important.
The involvement of citizens in scientific projects tends to have an educational value, implicit or
explicit. While in the majority of projects the informal learning aspect of adult citizens is addressed,
schools are more and more considered an important target for the introduction and promotion of
Citizen Science. Teachers play a relevant role easing the deployment of experiments and transmitting
the socio-scientific values of their contributions to the young audience.
How to increase awareness and linkages among all the actors considering their roles
and motivations?
How to make the most of the dierences on conditions in Europe (investments, social
culture, technologies adoption, legislation…)? How to avoid that those citizens who don’t
have access to technology are excluded
How could we best support Citizen Science in schools and what role are teachers
playing? Should we address younger audience in primary schools?
How should Citizen Science be addressed in the academic curriculum at dierent
levels (primary and secondary education, undergraduate and graduate level, etc.)?
Open questions
Green Paper on Citizen Science / Proposed focus points for Citizen Science roadmap
Motivation for active involvement
Motivational drivers and barriers for both scientists and volunteers are diverse and depend on the
project type but also on the context in which volunteer engagement is taking place. While in some
contexts providing valuable contributions to science or to the local community might be the most
important motivational driver for citizens’ involvement, in other contexts it might be monetary
incentives, as only financial aid would render the participation possible for some participants.
Intrinsic motivators, like the interest in the scientific topic or the satisfaction from contributing
to science, have been identified as being amongst the most important drivers for volunteers’
But when a preferably large number of citizens should be involved over longer time spans in Citizen
Science projects (that might be less intrinsically motivating), external motivators, like community
recognition, competitive elements, or incentives come into play. Volunteers’ motivations are said to
be temporal, dynamic and changing even when the ultimate goal remains the same. Physical spaces
devoted to Citizen Science and face to face meetings are understood as eective tools to improve
community aspects, easing social interaction, media coverage and emergent group dynamics.
- Ben Segal (honorary sta member at CERN, member of Citizen
Cyberscience Centre)
I see great potential in Citizen Science
projects to attract young people into science if they are
approached at the right time. The educational goal of
Citizen Science is most exciting”.
What are the motivational drivers and barriers related to dierent types of Citizen
Science projects and how do they change over time?
Do we need any expert help (publicists, psychologists, etc.) to find the “real” motivations
of people?
Open questions
28 Proposed focus points for Citizen Science roadmap / Green Paper on Citizen Science
Awareness and motivation among researchers
Motivational issue do not only consider volunteers, they are also relevant for the involvement of
scientists. Involving non-scientists, new scientific areas, and engage long-tail researchers in Citizen
Science will promote new research advances. In this multi- and inter-disciplinary context, we find
barriers like vocabulary, practices, meanings, but also competencies, mutual recognition, and prestige.
Large sets of existing and connected resources, with enormous granularity in space
and time
Large local and reality knowledge provided by amateur also providing valuable
feedback and collective ideas
Large experimental datasets and digital footprints
Existing mature e-infrastructures and open technologies allow ecient management
of data and virtual environments for creating multidisciplinary and global research groups
Potential in scientific dissemination about research and policy issues
New ways of greater recognition and impact
Scientific values and opportunities
How to disseminate and motivate
the involvement of citizens in research
amongst researchers?
How to engage more volunteers in
the scientific problem definition?
Open questions
Establishing trustful, balanced collaboration
between these groups is not always an easy
matter and must be encouraged also through
non-academic means.
It is said that in many institutions there
is still a lot of resistant scepticism amongst
researchers. Scientists need to understand that
Citizen Science is committed to authentic and
enhanced research which can bring viewpoints
and perspectives not otherwise available to
It takes an additional eort to redefine their
models and assumptions, and interacting
with volunteers is time consuming, but it
opens new sources of data, decreases costs in
infrastructure deployment and operational and
opens the door for new funding opportunities.
Green Paper on Citizen Science / Proposed focus points for Citizen Science roadmap
4.4. Drivers and barriers for Citizen
Citizen Science in Europe forms a complex environment where many agents tend to cross
boundaries fostering growth at European level. A cultural change is happening at global scale
through inspirational success stories of collaborative open-minded approaches breaking the walls
of disciplines with transdisciplinary strategies. The combination of the distributed knowledge of the
citizens with the systemic methodologies of the researchers represents a ground-breaking driving
force when addressing global challenges.
The use of e-Infrastructures is a relevant enabler for Citizen Science providing storage and
accessibility for the data sets as well as the computing power to manage the data. Citizen-based
resources like networks of desktop computers, mobile phones and other devices can be considered as
part of the available resources for the e-scientists, complementing services with a dierent approach.
Some eorts have been done addressing common services but further progress is needed.
The unprecedented scale in number and performance of citizen’s devices and the ubiquitous coverage
of high-speed connectivity allow Citizen Science to gain notable relevance for research in Europe.
Is there a need for shared services
and interoperability between
Citizen Science experiments and
Should Citizen Science only
useopen source software?
Are Citizen Science experiments
faultless and reproducible?
Does openness increase
confidence in and validity of Citizen
Science findings?
How to promote the values
of Citizen Science compared to
established scientific approach?
Open questions
Openness in the context of Citizen Science
relates to the software used as well as to the
data gathered. Current projects are based on
proprietary software as well as on open source
software with a clear trend towards openness.
Openness improve speed, eciency and
ecacy of science policy measures, allowing
researchers and general public faster access to
the information. New ways of interaction through
social media, direct involvement or artistic
visualizations also improve the interaction
between science-society-policy agents.
There are also some initiatives highlighting
the value of artistic approaches for participatory
science, bringing wider public into the process
and encouraging creativity. The emotional side of
communication acquires a new dimension while
new formats of visualization of scientific data
are consolidated. The number of shared spaces
of conceptualization, observation and interaction
between science-technology-arts is growing as
complement of more established spaces like
science museums. Participatory experiments
are gaining acceptance within all the interested
parties as the research impact of scientific
advances and awareness among researchers
grows in the last few years. Despite Citizen
Science is still in its infancy and this makes some
promises highly risked, ICT will continue to foster
and accelerate huge advances.
30 Proposed focus points for Citizen Science roadmap / Green Paper on Citizen Science
There is a recurrent debate about data reliability. Despite there are many successful experiences using
dierent techniques to ensure quality and accuracy of data, it is a common issue for some scientific
Access and interoperability of the Citizen Science data sets should be improved in many cases.
Large data sets based on Citizen Science data have been created by scientists for their own needs and
are often dicult to be used by other groups, like citizens or researchers. In addition, there is a claim
that public authorities and companies provide open access to their data as well in order to be used by
citizen scientists for their research and also increase interoperability between these data sets.
When opening the data sets, the important question of ownership and IPR issues arises. A frequent
issue for scientists who work in Citizen Science projects is that they do not want to share and provide
access to the collected data. When companies as sponsors are involved it might even complicate
this issue.
Only few projects have a clear policy about the ownership of the results, and especially volunteers
are hardly informed about the intellectual property rights of projects they have been involved in. Hardly
any regulations are foreseen for the use of the data by third parties. Experts require a political decision
regarding the access to scientific data.
Regarding interoperability of data, there have been first eorts in the United States to synchronise
data amongst data sets, but these eorts are still in the very early stages. That’s why one of the
biggest goals is that people working in this field define data standards that all Citizen Science projects
can use.
Another claim by some experts in the community is that Citizen Science platforms and software
should be free to use and preferably open source, as this would best fit the initial idea of voluntariness,
openness and collaboration.
Should there be open access and interoperability between Citizen Science datasets
and/or public data?
Is there a need for standards in terms of used technology and interoperability?
Is there a need to improve privacy regulations and IPR issues with regards to data
usage and ownership
Is there any eective anonymization technique for privacy data sharing?
Open questions
Green Paper on Citizen Science / Proposed focus points for Citizen Science roadmap
4.5. Impact measurement and evaluation
Measuring impact and value of Citizen Science
Citizen Science generates a diverse set of outcomes for science, individual participants and
socio-ecological systems, which determine the success of a project. In the core of all Citizen Science
projects is the scientific progress, next to advances in individual participants and local
communities/societies as well as educational benefits. The degree to which the divers outcomes
are realized depends on the type of the project and its objectives.
As a complex collective activity, in Citizen Science the total is more than the sum of the parts
and overall performance depends on researchers excellence, technological equipment and their
networking capabilities, notably commitment and interactions with society.
The involvement of citizens helps to collect and analyse data that could not be treated any other
way easily and makes use of computing power, time, cognition and human perception from volunteers
to support the analysis of data. It allows gathering large volume of field data on large geographic
scales or long time spans. Citizen science provides new opportunities to widen the scope of traditional
projects, combining natural systems together with social data. It has the potential to better investigate
and understand how society and culture influences environmental issues and how these systems are
dynamically interlinked with each other.
The challenge is to disconnect from traditional ways of conducting science and thinking about new
opportunities for innovation and insights that lies at the interface of science and society and in the
links between disciplines.
Dierent motivations Dierent outcomes
Volunteer computing
Human sensing
Critical mass
32 Proposed focus points for Citizen Science roadmap / Green Paper on Citizen Science
Projects that directly involve members of the public in scientific research seem particularly suitable
for increasing participants’ awareness, content and scientific knowledge as well as some changes
in attitudes towards science and in behaviour related to the topic under investigation. Studies which
investigated the knowledge increase amongst volunteers stress the importance of collaborative and
co-created projects as well as projects which cover a broader spectrum of activities for volunteers to
make learning amongst citizens more robust.
In action-oriented and conservation projects scientific knowledge supports local initiatives to
provide evidence for interventions influencing in policy decision-making. An increasing number
of literature points out to the benefits of combining scattered local and practical knowledge from
communities with the scientific work. To better understand the contribution of Citizen Science to
science and society, advanced measurement tools and assessment scales are required in order to
evaluate and compare the outcomes and eectiveness across multiple Citizen Science projects.
- Francois Grey (coordinator of the Citizen Cyberscience Centre)
We should promote the next phase of Citizen
Science as “Crowdcrafting” where citizens make projects
with the help of scientists, not only for the benefits of
professionals but for the benefits of society, a rather
citizen-driven research”.
Would a standardised impact measurement across multiple European Citizen
Science projects foster the larger expansion and acceptance of this approach?
Who should be the actors to create these measurement tools and assessment scales?
How to measure balanced scientific, social and educational impact?
How to ensure eciency and added value to the public contributions?
How can we extract and recognise additional values of Citizen Science, such as
ready access to information, transparent and responsive procedures or flexible working
Open questions
Green Paper on Citizen Science / Proposed focus points for Citizen Science roadmap
How can the awareness of potential scientific value be improved and compared to
established scientific approach?
How should Citizen Science be addressed in the scientific value systems?
Open questions
Including Citizen Science into scientific value system
Trans-disciplinary approaches represent an opportunity for cutting-edge research but the involvement
of the public in scientific research still faces some resistance and scepticism in the scientific world. In
the case of Citizen Science the wide range of heterogeneous stakeholders with dierent motivations
and objectives tends to challenge the fundamental mechanisms of scientific evaluation systems.
Despite the fact that participatory experiments increase the visibility of research and researchers,
there are few motivations for them to perform activities without explicit recognition in the scientific
value system. It is broadly understood within the scientific community that dissemination or
inspirational approaches have less scientific value than traditional research outcomes like peer-
reviewed publications. But collaborative and co-crated approaches often have other, more practical
goals, from the collaboration with citizens. They are rather expressed in actions and practical results
than in emphasis on data gathering for mainly scientific interpretations and outcomes.
To eectively foster the wide adoption of citizen science in the research world we have to question
the existing scientific value system and open it up to integrate more practical benefits of research,
which are expressed in a concrete set of measures and indicators promoted at European level.
The set of open questions presented in the previous section group the issues
discussed with the stakeholders during the first year of the SOCIENTIZE
project. The recommendations presented below are based on contributions
gathered by the Consortium from the contributors. They are grouped in three
levels: policy, science and technology, and society.
This set of suggestions will be presented, discussed, completed and improved through the public
consultation presented in the Chapter 6 of this document so related parties are encouraged to suggest
improvements and more aspects that need specific policy actions.
34 Proposed actions and policy recommendations for Citizen Science roadmap / Green Paper on Citizen Science
Proposed actions
and policy recommendations
for Citizen Science
Green Paper on Citizen Science / Proposed actions and policy recommendations for Citizen Science roadmap
Define the scope of Citizen Science and its participatory model, adopting the
implications of the definition on the support measures e.g. reflecting it in the funding
schemes, setting a list of requirements for the Citizen Science projects, launching specific
calls, and favouring projects that include Citizen Science aspects.
Identify, catalogue and align funding programmes related with Citizen Science,
developing a strategic agenda and promoting synergies between EU and national funding
mechanisms, optimising individual strengths of every region.
Promote the development and implementation of Citizen Science agenda in Europe,
with strategic roadmap and actions, created jointly with all the stakeholders.
Promote structured partnerships and international networks of cooperation of Citizen
Science institutions from dierent regions, including excellent research institutions and
low performing who benefit from the insight of experienced initiatives, and promoting the
upscaling of regional successful initiatives in order to validate models.
Enhance public debate and decision-making processes on science challenges and
policies, giving more publicity to the funded projects and increasing the participation of
the society in the meetings organized about funding programmes.
Launch a tender to create a standard set of impact measurement toolbox that should
facilitate the evaluation of any Citizen Science project. Ensure that all Citizen Science
projects financially supported perform impact measurement.
Policy level.
European and national policy actors
Raise awareness amongst researchers to perform Citizen Science with knowledge
exchange and public interaction making explicit the importance of involving dierent
stakeholders e.g. civil society organizations; even through non-academic means e.g.
artistic performance, storytelling or film making. Consider an operational scheme to
include all the interested parties in funded projects.
Promote both supporting initiatives, oering services to the community, and
researchers groups implementing success stories. Ensure that best practices are shared
among public funded projects.
Reform researcher evaluation and reputation systems, and definition of incentives for
interaction with citizens, such as recognition in appraisal and tenures.
Promote the design and definition of sustainability models for Citizen Science projects
with long-term commitment for infrastructures and data repositories.
Promote the creation of appropriate tools as well as standards for interoperability,
metadata, citations, anonymization and accessibility.
Adopt Open Source and Open Access policy, developing a set of indicators to measure
open access. Encourage resources sharing including access to journals, methods, data,
tools, and equipment akin to open science.
Science and technology level.
Research funders and Research institutions
Proposed actions and policy recommendations for Citizen Science roadmap / Green Paper on Citizen Science
Promote cultural change and new scientific culture by increasing the benefits for
researchers, public institutions and industry of opening, sharing and co-creation.
Support inspirational projects which can lead to breakthrough research and innovation
based on the collective intelligence.
Promote public spaces and events in Europe specifically promoting Citizen Science
initiatives and teaming with science festivals and science museums, open laboratories
and citizens communities.
Promote both informal and formal recognition as well as incentives for citizens
contributing in Citizen Science e.g. diplomas, discount vouchers in business, etc.
Define governance structures regarding data ownership and usage.
Promote democratic governance of science via public engagement and debate between
policy makers, researchers, innovators and the general public in a structured channel for
feedback and open criticism. Consider an organisational structure to facilitate general
public evaluation of science policies and public funded projects.
Society level.
Public institutions, organizations and citizen associations
Green Paper on Citizen Science / Proposed actions and policy recommendations for Citizen Science roadmap
Next steps
and roadmap
The creation of the White Paper on Citizen Science will be based on a second
round of broad consultation, where the wide range of stakeholders will be
invited to participate and debate on the basis of the first relevant topics,
open questions and policy recommendations of this Green Paper, which will be
spread in digital or paper format amongst all the interested parties.
A continuous dialogue with partners, subcontractors, citizens, scientists, infrastructure providers
and experts will lead to the wider endorsement, collection of further inputs, the refinement of the first
strategies of the Green Paper as well as a prioritization of topics. It will help to compile success criteria
for Citizen Science in Europe, best practices, as well as potential risks and requisites for the broader
implementation of this approach.
This consultation process will be organised from 7th of January to 7th of April 2014 in the on- and
oine world.
Open consultation process
The Green Paper will be published and put under discussion by the stakeholders using a collective
consultation tool, supported by social media. This tool will support the open debate, facilitate the
collection of the stakeholder's knowledge, provide an overview of the topics under discussion, identify
further experiences from the field, open questions and policy recommendations. Follow-up roadmap
and implementation of the outcome of the White Paper will be also taken into account.
38 Next steps and roadmap / Green Paper on Citizen Science
Endorsement and debate workshop
After the deadline for submitting responses, the SOCIENTIZE project will organise a workshop to
present and discuss the outcome of the consultation. The Green Paper will be presented in workshops,
science events and conferences amongst the stakeholders.
The feedback from the open consultation process and the workshops will be collected analysed,
synthesised and feed the White Paper on Citizen Science.
Invitation to the consultation process
Consultation will be disseminated between main stakeholders and the general public. All participants,
who have already contributed to the Green Paper, will be actively involved in the online and oine
consultation activities. In addition the dissemination channels of the SOCIENTIZE consortium
(company and personal networks, social media, newsletters and websites etc.) will be used to broadly
distribute the invitation to participate in the consultation process throughout this three months period.
Stakeholders for the consultation are scientists, science communicators, Citizen Science experts,
Citizen Science volunteers, artist, policy makers, organisations, and infrastructure providers.
European and national policy ocers are invited to promote the debate with their stakeholders.
Green Paper on Citizen Science / Next steps and roadmap
Universidad de Zaragoza - BIFI (Coordinator)
Musêu da Ciencia de Coimbra
Universidade de Coimbra
Universidade Federal de Campina Grande
Asociación de Empresas de tecnología de la Información,
Electrónica y Comunicaciones de Aragón
Zentrum für Soziale Innovation
SOCIENTIZE Consortium:
40 Acknowledgements / Green Paper on Citizen Science
Green Paper on Citizen Science / Acknowledgements
The SOCIENTIZE Consortium wants to express its gratitude to the institutions and initiatives who help
us in the networking activities of this Green Paper when disseminating and discussing the
potential Citizen Science capabilities:
Fundación Ibercivis, Global Excursion Project, International Association of Technology, Education
and Development, Instituto de Física de Cantabria, Citizen Cyberscience Center, Open Knowledge
Foundation, Medialab Prado Madrid, Universidad de Barcelona, Fundación La Caixa, Barcelona
Lab, Instituto Nacional de Tecnologías Educativas y Formación del Profesorado, Universidad
Internacional Menéndez Pelayo, Esciencia, MashMeTV, European Citizen Science Association, Centre
for Environmental Policy, Inno-group, SQW, The University of Manchester, BOINC, INRIA, Fundación
Española para la Ciencia y Tecnología, Diputación General de Aragón Fundación Zaragoza Ciudad
del Conocimiento, etopia_ Center for Art and Technology, SciCom Pt 2013, Researchers Night, ICT2013.
Annex I
42 Annex I. Contributors / Green Paper on Citizen Science
We want to thank all our formal contributors. In addition, we want to
express its gratitude to all our informal contacts in our organisations
and networks for all their input during fruitful discussions and
experience sharing.
1. Formal contributors
David Anderson
Steven Bamford
Drew Hemment
Steven Bishop
David Curren
Francois Grey
Ben Segal
Jennifer Shirk
Space Science Laboratory,
University of California
University of Nottingham
University College London
Citizen Cyberscience Centre (CCC)
Tsinghua University in Beijing
Citizen Cyberscience Centre
Honorary CERN sta member
The Cornell Lab of Ornithology
Project director of BOINC. SOCIENTIZE
External Advisory Board Member.
Science Director of the Citizen
Science Alliance. SOCIENTIZE External
Advisory Board Member.
External Advisory Board Member.
Professor, FuturICT
Management coordinator
Writer about Citizen Science and
Coordinator of CCC
Senior Advisor & Mentor
Project Leader
Green Paper on Citizen Science / Annex I. Contributors
1.1. Experts interviews
44 Annex I. Contributors / Green Paper on Citizen Science
Eduardo Actis,
Laura Ferrando,
Mónica Lara,
Pilar Tigeras
Rodríguez Álvaro
Chandra Clarke
Karl Donert
Yuri Gordienko
Muki Haklay
Susanne Hecker,
Monique Luckas,
Doreen Werner,
Angelika Wurbs
Coral Victoria de
la Iglesia Meleiro
Alexa Joyce
Citizen Science Center
G.V.Kurdyumov Institute for Metal
Physics (IMP), National Academy
of Sciences
Leibniz Centre for Agricultural
Landscape Research
Nature Abounds
European Schoolnet
Scientific Culture Ocer
Non-profit President and
Citizen-Science Program Manager
Scientific programs coordinator
Policy Maker
1.2. Open Call for contributions
Green Paper on Citizen Science / Annex I. Contributors
Monica Lobo
Daniel López
Victor Lucea
Jesus Marco
Adam McNamara
Claudio Mirasso
Rita Gabriela
Monteiro da
Erinma Ochu
John Prpic
Kutoma J
University of Crete, Department of
Preschool Education
British Science Association
Ariadne Computing Ltd.IFISC,
Universitat de les Illes Balears
IFISC, Universitat de les Illes
Mundo Científico, Lda.
The University of Manchester
The Open University
University of Saragosse
De Montfort University, United
Science Communicator
PhD student
Engagement fellow
46 Annex I. Contributors / Green Paper on Citizen Science
Kirsti Ala Mutka
Rosa Arias
James Borrell
Pieter van
Virginia Brussa
Caren Cooper
Linda Davies
Karl Donert
Tony Fox
Mariluz Guenaga
Susanne Hecker
Kshitiz Khanal
Waag Society's Open Wetlab
Centre for Environmental Policy
European Centre of Excellence
Tony Fox, chair of People's Parks
Deusto Research
Leibniz Centre for Agricultural
Landscape Research
Policy Ocer
Vlogs about fieldwork, motivation,
adventure and getting involved
Open Biotech
Wildlife ecology and conservation
Urban ecologist
Director, Geographer
Birmingham Park Ranger Services
Ingeniería Informática
Science communicator
1.3. Registered participants for the virtual workshop
Green Paper on Citizen Science / Annex I. Contributors
Daniel Lombraña
Victor Lucea
Adam McNamara
Erinma Ochu
Aina Pascual
Matt Postles
John Prpic
Anabela Ramos
Suraj Rai
Álvaro Rodríguez
Pawel Szczesny
Jan Theunis
CCC, Shutthleworth Foundation
Univ. Surrey
The University of Manchester
Biodiversity Assessment Unit
Bristol Natural History
Science in Action
Institute of Biochemistry and
Biophysics PAS
Environmental Risk and Health
Developer, Community leader
PhD Cognitive Neuroscience
Wellcome Trust Engagement Fellow
based at the University of Manchester
Amphibian conservationist
Project Manager
Management Information Systems
Cultural Heritage Manager
Business director
Systems Thinker/Researcher
Project Manager
Annex II
Bonney, R., Ballard, H., Jordan, R., McCallie, E., Phillips, T., Shirk, J., & Wilderman, C. C. (2009).
Public Participation in Scientific Research: Defining the Field and Assessing Its Potential for Informal
Science Education (p. 58)
Bonney, R., Cooper, C. B., Dickinson, J., Kelling, S., Phillips, T., Rosenberg, K. V., & Shirk, J. (2009).
Citizen Science: A Developing Tool for Expanding Science Knowledge and Scientific Literacy.
BioScience, 59(11), 977–984. doi:10.1525/bio.2009.59.11.9
British Science Association. (2013). Citizen Science for Schools: what’s happening, what’s needed,
what’s next? Retrieved September 02, 2013, from
Brossard, D., Lewenstein, B., & Bonney, R. (2005). Scientific knowledge and attitude change: The
impact of a Citizen Science project. International Journal of Science Education, 27(9), 1099–1121.
Cohn, J. P. (2008). Citizen Science: Can Volunteers Do Real Research? BioScience, 58(3), 192–197
Collins, A. (2013). Citizen Science in Formal Education. Urban Ecology and Science Education.
Collins Graduate Research. Retrieved September 18, 2013, from http://nycecology.wordpress.
Devictor, V., Whittaker, R. J., & Beltrame, C. (2010). Beyond scarcity: Citizen Science programmes as
useful tools for conservation biogeography. Diversity and Distributions, 16(3), 354–362. doi:10.1111/
48 Annex II. References / Green Paper on Citizen Science
Dickinson, J. L., Shirk, J., Bonter, D., Bonney, R., Crain, R. L., Martin, J., … Purcell, K. (2012). The current
state of Citizen Science as a tool for ecological research and public engagement. Frontiers in Ecology and
the Environment, 10(6), 291–297. doi:10.1890/110236
Dickinson, J. L., Zuckerberg, B., & Bonter, D. N. (2010). Citizen Science as an Ecological Research
Tool: Challenges and Benefits. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 41(1), 149–172.
Fortson, L., Masters, K., Nichol, R., Borne, K., Edmondson, E., Lintott, C., … Wallin, J. (2011). Galaxy
zoo: morphological classification and Citizen Science. Advances in Machine Learning and Data Mining for
Gray, S. A., Nicosia, K., & Jordan, R. C. (2012). Lessons Learned from Citizen Science in the Classroom.
A Response to “The Future of Citizen Science.Democracy & Education, 20(2), 1–5
Hemment, D., Ellis, R., & Wynne, B. (2011). Participatory Mass Observation and Citizen Science.
Leonardo, 44(1), 62–63
Jordan, R. C., Gray, S. a, Howe, D. V, Brooks, W. R., & Ehrenfeld, J. G. (2011). Knowledge gain and
behavioral change in citizen-science programs. Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for
Conservation Biology, 25(6), 1148–54. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2011.01745.x
Mathieson, K. (2013). Citizen Science for schools: What teachers need. British Science
Association Blog. British Science Association. Retrieved September 17, 2013, from http://www.
Michener, W. K., & Jones, M. B. (2012). Ecoinformatics: supporting ecology as a data-intensive science.
Trends in ecology & evolution, 27(2), 85–93. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2011.11.016
Mueller, M., Tippins, D., & Bryan, L. (2012). The Future of Citizen Science. Demogracy & Education, 20(1)
Newman, G., Graham, J., Crall, A., & Laituri, M. (2011). The art and science of multi-scale Citizen
Science support. Ecological Informatics, 6(3-4), 217–227. doi:10.1016/j.ecoinf.2011.03.002
Newman, G., Wiggins, A., Crall, A., Graham, E., Newman, S., & Crowston, K. (2012). The future of Citizen
Science: emerging technologies and shifting paradigms. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 10(6),
298–304. doi:10.1890/110294
Nov, O., & Anderson, D. (2011). Dusting for science : motivation and participation of digital Citizen
Science volunteers. In iConference 2011. Seattle, WA, USA
Nov, O., Arazy, O., & Anderson, D. (2011). Technology-Mediated Citizen Science Participation:
A Motivational Model. In Proceedings of the AAAI International Conference on Weblogs and Social
Media (ICWSM 2011). Retrieved from
Paulos, E., Foth, M., Satchell, C., Kim, Y., Dourish, P., & Jaz Hee-Jeong, C. (2008). Ubiquitous Sustainablity:
Citizen Science and Activism
Paulos, E., Honicky, R. J., & Hooker, B. (2008). Citizen science: Enabling participatory urbanism. In
Handbook of Research on Urban Informatics (pp. 414–436)
Green Paper on Citizen Science / Annex II. References
50 Annex II. References / Green Paper on Citizen Science
Raddick, M. J., Bracey, G., Carney, K., Gyuk, G., Borne, K., Wallin, J., & Jacoby, S. Citizen science:
status and research directions for the coming decade, Stars and Related Phenomenastro 2010: The
Astronomy and Astrophysics Decadal Survey (2009): 46P. 46 (2009)
Raddick, M. J., Bracey, G., Gay, P. L., Lintott, C. J., Murray, P., Schawinski, K., … Vandenberg, J. (2010).
Galaxy zoo: Exploring the motivations of Citizen Science volunteers. Astronomy Education Review, 9
Reed, M. S. (2008). Stakeholder participation for environmental management: A literature review.
Biological Conservation, 141(10), 2417–2431. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2008.07.014
Rotman, D., Preece, J., Hammock, J., Procita, K., Hansen, D., Parr, C., … Jacobs, D. (2012). Dynamic
changes in motivation in collaborative citizen-science projects. Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference
on Computer Supported Cooperative Work - CSCW ’12, 217. doi:10.1145/2145204.2145238
Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2000). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions.
Contemporary educational psychology, 25(1), 54–67. doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1020
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation,
social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78
Shirk, J. L., Ballard, H. L., Wilderman, C. C., Phillips, T., Wiggins, A., Jordan, R., … Bonney, R. (2012).
Public Participation in Scientific Research : a Framework for Deliberate Design. Ecology and Society,
17(2), 29
Silvertown, J. (2009). A new dawn for Citizen Science. Trends in ecology & evolution, 24(9), 467–71.
Wiggins, A., & Crowston, K. (2010). Developing a conceptual model of virtual organisations for Citizen
Science. International Journal on Organisational Design and Engineering, 1(2), 148–162
Wiggins, A., & Crowston, K. (2011). From Conservation to Crowdsourcing: A Typology of Citizen
Science. 2011 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 1–10. doi:10.1109/
Worthington, J. P., Silvertown, J., Cook, L., Cameron, R., Dodd, M., Greenwood, R. M., … Skelton, P.
(2012). Evolution MegaLab: a case study in Citizen Science methods. Methods in Ecology and Evolution,
3(2), 303–309. doi:10.1111/j.2041-210X.2011.00164.x
Sarmenta, L. F. (2002). Sabotage-tolerance mechanisms for volunteer computing systems. Future
Generation Computer Systems, 18(4), 561-572
Lintott, C. J., Schawinski, K., Slosar, A., Land, K., Bamford, S., Thomas, D., ... & Vandenberg, J. (2008).
Galaxy Zoo: morphologies derived from visual inspection of galaxies from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey.
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 389(3), 1179-1189
Alabri, A., & Hunter, J. (2010). Enhancing the quality and trust of Citizen Science data. In IEEE Sixth
International Conference on e-Science (e-Science) (pp. 81-88). IEEE
Dow, S., Kulkarni, A., Klemmer, S., & Hartmann, B. (2012). Shepherding the crowd yields better work.
In Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (pp. 1013-1022).
Green Paper on Citizen Science / Annex II. References
Jonathan Silvertown, A new dawn for Citizen Science, Trends in Ecology & Evolution, Volume 24,
Issue 9, September 2009, Pages 467-471, ISSN 0169-5347
The European Union explained: Europe 2020: Europe’s growth strategy. Brussels, 2012 ISBN 978-92-
The Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, Brussels 2011 COM(2011) 808 Final
Green Paper on a Common Strategic Framework for EU Research and Innovation Funding, Brussels
2011 ISBN 978-92-79-20325-1
Public-private partnerships in Horizon 2020; a powerful tool to deliver on innovation and growth in
Europe Brussels 2013, COM(2013) 494 Final
Concept paper of the Digital Science vision, and its integration in the Horizon 2020 programme..
Brussels 2013
e-IRG White Paper 2013 ISBN 978-90-817691-8-1
Owe R, Macnagthen P, Stilgoe J. Responsible research and innovation: From science in society to
science for society with society, Science and Public Policy 39 (2012) pp. 751-760
Options for Strengthening Responsible Research and Innovation, Brussels, ISBN 978-92-79-28233-1
Data management guide for public participation in scientific research 2013
Perelló J. Murray-Rust D, Nowak. A. and Bishop S.R., Linking science and arts: Intimate Science,
shared spaces and living experiments. Eur. Phys. J. Special Topics 214, 597-634 (2012)
San Miguel, Maxi; Johnson, Jerey H.; Kertesz, Janos; Kaski, Kimmo; Díaz-Guilera, Albert; MacKay,
Robert S.; Loreto, Vittorio; Erdi, Peter; Helbing, Dirk. Challenges in Complex Systems Science. European
Physical Journal Special Topics 214, 245-271 (2012)
EC Horizon 2020 proposal
- José Manuel Barroso, President of the European Commission
to the European Parliament, 11 September 2013
In the debate that is ongoing all across
Europe, the bottom-line question is: Do we want
to improve Europe or give it up? My answer is
clear: let’s engage! If you don’t like Europe as it is:
improve it!”
... Self-prestige and personal growth matter too: fostering personal reputation among community members, increasing scientific literacy and acquiring new skills and information are typical examples of internal motivations (Butteriss, 2019;Larson et al., 2020;Asingizwe et al., 2020). Accomplishment of such goals pertain to learning benefits through participation in CS (Rotman et al., 2014b;Martin et al., 2016); fostering personal CV and career track, especially for young persons (Gordienko, 2013;Geoghegan et al., 2016) as well as creating new professional contact points (Scotland Counts, 2016); monetary incentives as compensation for the efforts and time devoted (Gordienko, 2013); incentives for recreation and nature-based activities (Geoghegan et al., 2016;Kragh, 2016). ...
... Self-prestige and personal growth matter too: fostering personal reputation among community members, increasing scientific literacy and acquiring new skills and information are typical examples of internal motivations (Butteriss, 2019;Larson et al., 2020;Asingizwe et al., 2020). Accomplishment of such goals pertain to learning benefits through participation in CS (Rotman et al., 2014b;Martin et al., 2016); fostering personal CV and career track, especially for young persons (Gordienko, 2013;Geoghegan et al., 2016) as well as creating new professional contact points (Scotland Counts, 2016); monetary incentives as compensation for the efforts and time devoted (Gordienko, 2013); incentives for recreation and nature-based activities (Geoghegan et al., 2016;Kragh, 2016). ...
... Policymakers can share analogous, yet often unfounded, fears about the quality of CS efforts and outcomes. Fears of privacy violation and issues related to ownership of results and intellectual property rights are often recorded (Wilson Center: Commons Lab, 2014;Hecker et al., 2018;Gordienko, 2013). Often, there is limited awareness from all groups of QH stakeholders on the benefits and potentials of CS, whereas bias and scepticism pervade the scientific community members regarding the acceptance of data sources from CS. ...
Full-text available
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide answers regarding the factors that motivate or discourage the quadruple helix (QH) stakeholders and the wider public in citizen science (CS) activities. The research reveals a current overview of the perceptions, attitudes, concerns and motivation with regard to development of CS ecosystem in four countries: Greece, Lithuania, the Netherlands and Spain. Design/methodology/approach The researchers deploy a mixed methodology, entailing an in-depth literature review and a large-scale quantitative survey (approximately 2,000 citizens) targeting QH stakeholders and general public from the local national ecosystems. The results contain both descriptive statistics and statistical analysis per country. After the comprehensive overview of drivers and barriers regarding the participation in CS activities in general, the focus is narrowed down on the engagement motivation of different QH stakeholders and the differences in enabling/hindering factors at the local ecosystems. Findings Depending on the country and the pre-existing level of CS maturity, the results provide a complicated network of factors that unlock or block participation in CS activities. These factors include, to name a few, political maturity, civic engagement, technological infrastructures, economic growth, culture of stakeholder collaboration, psychological stimulus and surplus of resources. The implications of the findings necessitate the alignment of the envisioned CS ecosystem with the local dynamics in each country. Research limitations/implications The quantitative nature of the survey method, limited sample size and only four countries context are noted as limitations of the study and offer future research potential for longitudinal settings and mixed-methods studies. Originality/value The results contribute to the wider literature on CS that focuses on perspectives, possibilities and differences in local contexts with respect to the public engagement by developing CS ecosystem. At the same time, its added value lies in the overall practical proposition, and how the latter can effectively and efficiently attract and retain different stakeholder groups and citizens, under a collaborative approach.
... Nos últimos anos, uma nova proposta de se realizar ciência, denominada Ciência Cidadã, está adquirindo espaço na resolução de problemáticas ambientais, por integrar o público na pesquisa científica e possibilitar uma melhor interação entre cientistas-sociedade-governantes (PAUL et al., 2014;GORDIENKO, 2013). ...
... A ciência cidadã refere-se ao engajamento do público geral (denominados cientistas cidadãos) em atividades de pesquisa científica, sendo estes contribuidores ativos para a ciência por meio de seus conhecimentos ou com suas ferramentas e recursos (GORDIENKO, 2013), colaborando, assim, na ampliação da rede de monitoramento e de gerenciamento de recursos naturais, da biota e dos habitats (CONRAD; HILCHEY, 2011), funcionando como um recurso complementar aos governantes para a tomada de decisão (BOONSONG et al., 2010). ...
... Além disso, a ciência cidadã pode proporcionar inúmeros benefícios para os cientistas cidadãos, por meio da troca de informações e conhecimento entre os cientistas cidadãos e os cientistas profissionais, agregando valor à educação científica dos voluntários, como também possibilitando a aquisição de novas habilidades e uma compreensão mais profunda e crítica do trabalho científico (UNEP, 2014;WANG et al., 2015;GORDIENKO, 2013 O processo consistiu de cinco etapas, sendo elas: (i) aplicação do questionário pré-teste, (ii) aula sobre ciência cidadã, bioindicadores e euglenas, (iii) coleta de dados, (iv) análise dos dados pelos cientistas cidadãos e verificação da relação entre a presença de euglenas e a qualidade da praia visitada e (v) aplicação do questionário pós-teste. Os questionários visaram a comparação entre os conhecimentos prévios e os adquiridos na atividade pelos participantes. ...
... Through citizen science, people participate in the various parts of the research process: collecting and providing data or analyzing data themselves. This open and participatory approach of citizens should enhance research and contribute to build a new scientific culture and better societies empowered by citizens (Gordienko 2013). ...
Citizen scienceCitizen science is a very valuable complement to scientific efforts of tracking environmental changeEnvironmental change. The contribution of volunteers in scientific research is growing in Sierra NevadaSierra Nevada, and we here report three pilot experiences that include research on high mountain glacial lakesLakes, butterfliesButterflies, and streamStreammacroinvertebratesMacroinvertebrates. So far, participation has mainly led to the involvement of citizens into routine monitoring programsMonitoring programs, alleviating personnel and resource shortcomings. A necessary step forward in open scienceOpen Science is to develop a roadmap to extend dissemination by storytelling and outreach activities that reach civil society. By doing so, we expect to raise a new alliance, one that closes the gap between the necessary rapprochement among science, citizens, and environment managers.
Full-text available
Objective Workplace health promotion programs (WHPPs) have shown to be effective in improving lifestyle behaviors of employees. Despite potential benefits for employees, participation rates are generally low. The aim of this study was to gain deeper insight into barriers and facilitators for participation in WHPPs prior to implementation according to employees. Methods Peer-to-peer interviewing, a method derived from citizen science, was used to actively involve employees in the data collection. Employees working in the cleaning-, ICT- and facility-sector were trained to interview their co-workers. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis was performed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), complemented with the constructs ‘interpersonal factors’ and ‘intrapersonal factors’ from the social ecological model. Data were coded deductively and inductively, and rated by two researchers independently. Results Fourteen peer-interviewers conducted 62 peer-to-peer interviews. Main barriers for participation in WHPPs were an unsupportive organizational culture where lifestyle is not a common topic and programs that are not tailored to their needs. Support from peers and supervisors were facilitators. The availability of organizational resources, such as facilities and financial compensation, support participation. Conclusions To enhance participation of employees in WHPPs it is recommended to take into account the barriers and facilitators identified in this study. For instance, employees should be involved in the development and implementation of WHPPS by the employer and their needs and available resources should be taken into account. This may lead to more successful implementation and higher participation rates in future WHPPs.
Full-text available
The term responsible (research and) innovation has gained increasing EU policy relevance in the last two years, in particular within the European Commission’s Science in Society programme, in the context of the Horizon 2020 Strategy. We provide a brief historical overview of the concept, and identify three distinct features that are emerging from associated discourses. The first is an emphasis on the democratic governance of the purposes of research and innovation and their orientation towards the ‘right impacts’. The second is responsiveness, emphasising the integration and institutionalisation of established approaches of anticipation, reflection and deliberation in and around research and innovation, influencing the direction of these and associated policy. The third concerns the framing of responsibility itself in the context of research and innovation as collective activities with uncertain and unpredictable consequences. Finally, we reflect on possible motivations for responsible innovation itself.
Full-text available
There is an emerging trend of democratizing science and schooling within science education that can be characterized as citizen science. We explore the roots of this movement and some current projects to underscore the meaning of citizen science in science and schooling. We show that citizen science, as it is currently conceptualized, does not go far enough to resolve the concerns of communities and environments when considered holistically and when compared with more dynamic and multidimensional ideas for characterizing science. We use the examples of colony collapse disorder (CCD) and emerging trends of nanotechnology as cases in point. Then we justify three dialogical spheres of influence for future citizen science. As citizen science becomes more holistic, it embodies the responsibility of youths who are prepared to engage real concerns in their community.
Full-text available
A s the above vignette illustrates, the future of citizen science will likely be inextricably linked to emerging technologies. By spanning multiple spatial, temporal, and social scales, and by being designed to achieve a number of different outcomes, citizen-science projects will need to adopt new technologies to allow participants and organizers to communicate and interact effectively (Bonney et al. 2009a; Newman et al. 2011; Dickinson et al. 2012; Miller-Rushing et al. 2012; Shirk et al. 2012). As citizen science becomes more formalized and more widely accepted among scientific, educational, and community-oriented domains, additional factors – such as sociopolitical scenarios, eco-nomic conditions, and ethical considerations – will also influence how the field develops over time. Here, we discuss the future of citizen science (ie the process it uses to conduct scientific research, the culture of its future participants and programs, and the growing citizen-science community) using representative technologies and examples from the vignette above. n Emerging technologies New technologies, such as mobile applications (apps), wire-less sensor networks, and online computer/video gaming, show great promise for advancing citizen science. Mobile apps involve software developed for use on portable devices such as smartphones and other mobile, web-enabled equip-ment. Wireless sensor networks consist of spatially distrib-uted, autonomous or semi-autonomous sensors that moni-tor physical and/or environmental conditions, such as temperature, sound, vibration, pressure, motion, or pollu-tants. Gaming genres include alternate-and augmented-reality games, context-aware games, and games that involve
In this chapter, we present an important new shift in mobile phone usage-from communication tool to "networked mobile personal measurement instrument." We explore how these new "personal instruments" enable an entirely novel and empowering genre of mobile computing usage called citizen science. We investigate how such citizen science can be used collectively across neighborhoods and communities to enable individuals to become active participants and stakeholders as they publicly collect, share, and remix measurements of their city that matter most to them. We further demonstrate the impact of this new participatory urbanism by detailing its usage within the scope of environmental awareness. Inspired by a series of field studies, user driven environmental measurements, and interviews, we present the design of a working hardware system that integrates air quality sensing into an existing mobile phone and exposes the citizen authored measurements to the community-empowering people to become true change agents.
The authors outline and reflect upon a new research agenda on participatory mass observation and citizen science as an introduction to the 3 project outlines in this special section of Transactions.
Citizen science and community-based monitoring programs are increasing in number and breadth, generating volumes of scientific data. Many programs are ill-equipped to effectively manage these data. We examined the art and science of multi-scale citizen science support, focusing on issues of integration and flexibility that arise when programs span multiple spatial, temporal, and social scales across many domains. Our objectives were to: (1) review existing citizen science approaches and data management needs; (2) develop a cyber-infrastructure to support citizen science program needs; and (3) describe lessons learned. We find that approaches differ in scope, scale, and activities and that citizen science programs need best practices for data collection, standardization, integration and analysis. We built a multi-scale cyber-infrastructure support system for citizen science programs ( and show that carefully designed systems can support individual program requirements while promoting interoperability necessary for cross-program meta-analyses. The system allows users with different levels of permission to themselves easily customize features and attributes they wish to collect, while adhering to a growing user-contributed, yet vetted, set of attributes necessary for cross-discipline comparisons and meta-analyses. Program evaluation integrated into the cyber-infrastructure will improve our ability to track effectiveness. We discuss the importance of standards for interoperability and the challenges associated with system maintenance and long-term support and conclude by offering a vision of the future of citizen science data management and cyber-infrastructure support.
Collaborations between scientists and volunteers have the potential to broaden the scope of research and enhance the ability to collect scientific data. Interested members of the public may contribute valuable information as they learn about wildlife in their local communities.
This paper develops an organisation design-oriented conceptual model of scientific knowledge production through citizen science virtual organisations. Citizen science is a form of organisation design for collaborative scientific research involving scientists and volunteers, for which internet-based modes of participation enable massive virtual collaboration by thousands of members of the public. The conceptual model provides an example of a theory development process and discusses its application to an exploratory study. The paper contributes a multi-level process model for organising investigation into the impact of design on this form of scientific knowledge production.