Criteria for citizen science – A source of community empowerment or a barrier?

TY - ABST

T1 - Criteria for citizen science – A source of community empowerment or a barrier?

AU - Kragh, Gitte

AU - Dörler, Daniel

AU - Cavalier, Darlene

AU - Duerinckx, Annelies

AU - Gijsel, Liesbeth

AU - Tiago, Patricia

AU - Goldin, Jacqueline

AU - Luís, Cristina

AU - Sforzi, Andrea

AU - Heigl, Florian

PY - 2024

Y1 - 2024

N2 - Citizen science comes in many shapes and forms, and we use a variety ofdifferent terms to describe what we do. This sometimes causes confusion,both among researchers, but also when we interact with other citizen sciencestakeholders, e.g., funders, evaluators or collaboration partners. This confusionneeds to change to a shared understanding, and there are opportunities tomore clearly delineate what citizen science is, e.g., through use of vignettesor criteria. The ECSA Working Group on citizen science Networks has, overthe last 3 years, co-created transparent, impartial criteria with citizen scienceresearchers, practitioners and citizen scientists that can help decide if a projectshould be listed as citizen science on online platforms. If implemented, criteriacould facilitate a system change in how citizen science networks collaborate,enabling citizen science project listings across platforms. The criteria couldalso be useful for funding bodies, researchers and other citizen sciencestakeholders.The goal of this workshop is to familiarise participants with the criteria anddiscuss how and where citizen science criteria might be useful in their work,where criteria might be barriers and how to overcome such challenges.In this workshop, we invite researchers, practitioners and other citizen sciencestakeholders to share their experiences with and reflections on criteria forcitizen science and discuss how criteria can be most beneficial for all involved,especially when applied to create shared understandings between researchersand other stakeholders in citizen science projects.After a brief introduction to the developed criteria, participants are invited to join discussions in several ways:• First through a fishbowl approach, where they share their own experiences,case studies, and reflections on where and how criteria can most usefully beapplied (20 min.)• Secondly, through a mind mapping exercise of important topics, raised in thefishbowl or through new reflections (15 min.)• And finally, through World Café discussions based on chosen most importanttopics from the mindmapping (35 min.)

AB - Citizen science comes in many shapes and forms, and we use a variety ofdifferent terms to describe what we do. This sometimes causes confusion,both among researchers, but also when we interact with other citizen sciencestakeholders, e.g., funders, evaluators or collaboration partners. This confusionneeds to change to a shared understanding, and there are opportunities tomore clearly delineate what citizen science is, e.g., through use of vignettesor criteria. The ECSA Working Group on citizen science Networks has, overthe last 3 years, co-created transparent, impartial criteria with citizen scienceresearchers, practitioners and citizen scientists that can help decide if a projectshould be listed as citizen science on online platforms. If implemented, criteriacould facilitate a system change in how citizen science networks collaborate,enabling citizen science project listings across platforms. The criteria couldalso be useful for funding bodies, researchers and other citizen sciencestakeholders.The goal of this workshop is to familiarise participants with the criteria anddiscuss how and where citizen science criteria might be useful in their work,where criteria might be barriers and how to overcome such challenges.In this workshop, we invite researchers, practitioners and other citizen sciencestakeholders to share their experiences with and reflections on criteria forcitizen science and discuss how criteria can be most beneficial for all involved,especially when applied to create shared understandings between researchersand other stakeholders in citizen science projects.After a brief introduction to the developed criteria, participants are invited to join discussions in several ways:• First through a fishbowl approach, where they share their own experiences,case studies, and reflections on where and how criteria can most usefully beapplied (20 min.)• Secondly, through a mind mapping exercise of important topics, raised in thefishbowl or through new reflections (15 min.)• And finally, through World Café discussions based on chosen most importanttopics from the mindmapping (35 min.)

KW - Citizen science

KW - Criteria

M3 - Conference abstract for conference

SP - 80

EP - 81

T2 - European Citizen Science Association 2024 Conference: Change

Y2 - 3 April 2024 through 6 April 2024

ER -