Project
impact

Through the case study sites, MICS had a positive impact on society. Citizen scientists – varying in gender, age, ethnicity and educational level – were engaged in multiple activities throughout the project, including in the development of impact pathways. Citizen scientists gained skills (such as water quality measuring), knowledge (of their local areas) and competencies (developing their own methods for quantifying bacteria) during these activities, and – although we did not formally measure it – demonstrated changes in their behaviours and attitudes towards their local environments. Through the MICS project meeting in Noale, and the conference "Civil Science - Steps towards the revitalization of the Rákos stream" in Budapest, MICS also facilitated communication channels between citizen scientists and other interested parties and actors, including policy-makers. 

Indeed, fostering connections between different interested parties and actors, including policy-makers, is an example of how MICS has impacted governance. MICS has, of course, followed the FAIR guiding principles, and the outputs of the project are open access. The use of Freshwater Watch kits in case study sites has allowed citizen scientists to contribute to the SDG indicator 6.3.2; and the platform developed by the project is being utilised by the coordinating organisation, Earthwatch, to improve internal impact assessment processes. The presentation of MICS to the Environment Agency - an executive non-departmental public body, sponsored by the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs in the U.K. - may lead to increased commitment to, or investment in, citizen science practises within this agency in the future. 

In terms of the economy, it is difficult to measure the impact that MICS has had. Although the project has explicit plans to sustain the platform beyond the funding of the project, MICS has not improved economic productivity, or necessarily achieved more across the case study sites by using citizen scientists as opposed to professionals. It could, however, be argued that MICS will explicitly contribute to the reduction of costs for other external organisations, if previously organisations dedicated considerable amounts of time and money to assess the impacts of their projects, which they can now do freely and easily with the MICS impact assessment tools. 

MICS addresses the environmental challenges of Freshwater and Life on Land, monitoring a number of indicators including water quality, correct treatment of wastewater and biodiversity. Although the project’s impact has been limited to case-study areas, it is likely that the project will have a larger indirect impact on the environment, through the behaviour changes brought about through a direct impact on society. 

MICS’s greatest impact is on science; specifically, on the science of citizen science. MICS has taken the state of the art in impact assessment and built on it to create a platform that can be used to assess the impact of any citizen-science project at any stage of its lifecycle. It provides training and resources on how to co-design and assess the impact of projects, and recommendations as to how to improve on this impact.  

MICS may not score a full 42 out of 42 in its own impact assessment, but it has certainly advanced the science of citizen science.