MICS input features
On this page you will find every question that forms the MICS platform impact assessment; complete with answer options, as well as help and information text. We have also included the source(s) of the question, and how they were originally worded.
Click the links below to jump to any of the five domains.
General
|
# |
Question text and answer options |
Help and information |
Source of question and original wording |
|
1 (001) |
What forms of knowledge does the project as a whole create?
|
Help: New concepts or theories: for example, in MICS we are working on a new way to theorise impact assessment which is different to the "theory of change". |
ECSA Characteristics: Data and knowledge generation. Citizen science, scientific, academic, and policy-oriented research can include different forms of data and knowledge generation, including novel data generation, creation of new analyses, or production of new knowledge in written and other forms. The knowledge produced in such projects should aspire to disciplinary standards, such as appropriate data quality and quality assurance, the peer review of project publications and materials, or policy relevant evidence that is fit for decision-making. |
|
2 (004) |
What is the expected duration of the project?
|
Help: Duration refers to all stages of the project life cycle, not just the data collection phase. |
Cox et al. 2015: For many measures of project outcomes, we report rates of activity over time as opposed to raw numbers; both in terms of the active project duration (the length of time that the project has actively accepted new classifications) and project age (the length of time between the start of the project and October 2014, which may include periods of inactivity). These are used as appropriate depending on whether the particular performance measure can only occur whilst the project is active (e.g. classification activity) or after the project has finished accepting new classifications (e.g. publications). |
|
3 (005) |
Are participants currently able to contribute to the project's citizen-science activities?
|
Help: Projects use many words to describe the people who take part in their activities: citizen scientists, volunteers, stakeholders, amateurs, community members, human sensors.
In MICS we just use the word participants. |
Cox et al. 2015: For many measures of project outcomes, we report rates of activity over time as opposed to raw numbers; both in terms of the active project duration (the length of time that the project has actively accepted new classifications) and project age (the length of time between the start of the project and October 2014, which may include periods of inactivity). These are used as appropriate depending on whether the particular performance measure can only occur whilst the project is active (e.g. classification activity) or after the project has finished accepting new classifications (e.g. publications). |
|
4 (008) |
How many observations have been collected so far?
|
Help: What counts as an observation? That's up to the project to decide. Some projects count every item of data they collect. Some projects count each dataset uploaded if, for example, a single sample taken includes several data points. Some projects count the number of classifications made because their activities involve data analysis rather than data collection. Just choose whatever makes most sense in the context of the project. Information: The answers to this question are triggers for the logic in the platform. Answering "I don't really know what observations are" or "Observations are not a significant element of the project and quantifying them is not important" to this question will block the next question in this domain: "How many observations are collected in a typical recent year of active project? (If the project has been running for less than a year you can estimate the number.)". |
Wiggins et al. 2018: Data Specimens/samples (#) Number of material data points in the form of physical specimens or samples Bonney et al. 2009: Size and quality of citizen science databases |
|
5 (009) |
How many observations are collected in a typical recent year of active project? (If the project has been running for less than a year you can estimate the number.)
|
Information: To put the project’s data collection in perspective just think that eBird collected 700 000 000 observations and iNaturalist 40 000 000. But that doesn't mean that you have less than 1% of the impact of these projects. Context is important and that's why we need to ask so many questions. |
Wiggins et al. 2018: Data Specimens/samples (#) Number of material data points in the form of physical specimens or samples Bonney et al. 2009: Size and quality of citizen science databases |
|
6 (010) |
What is the scope of the citizen-science project? (The project, for example, studies plastic pollution globally.)
|
Help: Global projects can have participants anywhere in the world; multinational projects have participants in a limited number of countries across the world. |
ECSA Characteristics: What counts as scientific research? In common with research practice in general, citizen science can address a topic that is basic or applied, inductive or deductive, local or global. In specific contexts, it is appropriate to identify a subset of activities (explicitly include environmental monitoring, or focus on hypothesis-driven research). To ensure rigour, the research should aim to follow protocols and practices in line with the disciplines within which the research is framed. Chase and Levine 2016: Geographic scale Wehn et al. 2017: Geographic scope of the issue in focus |
|
7 (013) |
How many participants have contributed to the project's citizen-science activities so far?
|
Help: Citizen science activities can be broader than just data collection, and may include, for example, training other participants or sharing project outputs. Information: The answers to this question are triggers for the logic in the platform. Answering "Participants are not a significant element of the project and quantifying them is not important" to this question will block the next question in this domain: "How many participants contribute to citizen-science activities in a typical year of active project? (If the project has been running for less than a year you can estimate the number.)". |
ECSA Characteristics: Small scale vs large scale. Citizen science projects can include a single person carrying out a research project and publicly sharing their knowledge on a non-traditional platform (e.g. a blog) while adhering to scientific standards (e.g. peer review). It can also consist of a small group of participants, or be open to large-scale participation in various phases of the research process. Projects may aim to achieve large-scale participation, or to contribute significantly to knowledge through personal effort, depending on the context and the discipline. Depending on the aim of the project, all scales could be considered as citizen science. Cox et al. 2015: Project Appeal 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑒𝑟𝑠/(𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑗𝑒𝑐𝑡 𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑜𝑑)^2; Total number of volunteers who have contributed to the project divided by project active period squared. Chandler et al. 2017: Number of participants; Continuous; Number of participants/project per year; The number of people participating on project each year. |
|
8 (014) |
How many participants contribute to citizen science activities in a typical year of active project? (If the project has been running for less than a year you can estimate the number.)
|
|
Chandler et al. 2017: Number of participants; Continuous; Number of participants/project per year; The number of people participating on project each year. |
|
9 (015) |
How many people have been directly engaged by the project (including participants who have contributed to the citizen science activities)?
|
Help: People can be engaged with a project in ways other than taking part in citizen science activities. For example, they might attend a project event or subscribe to the project newsletter. |
Jackson et al. 2016: Active, less active, and passive participants: A number of prior studies divided participants into active members who contribute the majority of work, less active participants, and passive members who take advantage of the benefits offered without contributing themselves to community activities. |
|
10 (018) |
What is the total external funding received by the project (in €, £ GBP, or $ USD)?
|
Help: External funding is money that comes from outside the organisation(s) managing the project.
In this question, we use €, £ GBP, or $ USD interchangeably because the answers are given as orders of magnitude which make the difference in the exchange rate between the three currencies largely irrelevant. Here's a currency converter in case it's helpful: https://www1.oanda.com/currency/converter/ |
Wehn et al. 2017: How many different revenue streams does your organisation have for CO-related value propositions? Bonney et al. 2009: Numbers and sizes of grants received for citizen science research |
|
11 (021) |
What is the total financial investment in the project, including internal funding (in €, £ GBP, or $ USD)?
|
Help: Total financial investment is money that comes both externally and internally from the organisation(s) managing the project In this question, we use €, £ GBP, or $ USD interchangeably because the answers are given as orders of magnitude which make the difference in the exchange rate between the three currencies largely irrelevant. Here's a currency converter in case it's helpful: https://www1.oanda.com/currency/converter/ |
Wehn et al. 2017: In total, what is your organization's budget (income & own investment) in these CO-related research projects? |
|
12 (022) |
Is the project focused on one or more of the following five domains?
|
Help: Society: individuals as well as collective (societal) values, understanding, actions and well-being (including relationships) Governance: the processes and institutions through which decisions are made, both informal and formal Economy: the production and exchange of goods and services among economic agents Science and technology: the scientific process (method) as well as research more broadly; the scientific system, scientific paradigms and resulting technological artefacts and standards Environment: the bio-chemical-physical environment |
Wehn et al. 2020: While the three domains of sustainable development (environment, society and economy) are well-known and accepted, the context of citizen science warrants the focus on the two additional domains (science & technology, and governance). The science & technology domain is considered by MICS due to the inherent nature of citizen-science’s alignment with/use of the scientific process and resulting (potential) implications for the scientific system, scientific paradigms and technological artefacts. A separate governance domain is considered owing to the links of citizen-science processes and results in monitoring, (environmental) management and (public) decision making processes. |
Society
|
# |
Question text and answer options |
Help and information |
Source of question and original wording |
|
1 (101) |
In which phases of the project do participants play a role?
|
Help: Projects use many words to describe the people who take part in their activities: citizen scientists, volunteers, stakeholders, amateurs, community members, human sensors. In MICS we just use the word participants. |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: In which project phases are citizens involved? [Are citizen scientists recognized in publications and if so,] can they participate in the dissemination of results? ECSA Characteristics: The roles of the participants can include, for example: identifying a research question, collecting or analysing data to support or refute a hypothesis; monitoring environmental or health conditions for management or policy outcomes; and creation of generic data within a domain to support a wide range of research questions (e.g. digitising art collections, observations or mapping). Degree of engagement. Active engagement that requires citizens’ cognitive attention during participation in the research process is favoured over limited interaction. It is also preferable to engage citizens in several phases of the research process. Minimal participation, for example volunteers sharing computing resources or social media habits without actively engaging in the research itself, or downloading an app that automatically collects data for scientific purposes, could still be considered as citizen science under certain conditions. Examples include when a project actively aligns with the 10 principles, or supports the production of scientific results that would not have been possible without the informed decision of volunteers to contribute. Haywood and Besley 2014: How early are citizen participants consulted in the process and what stage/s of the research process are citizen participants included in? What roles do citizen participants have in the process compared to project leaders? (e.g. is there a division of labor?, are citizens included in analysis and interpretation of results?) Butterfoss 2006: [measures of community participation] role in the coalition or its activities Khodyakov et al. (2013): Question: Please think about the extent to which the community partners participated in the research component of this partnered project and check all the research activities that they have been involved with either as “consultants” or “active participants.” Grant proposal writing, Background research, choosing research methods, developing sampling procedures, recruiting study participants, Implementing the intervention, designing interview and/or survey questions, collecting primary data, Analyzing collected data, interpreting study findings, writing reports and journal articles, Giving presentations at meetings and conferences. Wehn et al. 2017: Mechanisms for stakeholder interactions in decision making process-es (e.g. data provision, expressing preferences, deliberation and negotiation, etc.) |
|
2 (102) |
Are participants offered multiple project activities which they can take part in?
|
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Are the options for participation and the degree of involvement diversified? How much involvement and responsibility is offered to the participants? Wehn et al. 2017: Perception of the users about the flexibility of the participation methods |
|
|
3 (103) |
Are participants offered different levels of involvement in each project activity depending on their interest, availability and knowledge?
|
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Are the options for participation and the degree of involvement diversified? |
|
|
4 (104) |
How much responsibility is offered to the participants (with options depending on interests, availability and knowledge)?
|
Help: A lot of responsibility might involve collecting repeated observations, maintaining equipment or running workshops, whilst not much responsibility might be analysing data as part of a group or collecting data as part of a BioBlitz. |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: How much involvement and responsibility is offered to the participants? |
|
5 (105) |
What type of citizen science is the project according to the following categories?
|
Information: These categories come from a paper by Jennifer Shirk et al., "Public Participation in Scientific Research: a Framework for Deliberate Design" which has become a reference in citizen science. And if your project doesn't fit into any of these categories, Jennifer won't be happy... |
ECSA Characteristics: Roles and responsibilities. In citizen science, there are contexts in which it is appropriate for citizens, scientists and other project stakeholders to be considered as equal partners in the research process, and cases where the appropriate contribution is limited to data collection or providing resources. Contributors need to be aware of the act of participation, with the deliberate intention of being involved in the project. Transparency regarding the different roles and expectations in the process is recommended, and participants should be made aware that they are contributing to research. This is especially important if participants are only taking over small or micro-tasks that require little engagement, but the overall contribution to a clearly defined scientific process or research is important. Individual project, community-led project and researcher-led project. Citizen science projects can be led by researchers or scientists, or can be led collaboratively by a community to address a particular issue. Projects can also be run by an individual, who will carry out the whole project alone. All are potentially consistent with citizen science, and the decision on each project can be made by examining its context and practices. Shirk et al. 2012: We divide PPSR projects into five models based on degree of participation: · Contractual projects, where communities ask professional researchers to conduct a specific scientific investigation and report on the results; · Contributory projects, which are generally designed by scientists and for which members of the public primarily contribute data; · Collaborative projects, which are generally designed by scientists and for which members of the public contribute data but also help to refine project design, analyze data, and/or disseminate findings; · Co-Created projects, which are designed by scientists and members of the public working together and for which at least some of the public participants are actively involved in most or all aspects of the research process; and · Collegial contributions, where non-credentialed individuals conduct research independently with varying degrees of expected recognition by institutionalized science and/or professionals. |
|
6 (106) |
Are participants equal partners in the knowledge generation with the project organizers?
|
Help: Knowledge generation can be understood as the conclusions drawn from the research. |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Are citizens and scientists equal partners in the knowledge generation process? Butterfoss 2006: [measures of community participation] balance of power and leadership. |
|
7 (107) |
Does the project explicitly foster co-ownership of the project among participants and other stakeholders?
|
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Individual development: Behaviour and ownership "Does the project foster ownership amongst participants?" Pocock et al. 2019: Enhanced capacity and empowerment of all stakeholders in conservation, leading to action. Greater ownership through involvement at every stage, including motivations for monitoring and action, increased trust, tolerance and attitudes to nature |
|
|
8 (108) |
Are the participants satisfied with the process of participation in the project?
|
Information: If you haven’t measured participant’s satisfaction with the process of participation, you might be interested to see how other projects have tried to measure it. Two examples are summarised on about.mics.tools: Butterfoss, 2006 and Gresle et al. 2019. |
Butterfoss 2006: [measures of community participation] satisfaction with the work or process of participation, Gresle et al. 2019: Participatory Dynamics - Satisfaction with the participatory dynamics DITOs consortium 2016: Public expectations of engagement in decision-making processes; Perceived 'level' of participation/contribution; Attitude toward facilitator & organisation. |
|
9 (109) |
Do the goals of the project align to the demands of the participants?
|
Information: If you’re interested in measuring the alignment of the project’s goals to the demands of the participants, it might be helpful to consider Guldberg’s classification of value creation or Gresle’s measures of community alignment which are described in the impact indicator explorer on about.mics.tools. |
Guldberg et al. 2019: to the extent that changes in practice make a difference to what really matters, social learning produces realised value Gresle et al. 2019: community alignment (alignment of project goals to the community demands and efficacy of engagement techniques) and responsiveness to community alignment. |
|
10 (110) |
Are participants satisfied with the results of the project?
|
Information: Satisfaction of participants was identified as an important metric by Butterfoss in their review of evaluation methods. If you haven’t attempted to measure participations satisfaction with the results of the project you might find inspiration by reading these papers by Butterfoss, 2006 and Woods et al. 2020. |
Woods et al. 2020: To what extent is the value created worth the time and effort you put into this project? Butterfoss 2006: [measures of community participation] satisfaction with the work or process of participation, |
|
11 (111) |
Is participation in the project voluntary or non-voluntary?
|
ECSA Characteristics: Professionalism vs volunteerism. When citizen science is understood as a collaboration between professional and volunteer scientists, the question arises: what is ‘professional’ and what is ‘voluntary’? The interpretation of these terms varies widely and depends on context, culture and the field of enquiry. It includes aspects like professional skill sets, remuneration and timescales of involvement. For example, volunteers with a scientific background or professional scientific role in other capacities can still be volunteers when they apply their skills in their free time. They can engage in scientific activities full time and still be understood as volunteers under certain conditions (e.g. when the effort is beyond their roles). |
|
|
12 (112) |
Are participants aware they are contributing to a citizen-science project?
|
ECSA Characteristics: Contributors need to be aware of the act of participation, with the deliberate intention of being involved in the project. Transparency regarding the different roles and expectations in the process is recommended, and participants should be made aware that they are contributing to research. This is especially important if participants are only taking over small or micro-tasks that require little engagement, but the overall contribution to a clearly defined scientific process or research is important. |
|
|
13 (113) |
Are participants the focus of the research?
|
ECSA Characteristics: Intention and framing. In many fields, but particularly the medical and health sciences and the social sciences, there is a subtle difference between citizen science activities and traditional practices that view participants as subjects of research, or as participants in a survey or workshop. Therefore, the decision to call an activity citizen science should include an articulation of which aspects justify this, for example, by referencing the 10 principles. Subject or participant? In some disciplines, such as the medical and the social sciences, the shift from being a research subject to becoming an active researcher should be made clear. The nature of such studies means it is common that citizens themselves, their behaviours, challenges and health issues are under examination. But citizens can also take an active role in, and even initiate, the above activities. It is possible that the people who take part in such projects can be subjects and participants at the same time, depending on the intentions and framing of the research. The use of digital data-collection tools in the medical and the social sciences can be seen as a social survey or as participatory data collection, and therefore part of citizen science. The intention and framing of the project, as well as adherence to the 10 principles, can help in deciding if such use is a citizen science activity. |
|
|
14 (114) |
Do changes in participants' values, perspectives, opinions and attitudes occur as a consequence of actions carried out in the project?
|
Information: Changes in participants’ values, perspectives, opinions and attitudes can be one of the most important impacts of citizen science projects. Several relevant frameworks and scales for measuring this change have already been developed such as the Sustainability Attitudes Scale described in Zwickle and Jones, 2018. |
Haywood and Besley 2014: Are participants encouraged to reflect on and discuss current VPOA [Values, Perspectives, Opinions and Attitudes] relating to general science concepts and the research project? Do changes in these VPOA occur? Zwickle and Jones 2018: Sustainability attitudes scale Smajgl et al. 2015: The learning-focused ChaRL framework measured and facilitated changes in existing beliefs, by tracing the fate of new knowledge introduced by a specific research process and capturing attendant changes in value and belief orientations. |
|
15 (115) |
Does the project contribute to personal change in behaviour?
|
Help: For example, behaviour change could include "switching from plastic bags to reusable shopping bags" or "changing an omnivorous diet to a vegan one and losing all friends in the process". Information: Behaviour change has been included in several citizen-science assessment frameworks e.g. Kieslinger et al. 2017; Haywood and Besley, 2014. If you’re interested in trying to measure participants’ change in behaviour you might find it helpful to consider: Braun and Dierkis categorisation of environmental knowledge; Phillips et al’s framework of learning outcomes; and Kaiser’s general ecological behaviour scale. All these examples are focused on environmental behaviour change but could also provide inspiration for similar assessment in other fields. |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the project contribute to personal change in behavior? Haywood and Besley 2014: Do participants or project leaders exhibit changes in behavior or lifestyle choices? Braun and Dierkes 2019: Environmental knowledge incorporates at least three different subtypes: system, action-related and effectiveness knowledge. To enable a person to act in an environmentally friendly manner, they must primarily understand the basic structural and functional characteristics of an ecosystem (system knowledge). Furthermore, knowledge about solutions for environmental issues (action-related knowledge) and the benefit of sustainable actions (effectiveness knowledge) are deemed crucial for an individual to choose a set of behaviours. Phillips et al. 2018: Our new framework is thus based on both empirical data and contributions from the literature and includes the following learning outcomes: Interest in Science and the Environment; Self efficacy for Science and the Environment; Motivation for Science and the Environment; Knowledge of the Nature of Science; Skills of Science Inquiry; and Behavior and Stewardship. Kaiser 2020: [General Ecological Behavior Scale] |
|
16 (116) |
Do participants self-organize to carry out additional activities beyond the original scope of the project?
|
Chase and Levine 2016: Self-organization of a community or group around resource DITOs consortium 2016: Number and type of participant-initiated/led activities: While these might vary in type and extent, they should be acknowledged and celebrated. Within their contexts, partner organisations should follow the cases of participant initiated/led activities to encourage them by e.g. understanding their sources and needs (this can lead to further capacity development on the part of the participant, the facilitator, and the organisation). This indicator also aims to capture over time how these initiatives develop (are they temporary, goal oriented, intended to be longer-terms, etc.). |
|
|
17 (117) |
Are participants involved in similar activities outside of the project as a consequence of being involved in the project?
|
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Are participants motivated to continue the project or involve in similar activities? Wehn et al. 2017: People who volunteered time to an organisation in the past month. |
|
|
18 (118) |
What is the balance between engagement and research in the project? (We know that many of you would be tempted to say they are equal in the project but we want to force you to choose one!)
|
Help: Research investigates a topic within sciences, social sciences, humanities or the arts to reach new conclusions. This may be done by following protocols to investigate a hypothesis, collecting and analysing data or creating generic data to answer questions. Engagement requires participants' attention during one or more stages of the project. This may be in the form of using apps or social media to interact with the project, learning and applying a scientific method or attending a workshop Information: The balance between engagement and research is highlighted as an important issue in ECSA's characteristics of citizen science. For example, if a project only focuses on engagement, can it really be considered citizen science?" |
ECSA Characteristics: Science engagement and science education. Citizen science projects can have educational outcomes for participants involved in various phases of the research process. Intended learning outcomes for participants are a favourable aspect in citizen science. However, for a project to be classified as citizen science, educational goals or science engagement/outreach should not be the only focus, to ensure they are aligned with the research goals. Hence, achieving higher awareness of and engagement with scientific processes can be one aim (intentional or unintentional) of citizen science projects – but should not be the main aim. |
|
19 (119) |
What engagement approaches does the project use?
|
Help: Here are some definitions in case you're not familiar with the terms we've used: - Gamification is the process encouraging engagement within the project by turning the process into a game (using point scoring, challenges and competition). - A workshop is a group of people discussing a topic or engaging in activities surrounding the topic. - A measurement campaign or intensive observation period involves collecting a large amount of data in a defined, and usually short, time period. |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: What engagement strategies does the project have (e.g. gamification)? |
|
20 (120) |
Does the project offer any incentives for participation?
|
ECSA Characteristics: Incentives to participate in an activity. Projects that incentivise participants can qualify as citizen science, but this is dependent on the context and form of relationship between project leaders and participants. Incentives could take different forms, such as small payments in crowdsourcing activities, or providing bikes to facilitate mobility in a place with high deprivation. However, the type or amount of the incentive should be taken into account before considering its consistency with citizen science. Acceptance of incentives/payments to participants in the citizen science context depends on the culture/country and the social/economic status of participants. Guldberg et al. 2019: engaging in social learning can create immediate value such as the company of like-minded people or doing something exciting. Woods et al. 2020: How has participating in the project enhanced your community? Wehn et al. 2017: Type of incentives offered to encourage different participant groups |
|
|
21 (121) |
Does the project work with other organisations to involve specific target groups or individuals?
|
Help: For example, a project about water-quality monitoring might work with an organisation like a river trust to reach volunteers who are likely to be interested in water (the specific target group). |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: "Working with civic society organizations may allow for working with specific target groups and individuals with a genuine interest in the topic." |
|
22 (122) |
Does the project have a formal engagement strategy?
|
Help: An engagement strategy is a document which outlines the project's approach to engaging participants in the project activities. Information: The answers to this question are triggers for the logic in the platform. Answering "No" to this question will block Question 23 in the society domain "Is the engagement strategy shared with participants?". |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: What engagement strategies does the project have (e.g. gamification)? Is the engagement strategy clearly communicated and transparent? |
|
23 (123) |
Is the engagement strategy shared with participants?
|
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Is the engagement strategy clearly communicated and transparent? |
|
|
24 (124) |
How does the project communicate with participants?
|
Information: Some projects experiment with rich, multimedia formats such as video. Interestingly, video isn't' always the best way to go, many people prefer news in text form. Simply put, video takes too long. The most important thing is to understand the project participants and what they want. You can read more here: https://digiday.com/media/despite-publisher-enthusiasm-video-people-prefer-getting-news-text/ [Image: Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2016, https://www.digitalnewsreport.org/] |
ECSA Characteristics: Local and lay knowledge-sharing and application. Citizen involvement in producing and interpreting data gathered locally by community members, to raise local awareness and action, is a common model of citizen science. The active participation of professional scientists or researchers, and the sharing of results outside the local community, are not mandatory, as long as the project adheres to established research principles and practices. Kieslinger et al. 2017: Are the project objectives and results clearly and transparently communicated? Chandler et al. 2017: Peer reviewed publications, Popular publications and outreach events Bonney et al. 2009: Frequency of media exposure Wiggins et al. 2018: Newsletters (Y/N), Videos (Y/N), Presentations (Y/N), Website (Y/N) Wehn et al. 2017: Channels of data and information flow between different stakeholders, the pattern of information flow ('unidirectional', 'bi-directional' and 'interactive') between different stakeholders |
|
25 (125) |
Does the project include any of the following communication activities?
|
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the communication strategy include hands-on experiences and bi-directional communication? Does the project include innovative means of science communication and popular media (e.g. art)? Does the project seek collaboration with science communication professionals? |
|
|
26 (126) |
How are the project outcomes shared?
|
Help: Grey literature is produced by organisations whose main activity is not publishing (at least in traditional commercial or academic publishing). It can include reports, speeches, policy briefs and working papers. |
ECSA Characteristics: Local and lay knowledge-sharing and application. Citizen involvement in producing and interpreting data gathered locally by community members, to raise local awareness and action, is a common model of citizen science. The active participation of professional scientists or researchers, and the sharing of results outside the local community, are not mandatory, as long as the project adheres to established research principles and practices. Kieslinger et al. 2017: Are the project objectives and results clearly and transparently communicated? Chandler et al. 2017: Peer reviewed publications, Popular publications and outreach events Bonney et al. 2009: Frequency of media exposure Wiggins et al. 2018: Newsletters (Y/N), Videos (Y/N), Presentations (Y/N), Website (Y/N) |
|
27 (127) |
Does the project have specific communication plans for specific target groups?
|
Information: Projects often have different communication plans for specific target groups. For example, projects which work with schools may need to contact teachers before other participants because teachers need to plan lessons in advance whereas the general public can be contacted closer to the start of project activities. |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the project have specific communication plans for target groups? Does the project have a targeted outreach and communication strategy? DITOs consortium 2016: Considerations/strategies for the design of communication and outreach strategies; consideration for language/cultural barriers, etc. |
|
28 (128) |
Does the project create a positive change in how stakeholders communicate with one another?
|
Help: A positive change in how stakeholders communicate could include new communication channels, increased frequency of communication, or more diverse methods of communication (such as social media, newsletters, posters and emails). |
Woods et al. 2020: How has participating in the project enhanced your community? To what extent has this project strengthen the communication and networks in your community? Fazey et al. 2014: New structure: new networks or structures are set up, communication is improved |
|
29 (129) |
As a result of this project, are channels available for participants and other stakeholders to communicate without the project?
|
Woods et al. 2020: How has participating in the project enhanced your community? To what extent has this project strengthen the communication and networks in your community? |
|
|
30 (130) |
Are there plans for sustaining the collaboration between citizen scientists and other stakeholders (for example, scientists or public authorities) beyond the project activities?
|
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Are there plans for sustaining the collaboration between citizens and scientists? Haywood and Besley 2014: Do new networks, connections, or collaborative efforts result from the project or interactions among project participants or are existing connections strengthened? How are these networks sustained upon completion of the project? |
|
|
31 (131) |
Which socially-relevant issues are directly addressed by the project? (We'll ask details about each issue later.)
|
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the scientific objective show relevance for society and does it address a socially relevant problem? SDGs: Goal 1. End poverty in all its forms everywhere; Goal 2. End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture; Goal 3. Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages; Goal 4. Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all; Goal 5. Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls; Goal 6. Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all; Goal 8. Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all; Goal 9. Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation; Goal 10. Reduce inequality within and among countries; Goal 12. Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns; Goal 16. Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels |
|
|
32 (132) |
Does the project relate to human physical health (directly or indirectly)?
|
Information: The answers to this question are triggers for the logic in the platform. Answering "No" to this question will block three questions in the society domain: Question 33 "Does the project aid in the investigation of diseases?"; Question 34 "Does the project aid in the research and development of vaccines and medical interventions?"; and Question 36 "Does the project have a positive impact on the physical health of participants?". |
ECSA Characteristics: Medical sciences and human health. Projects investigating human health (physical or mental) can present different challenges to assess as citizen science due to their varying levels of active engagement, the purpose of knowledge production, data sharing, the level of expertise required to assess medical information, and the involvement of commercial activities. In such cases, the organisational context needs to be considered: the same activity (e.g. a trial of an intervention) can be done by a hospital or a commercial actor, and therefore be assessed differently. While in other domains, sharing personal data is sometimes problematic, in the health domain it is almost a prerequisite to participation. |
|
33 (133) |
Does the project aid in the investigation of diseases?
|
SDG 3.3: By 2030, end the epidemics of AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria and neglected tropical diseases and combat hepatitis, water-borne diseases and other communicable diseases SDG 3.4 By 2030, reduce by one third premature mortality from non-communicable diseases through prevention and treatment and promote mental health and well-being |
|
|
34 (134) |
Does the project aid in the research and development of vaccines and medical interventions?
|
SDG 3.b: Support the research and development of vaccines and medicines for the communicable and non-communicable diseases that primarily affect developing countries, provide access to affordable essential medicines and vaccines, in accordance with the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health, which affirms the right of developing countries to use to the full the provisions in the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights regarding flexibilities to protect public health, and, in particular, provide access to medicines for all |
|
|
35 (135) |
Does the project explicitly investigate the link between pollution and health?
|
SDG 3.9: "By 2030, substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water and soil pollution and contamination" |
|
|
36 (136) |
Does the project have a positive impact on the physical health of participants?
|
SDG: Goal 3. Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages Chase and Levine 2016: A perceived direct link between a resource and the health and well-being of a community can also foster and influence citizen science programs. For example, a direct reliance on clean air and drinking water may foster a monitoring program for the resource, as well as motivate a pool of volunteers. |
|
|
37 (137) |
Does the project directly research mental health concerns?
|
Information: More information about how a project could research mental health concerns and contextual examples are available in this paper: "Developing a Citizen Social Science approach to understand urban stress and promote wellbeing in urban communities". |
SDG 3.4 By 2030, reduce by one third premature mortality from non-communicable diseases through prevention and treatment and promote mental health and well-being |
|
38 (138) |
Does the project actively raise motivation amongst participants?
|
Help: Motivation is based on the individual’s desire to achieve. |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the project raise motivation and self-esteem amongst participants? Phillips et al. 2018: Our new framework is thus based on both empirical data and contributions from the literature and includes the following learning outcomes: Interest in Science and the Environment; Self efficacy for Science and the Environment; Motivation for Science and the Environment; Knowledge of the Nature of Science; Skills of Science Inquiry; and Behavior and Stewardship. |
|
39 (139) |
Does the project increase the self-efficacy of participants?
|
Help: Self-efficacy is based on an individual’s belief in their own capacity to achieve. Information: Self-efficacy can be a difficult concept to measure. The DITOs consortium used a mixture of surveys and one-on-one or group discussions with participants to gain a better understanding of their attitude towards their own abilities. The DITOs consortium approach is described briefly on page 34 of this report. |
Phillips et al. 2018: Our new framework is thus based on both empirical data and contributions from the literature and includes the following learning outcomes: Interest in Science and the Environment; Self efficacy for Science and the Environment; Motivation for Science and the Environment; Knowledge of the Nature of Science; Skills of Science Inquiry; and Behavior and Stewardship. DITOs consortium 2016: Attitude towards their own abilities: This is for participants, facilitators, and organisations as a whole - it points to a level of (self-)confidence and acknowledgement of abilities, aspirations, and limitations. Limitations can be technical but may also be attitudinal. This indicator also aims to capture facilitators' and participants' lessons learnt, openness to change, willingness to share thoughts on room for improvement, etc. Fazey et al. 2014: Confidence: increased confidence in participants. Self-efficacy (of patients in speaking to doctors). |
|
40 (140) |
Does the project have a positive impact on the mental health of participants?
|
Pocock et al. 2019: Improved wellbeing and livelihoods through connection to (and consequent ownership of) nature and sense of belonging SDG 3.4 By 2030, reduce by one third premature mortality from non-communicable diseases through prevention and treatment and promote mental health and well-being Chase and Levine 2016: A perceived direct link between a resource and the health and well-being of a community can also foster and influence citizen science programs. For example, a direct reliance on clean air and drinking water may foster a monitoring program for the resource, as well as motivate a pool of volunteers. |
|
|
41 (141) |
Does the project investigate the social or psychological needs of non-human animals?
|
Peggs 2013: Two central questions are raised: first, should sociology include the study of nonhuman animals and secondly, can sociology advocate for non-human animals? The paper concludes with an affirmative response to both of these questions. |
|
|
42 (142) |
What kind of specific training does the project provide to participants?
|
SDG: 4.4 By 2030, substantially increase the number of youth and adults who have relevant skills, including technical and vocational skills, for employment, decent jobs and entrepreneurship Haywood and Besley 2014: What instruction and training is necessary? When and how will this be provided? |
|
|
43 (143) |
At what level does the project contribute to the formal education of participants (for example, by working with schools)?
|
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Did the project contribute to adult education and life-long-learning? SDG 4.1: By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable and quality primary and secondary education leading to relevant and effective learning outcomes; 4.2: By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys have access to quality early childhood development, care and pre‑primary education so that they are ready for primary education; 4.3 By 2030, ensure equal access for all women and men to affordable and quality technical, vocational and tertiary education, including university |
|
|
44 (144) |
What support is provided to educational institutions by the project?
|
SDG 4.c By 2030, substantially increase the supply of qualified teachers, including through international cooperation for teacher training in developing countries, especially least developed countries and small island developing States |
|
|
45 (145) |
Do participants gain new knowledge from taking part in the project?
|
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Do individuals gain new knowledge, skills and competences? Bonney et al. 2009: Improved participant understanding of science content Fazey et al. 2014: Increased knowledge, awareness or understanding |
|
|
46 (146) |
Do participants gain new skills from taking part in the project?
|
Help: A skill is the ability to perform a task. To help participants learn new skills, the project might provide: · IT training (such as using a website) · Equipment training (such as using an app) · Measurement training · Training for the trainer · Training about citizen-science methodologies |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Do individuals gain new knowledge, skills and competences? Haywood and Besley 2014: Does knowledge about the science process increase or the acquisition of skills occur? Are participants provided opportunities to expand skill sets that are transferable to other settings and applications? What new skills are developed? Bonney et al. 2009: Improved participant skills for conducting science Phillips et al. 2018: Skills of Science Inquiry SDG: 4.4 By 2030, substantially increase the number of youth and adults who have relevant skills, including technical and vocational skills, for employment, decent jobs and entrepreneurship Fazey et al. 2014: Skills: new skills learned by participants |
|
47 (147) |
Do participants gain new competencies from taking part in the project?
|
Help: Competencies are behaviours which allow a participant to perform a task well and often require specific skills and knowledge. For example, competencies include working together, creativity and flexibility, the ability to learn, and internet savviness. Information: If you’re interested in measuring whether participants have gained new competencies from taking part in the project, you might find it helpful to learn about how other citizen science projects have monitored this impact. Wehn et al. carried out an in-depth study looking at three competencies (working together, creativity, internet savviness) as part of the Ground Truth 2.0 project. You can read a summary of the methods they used here: https://about.mics.tools/capacities-skills-and-competences. |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Do individuals gain new knowledge, skills and competences? Wehn et al. 2017: There are specific skills and competences that a community needs to participate in planning, decision making and governance processes. Longstaff (2005) argued that the capacity to acquire trusted and accurate information, to reflect on that information critically and to solve emerging problems is far more important for community resilience than is a detailed plan that rarely foresees all. Working together, creativity and flexibility, ability to learn, internet savviness. |
|
48 (148) |
Is specific equipment or infrastructure required for participants to be able to contribute to project activities?
|
Wehn et al. 2017: Equipment required for participation, Infrastructure required for participation |
|
|
49 (149) |
Are specific knowledge and skills required for individuals to participate in the project activities? For example, do participants need to be trained before they can take part?
|
Wehn et al. 2017: Knowledge required for participation, Skills required for participation |
|
|
50 (150) |
Are support and training adapted to all relevant participant groups (e.g. participants' age or language)?
|
Help: "All relevant participant groups" refers to those people who could reasonably be expected to have an interest in participating in the project; we don't expect projects to translate all their resources into Portuguese if the project only runs in Sweden. |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Are support and training measures adapted to the different participant groups? Chase and Levine 2016: Ease of training or learning for monitoring DITOs consortium 2016: The percentage of activities purposefully modified to address issues of social justice and inclusion: e.g. translated methodologies and techniques, linked to the needs of a specific community, etc. |
|
51 (151) |
Has consideration been given to enable citizen participants to participate in the project given other demands and responsibilities?
|
Help: This question refers to any consideration the project has made that allows participants to be involved in the project without a negative impact on their everyday lives. This may include running sessions both inside and outside of working hours (for participants who are involved in the project as part of their jobs and for those who are involved in a voluntary capacity), recording sessions to allow for viewing flexibility or allowing for data collection to occur at any time of day. |
Haywood and Besley 2014: Has adequate consideration been provided to allow citizen participants time and space to participate in the research given other demands and responsibilities? DITOs consortium 2016: The percentage of activities purposefully delivered in accessible locations: e.g. at community centres. The percentage of activities purposefully modified to address issues of social justice and inclusion: e.g. translated methodologies and techniques, linked to the needs of a specific community, etc. Considerations/strategies of ethical issues and values in the design, development and implementation of activities: This includes... suitable event times and locations (provisions such as day care or meals). |
|
52 (152) |
Has the project been designed to give access, where possible, to all participants, including those with "functional diversity"?
|
Help: Functional diversity is a politically and socially correct term for special needs, disability, impairment and handicap, which began to be used in Spain in scientific writing, at the initiative of those directly affected, in 2005 [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_diversity_(disability)]. It is unlikely that a project can be made accessible to all potential participants. For example, it may not be possible to adapt projects which rely on participants recording observations to be accessible to individuals with visual impairments. |
SDG 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status Butterfoss 2006: diversity of participants/organizations DITOs consortium 2016: Strategies for addressing access issues from disadvantaged social groups: Number and type of strategies for e.g. the disabled. The percentage of activities purposefully delivered in accessible locations: e.g. at community centres. |
|
53 (153) |
Which age groups are the participants in the project?
|
SDG 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status Butterfoss 2006: diversity of participants/organizations DITOs consortium 2016: DITOs: Strategies for addressing access issues from disadvantaged social groups: Number and type of strategies for e.g. elderly people. Wehn et al. 2017: Demographic characteristics of the population |
|
|
54 (154) |
Does the project explicitly promote diversity and inclusion among all relevant participant groups?
|
Help: A diverse group could include people from ethnic minorities, or people who are non-binary. |
SDG 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status Haywood and Besley 2014: How are citizen participants initially recruited and are diverse constituent groups targeted? DITOs consortium 2016: Strategies for addressing access issues from disadvantaged social groups: Number and type of strategies for e.g. the disabled, illiterate people, migrants, elderly people, single parents, etc. The percentage of activities purposefully delivered in accessible locations: e.g. at community centres. The percentage of activities purposefully modified to address issues of social justice and inclusion: e.g. translated methodologies and techniques, linked to the needs of a specific community, etc. The percentage of participants attending events from disadvantaged groups: This includes inquiring how these participants found out about the event. |
|
55 (155) |
Does the project involve a socio-economically diverse pool of participants?
|
Help: Socioeconomic status is the social standing or class of an individual or group. It is often measured as a combination of education, income and occupation. |
Palmer et al. 2017: Citizen science often struggles to attract a socio-economically diverse pool of participants, and that challenge is clearly vital to ensuring not only the equitable distribution of benefits stemming from participation, but also sound scientific outcomes. Butterfoss 2006: diversity of participants/organizations, |
|
56 (156) |
Does the project actively engage participants from disadvantaged or historically marginalised backgrounds?
|
SDG 1.4: By 2030, ensure that all men and women, in particular the poor and the vulnerable, have equal rights to economic resources, as well as access to basic services, ownership and control over land and other forms of property, inheritance, natural resources, appropriate new technology and financial services, including microfinance Pocock et al. 2019: Widens participation to all stakeholders (not just elites) DITOs consortium 2016: Strategies for addressing access issues from disadvantaged social groups: Number and type of strategies for e.g. the disabled, illiterate people, migrants, elderly people, single parents, etc. The percentage of participants attending events from disadvantaged groups: This includes inquiring how these participants found out about the event. |
|
|
57 (157) |
Does the project make sure that minorities and those who usually have less power are among those who are able to influence the project?
|
Information: Whether the scientific questions to be addressed by a citizen science project come from citizens themselves or civic educators - including scientists, professional researchers, and their institutions - needs to be interrogated. Is it reasonable to expect communities to ask the questions? Is it overambitious to assume that they can? Does suggesting that they cannot indicate a level of institutional and structural racism? Empowering people includes enabling them to drive citizen-science projects. (Ceccaroni et al., 2021) |
Ceccaroni et al. 2021: "How can we make sure that those with less power, women, and minorities are among those who are asking the questions? Is the science being conducted by a diverse group of people? Is it being analysed by a diverse group of people, using technology that does not discriminate?" "First, who asks the questions? Whether the scientific questions to be addressed by a citizen science project come from citizens themselves or civic educators (including scientists, professional researchers, and their institutions) needs to be interrogated. Is it reasonable to expect communities to initiate and drive a socio-environmental justice movement? Is it overambitious to assume that they can? Does suggesting that they cannot indicate a level of institutional and structural racism? Empowering people includes enabling them to initiate citizen science projects" |
|
58 (158) |
Does the project incorporate traditional or local knowledge?
|
Help: Traditional knowledge and local knowledge generally refer to knowledge systems embedded in the cultural traditions of regional, indigenous, or local communities. These kinds of knowledge are generally based on accumulations of empirical observation and on interaction with the environment. |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the project ease the access to traditional and local knowledge resources? Pocock et al. 2019: Widening perspectives through better integration of indigenous knowledge and reflections from participants |
|
59 (159) |
Does the project explicitly contribute to gender equality?
|
SDG Goal 5. Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls DITOs consortium 2016: % of women attending events; % of women in Advisory Boards; % of women facilitators & collaborators; % of women initiating/leading citizen initiatives; % of women sharing feedback. |
|
|
60 (160) |
What proportion of participants are cisgender men?
|
Help: Cisgender (sometimes shortened to cis) describes a person whose gender identity matches their sex assigned at birth. |
DITOs consortium 2016: % of women attending events; % of women sharing feedback. |
|
61 (161) |
Are there relevant stakeholders which the project was not able to engage?
|
Wehn et al. 2017: Composition of stakeholders involved in decision making process in focus of the Demo Case. Skarlatidou et al. 2019: Our workshop identified certain stakeholder groups that tended to be neglected in our three cases studies. For instance, funders are of the utmost importance, but they are often missing as a stakeholder group in the studied CS initiatives. Funders need to be identified early, approached regularly, and project results disseminated to them to increase future funding. Policy-makers were also found to be often neglected and need to be more actively engaged: Their support is crucial to increase the appreciation of the benefits of CS and evidence-based policymaking. |
|
|
62 (162) |
Does the project include objectives to protect or enhance cultural heritage components?
|
Chandler et al. 2017: Enhancing natural and socio-cultural capital to create a sustainable environment. Cultural heritage components enhanced. SDG: 11.4 Strengthen efforts to protect and safeguard the world’s cultural and natural heritage |
|
|
63 (163) |
Does the project help to strengthen adaptive capacity to respond to natural disasters or other hazards?
|
SDG 13.1: Strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards and natural disasters in all countries |
|
|
64 (164) |
Does the project contribute to social innovation?
|
Help: Social innovation is the process of developing and deploying effective solutions to challenging and often systemic social and environmental issues in support of social progress. These solutions often require the active collaboration of constituents across government, business, and the non-profit world. |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the project contribute to social innovation? |
|
65 (165) |
Does the project foster resilience (potentially by fostering learning and adaptation which then leads to resilience)?
|
Help: This is often done by fostering one of the following: (1) the will and intention to maintain social-ecological resilience (2) knowledge about the problem and the desired direction of change (3) proactive behaviour (4) the capacity to change existing patterns of behaviour.
Information: In order to measure resilience, it is first helpful to consider its definition. A helpful reference in this respect is the paper by Fazey et al. titled “Adaptive capacity and learning to learn as leverage for social–ecological resilience”. |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the project foster resilience and collective capacity for learning and adaptation? Fazey et al. 2007: Four main requirements enable societies to successfully adapt to change: (1) the will and intention to maintain social–ecological resilience, (2) knowledge about current problems and the desired direction of change, (3) proactive behavior, and (4) the capacity to change existing patterns of behavior. Haywood and Besley 2014: Does the project enhance the resiliency or adaptive capacity of socio-ecological systems? Are residents better prepared to face future challenges? SDG 1.5: By 2030, build the resilience of the poor and those in vulnerable situations and reduce their exposure and vulnerability to climate-related extreme events and other economic, social and environmental shocks and disasters. SDG 13.1 Strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards and natural disasters in all countries. |
|
66 (166) |
Does the project foster social capital?
|
Help: Social capital is the networks of relationships among people that enable society to function effectively. Information: Social capital can be a difficult concept to measure. It can be helpful to focus on particular elements of social capital which together can be considered indicative of an overall impact. For example, as part of the evaluation of the GROW observatory several questions were asked related to social capital: How has participating in the project enhanced your community? To what extent has this project strengthen the communication and networks in your community? You can read more about this study by Woods et al. in their co-evaluation tool. |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the project foster social capital? Woods et al. 2020: How has participating in the project enhanced your community? To what extent has this project strengthen the communication and networks in your community? |
|
67 (167) |
Does the project lead to an increased level of trust among participants and other stakeholders?
|
Information: As part of the Ground Truth 2.0 project, Wehn et al. investigated several aspects of trust within both neighbourhoods and online communities. You can read a summary of the methods used on about.mics.tools as well as links to a full description of the questions used in interviews. |
Haywood and Besley 2014: Does engagement in the project influence the level of trust, confidence, or respect among citizen participants and project leaders? Pocock et al. 2019: Greater ownership through involvement at every stage, including motivations for monitoring and action, increased trust, tolerance and attitudes to nature Wehn et al. 2017: Trust and belonging (neighbourhood) Trust and belonging are important indicators of how much people care about their mutual environment. It is linked to the likelihood with which they will participate in decision making if it concerns their neighbourhood. Trust and belonging is measured with the presence of mutual concerns and shared values amongst neighbours and an emotional connection to the neighbourhood or city. Fazey et al. 2014: Shared understanding; consensus on the topic; fishing agreement in place; less intervillage conflict; communication and collaboration is increased; trust has increased between partners |
Governance
|
# |
Question text and answer options |
Help and information |
Source of question and original wording |
|
1 (201) |
How is the project managed?
|
Information: The answers to this question are triggers for the logic in the platform. Answering "The project is run by a single organisation" to this question will block Question 03 in the governance domain "What types of organisations are partners in running the project?". Answering "The project is run by a group of organisations who lead equally" to this question will block Question 02 in the governance domain "What type of organisation leads the project?". |
ECSA Characteristics: Individual project, community-led project and researcher-led project. Citizen science projects can be led by researchers or scientists, or can be led collaboratively by a community to address a particular issue. Projects can also be run by an individual, who will carry out the whole project alone. All are potentially consistent with citizen science, and the decision on each project can be made by examining its context and practices. |
|
2 (202) |
What type of organisation leads the project?
|
ECSA Characteristics: Research-performing organisations, public bodies and institutions, non-governmental organisations. Citizen science initiatives can be supported and run by different types of organisations. While commercial activities need special attention, activities that are run by public bodies (e.g. environmental monitoring) and non-governmental organisations (e.g. health charities) could be part of citizen science, and it is not mandatory to include professional scientists or research-performing organisations. Chandler et al. 2017: PI affiliation: University, NGO, University and NGO, Governemnt agency. |
|
|
3 (203) |
What types of organisations are partners in running the project?
|
Help: Organisations which are partners in running the project will likely have made a formal commitment to running the project (for example, signing a consortium agreement) and may have received funding if the project was funded by a grant. |
ECSA Characteristics: Research-performing organisations, public bodies and institutions, non-governmental organisations. Citizen science initiatives can be supported and run by different types of organisations. While commercial activities need special attention, activities that are run by public bodies (e.g. environmental monitoring) and non-governmental organisations (e.g. health charities) could be part of citizen science, and it is not mandatory to include professional scientists or research-performing organisations. Chandler et al. 2017: Partnerships: organizations actively engaged |
|
4 (204) |
What types of organisations are involved with the project (but don't help to manage the project)?
|
Help: There are many ways organisations could be involved with a citizen-science project without directly helping to manage the project. For example, representatives from the organisation could attend project events or the organisation may have expressed an interest in using the results of the project. |
ECSA Characteristics: Research-performing organisations, public bodies and institutions, non-governmental organisations. Citizen science initiatives can be supported and run by different types of organisations. While commercial activities need special attention, activities that are run by public bodies (e.g. environmental monitoring) and non-governmental organisations (e.g. health charities) could be part of citizen science, and it is not mandatory to include professional scientists or research-performing organisations. Wehn et al. 2017: Composition of stakeholders involved in decision making process in focus of initiative Chandler et al. 2017: Partnerships: organizations actively engaged |
|
5 (205) |
Does the project have explicit links with public authorities?
|
Help: There are many ways in which a project could have explicit links with public authorities. For example, having them as partners of the consortium managing the project, as part of the advisory board, or as regular attendants of project events. |
Ferri et al. 2020: Citizen observatories (COs) are a particular form of citizen science in so far as they constitute the means not just for new knowledge creation but also for its application, which is why they are typically set up with linkages to specific policy domains (Wehn et al., 2019). COs must, therefore, include a public authority (e.g. a local, regional or national body) to enable two-way communication between citizens and the authorities to create a new source of high-quality, authoritative data for decision-making and for the benefit of society. |
|
6 (206) |
Does the project explicitly foster new relationships among different stakeholders (not including those between citizens and scientists; so, for example, between public bodies and commercial organisations)?
|
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Scientific impact: New knowledge resources "Does the project foster new collaborations amongst societal actors and groups?" Haywood and Besley, 2014: Do new networks, connections, or collaborative efforts result from the project or interactions among project participants or are existing connections strengthened? |
|
|
7 (207) |
Does the project collaborate with other initiatives to enhance mutual learning?
|
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Collaboration and synergies "Does the project collaborate with other initiatives at national or international level to enhance mutual learning and adaptation?" |
|
|
8 (208) |
Which resources does the project directly share with other initiatives?
|
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Scientific impact: New fields of research and research structures "Did any cross-fertilization of projects take place?" |
|
|
9 (209) |
Among which of the following dimensions does the project create institutional change (within the organisations associated with the project)?
|
Help: This question refers to the "institutional changes" a project contributes to; which EU funded projects are required to consider. The institutional change is usually measured along the following six dimensions: 1. Open access/data 2. Ethics 3. Gender equality 4. Public engagement 5. Science education 6. Responsible research and innovation This question asks not just what dimensions the project works on, but whether the project has led to a change in the organisations associated with the project. |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Scientific impact: New fields of research and research structures "Did the project contribute to any institutional or structural changes?" DITOs consortium 2016: Capacity building initiatives at the organisational level [for public engagement]: How do facilitators prepare for their science activities (what training, sources, guidance do they use); how are they supported (infrastructurally (on and off-line), in terms of content and resources, etc.); what learning plans are in place (e.g. scientific procedures, philosophical orientations, technical issues, learning methodologies, etc.). |
|
10 (210) |
Are the outputs generated by the project open access?
|
Help: Outputs are any direct result of the project's activities. They include data collected, and technology developed (and the data collected by that technology) during the project. Information: The answers to this question are triggers for the logic in the platform. Answering "No" to this question will block Question 11 in the governance domain "How can the outputs generated by the project be used by external parties?". |
SDG 16.10 "Ensure public access to information and protect fundamental freedoms, in accordance with national legislation and international agreements" Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the project have open interfaces to connect to other systems and platforms?; Is the generated data shared publicly and if so, under which conditions? |
|
11 (211) |
How can the outputs generated by the project be used by external parties?
|
SDG 16.10 "Ensure public access to information and protect fundamental freedoms, in accordance with national legislation and international agreements" Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the project have open interfaces to connect to other systems and platforms?; Is the generated data shared publicly and if so, under which conditions? |
|
|
12 (212) |
Does the project have a data management plan?
|
Help: A data management plan describes the data management life cycle for the data to be collected, processed and/or generated. |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the project have a data management plan, IPR strategy and ethical guidelines? |
|
13 (213) |
The following four questions focus on the 'FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship'. They focus on the data generated by the project, rather than on other outputs. Are the data generated by the project findable?
|
Help: To be findable, data are assigned a globally unique and persistent identifier and are registered or indexed in a searchable resource. Information: The FAIR Guiding Principles aim to encourage good data management with the end goal of increasing the ease of finding and sharing data, particularly in the case of machine-automated data retrieval. It is based around four principles (Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reusability), which are fully defined in the following questions, and apply to data, algorithms, tools and workflows. It is important that datasets can be easily found, accessed (while protecting privacy where applicable) and reused in future projects to aid research and development. The guidelines can be applied to different degrees to suit the characteristics of the data. More information about the FAIR guidelines can be found in this paper: "The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship". |
Wilkinson et al. 2016: [the FAIR guiding principles] ECSA Characteristics: Data ownership and use. Citizen science is commonly perceived and placed within the open science domain, such as by complying with open data-sharing, open access publications, and full transparency of data ownership. There may, however, be cases in which data use is limited to certain stakeholder groups, the outcomes are not made public, or the publications generated are not open access, particularly with regards to privacy concerns. It is preferable for participants to own the data they generate, and they should be made fully aware of why, when and how it is used by others. |
|
14 (214) |
Are the data generated by the project accessible?
|
Help: To be accessible, data are retrievable by their identifier using a standardized communications protocol. The protocol is open, free, and universally implementable. |
Wilkinson et al. 2016: [the FAIR guiding principles] ECSA Characteristics: Data ownership and use. Citizen science is commonly perceived and placed within the open science domain, such as by complying with open data-sharing, open access publications, and full transparency of data ownership. There may, however, be cases in which data use is limited to certain stakeholder groups, the outcomes are not made public, or the publications generated are not open access, particularly with regards to privacy concerns. It is preferable for participants to own the data they generate, and they should be made fully aware of why, when and how it is used by others. Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the data adhere to common standards? |
|
15 (215) |
Are the data generated by the project interoperable?
|
Help: To be interoperable, data use a formal, accessible, shared, and broadly applicable language for knowledge representation. An example would be a resource that is available in a standardised format, clearly labelled, and with relationships between categories shown. |
Wilkinson et al. 2016: [the FAIR guiding principles] ECSA Characteristics: Data ownership and use. Citizen science is commonly perceived and placed within the open science domain, such as by complying with open data-sharing, open access publications, and full transparency of data ownership. There may, however, be cases in which data use is limited to certain stakeholder groups, the outcomes are not made public, or the publications generated are not open access, particularly with regards to privacy concerns. It is preferable for participants to own the data they generate, and they should be made fully aware of why, when and how it is used by others. Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the data adhere to common standards? |
|
16 (216) |
Are the data generated by the project reusable?
|
Help: To be reusable, data are released with a clear and accessible data usage license and meet domain-relevant community standards. |
Wilkinson et al. 2016: [the FAIR guiding principles] ECSA Characteristics: Data ownership and use. Citizen science is commonly perceived and placed within the open science domain, such as by complying with open data-sharing, open access publications, and full transparency of data ownership. There may, however, be cases in which data use is limited to certain stakeholder groups, the outcomes are not made public, or the publications generated are not open access, particularly with regards to privacy concerns. It is preferable for participants to own the data they generate, and they should be made fully aware of why, when and how it is used by others. Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the data adhere to common standards? |
|
17 (217) |
Whilst the FAIR Guiding Principles are highly specific in their definition, there are other ways to consider the project's data. For example... Are data access rights clear and transparent?
|
Help: Making data access rights clear and transparent doesn't necessarily mean that all data has to be fully open access. However, it does mean that it should be obvious what data is accessible to who. |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Are data ownership and access rights clear and transparent? |
|
18 (218) |
Do other stakeholders have more access to project data than participants (for example, access to raw data)?
|
Wehn et al. 2017: Access restrictions to the data for different stakeholder groups |
|
|
19 (219) |
Are participants informed about where the data collected by the project are stored?
|
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Data and Systems: Ethics, data protection, IPR "Is the data handling process transparent? E.g. do citizens know what the data is used for, where the data is stored and shared?" Wehn et al. 2017: Access restrictions to the data for different stakeholder groups |
|
|
20 (220) |
Are participants informed about how the data collected and analysed by the project are used?
|
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Data and Systems: Ethics, data protection, IPR "Is the data handling process transparent? E.g. do citizens know what the data is used for, where the data is stored and shared?" |
|
|
21 (221) |
Are participants informed about whether the data collected by the project are shared?
|
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Data and Systems: Ethics, data protection, IPR "Is the data handling process transparent? E.g. do citizens know what the data is used for, where the data is stored and shared?" |
|
|
22 (222) |
Does the project explicitly state which procedures it follows to ensure all data are collected and processed lawfully?
|
Help: "All data" here refers to any data collected by the project, not just personal data about participants. |
ECSA Characteristics: "This statement is also linked to the ‘Ethics’ statement above, and attention should be paid to local ethics practices and guidance on personal and medical data" Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the project have a data management plan, IPR strategy and ethical guidelines? |
|
23 (223) |
Does the project involve the collection of personal data of the participants?
|
Help: Personal data is any information that relates to an identified, or identifiable, living individual. |
ECSA Characteristics: Sharing personal and medical data. In the medical and the social sciences, the boundaries of citizen science and data-collection practices can be challenging. Sharing personal and medical data can be part of citizen science, but this depends on the framing and intention of the project, and on a consideration of whether those taking part are subjects of research or participants who are shaping and carrying out different stages of the project. The inclusion of practices that are in line with the 10 principles can assist in establishing this. |
|
24 (224) |
Do participants have to explicitly give consent (for example, signing a consent form) to take part in the project?
|
ECSA Characteristics: The aim here is to re-emphasise the need for ethical practices, and with a linkage to the previous statements in this section. The need for communication of ethical standards “clearly and openly” is noted as explicit consent from participants. |
|
|
25 (225) |
Does the project have a code of ethics?
|
Information: The answers to this question are triggers for the logic in the platform. Answering "No" to this question will block Question 26 in the governance domain "Is the code of ethics made available to participants?". |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the project have a data management plan, IPR strategy and ethical guidelines? DITOs consortium 2016: Considerations/strategies of ethical issues and values in the design, development and implementation of activities: |
|
26 (226) |
Is the code of ethics made available to participants?
|
Bowser et al. 2017: Some research suggests that incomplete or poorly articulated data policies prevent volunteers from understanding how information is collected and shared. Volunteers become aware of privacy concerns in a number of ways. Ideally, information on key facets of participation— particularly the types of data collected, and relevant information flows—is posted to a project’s website. But data policies are often opaque, or insufficiently documented. Bowser and Wiggins 2015: To effectively support agency, all policies should be hosted on clearly labeled pages and explained at in-person recruitment and training events. |
|
|
27 (227) |
Does the project include opportunities for project leaders and participants to discuss the ethical and political dimensions of the science involved?
|
Haywood and Besley 2014: Table 1: Science in Society Bell et al., 2009; Biegelbauer and Hansen, 2011; Blackstock et al., 2007; Bonney et al., 2009a; McCallie et al., 2009 "Degree to which participants are able to situate science concepts, theories, phenomena, and skills within broader social processes (includes analysis of the ethics and political aspects of science)" / "For Citizen Scientists: Are participants asked to consider the “big picture” implications of the research project and encouraged to discuss the political and ethical dimensions of the project or potential impacts that might emerge from the research?" / "For Professional Scientists/Staff: Are project leaders exposed to new ways of thinking about science in society? Are they willing to engage in conversation or debate about the ethical and political dimensions of the research project?" Lucero et al. 2018: Our partnership reflects on issues of power and privilege within our partnership [7 point scale: completely disagree - completely agree] DITOs consortium 2016: Considerations/strategies of ethical issues and values in the design, development and implementation of activities: This includes... issues/topic discussed (are there multiple interpretations/perspectives, are these contentious (and how is it moderated), are there resolutions/follow ups?). |
|
|
28 (228) |
Does the project have explicit health and safety procedures in place?
|
SDG 8.8 Protect labour rights and promote safe and secure working environments for all workers, including migrant workers, in particular women migrants, and those in precarious employment |
|
|
29 (229) |
Does the project have a risk management plan?
|
Help: Risk in the context of project management rather than risk to the participants. |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the project have an appropriate risk management plan? |
|
30 (230) |
Have the organisations involved in the project increased their commitment to, or investment in, citizen science as a result of being involved in the project?
|
Wehn et al. 2017: How much has your organization invested in CO-related activities in [year]? |
|
|
31 (231) |
Does the project lead to an increase in the commitment of organizations to public participation in decision making?
|
SDG: 16.7 Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels DITOs consortium 2016: Commitments by institutions and organisations to public engagement: These may be embedded in organisational' structure (e.g. mission statements and goals or their types of projects/programmes they hold or plan). This indicator also includes the type as well as the number of commitments and its source (e.g. linked to funding commitments, political environment, social pressures, etc.). |
|
|
32 (232) |
Does the project help organisations to increase their capacity for public participation in decision making?
|
Help: For example, the project could provide training or resources to help give organisations concrete suggestions of how to include members of the public in their decision making processes. |
SDG 16.7 Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels |
|
33 (233) |
Are participants more actively involved in political processes as a result of taking part in the project?
|
Information: Woods et al. 2020 attempted to monitor participants’ political participation as part of their co-evaluation tool. For example, they asked participants the following questions: Have you had any interactions with policy makers? e.g. visits from policy makers, writing a letter to your local council. Have you identified local policy problems the sensor data can help solve? |
Haywood and Besley 2014: Do participants and project leaders exhibit changes in behaviors towards community action, political processes, or advocacy? Woods et al. 2020: Have you had any interactions with policy makers? e.g. visits from policy makers, writing a letter to your local council. Have you identified local policy problems the sensor data can help solve? Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the project stimulate political participation? |
|
34 (234) |
Have the project's results or findings supported authorities in enforcing existing regulations, laws, or policies?
|
Help: Authorities could include Environmental Protection Agencies, Ministries for Health and the Environment, or other sectorial authorities that have the task to oversee compliance with existing laws. More resources on the topic can be found at https://sensingforjustice.webnode.it/. |
ECSA Characteristics: "Links to decision-making. Citizen science projects may include an intervention into the current state of affairs, such as local decision making. This might happen in activities that fall under banners such as participatory action research, community science, or addressing environmental injustice.” Haywood and Besley, 2014: How successful is the project at influencing relevant policies or management practices? Are project results utilized for these purposes and if so, in what ways? |
|
35 (244) |
Have the project's results or findings been used as evidence in court (for example, for demonstrating environmental harm)?
|
Help: Results and findings could include: raw data, visual and audio materials, analyses, maps built by the project but also testimonies of the citizen scientists engaged in the project. For an example of a case where citizen science evidence were used in court to demonstrate an environmental harm, see https://cstrack.eu/format/reports/the-formosa-case-a-step-forward-on-the-acceptance-of-citizen-collected-evidence-in-environmental-litigation/. |
Suman and Schade 2021: In June 2019, a landmark court decision (San Antonio Bay Estuarine Waterkeeper, et al. v. Formosa Plastics Corporation, et al., hereafter referred to as the Formosa ruling) was issued in Texas, where a judge found a petrochemical company liable for violating the United States Clean Water Act. The case—initiated by a civic group—was mostly built on citizen-collected evidence involving volunteer observations of plastic pellets, powder and flakes in the water over a considerable time span. The contamination could not be proven through existing data held by competent authorities because the company never filed any record of pollution (Formosa ruling, XI.A, p. 17).1 In contrast to the majority of environmental pollution cases to date, the monitoring and data collection for this case was conducted by local residents who gathered a wealth of evidence of plastic pollution in water. Through a traditional case law and text analysis of the Formosa ruling, complemented by the analysis of surrounding communications, we explore why and how citizen-collected evidence was admitted and influenced the judge’s ruling. |
|
36 (235) |
Which policy frameworks does the project consider?
|
Help: A policy framework is a document that sets out procedures or goals used to guide the creation or ongoing maintenance of an organisation's policies. An explanation of the different scales of policy frameworks is outlined below: · Organisational frameworks occur within an organisation such as Goldman Sachs Environmental Policy Framework · Local frameworks occur within a county/municipality · Regional frameworks influence policy over multiple counties/municipalities · National frameworks such as the U.K. Environment Agency framework, are significant for a country · Global frameworks have influence throughout the world, such as UNEP Environmental, social and sustainability framework |
Wehn et al. 2017: National or sub-national policy related to the environmental problem in focus |
|
37 (236) |
Does the project explicitly inform any governmental policy process?
|
ECSA Characteristics: "Links to decision-making. Citizen science projects may include an intervention into the current state of affairs, such as local decision making. This might happen in activities that fall under banners such as participatory action research, community science, or addressing environmental injustice.” Kieslinger et al. 2017: Political participation "Does the project have any impact on political decisions?" Haywood and Besley, 2014: How successful is the project at influencing relevant policies or management practices? Are project results utilized for these purposes and if so, in what ways? Woods et al. 2016: Efforts by local government to reduce its effect on the environment (e.g., mandated use of low-emissions vehicles on government business, low-emissions or electric vehicles used for public transportation and garbage pickup) |
|
|
38 (237) |
Does the project have any explicit impact on external organisational policy?
|
Help: For example, Outfall Safari, a project monitoring urban water quality, has caused a change in the policies of Thames Water, the local water company. |
ECSA Characteristics: "Links to decision-making. Citizen science projects may include an intervention into the current state of affairs, such as local decision making. This might happen in activities that fall under banners such as participatory action research, community science, or addressing environmental injustice.” Haywood and Besley, 2014: How successful is the project at influencing relevant policies or management practices? Are project results utilized for these purposes and if so, in what ways? Wiggins et al. 2018: Existence of decisions based on project data and findings (e.g., for policy or management) Chandler et al. 2017: Informing environmental policies, agendas, management plans and government policies. Contributions to conventions, agendas, policies, and management plans |
|
39 (238) |
Is the project team aware of what the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are?
|
Help: In 2015, the UN met and decied on the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) with a total of 169 targets. The SDGs aim to end poverty and hunger, encourage peace, protect the planet and foster partnerships. Projects may be related to the SDGs by investigating a specific indicator for an SDG and reporting on this, or by considering the SDGs in the planning stage. More information about the aims of the SDGs can be found at https://sdgs.un.org/ and a full list of the SDGs at https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/indicators/indicators-list/ And now you've read this help text, you can tick yes to answer the question. Information: The answers to this question are triggers for the logic in the platform. Answering "No" to this question will block four questions in the governance domain: Question 40 "Is the project at all related to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)?"; Question 41 "Which of the following Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is the project related to?"; Question 42 "Does the project involve data which match a specific indicator of a Sustainable Development Goal (SDG)?"; and Question 43 "Does the project contribute data to the official reporting for a Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) indicator?". |
Fritz et al. 2019: Here we argue that data produced through ‘citizen science’, which is the involvement of citizens in scientific research and/or knowledge production, can complement and ultimately improve the SDG reporting process |
|
40 (239) |
Is the project at all related to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)?
|
Information: The answers to this question are triggers for the logic in the platform. Answering "No" to this question will block three questions in the governance domain: Question 41 "Which of the following Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is the project related to?"; Question 42 "Does the project involve data which match a specific indicator of a Sustainable Development Goal (SDG)?"; and Question 43 "Does the project contribute data to the official reporting for a Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) indicator?". |
Fritz et al. 2019: Here we argue that data produced through ‘citizen science’, which is the involvement of citizens in scientific research and/or knowledge production, can complement and ultimately improve the SDG reporting process |
|
41 (240) |
Which of the following Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is the project related to?
|
|
Fritz et al. 2019: Here we argue that data produced through ‘citizen science’, which is the involvement of citizens in scientific research and/or knowledge production, can complement and ultimately improve the SDG reporting process |
|
42 (241) |
Does the project involve data which match a specific indicator of a Sustainable Development Goal (SDG)?
|
Information: The answers to this question are triggers for the logic in the platform. Answering "No" to this question will block Question 43 in the governance domain "Does the project contribute data to the official reporting for a Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) indicator?". |
Fritz et al. 2019: Here we argue that data produced through ‘citizen science’, which is the involvement of citizens in scientific research and/or knowledge production, can complement and ultimately improve the SDG reporting process |
|
43 (243) |
Does the project contribute data to the official reporting for a Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) indicator?
|
SDG 17.18.1 "Proportion of sustainable development indicators produced at the national level with full disaggregation when relevant to the target, in accordance with the Fundamental Principles of Official Statistics" |
Economy
|
# |
Question text and answer options |
Help and information |
Source of question and original wording |
|
1 (301) |
How has the project been funded?
|
Help: Not sure about the difference between microfunding and crowdfunding? There is a general connection between all forms of alternative funding: they all provide access to capital for a segment of the population that cannot access it through traditional means. However, there are significant differences between micro funding and crowdfunding. Micro funding includes microfinance and social (peer-to-peer) lending, and is not commonly used in citizen science. Microfinance provides loans and other basic financial services to the poor. Social lending gives ordinary people the ability to lend around the world. Crowdfunding is the practice of funding a project or venture by raising money from a large number of people, typically via the Internet. |
Bonney et al. 2009: # of grants received Wiggins et al. 2018: Existence (or total monetary value) of competitive funding awards from private or public funders Wehn et al. 2017: revenue stream Chandler et al. 2017: Funding source: Public, Philanthropic, Combination |
|
2 (302) |
Did the project generate related new projects?
|
Help: For example, a related new project might include the project's methods being applied in other locations or a new iteration of the project's methods or technology. "Not yet, but it might one day?" Don't worry, you can always come back and update your answers on the MICS platform when it does. Information: The answers to this question are triggers for the logic in the platform. Answering "It's in progress (for example, a project proposal has been written" or "No" to this question will block Question 03 in the economy domain "In total, how much external funding has been received for these new projects? (in €, £ GBP, or $ USD)". |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Did the project generate new research questions, new projects or proposals? Wehn et al. 2017: How many CO-related research projects is your organization currently involved? |
|
3 (303) |
In total, how much external funding has been received for these new projects? (in €, £ GBP, or $ USD)
|
Help: External funding is money that comes from outside the organisation(s) managing the project. In this question, we use €, £ GBP, or $ USD interchangeably because the answers are given as orders of magnitude which make the difference in the exchange rate between the three currencies largely irrelevant. Here's a currency converter in case it's helpful: https://www1.oanda.com/currency/converter/ |
Wehn et al. 2017: In total, what is your organization's budget (income & own investment) in these CO-related research projects? |
|
4 (304) |
Does the project create any competitive advantage for the organisations involved with the project?
|
Help: Here "competitive advantage" refers to factors that allow an organisation to produce outputs or services better or more cheaply than its rivals. For example, incorporating citizen science might provide a competitive advantage for the ecotourism providers in the tourism market; healthcare data might provide a competitive advantage for pharmaceutical companies. |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the project include any competitive advantage? Wehn et al. 2017: What value proposition(s) related to COs and enabling technologies does your organization have? How many different revenue streams does your organization have for CO-related value propositions? |
|
5 (305) |
Does the project generate new jobs among the organisations running the project?
|
Help: Some projects are run by paid staff at organisations. Growth of these projects can therefore create new jobs. However, some citizen science projects are run entirely by volunteers without any jobs related to the project. These types of project are sometimes referred to as collegial projects (as explained in this model of participation by Shirk et al). |
Wehn et al. 2017: How many jobs are currently directly related to [CO topic] and enabling technologies? What is the nature of these jobs? (junior, medior, senior position(s)) [nominal] |
|
6 (306) |
Does the project involve commercial activities related to industry or academia?
|
Information: While a level of scepticism exists towards business involvement in citizen science, some observe that the sector has made positive and impactful contributions towards advancing the tools and application of citizen science as well as in providing participants through campaigns that engage employees. |
ECSA Characteristics: Commercial activities. If a direct commercial benefit is the main aim of an activity, and results from the use of data, for example via paid data services for the sole personal benefit of the person who shares the data and further commercial use beyond services for the data provider, it is generally not considered as citizen science. This also applies if motives for activities are perceived solely to support a marketing or business strategy, rather than supporting a unique research goal and a justified involvement of citizens. However, commercial activities that are in line with the 10 principles and are transparent could still be considered as citizen science. |
|
7 (307) |
Does the project explicitly promote the formation and growth of micro-, small- or medium-sized enterprises / businesses?
|
Help: Ways in which a project could promote the formation and growth of small- and medium-sized enterprsies (SMEs) include new start-ups forming based on technology developed by the project; or growth of a business due to the project creating increased awareness in the business's target market. |
SDG 8.3 Promote development-oriented policies that support productive activities, decent job creation, entrepreneurship, creativity and innovation, and encourage the formalization and growth of micro-, small- and medium-sized enterprises, including through access to financial services Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the project generate any economic impact, e.g. cost reduction, new job creation, new business model, etc.? Wehn et al. 2017: How many jobs are currently directly related to [CO topic] and enabling technologies? What is the nature of these jobs? (junior, medior, senior position(s)) [nominal] |
|
8 (308) |
Does the project generate new jobs in organisations external to those running the project?
|
Wehn et al. 2017: How many jobs are currently directly related to [CO topic]? What is the nature of these jobs? (junior, medior, senior position(s)) Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the project generate any economic impact, e.g. cost reduction, new job creation, new business model, etc.? |
|
|
9 (309) |
Does the project increase demand for the sustainable services of any organisation, internal or external to the project (for example, by promoting sustainable tourism or by promoting clean energy)?
|
Information: The platform doesn't assign a positive economic impact to unsustainable services given the externalities associated with them. |
SDG 8.9 By 2030, devise and implement policies to promote sustainable tourism that creates jobs and promotes local culture and products |
|
10 (310) |
Does the project have a positive impact on the livelihoods of participants?
|
Pocock et al. 2019: Improved wellbeing and livelihoods through connection to (and consequent ownership of) nature and sense of belonging Chandler et al. 2017: Enhancing natural and socio-cultural capital to create a sustainable environment. Livelihood assets enhanced. SDG 8.5 By 2030, achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all women and men, including for young people and persons with disabilities, and equal pay for work of equal value Chase and Levine 2016: Reliance on a resource for economic benefit or livelihood motivates some citizen science programs and may foster a more diverse and dedicated group of collaborating partners. Industries or communities may be highly motivated to participate in monitoring a resource upon which they are heavily dependent (e.g., cooperative fisheries research partnerships [Hartley & Robertson 2006]). Those who rely heavily on a resource for livelihood purposes are also more likely to self-organize and to have greater knowledge about the resource, which relates to awareness and knowledge characteristics. |
|
|
11 (311) |
Does the project have any economic potential to be exploited in the future (for example, new intellectual property with economic value, or new sensors with a clear market)?
|
Help: Exploitation is defined as the use of results for commercial purposes or in public policymaking. |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the project have any economic potential to be exploited in the future? Wehn et al. 2017: How many IPRs related to COs and enabling technologies (patents, trademarks, copyright, other know-how rights) does your organization hold? What value proposition(s) related to COs and enabling technologies does your organization have? |
|
12 (312) |
Does the project have an explicit exploitation plan?
|
Help: Exploitation is defined as the use of results for commercial purposes or in public policymaking. Exploitation plans often include generating new business models. |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the project have a sustainability plan? |
|
13 (313) |
Does the project have any concrete cooperation in place for the exploitation of results?
|
Help: Exploitation is defined as the use of results for commercial purposes or in public policymaking. |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the project have any cooperation for exploitation, e.g. with social entrepreneurs? |
|
14 (314) |
Does the project have an intellectual property rights (IPR) strategy?
|
Help: Intellectual property refers to creations of the human mind, including patents, copyrights and industrial design. An Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) strategy helps organisations and projects to manage these assets. Here is a resource which might help the project to develop an IPR strategy. |
Wehn et al. 2017: How many IPRs related to COs and enabling technologies (patents, trademarks, copyright, other know-how rights) does your organization hold? |
|
15 (315) |
Does the project have explicit plans to sustain its activities after the current funding received has ended?
|
Woods et al. 2020: How likely are you going to carry on recording measurements and associated data after the project ends? How likely are you going to stay in contact with your citizen science community? |
|
|
16 (316) |
Does the project explicitly improve economic productivity through diversification, technological upgrading or innovation?
|
SDG 8.2 Achieve higher levels of economic productivity through diversification, technological upgrading and innovation, including through a focus on high-value added and labour-intensive sectors Woods et al. 2020: To what extent has participating in this project fostered innovative and entrepreneurial approaches? Have you identified any new areas where the data can be used innovatively? |
|
|
17 (317) |
Is the citizen science used in the project more cost-efficient than using experts and traditional scientific methods?
|
Palmer et al. 2017: Economic cost Our first point of comparison is cost. Mosquito Alert operated during 2014–2015 with a total budget of 300,000 Euros, covering 487,775 km2 in Spain for an average cost of about 1.23 Euros per km2 per month. In contrast, we estimate that the much more labour-intensive ovitraps, which must be set and checked by experts in the field and lab, cost about 9.36 Euros per km2 per month (see Methods for detailed calculation)—nearly eight times the cost of Mosquito Alert. Pocock et al. 2019: Increased ability to leverage funds and enhance sustainability through cost-effectiveness Wehn et al. 2017: For your organization, what is the value added of the citizen observatory focused on [CO topic] for your capital expenditure? (Cost avoidance due to CO - CAPEX) For your organization, what is the value added of the citizen observatory focused on [CO topic] for your operating expenditure? (Cost avoidance due to CO (OPEX)) |
|
|
18 (318) |
By engaging citizen scientists, is the project able to cover a larger sample size (i.e., to collect or analyse a larger amount of data) than a project with equivalent resources involving only professional scientists?
|
Palmer et al. 2017: With its relatively low cost centred on non-recurring investments, citizen science is inherently more scalable than traditional tools. This makes it possible for citizen science to greatly expand surveillance areas even in the face of shrinking budgets. Pocock et al. 2019: Enhanced data collection, including coverage, resolution (spatial, temporal and taxonomic), accuracy and inter-disciplinarity |
|
|
19 (319) |
Does the project explicitly contribute to the reduction of government expenditure?
|
Help: "Not yet, but it might one day?" Don't worry, you can always come back and update your answers on the MICS platform when it does. |
MacKenchie et al. 2011: Recent UK Government policy speeches have described the use of Big Society as a way to compensate for reduced funding. In particular, the Secretary of State for the UK’s Department for the Environment and Rural Affairs (Defra) when launching the consultation on the Natural Environment White Paper, described the ‘new opportunity to hand over control to local people’. |
|
20 (320) |
Does the project explicitly contribute to the reduction of costs for other external organisations?
|
Help: An example of contributing to the reduction of costs for an external organisation would be a project increasing the availability of data required by another organisation. |
Wehn et al. 2017: Overall, what are the current costs of external inputs (e.g. data, public opinions, expert knowledge) that your organisation needs in order to perform its function in relation to [CO topic]? How easily available are these external inputs (e.g. data, public opinions, expert knowledge)? (example of efforts) Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the project generate any economic impact, e.g. cost reduction, new job creation, new business model, etc.? |
|
21 (321) |
What are the estimated, typical, annual project staff costs (in €, £ GBP, or $ USD)?
|
Help: In this question, we use €, £ GBP, or $ USD interchangeably because the answers are given as orders of magnitude which make the difference in the exchange rate between the three currencies largely irrelevant. Here's a currency converter in case it's helpful: https://www1.oanda.com/currency/converter/
|
Ferri et al. 2020: to estimate the costs as data-related costs, staff costs and other costs and the benefits in terms of scientific benefits, public engagement benefits and the benefits of strengthened capacity of participants |
|
22 (322) |
What are the estimated, typical, annual costs of IT systems for data collection and management (in €, £ GBP, or $ USD) (for example for the use of cloud-computing services or software licenses)?
|
Help: This would not usually include initial investments in IT to develop an app or a platform. In this question, we use €, £ GBP, or $ USD interchangeably because the answers are given as orders of magnitude which make the difference in the exchange rate between the three currencies largely irrelevant. Here's a currency converter in case it's helpful: https://www1.oanda.com/currency/converter/
|
Ferri et al. 2020: to estimate the costs as data-related costs, staff costs and other costs and the benefits in terms of scientific benefits, public engagement benefits and the benefits of strengthened capacity of participants |
|
23 (323) |
What are the estimated, typical, annual equipment costs (in €, £ GBP, or $ USD)?
|
Help: In this question, we use €, £ GBP, or $ USD interchangeably because the answers are given as orders of magnitude which make the difference in the exchange rate between the three currencies largely irrelevant. Here's a currency converter in case it's helpful: https://www1.oanda.com/currency/converter/ |
Ferri et al. 2020: to estimate the costs as data-related costs, staff costs and other costs and the benefits in terms of scientific benefits, public engagement benefits and the benefits of strengthened capacity of participants |
|
24 (324) |
Does the project require recurring investments in technology (for example, software licences or app/platform maintenance) that affect its long-term sustainability?
|
Palmer et al. 2017: Overall, the results suggest the potential for citizen science to outperform traditional methods in many respects. With its relatively low cost centred on non-recurring investments, citizen science is inherently more scalable than traditional tools. |
|
|
25 (325) |
What is the estimated, approximate cost per observation (in €, £ GBP, or $ USD) (observations as defined by the project)?
|
Help: It can be hard to define the number of observations for projects which involve continuous, real-time measurement (for example, collected by a sonde). To make the calculations easier consider the number of observations to be the number of minutes of active measurement. A single sonde collecting data for a full calendar year would therefore be considered to have collected about 500,000 observations (the number of minutes in a year). In this question, we use €, £ GBP, or $ USD interchangeably because the answers are given as orders of magnitude which make the difference in the exchange rate between the three currencies largely irrelevant. Here's a currency converter in case it's helpful: https://www1.oanda.com/currency/converter/ |
Alfonso et al. 2022: An important variable, albeit almost never explicitly reported in projects involving Citizen Science, to evaluate the value of Citizen Science for data generation is related to the costs invested to produce these observations. As mentioned before, the statement that Citizen Science is a cost-effective approach to data collection frequently found in literature, needs to be based on evidence. |
|
26 (326) |
How much time is invested by the project in training citizens in a typical recent year?
|
Help: Training might involve identifying different species or planets, using equipment or sensors, or analysing data, and can include the production of training materials. This is not the time invested by the participant to be trained. It is the total time invested by the project in training all participants. |
Thornhill et al. 2017: to explore the relationship between the costs and benefits of a citizen science program, we compared the time invested in training and engagement by individual researchers with the equivalent time saved in sampling and measurement. DITOs consortium 2016: Costs of (increased organisational) capacity: As these engagement activities are intended to be sustainable after the end of the project, information about the actual costs of developing and maintaining these is an important consideration. One way to explore this is by looking at budget allocation; another is by enquiring how much participants are willing to pay for such events - the difference between these can shed light on the needed cost to be covered by other means. This is useful information for funders and decision-makers. |
|
27 (327) |
On average, how many hours does a participant dedicate to the project in a typical recent year?
|
Help: We acknowledge that this can vary hugely from participant to participant; go with an average participant. |
Chandler et al. 2017: # of people and # of person hours dedicated to collecting scientific data Cox et al. 2015: Median time interval (in weeks) between a registered user's first and last recorded classification Wehn et al. 2017: Time (hours/month) required for participation Butterfoss 2006: [measures of community participation] amount of time spent in and outside of coalition activities, |
|
28 (328) |
On average, how long do participants have to travel to take part in the citizen science activities?
|
Wehn et al. 2017: Geographic scope of the issue in focus and location of stakeholders (inside/outside the geographic boundaries) |
|
|
29 (329) |
Do participants have to pay to take part in the project?
|
Information: The answers to this question are triggers for the logic in the platform. Answering "No" to this question will block Question 30 in the economy domain "What is this payment used for?". |
ECSA Characteristics: Payment to take part in a project. Requesting financial contributions from citizens to participate in a project, for example, to finance data-measurement kits can be consistent with citizen science. But consideration should be made as to how this may affect social inclusion (e.g. excluding poorer participants) and bias participation. Wehn et al. 2017: Investment required for participation; capital (€) and long term (€/month) |
|
30 (330) |
What is this payment used for?
|
ECSA Characteristics: Payment to take part in a project. Requesting financial contributions from citizens to participate in a project, for example, to finance data-measurement kits can be consistent with citizen science. But consideration should be made as to how this may affect social inclusion (e.g. excluding poorer participants) and bias participation. Wehn et al. 2017: Investment required for participation; capital (€) and long term (€/month) |
|
|
31 (331) |
Can participants make a voluntary financial contribution to the project?
|
Help: An example of a voluntary financial contribution could be a participant becoming a Patreon supporter. |
ECSA Characteristics: Financial support for scientific research. Pure financial support to a project, such as crowdfunding, subscription fees and donations, is not considered citizen science, as no participation in any phase of the scientific research takes place. Careful consideration of the consistency with citizen science should be made if the financial contribution is a prerequisite to a form of participation in the scientific research phase of the project. |
Environment
|
# |
Question text and answer options |
Help and information |
Source of question and original wording |
|
1 (401) |
Does the project take measures to decrease its material footprint?
|
Help: A material footprint is the total amount of raw materials needed to meet the final demands of the project. This includes biomass (such as food for participants), fossil fuels (petrol for cars), and metal and non-metal ores (often used in the production of laptops and smartphones). All projects have a material footprint but steps such as reducing the amount of printing, or sharing equipment between teams can help to reduce the amount of "stuff" the project uses. |
SDG 8.4.1; SDG 12.2.1 Material footprint, material footprint per capita, and material footprint per GDP |
|
2 (402) |
Does the project take measures to reduce its polluting emissions?
|
Help: Polluting emissions can be caused by transport or energy use. This can be reduced by using carbon-neutral or net-zero transportation methods and clean energy sources. |
SDG 9.4 By 2030, upgrade infrastructure and retrofit industries to make them sustainable, with increased resource-use efficiency and greater adoption of clean and environmentally sound technologies and industrial processes, with all countries taking action in accordance with their respective capabilities. SDG 9.4.1 CO2 emission per unit of value added. |
|
3 (403) |
Does the project have a procurement policy that is environmentally sustainable?
|
Help: A procurement policy guides decision making and purchasing within a project or operation to ensure that the solutions are in line with the values and ethics of the organisation. The environmental impact of the procurement policy can be improved by: · Using items of high recycled content or those that can be recycled or reused · Using services that consider and reduce their environmental impact · Considering the amount of, and cost of energy used in processes More information on writing a procurement policy can be found at https://planergy.com/blog/procurement-policy-sample/. |
SDG 12.7 Promote public procurement practices that are sustainable, in accordance with national policies and priorities |
|
4 (404) |
Does the project explicitly share information on sustainable development or lifestyles?
|
Help: Information on sustainable development or lifestyles could be shared directly to participants or more widely through the project's social-media and other communication channels. |
SDG 12.8 "By 2030, ensure that people everywhere have the relevant information and awareness for sustainable development and lifestyles in harmony with nature" |
|
5 (405) |
Does the project educate participants on environmental challenges?
|
SDG 13.3 "Improve education, awareness-raising and human and institutional capacity on climate change mitigation, adaptation, impact reduction and early warning" Braun and Dierkes 2019: Environmental knowledge incorporates at least three different subtypes: system, action-related and effectiveness knowledge. To enable a person to act in an environmentally friendly manner, they must primarily understand the basic structural and functional characteristics of an ecosystem (system knowledge). Furthermore, knowledge about solutions for environmental issues (action-related knowledge) and the benefit of sustainable actions (effectiveness knowledge) are deemed crucial for an individual to choose a set of behaviours. |
|
|
6 (406) |
Does the project explicitly contribute to a higher awareness of, or positive attitude towards, the natural environment, on this planet or others?
|
Information: Increases to participants’ awareness and positive attitudes to the environment has been included as a metric in several citizen-science assessment frameworks e.g. Kieslinger et al. 2017; Pocock et al. 2019. The MICS project undertook a review of approaches to measure the impact of citizen science on environmental attitudes, behaviour and knowledge which you can read here: Somerwill and Wehn, 2022. |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Ecological impact "Does the project contribute to higher awareness and responsibility for the natural environment?" Braun and Dierkes 2019: Environmental knowledge incorporates at least three different subtypes: system, action-related and effectiveness knowledge. To enable a person to act in an environmentally friendly manner, they must primarily understand the basic structural and functional characteristics of an ecosystem (system knowledge). Furthermore, knowledge about solutions for environmental issues (action-related knowledge) and the benefit of sustainable actions (effectiveness knowledge) are deemed crucial for an individual to choose a set of behaviours. Zwickle and Jones 2018: This chapter introduces a revised Assessment of Sustainability Knowledge (ASK) and the Sustainability Attitudes Scale (SAS), and discusses when and how to use them for applied and theoretical purposes. Pocock et al. 2019: Increased awareness of conservation and the environment by individuals, communities, media, NGOs and governments Milfont and Duckitt 2010: Environmental attitudes (EA), a crucial construct in environmental psychology, are a psychological tendency expressed by evaluating the natural environment with some degree of favour or disfavour. There are hundreds of EA measures available based on different conceptual and theoretical frameworks, and most researchers prefer to generate new measures rather than organize those already available. The present research provides a cumulative and theoretical approach to the measurement of EA, in which the multidimensional and hierarchical nature of EA is considered. Reported are findings from three studies on the development of a psychometrically sound, multidimensional inventory to assess EA cross-culturally, the Environmental Attitudes Inventory (EAI). |
|
7 (407) |
Does the project lead to an increased stewardship of the natural environment among participants?
|
Phillips et al. 2018: Our new framework is thus based on both empirical data and contributions from the literature and includes the following learning outcomes: Interest in Science and the Environment; Self efficacy for Science and the Environment; Motivation for Science and the Environment; Knowledge of the Nature of Science; Skills of Science Inquiry; and Behavior and Stewardship. |
|
|
8 (408) |
Does the project collaborate with external companies to enable the adoption of sustainable practices?
|
Help: This collaboration may involve working with companies that have made pledges to work towards sustainable practices (clean energy, waste reduction, carbon neutral practices) or that are certified to work to environmental standards such as B Corps. |
SDG 12.6 Encourage companies, especially large and transnational companies, to adopt sustainable practices and to integrate sustainability information into their reporting cycle Woods et al. 2016: Level of regulation and enforcement of environmental standards for business and industry Chandler et al. 2017: Enabling organizations and business to become more sustainable. Partnerships: organizations actively engaged |
|
9 (409) |
Do the project activities include pro-environmental actions e.g. litter picking?
|
|
Chandler et al. 2017: Pro-environment actions taken at the research project site |
|
10 (410) |
Does the project include objectives to protect or enhance natural resources?
|
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Ecological impact "Does the project include objectives that protect and enhance natural resources?" Chandler et al. 2017: Natural habitats enhanced |
|
|
11 (411) |
Does the project help to identify the location of specific issues related to environmental challenges?
|
Help: Ways in which a project might help to identify the location of specific issues include identifying which sections of a river are polluted or which areas of a city have high levels of air pollution. |
Moses 2022: The role of citizen science in improving source awareness is less clear. Without greater emphasis on sources of pollution, scientists or community members using citizen science techniques cannot effectively identify or target interventions Dickinson et al. 2012: Dispersed data collection and the ability to collect observations and connect with people, in places, and at scales that would otherwise not be possible, render citizen science increasingly important to environmental research. Today, the internet and geographic information system-(GIS-) enabled web applications allow participants to collect large volumes of location-based ecological data and submit them electronically to centralized databases. |
|
12 (412) |
Does the project inform how a natural resource or ecosystem is managed?
|
Pocock et al. 2019: Improved conservation action leading to better environment including ecosystem function, ecosystem services and resilience Chandler et al. 2017: Informing environmental policies, agendas, management plans and government policies. Contributions to conventions, agendas, policies, and management plans. |
|
|
13 (413) |
Does the project monitor ecosystem services?
|
Help: The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment – a four-year United Nations assessment of the condition and trends of the world’s ecosystems - categorizes ecosystem services as: · Provisioning Services or the provision of food, fresh water, fuel, fibre, and other goods · Regulating Services such as climate, water, and disease regulation as well as pollination · Supporting Services such as soil formation and nutrient cycling · Cultural Services such as educational, aesthetic, and cultural heritage values as well as recreation and tourism. |
Pocock et al. 2019: Improved conservation action leading to better environment including: Improved ecosystem function, Improved ecosystem services, Improved resilience Chandler et al. 2017: Enhancing natural and socio-cultural capital to create a sustainable environment. Ecosystem services enhanced. |
|
14 (414) |
Which environmental challenges are related to the aims of the project? (We'll ask details about each issue later.)
|
SDGs Goal 2. End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture; Goal 6. Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all; Goal 7. Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all; Goal 11. Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable; Goal 12. Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns; Goal 13. Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts; Goal 14. Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development; Goal 15. Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss; |
|
|
15 (415) |
How does the project contribute to sustainable agriculture?
|
SDGs 2.a "Increase investment, including through enhanced international cooperation, in rural infrastructure, agricultural research and extension services, technology development and plant and livestock gene banks in order to enhance agricultural productive capacity in developing countries, in particular least developed countries"; 2.4.1 "Proportion of agricultural area under productive and sustainable agriculture". 2.3 "By 2030, double the agricultural productivity and incomes of small-scale food producers, in particular women, indigenous peoples, family farmers, pastoralists and fishers, including through secure and equal access to land, other productive resources and inputs, knowledge, financial services, markets and opportunities for value addition and non-farm employment" |
|
|
16 (416) |
With regards to freshwater, which of the following does the project monitor?
|
SDGs 6.3.2 "Proportion of bodies of water with good ambient water quality"; 6.6 By 2020, protect and restore water-related ecosystems, including mountains, forests, wetlands, rivers, aquifers and lakes; 6.4 By 2030, substantially increase water-use efficiency across all sectors and ensure sustainable withdrawals and supply of freshwater to address water scarcity and substantially reduce the number of people suffering from water scarcity; 6.4.2 "Level of water stress: freshwater withdrawal as a proportion of available freshwater resources"; 6.3.1 Proportion of domestic and industrial wastewater flows safely treated; 6.6.1 "Change in the extent of water-related ecosystems over time"; 6.b "Support and strengthen the participation of local communities in improving water and sanitation management" Wehn et al. 2017: Quality of specific natural resources |
|
|
17 (417) |
With regards to freshwater, which of the following does the project have a demonstrable positive impact on?
|
SDGs 6.3.2 "Proportion of bodies of water with good ambient water quality"; 6.6 By 2020, protect and restore water-related ecosystems, including mountains, forests, wetlands, rivers, aquifers and lakes; 6.4 By 2030, substantially increase water-use efficiency across all sectors and ensure sustainable withdrawals and supply of freshwater to address water scarcity and substantially reduce the number of people suffering from water scarcity; 6.4.2 "Level of water stress: freshwater withdrawal as a proportion of available freshwater resources"; 6.3.1 Proportion of domestic and industrial wastewater flows safely treated; 6.6.1 "Change in the extent of water-related ecosystems over time"; 6.b "Support and strengthen the participation of local communities in improving water and sanitation management" Wehn et al. 2017: Quality of specific natural resources Chandler et al. 2017: Ecosystem services enhanced |
|
|
18 (418) |
How does the project contribute to affordable and clean energy?
|
Help: Clean energy includes sources like sunlight, wind, rain, tides, waves, and geothermal heat. |
SDGs 7.2 "By 2030, increase substantially the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix"; 7.3 By 2030, double the global rate of improvement in energy efficiency; 7.a "By 2030, enhance international cooperation to facilitate access to clean energy research and technology, including renewable energy, energy efficiency and advanced and cleaner fossil-fuel technology, and promote investment in energy infrastructure and clean energy technology" |
|
19 (419) |
With regards to sustainable cities and communities, which of the following does the project monitor?
|
SDGs 11.3.2 "Proportion of cities with a direct participation structure of civil society in urban planning and management that operate regularly and democratically"; 11.6.1 "Proportion of urban solid waste regularly collected and with adequate final discharge out of total urban solid waste generated, by cities"; 11.7 "By 2030, provide universal access to safe, inclusive and accessible, green and public spaces, in particular for women and children, older persons and persons with disabilities" |
|
|
20 (420) |
With regards to sustainable cities and communities, which of the following does the project have a demonstrable positive impact on?
|
SDGs 11.3.2 "Proportion of cities with a direct participation structure of civil society in urban planning and management that operate regularly and democratically"; 11.6.1 "Proportion of urban solid waste regularly collected and with adequate final discharge out of total urban solid waste generated, by cities"; 11.7 "By 2030, provide universal access to safe, inclusive and accessible, green and public spaces, in particular for women and children, older persons and persons with disabilities" |
|
|
21 (421) |
Does the project monitor ambient air quality or pollution?
|
SDG 11.6.2 "Annual mean levels of fine particulate matter (e.g. PM2.5 and PM10) in cities (population weighted)" Wehn et al. 2017: Average concentration of particulate matter (PM2.5) in the air |
|
|
22 (422) |
With regards to air quality, which of the following does the project have a demonstrable positive impact on?
|
SDG 11.6.2 "Annual mean levels of fine particulate matter (e.g. PM2.5 and PM10) in cities (population weighted)" Wehn et al. 2017: Average concentration of particulate matter (PM2.5) in the air |
|
|
23 (423) |
With regards to responsible consumption and production, which of the following does the project monitor?
|
SDGs 12.3 "By 2030, halve per capita global food waste at the retail and consumer levels and reduce food losses along production and supply chains, including post-harvest losses"; 12.4 "By 2020, achieve the environmentally sound management of chemicals and all wastes throughout their life cycle, in accordance with agreed international frameworks, and significantly reduce their release to air, water and soil in order to minimize their adverse impacts on human health and the environment"; 12.5 "By 2030, substantially reduce waste generation through prevention, reduction, recycling and reuse" Wehn et al. 2017: Average concentration of particulate matter (PM2.5) in the air Woods et al. 2016: Availability and ease of recycling of paper, plastic, hazardous waste, and metal for both households and business/industry |
|
|
24 (424) |
With regards to responsible consumption and production, which of the following does the project have a demonstrable positive impact on?
|
SDGs 12.3 "By 2030, halve per capita global food waste at the retail and consumer levels and reduce food losses along production and supply chains, including post-harvest losses"; 12.4 "By 2020, achieve the environmentally sound management of chemicals and all wastes throughout their life cycle, in accordance with agreed international frameworks, and significantly reduce their release to air, water and soil in order to minimize their adverse impacts on human health and the environment"; 12.5 "By 2030, substantially reduce waste generation through prevention, reduction, recycling and reuse" Wehn et al. 2017: Average concentration of particulate matter (PM2.5) in the air |
|
|
25 (425) |
With regards to marine water, which of the following does the project monitor?
|
SDGs 14.1 "By 2025, prevent and significantly reduce marine pollution of all kinds, in particular from land-based activities, including marine debris and nutrient pollution"; 14.3 "Minimize and address the impacts of ocean acidification, including through enhanced scientific cooperation at all levels"; 14.5 "By 2020, conserve at least 10 per cent of coastal and marine areas, consistent with national and international law and based on the best available scientific information"; 14.a "Increase scientific knowledge, develop research capacity and transfer marine technology, taking into account the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission Criteria and Guidelines on the Transfer of Marine Technology, in order to improve ocean health and to enhance the contribution of marine biodiversity to the development of developing countries, in particular small island developing States and least developed countries" 14.4 "By 2020, effectively regulate harvesting and end overfishing, illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing and destructive fishing practices and implement science-based management plans, in order to restore fish stocks in the shortest time feasible, at least to levels that can produce maximum sustainable yield as determined by their biological characteristics" |
|
|
26 (426) |
With regards to marine water, which of the following does the project have a demonstrable positive impact on?
|
SDGs 14.1 "By 2025, prevent and significantly reduce marine pollution of all kinds, in particular from land-based activities, including marine debris and nutrient pollution"; 14.3 "Minimize and address the impacts of ocean acidification, including through enhanced scientific cooperation at all levels"; 14.5 "By 2020, conserve at least 10 per cent of coastal and marine areas, consistent with national and international law and based on the best available scientific information"; 14.a "Increase scientific knowledge, develop research capacity and transfer marine technology, taking into account the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission Criteria and Guidelines on the Transfer of Marine Technology, in order to improve ocean health and to enhance the contribution of marine biodiversity to the development of developing countries, in particular small island developing States and least developed countries" 14.4 "By 2020, effectively regulate harvesting and end overfishing, illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing and destructive fishing practices and implement science-based management plans, in order to restore fish stocks in the shortest time feasible, at least to levels that can produce maximum sustainable yield as determined by their biological characteristics" |
|
|
27 (427) |
With regards to life on land, which of the following does the project monitor?
|
SDGs 15.1 "By 2020, ensure the conservation, restoration and sustainable use of terrestrial and inland freshwater ecosystems and their services, in particular forests, wetlands, mountains and drylands, in line with obligations under international agreements"; 15.2 "By 2020, promote the implementation of sustainable management of all types of forests, halt deforestation, restore degraded forests and substantially increase afforestation and reforestation globally"; 15.3 "By 2030, combat desertification, restore degraded land and soil, including land affected by desertification, drought and floods, and strive to achieve a land degradation-neutral world 15.4 By 2030, ensure the conservation of mountain ecosystems, including their biodiversity, in order to enhance their capacity to provide benefits that are essential for sustainable development"; 15.5 "Take urgent and significant action to reduce the degradation of natural habitats, halt the loss of biodiversity and, by 2020, protect and prevent the extinction of threatened species"; 15.7 "Take urgent action to end poaching and trafficking of protected species of flora and fauna and address both demand and supply of illegal wildlife products"; 15.8 "By 2020, introduce measures to prevent the introduction and significantly reduce the impact of invasive alien species on land and water ecosystems and control or eradicate the priority species" 15.c Enhance global support for efforts to combat poaching and trafficking of protected species, including by increasing the capacity of local communities to pursue sustainable livelihood opportunities Pocock et al. 2019: Improved conservation action leading to better environment including: Improved ecosystem function, Improved ecosystem services, Improved resilience |
|
|
28 (428) |
With regards to life on land, which of the following does the project have a demonstrable positive impact on?
|
SDGs 15.1 "By 2020, ensure the conservation, restoration and sustainable use of terrestrial and inland freshwater ecosystems and their services, in particular forests, wetlands, mountains and drylands, in line with obligations under international agreements"; 15.2 "By 2020, promote the implementation of sustainable management of all types of forests, halt deforestation, restore degraded forests and substantially increase afforestation and reforestation globally"; 15.3 "By 2030, combat desertification, restore degraded land and soil, including land affected by desertification, drought and floods, and strive to achieve a land degradation-neutral world 15.4 By 2030, ensure the conservation of mountain ecosystems, including their biodiversity, in order to enhance their capacity to provide benefits that are essential for sustainable development"; 15.5 "Take urgent and significant action to reduce the degradation of natural habitats, halt the loss of biodiversity and, by 2020, protect and prevent the extinction of threatened species"; 15.7 "Take urgent action to end poaching and trafficking of protected species of flora and fauna and address both demand and supply of illegal wildlife products"; 15.8 "By 2020, introduce measures to prevent the introduction and significantly reduce the impact of invasive alien species on land and water ecosystems and control or eradicate the priority species" Pocock et al. 2019: Improved conservation action leading to better environment including: Improved ecosystem function, Improved ecosystem services, Improved resilience |
|
|
29 (429) |
Does the project help to classify local breeds or species at risk of extinction?
|
SDG 2.5.2 Proportion of local breeds classified as being at risk of extinction |
|
|
30 (430) |
Does the project contribute to secure plant and animal genetic resources in either medium- or long-term conservation facilities?
|
SDG 2.5.1 "Number of plant and animal genetic resources for food and agriculture secured in either medium or long-term conservation facilities" |
Science and technology
|
# |
Question text and answer options |
Help and information |
Source of question and original wording |
|
1 (501) |
Which disciplines are the focus of the project?
|
Help: The list of disciplines used in this question is from the PPSR core citizen-science ontology. A discipline is an area which is studied in the project. The project may not be interested in the discipline of IT solely because an app or website is used or may not be investigating education simply because some learning is involved in the project for participants (these examples would not disqualify the project from investigating the mentioned disciplines but they are not enough alone to suggest that the project is interested in those areas). |
ECSA Characteristics: Science and research. Citizen science practices cross-disciplinary boundaries: some belong to fields widely acknowledged as scientific research, while others fall under the general term ‘research’, especially in the arts and humanities. Citizen science can describe many of these activities, especially when they comply with the 10 principles. We use ‘scientific research’ to refer to research in the sciences, the social sciences, the humanities and the arts. Gresle et al. 2019: Transdisciplinary Pocock et al. 2019: Enhanced data collection, including coverage, resolution (spatial, temporal and taxonomic), accuracy and interdisciplinarity |
|
2 (502) |
Does the project explicitly promote interdisciplinary ways of working?
|
ECSA Characteristics: Science and research. Citizen science practices cross-disciplinary boundaries: some belong to fields widely acknowledged as scientific research, while others fall under the general term ‘research’, especially in the arts and humanities. Citizen science can describe many of these activities, especially when they comply with the 10 principles. We use ‘scientific research’ to refer to research in the sciences, the social sciences, the humanities and the arts. Gresle et al. 2019: Transdisciplinary Pocock et al. 2019: Enhanced data collection, including coverage, resolution (spatial, temporal and taxonomic), accuracy and interdisciplinarity |
|
|
3 (503) |
Is the project's citizen science basic or applied?
|
Help: Basic science is research aimed at understanding fundamental problems. Examples of this include understanding how cells work, or biodiversity monitoring projects where participants collect data on which species are present. Applied science, such as the medical field or in the game Quantum Moves where citizen scientists optimise solutions to quantum problems, is the application of basic scientific knowledge to solve practical problems. |
ECSA Characteristics: What counts as scientific research? In common with research practice in general, citizen science can address a topic that is basic or applied, inductive or deductive, local or global. In specific contexts, it is appropriate to identify a subset of activities (explicitly include environmental monitoring, or focus on hypothesis-driven research). To ensure rigour, the research should aim to follow protocols and practices in line with the disciplines within which the research is framed. |
|
4 (504) |
Is the purpose of the project's research to put existing theories to the test (deductive), or is it about gathering information and developing knowledge from this information (inductive)?
|
Help: Inductive reasoning is described as a method where one's experiences and observations are synthesised to come up with a general truth. Many dictionaries define inductive reasoning as deriving general principles from specific observations: "bottom-up logic". Deductive reasoning, or "top-down logic", is the process of reasoning from one or more hypotheses to reach a logical conclusion. |
ECSA Characteristics: What counts as scientific research? In common with research practice in general, citizen science can address a topic that is basic or applied, inductive or deductive, local or global. In specific contexts, it is appropriate to identify a subset of activities (explicitly include environmental monitoring, or focus on hypothesis-driven research). To ensure rigour, the research should aim to follow protocols and practices in line with the disciplines within which the research is framed. |
|
5 (505) |
Do participants take part in systematic or convenience data-collection?
|
Help: Convenience data-collection or sampling - also known as grab sampling, accidental sampling, or opportunistic sampling - is a type of non-probability sampling that involves the sample being drawn from that part of the population that is close to hand. This type of sampling is the most common in citizen science (for example, data collected by participants travelling to any green space to do a biodiversity study or water testing). Systematic sampling is a type of probability sampling where the sample is selected, at regular intervals, from a randomised list of the whole population (for example, data collected by participants going to a specific local green space to do a biodiversity study or water testing). An example of both may be a project where the locations sampled are based on convenience, but in each location the sampling frequency and location is systematic (for example if a citizen-scientist chose a green space because it was close to their house, but for the biodiversity study, the green space was divided into sections and the sections sampled were chosen randomly in a systematic way). |
ECSA Characteristics: Opportunistic vs systematic data collection. Different scientific research projects can use and benefit from datasets with a wide variety of characteristics. For some analyses, a systematic and rigorously created dataset is necessary, while in others opportunistic or partial information is fit for purpose. Citizen science can contribute to both. The specific context, research aims and disciplinary practices of the project will determine where the activities fall on the spectrum of opportunistic to systematic data collection. |
|
6 (506) |
Does the project formally build on existing citizen-science expertise in the specific field of research?
|
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the project build on existing citizen science expertise in the specific field of research? |
|
|
7 (507) |
Is new knowledge developed regarding how best to incorporate citizens into research design?
|
Haywood and Besley, 2014: Is new knowledge developed regarding how best to incorporate citizens into research design? |
|
|
8 (508) |
Does the project use a code of research or a research integrity policy? (See, for example [https://ukrio.org/publications/code-of-practice-for-research/])
|
ECSA Characteristics: Ethics. The aims and intentions of citizen science projects and the research they involve should be communicated clearly and openly with participants and other stakeholders. If involvement is consensual and fully understood by participants, it may be considered citizen science. Special attention needs to be paid to transparency in community- or self-initiated projects that operate outside organisational ethical practices. In any case, all actors must adhere to a code of research integrity and quality issues when they participate in a research project. |
|
|
9 (509) |
Does the project have a formal dissemination strategy?
|
Help: Unsure how dissemination differs from communication? - Communication means taking strategic and targeted measures for promoting the action itself and its results to a multitude of audiences, including the media and the public, and possibly engaging in a two-way exchange. - Dissemination is the public disclosure of the results of the project in any medium. It is a process of promotion and awareness-raising that makes research results known to various stakeholder groups in a targeted way, to enable them to use the results in their own work. |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the project demonstrate an appropriate dissemination strategy? |
|
10 (510) |
How many publications, indexed by Google Scholar, resulted from the project?
|
Help: You can check the number of publications here: https://scholar.google.com/ Information: The answers to this question are triggers for the logic in the platform. Answering "No" to this question will block four questions in the science and technology domain: Question 11 "How many open-access publications, indexed by Google Scholar, resulted from the project?"; Question 12 "How many citations have the publications produced by the project received, in total (according to Google scholar)?"; Question 13 " What is the highest impact-factor (or impact-index) of the publications produced by the project?"; and Question 14 "How is the involvement of participants formally recognised in publications?". |
ECSA Characteristics: Data and knowledge generation. Citizen science, scientific, academic, and policy-oriented research can include different forms of data and knowledge generation, including novel data generation, creation of new analyses, or production of new knowledge in written and other forms. The knowledge produced in such projects should aspire to disciplinary standards, such as appropriate data quality and quality assurance, the peer review of project publications and materials, or policy relevant evidence that is fit for decision-making. Wiggins et al. 2018: Number of published peer-reviewed science papers that report on the project or apply its data Chandler et al. 2017: Peer reviewed publications |
|
11 (511) |
How many open-access publications, indexed by Google Scholar, resulted from the project?
|
Help: You can check the number of open access publications here: https://scholar.google.com/ |
ECSA Characteristics: Data and knowledge generation. Citizen science, scientific, academic, and policy-oriented research can include different forms of data and knowledge generation, including novel data generation, creation of new analyses, or production of new knowledge in written and other forms. The knowledge produced in such projects should aspire to disciplinary standards, such as appropriate data quality and quality assurance, the peer review of project publications and materials, or policy relevant evidence that is fit for decision-making. Wiggins et al. 2018: Number of published peer-reviewed science papers that report on the project or apply its data |
|
12 (512) |
How many citations have the publications produced by the project received, in total (according to Google scholar)?
|
Help: You can check the number of citations here: https://scholar.google.com/ |
ECSA Characteristics: Data and knowledge generation. Citizen science, scientific, academic, and policy-oriented research can include different forms of data and knowledge generation, including novel data generation, creation of new analyses, or production of new knowledge in written and other forms. The knowledge produced in such projects should aspire to disciplinary standards, such as appropriate data quality and quality assurance, the peer review of project publications and materials, or policy relevant evidence that is fit for decision-making. Wiggins et al. 2018: Number of published peer-reviewed science papers that report on the project or apply its data Bonney et al. 2009: # of papers published, # of citations |
|
13 (513) |
What is the highest impact-factor (or impact-index) of the publications produced by the project?
|
Help: Just Google: "[journal name]" impact factor |
ECSA Characteristics: Data and knowledge generation. Citizen science, scientific, academic, and policy-oriented research can include different forms of data and knowledge generation, including novel data generation, creation of new analyses, or production of new knowledge in written and other forms. The knowledge produced in such projects should aspire to disciplinary standards, such as appropriate data quality and quality assurance, the peer review of project publications and materials, or policy relevant evidence that is fit for decision-making. Wiggins et al. 2018: Number of published peer-reviewed science papers that report on the project or apply its data |
|
14 (514) |
How is the involvement of participants formally recognised in publications?
|
Information: When the project does produce publications, you may wish to use a group pseudonym, such as "on behalf of the consortium", as Rambaut et al did https://virological.org/t/preliminary-genomic-characterisation-of-an-emergent-sars-cov-2-lineage-in-the-uk-defined-by-a-novel-set-of-spike-mutations/563 |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Are citizen scientists participating in publications or is their engagement recognised? Cox et al. 2015: Total number of papers where the list of authors contains at least one citizen scientist author. The coauthorship of academic papers is a means by which well-functioning citizen science platforms can formally recognise the participation of volunteers and incentivise more valuable contributions. |
|
15 (515) |
Has the project supported student's dissertations or theses?
|
Wiggins et al. 2018: Number of theses and dissertations using data from or reporting on the project |
|
|
16 (516) |
How many stakeholders have shown an active interest in the results of the project (for example, downloaded results from the project website)?
|
Help: A stakeholder is anyone with interest in the project and may have been involved in the project or only be interested in the data or technology produced by the project. External stakeholders may include policy makers or businesses in the area the project affects. |
Wiggins et al. 2018: Number of curated exports of data and related documentation, usually as a downloadable file DITOs consortium 2016: Number of stakeholders who actively review/show interest in research results that have an impact on social justice E.g. advisory board members, collaborators, external researchers, community leaders, etc. |
|
17 (517) |
Does the project provide data visualisations such as graphs, maps and animations?
|
Wiggins et al. 2018: Existence of documentation describing data structure, formats, and contents |
|
|
18 (518) |
Are the project data used in models or forecasting?
|
Wiggins et al. 2018: Existence of models based on project data that simulate or predict complex phenomena |
|
|
19 (519) |
What processes are defined in the project to guarantee high data-quality?
|
Help: Matching may use "fuzzy logic" to find duplicates in the data; it can for example recognise that "Sasha Wood" and "Sasha Woods" may be the same individual |
ECSA Characteristics: Data quality. Citizen science raises questions about data quality, which can be addressed in a range of way, such as well-developed protocols, good design of the task to fit the purpose, and good participant support. Similar to research activities generally, data quality is a key aspect that warrants attention throughout the entire process of knowledge production. Kieslinger et al. 2017: What processes are defined to guarantee high data quality? Haywood and Besley, 2014: Are efforts made to ensure that the quality standards of all participants are upheld? |
|
20 (520) |
Are project data available through APIs?
|
Help: An application programming interface (API) is a connection between computers or between computer programs. It is a type of software interface, offering a service to other pieces of software. |
Wiggins et al. 2018: API: Y/N |
|
21 (521) |
What technology does the project use a pre-existing version of?
|
Kieslinger et al. 2017: "Wider innovation potential: Does the project foster the use of new technologies? Does the project contribute to the development of new technologies?" |
|
|
22 (539) |
What technology does the project develop?
|
Help: Development can include new versions of existing technology. |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: "Wider innovation potential: Does the project foster the use of new technologies? Does the project contribute to the development of new technologies?" |
|
23 (522) |
Does the project explicitly develop, transfer or disseminate information about environmentally-sound technologies?
|
Help: Environmentally sound technologies are techniques and technologies capable of reducing environmental damage through processes and materials that generate fewer potentially damaging substances, recover such substances from emissions prior to discharge, or utilize and recycle production residues. |
SDG 17.7 Promote the development, transfer, dissemination and diffusion of environmentally sound technologies to developing countries on favourable terms, including on concessional and preferential terms, as mutually agreed |
|
24 (523) |
Does the project use mobile phones as a primary tool (for example, using an app to collect observations)?
|
SDG 5.b.1 Proportion of individuals who own a mobile telephone, by sex Wehn et al. 2017: Equipment required for participation, Infrastructure required for participation |
|
|
25 (524) |
Is participation possible without a phone connected to the internet?
|
Wehn et al. 2017: Equipment required for participation, Infrastructure required for participation DITOs consortium 2016: Considerations/strategies of ethical issues and values in the design, development and implementation of activities: This includes a tally of existing and development of strategies for the use of technologies/methodologies (are these affordable/accessible to the participating population) |
|
|
26 (525) |
Does the project provide technical support to participants?
|
Help: Technical support provides help regarding specific problems with a product or service, rather than providing training or other support services |
SDG 4.4: By 2030, substantially increase the number of youth and adults who have relevant skills, including technical and vocational skills, for employment, decent jobs and entrepreneurship Wehn et al. 2017: Type of material support provided for participants (e.g. manuals, instructions, training, sensor devices, etc.). Digital divide: With the digital age, another source of (in)equity has emerged. As internet savviness has become important to sustain oneself, the gap between people that do know their way around the computer and internet and those who do not has become another societal divider. |
|
27 (526) |
Does the project use enabling technology, in particular information and communications technology, to promote the empowerment of women?
|
Help: One way in which a project could use technology to promote the empowerment of women is by using social media to reach a wider audience. This may allow women to overcome structural barriers which would usually prevent them being able to take part in projects. You can read examples in this blog. |
SDG 5.b: Enhance the use of enabling technology, in particular information and communications technology, to promote the empowerment of women DITOs Consortium 2016: # & type of events discussing gender dimension in science & technology; % of women sharing feedback |
|
28 (527) |
Does the project enhance international cooperation on science, technology or innovation?
|
SDG 17.6: Enhance North-South, South-South and triangular regional and international cooperation on and access to science, technology and innovation and enhance knowledge sharing on mutually agreed terms, including through improved coordination among existing mechanisms, in particular at the United Nations level, and through a global technology facilitation mechanism Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the project collaborate with other initiatives at the (inter-) national level to enhance mutual learning? Wehn et al. 2017: How many international clients does your organization have in the CO business? |
|
|
29 (528) |
Does the project provide participants with easy and explicit access to pertinent research findings or important literature used to inform the project (i.e. not produced by the project itself) before participants begin their research activities?
|
Haywood and Besley, 2014: Are citizen participants able to access pertinent research findings, salient literature, or project information used to inform the project before research begins? |
|
|
30 (529) |
Are participants exposed to steps in the scientific process in a systematic manner?
|
Help: There are many ways in which participants could be exposed to steps in the scientific process in a systematic manner. For example, they may be presented with the problem before they are presented with the method or they could be exposed to the results before they are given the conclusion. |
Haywood and Besley, 2014: Are participants exposed to steps in the science process in a systematic manner and are they allowed to practice research skills in an integrated fashion? |
|
31 (530) |
Are participants explicitly encouraged to reflect on or discuss current values, perspectives, opinions and attitudes relating to science concepts?
|
Haywood and Besley, 2014: Are participants encouraged to reflect on and discuss current VPOA [Values, Perspectives, Opinions, and Attitudes] relating to general science concepts and the research project? Smajgl et al. 2015: The learning-focused ChaRL framework measured and facilitated changes in existing beliefs, by tracing the fate of new knowledge introduced by a specific research process and capturing attendant changes in value and belief orientations. |
|
|
32 (531) |
Does participation in the project increase participants' scientific literacy?
|
Help: Scientific literacy is the knowledge and understanding of scientific concepts and processes required for personal decision making, participation in civic and cultural affairs, and economic productivity. |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the project contribute to a better understanding of science? Haywood and Besley, 2014: Are participants able to interact with novel concepts, theories, and phenomena to expand their understanding of science and relate knowledge to their personal lives? Bonney et al. 2009: Improved participant understanding of science content. Enhanced participant understanding of science process. Phillips et al. 2018: Our new framework is thus based on both empirical data and contributions from the literature and includes the following learning outcomes: Interest in Science and the Environment; Selfefficacy for Science and the Environment; Motivation for Science and the Environment; Knowledge of the Nature of Science; Skills of Science Inquiry; and Behavior and Stewardship. DITOs consortium 2016: Understanding of science: We base this directly on EC (2015) classical indicators for public understanding of science "knowledge of science in terms of textbook facts, methodological processes and awareness of and beliefs about institutional functioning" and it applied to both facilitators and participants. However, they also note that "knowledge is not a driver of positive attitudes but a cognitive component of public perceptions". |
|
33 (532) |
Does the project positively influence the attitudes of participants regarding science?
|
Information: The DITOs consortium used a mixture of surveys and one-on-one or group discussions with participants to gain a better understanding of their attitudes towards science including their perception of science in broader terms and the relevance of science to their daily lives. The DITOs consortium approach is described briefly on page 34 of this report. |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the project influence the values and attitudes of participants regarding science? Bonney et al. 2009: Better participant attitudes toward science Phillips et al. 2018: Our new framework is thus based on both empirical data and contributions from the literature and includes the following learning outcomes: Interest in Science and the Environment; Selfefficacy for Science and the Environment; Motivation for Science and the Environment; Knowledge of the Nature of Science; Skills of Science Inquiry; and Behavior and Stewardship. DITOs consortium 2016: Attitude towards science: Includes the perception of science in broaders terms (e.g. social gains from science and technology - medicine, environmental protection, etc.), relevance or science to daily lives, etc |
|
34 (533) |
Does the project increase the interest of participants in the topic of the research?
|
Phillips et al. 2018: Our new framework is thus based on both empirical data and contributions from the literature and includes the following learning outcomes: Interest in Science and the Environment; Selfefficacy for Science and the Environment; Motivation for Science and the Environment; Knowledge of the Nature of Science; Skills of Science Inquiry; and Behavior and Stewardship. Chase and Levine 2016: Social and cultural characteristics of a resource - resource perceived as charismatic or ecologically significant. Because citizen science programs draw upon the public for natural resource monitoring, social and cultural characteristics of the resource are an important consideration in program approaches and outcomes. These characteristics reflect the diverse ways that communities and individuals interact with the resource, causing the resource to become socially or culturally significant. |
|
|
35 (534) |
Are participants explicitly exposed to various careers in science through the project?
|
Help: Example careers in science include: academic careers such as lecturers; laboratory careers such as researchers or lab managers; data analysts, such as bioinformaticians; or science communicators, including editors. |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: In case of younger students, do they consider a scientific career? Haywood and Besley, 2014: Are participants exposed to various careers in science and able to analyze the contributions of those careers to society? |
|
36 (535) |
Are participants more likely to consider a scientific career having participated in the project?
|
Kieslinger et al. 2017: In case of younger students, do they consider a scientific career? Bonney et al. 2009: Increased participant interest in science as a career |
|
|
37 (536) |
Does the project link participants to experts (often researchers)?
|
Help: Links between participants and experts may occur to validate data, provide data analysis, or discuss the conclusions arising from the results. |
Kieslinger et al. 2017: Does the validation of citizen science data match with the scientific question and the expertise in the project? Does the project link to experts from other disciplines? |
|
38 (537) |
Are participants able to challenge the project's methodologies?
|
Help: A methodology is a system of methods used in a particular area of study. This could include interviewing participants, sending out surveys or how data is analysed. Methodologies may not be changed in a project because, for example, data need to be compared with existing datasets, for continuity of research, or because some SDG indicator is determining the parameters to measure, even if they don't necessarily make sense in a particular location. |
Lucero et al. 2018: Power relations: How much do you agree or disagree that community members…[7 point scale: completely disagree - completely agree] - Have increased participation in the research process - Can voice their opinions about research in front of researchers |
|
39 (538) |
Are professionals involved in organising the project (coordinators or researchers, for example) challenged to consider novel connections between their own careers and research, and the context of participating citizens?
|
Help: Project coordinators and researchers involved in citizen science often have to consider the context of participating citizens. This may challenge them to reconsider their own career or research for example if parameters which they thought were important aren't of interest to participants or if participants are passionate about an issue which they hadn't considered before. |
Haywood and Besley, 2014: Are project leaders challenged to consider novel connections between their own careers and research and those of citizen participants?
Gresle et al. 2019: community alignment (alignment of project goals to the community demands and efficacy of engagement techniques) and responsivement to community alignment. |