To have your citizen science cake and eat it?

Delivering research and outreach through Open Air Laboratories (OPAL)

Poppy Lakeman-Fraser, Laura Gosling, Andy J Moffat, Sarah E West, Roger Fradera, Linda Davies, Maxwell A Ayamba, René van der Wal

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)
6 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The vast array of citizen science projects which have blossomed over the last decade span a spectrum of objectives from research to outreach. While some focus primarily on the collection of rigorous scientific data and others are positioned towards the public engagement end of the gradient, the majority of initiatives attempt to balance the two. Although meeting multiple aims can be seen as a 'win-win' situation, it can also yield significant challenges as allocating resources to one element means that they may be diverted away from the other. Here we analyse one such programme which set out to find an effective equilibrium between these arguably polarised goals. Through the lens of the Open Air Laboratories (OPAL) programme we explore the inherent trade-offs encountered under four indicators derived from an independent citizen science evaluation framework. Assimilating experience from the OPAL network we investigate practical approaches taken to tackle arising tensions.

RESULTS: Working backwards from project delivery to design, we found the following elements to be important: ensuring outputs are fit for purpose, developing strong internal and external collaborations, building a sufficiently diverse partnership and considering target audiences. We combine these 'operational indicators' with four pre-existing 'outcome indicators' to create a model which can be used to shape the planning and delivery of a citizen science project.

CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that whether the proverb in the title rings true will largely depend on the identification of challenges along the way and the ability to address these conflicts throughout the citizen science project.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)16
JournalBMC Ecology
Volume16
Issue numberSuppl 1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 22 Jul 2016

Fingerprint

outreach
air
Lens
planning
project
science
laboratory
citizen
resource
indicator
programme

Keywords

  • Citizen science
  • evaluation framework
  • Lessons learned
  • OPAL
  • outputs
  • outreach
  • public participation in scientific research
  • research
  • trade-off
  • volunteers

Cite this

To have your citizen science cake and eat it? Delivering research and outreach through Open Air Laboratories (OPAL). / Lakeman-Fraser, Poppy; Gosling, Laura; Moffat, Andy J; West, Sarah E; Fradera, Roger; Davies, Linda; Ayamba, Maxwell A; van der Wal, René.

In: BMC Ecology, Vol. 16 , No. Suppl 1, 22.07.2016, p. 16.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Lakeman-Fraser, P, Gosling, L, Moffat, AJ, West, SE, Fradera, R, Davies, L, Ayamba, MA & van der Wal, R 2016, 'To have your citizen science cake and eat it? Delivering research and outreach through Open Air Laboratories (OPAL)', BMC Ecology, vol. 16 , no. Suppl 1, pp. 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12898-016-0065-0
Lakeman-Fraser, Poppy ; Gosling, Laura ; Moffat, Andy J ; West, Sarah E ; Fradera, Roger ; Davies, Linda ; Ayamba, Maxwell A ; van der Wal, René. / To have your citizen science cake and eat it? Delivering research and outreach through Open Air Laboratories (OPAL). In: BMC Ecology. 2016 ; Vol. 16 , No. Suppl 1. pp. 16.
@article{83958adb35d24abc9374699fddb3682b,
title = "To have your citizen science cake and eat it?: Delivering research and outreach through Open Air Laboratories (OPAL)",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: The vast array of citizen science projects which have blossomed over the last decade span a spectrum of objectives from research to outreach. While some focus primarily on the collection of rigorous scientific data and others are positioned towards the public engagement end of the gradient, the majority of initiatives attempt to balance the two. Although meeting multiple aims can be seen as a 'win-win' situation, it can also yield significant challenges as allocating resources to one element means that they may be diverted away from the other. Here we analyse one such programme which set out to find an effective equilibrium between these arguably polarised goals. Through the lens of the Open Air Laboratories (OPAL) programme we explore the inherent trade-offs encountered under four indicators derived from an independent citizen science evaluation framework. Assimilating experience from the OPAL network we investigate practical approaches taken to tackle arising tensions.RESULTS: Working backwards from project delivery to design, we found the following elements to be important: ensuring outputs are fit for purpose, developing strong internal and external collaborations, building a sufficiently diverse partnership and considering target audiences. We combine these 'operational indicators' with four pre-existing 'outcome indicators' to create a model which can be used to shape the planning and delivery of a citizen science project.CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that whether the proverb in the title rings true will largely depend on the identification of challenges along the way and the ability to address these conflicts throughout the citizen science project.",
keywords = "Citizen science , evaluation framework, Lessons learned, OPAL, outputs, outreach , public participation in scientific research, research, trade-off, volunteers",
author = "Poppy Lakeman-Fraser and Laura Gosling and Moffat, {Andy J} and West, {Sarah E} and Roger Fradera and Linda Davies and Ayamba, {Maxwell A} and {van der Wal}, Ren{\'e}",
note = "Acknowledgements We would like to thank the Big Lottery Fund for financing this research through the OPAL programme and Defra for supporting the publication of this manuscript. David Slawson and Kate Martin provided guidance throughout the development of this manuscript. Lastly, we are grateful to the OPAL participants, without whom this citizen science programme would not be possible.",
year = "2016",
month = "7",
day = "22",
doi = "10.1186/s12898-016-0065-0",
language = "English",
volume = "16",
pages = "16",
journal = "BMC Ecology",
issn = "1472-6785",
publisher = "BioMed Central",
number = "Suppl 1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - To have your citizen science cake and eat it?

T2 - Delivering research and outreach through Open Air Laboratories (OPAL)

AU - Lakeman-Fraser, Poppy

AU - Gosling, Laura

AU - Moffat, Andy J

AU - West, Sarah E

AU - Fradera, Roger

AU - Davies, Linda

AU - Ayamba, Maxwell A

AU - van der Wal, René

N1 - Acknowledgements We would like to thank the Big Lottery Fund for financing this research through the OPAL programme and Defra for supporting the publication of this manuscript. David Slawson and Kate Martin provided guidance throughout the development of this manuscript. Lastly, we are grateful to the OPAL participants, without whom this citizen science programme would not be possible.

PY - 2016/7/22

Y1 - 2016/7/22

N2 - BACKGROUND: The vast array of citizen science projects which have blossomed over the last decade span a spectrum of objectives from research to outreach. While some focus primarily on the collection of rigorous scientific data and others are positioned towards the public engagement end of the gradient, the majority of initiatives attempt to balance the two. Although meeting multiple aims can be seen as a 'win-win' situation, it can also yield significant challenges as allocating resources to one element means that they may be diverted away from the other. Here we analyse one such programme which set out to find an effective equilibrium between these arguably polarised goals. Through the lens of the Open Air Laboratories (OPAL) programme we explore the inherent trade-offs encountered under four indicators derived from an independent citizen science evaluation framework. Assimilating experience from the OPAL network we investigate practical approaches taken to tackle arising tensions.RESULTS: Working backwards from project delivery to design, we found the following elements to be important: ensuring outputs are fit for purpose, developing strong internal and external collaborations, building a sufficiently diverse partnership and considering target audiences. We combine these 'operational indicators' with four pre-existing 'outcome indicators' to create a model which can be used to shape the planning and delivery of a citizen science project.CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that whether the proverb in the title rings true will largely depend on the identification of challenges along the way and the ability to address these conflicts throughout the citizen science project.

AB - BACKGROUND: The vast array of citizen science projects which have blossomed over the last decade span a spectrum of objectives from research to outreach. While some focus primarily on the collection of rigorous scientific data and others are positioned towards the public engagement end of the gradient, the majority of initiatives attempt to balance the two. Although meeting multiple aims can be seen as a 'win-win' situation, it can also yield significant challenges as allocating resources to one element means that they may be diverted away from the other. Here we analyse one such programme which set out to find an effective equilibrium between these arguably polarised goals. Through the lens of the Open Air Laboratories (OPAL) programme we explore the inherent trade-offs encountered under four indicators derived from an independent citizen science evaluation framework. Assimilating experience from the OPAL network we investigate practical approaches taken to tackle arising tensions.RESULTS: Working backwards from project delivery to design, we found the following elements to be important: ensuring outputs are fit for purpose, developing strong internal and external collaborations, building a sufficiently diverse partnership and considering target audiences. We combine these 'operational indicators' with four pre-existing 'outcome indicators' to create a model which can be used to shape the planning and delivery of a citizen science project.CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that whether the proverb in the title rings true will largely depend on the identification of challenges along the way and the ability to address these conflicts throughout the citizen science project.

KW - Citizen science

KW - evaluation framework

KW - Lessons learned

KW - OPAL

KW - outputs

KW - outreach

KW - public participation in scientific research

KW - research

KW - trade-off

KW - volunteers

U2 - 10.1186/s12898-016-0065-0

DO - 10.1186/s12898-016-0065-0

M3 - Article

VL - 16

SP - 16

JO - BMC Ecology

JF - BMC Ecology

SN - 1472-6785

IS - Suppl 1

ER -