Abstract
Environmental data is collected at unprecedented scales and speeds, targeting diverse societal challenges, and through the inclusion of multiple stakeholders. Yet, an understanding of enabling technologies involved in the engagement of citizens appear largely outside of the realm of air pollution. Recently, different air pollution projects have been rolled out in Europe and abroad; a structured analysis, however, of the way citizens are involved in these type of projects does not yet exist. In contribution to the ongoing EU-Funded project hackAIR, this paper therefore explores this research gap on the topic of air pollution and citizen science through the following question: Which engagement mechanisms can be identified in existing air pollution citizen science projects? We combine multiple literature sources, employ a systematic case study analysis and conduct seven qualitative interviews with key experts to target citizen science projects related to air pollution. Several mechanisms emerged at the interface between air pollution, citizen participation and knowledge production. These include: (1) Scale, (2) User-involvement and co-creation, (3) Communication, and (4) User motivation and aspects of behaviour. Despite its growing reputation in digital innovation, a majority of the mapped projects do not explicitly engage in any co-creation process. Multiple project insights suggest the importance of non-academic stakeholders as agents for communication and engagement. Campaign-based gamification can prove successful in establishing urgency in local contexts. Common engagement barriers include issues in the data contribution, science communication, technical project limitations, scaling and the critical nature of distributed sensors. This preliminary research offers a fruitful approach in assessing and comparing initiatives, and can enrich our understanding of the contribution that air pollution technology can have in citizen science.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
References
Alfonso, L., Chacón, J.C., Peña, G.: Allowing citizens to effortlessly become rainfall sensors. In: E-Proceedings of the 36th IAHR World Congress, 28 June – 3 July 2015, The Hague, The Netherlands, (1), pp. 1–5 (2015)
Arniani, M., Badii, A., Liddo, A., Georgi, S., Passani, A., Piccolo, L.S.G., Teli, M.: Collective awareness platforms for sustainability and social innovation: an introduction. (2014). http://booksprints-for-ict-research.eu/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/BS5-CAPS-FIN-003.pdf
Barney, D.: The morning after: citizen engagement in technological society. Techne 9(3), 23–31 (2006)
Bonney, R., Cooper, C.B., Dickinson, J., Kelling, S., Phillips, T., Rosenberg, K.V., Shirk, J.: Citizen science: a developing tool for expanding science knowledge and scientific literacy. Bioscience 59(11), 977–984 (2009)
Certomà, C., Corsini, F., Rizzi, F.: Crowdsourcing urban sustainability. Data, people and technologies in participatory governance. Futures 74, 93–106 (2015). doi:10.1016/j.futures.2014.11.006
European Commission. CAPS Projects in FP7 (2016). https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/programme-and-projects/caps-projects-fp7
Fritz, S., McCallum, I., Schill, C., Perger, C., Grillmayer, R., Achard, F., Kraxner, F., Obersteiner, M.: Geo-wiki.org: The use of crowdsourcing to improve global land cover. Remote Sens. 1(3), 345–354 (2009) http://doi.org/10.3390/rs1030345
Geoghegan, H., Dyke, A., Pateman, R., West, S., Everett, G.: Understanding Motivations for Citizen Science, May 2016
Haklay, M.: Citizen Science and Policy: A European Perspective, 4 (2015)
Higgins, C.I., Williams, J., Leibovici, D.G., Simonis, I., Davis, M.J., Muldoon, C., van Genuchten, P., O’hare, G., Wiemann, S.: Citizen observatory web cobweb a generic infrastructure platform to facilitate the collection of citizen science data for environmental monitoring. Int. J. Spatial Data Infrastruct. Res. 11, 20–48 (2016) http://doi.org/10.2902/1725-0463.2016.11.art3
Kruger, L.E., Shannon, M.A.: Getting to know ourselves and our places through participation in civic social assessment. Soc. Nat. Resour. 13, 461–478 (2000)
Land-Zandstra, A.M., Devilee, J.L.A., Snik, F., Buurmeijer, F., van den Broek, J.M.: Citizen science on a smartphone: participants’ motivations and learning. Pub. Underst. Sci. (Bristol, England), 25(1), 45–60. http://doi.org/10.1177/0963662515602406
Leonardi, C., Cappellotto, A., Caraviello, M., Lepri, B., Antonelli, F.: SecondNose: an air quality mobile crowdsensing system. In: Proceedings of the 8th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction Fun, Fast, Foundational – NordiCHI 2014, pp. 1051–1054 (2014). http://doi.org/10.1145/2639189.2670273
Nov, O., Arazy, O., Anderson, D.: Technology-mediated citizen science participation: a motivational model. In: Proceedings of the Fifth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, pp. 249–256, July 2011 http://doi.org/10.1145/1940761.1940771
Olsson, P., Lebel, L., Garden, P., Berkes, F., Adger, W. N., Cash, D. W., Pritchard, L., Young, O.: Scale and cross-scale dynamics: governance and information in a multilevel world. Ecology and Society, 11(2), 8 (2006). http://uu.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwtV1La9wwEBbbQKCX0jYpSR-gUy_GwSvZlhToYZPmQcmLPC65LNYrmKTe4Oz-_44kv3bJoQ3pxdjC2Ov9Ps9o5G9mEKJkJ4lXbIIEN6ETZrlOhVHEFQrTlNBc0hwcsq-4cXrLJ2f81yk_GI3ayhX92H8FHsYAepdI-w_gdxeFAdgHCsAWSADbv6LBFWAQvhDsO38Y
Poliakoff, E., Webb, T.L.: What factors predict scientists’ intentions to participate in public engagement of science activities? Sci. Commun. 29, 242–263 (2007)
Powell, M.C., Colin, M.: Meaningful citizen engagement in science and technology what would it really take? Sci. Commun. 30(1), 126–136 (2008). http://doi.org/10.1177/1075547008320520
Rotman, D., Hammock, J., Preece, J., Hansen, D., Boston, C., Bowser, A., He, Y.: Motivations affecting initial and long-term participation in citizen science projects in three countries. iConference, 110–124 (2014). http://doi.org/10.9776/14054
Sanders, E.B.-N.: From user-centered to participatory design approaches. In: Design and the Social Sciences: Making Connections, pp. 1–8 (2002)
Sîrbu, A., Becker, M., Caminiti, S., De Baets, B., Elen, B., Francis, L., Gravino, P., Hotho, A., Ingarra, S., Loreto, V., Molino, A., Mueller, J., Peters, J., van den Bossche, J.: Participatory patterns in an international air quality monitoring initiative. PLoS ONE, 10(8), 1–19 (2015). http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0136763
Yin, R.K.: Qualitative Research from Start to Finish. Guilford Publications, New York City (2015)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendices
Appendix 1: Selected Interview Information
Project | Expert | Organization | Conducted |
|---|---|---|---|
CityZen | Bas Baccarne | imec Living Labs | 18/04/17 10:00 |
Urban AirQ | Gijs Boerwinkel | Waag Society | 13/04/17 10:00 |
Clair City | Dr. Enda Hayes | UWE Bristol | 21/04/17 14:00 |
CITI-SENSE | Sonja Grossberndt; Hai-Ying Liu | NILU | 26/04/17 10:00 |
Second Nose | Chiara Leonardi | Fondazione Bruno Kessler | 28/04/17 10:00 |
iSPEX | Dr. Frans Snik | University Leiden | 28/04/17 11:00 |
EveryAware: APIC | Dr. Alina Sirbu | University of Pisa | 08/05/17 11:00 |
Appendix 2: Qualitative Interview Topic List
Section A: General Project Information
-
1.
Can you tell me a bit about the general aims and ambitions of your project?
-
2.
More specifically, can you explain a bit about the role of yourself and your organization in the project?
-
3.
Could you describe how community engagement fitted within your strategy?
Section B: Broad engagement
-
4.
It would be great if you could tell me a bit about the process that your project took towards narrowing and defining target groups?
-
5.
Likewise, could you describe how your engagement process was influenced by the different technologies involved in your project?
-
6.
Could you tell me a bit about the roles and responsibilities of project partners in implementing the engagement strategy?
Section C: Characteristics of engagement
-
7.
Could you explain a bit how your engagement strategy was tailored to reflect multiple stages of engagement?
-
8.
Who was responsible for the communication of materials towards target groups for initial selection? This can be both via online/offline activities.
-
9.
Furthermore, throughout your project were there any periods where corrective actions needed to be taken, or when you needed to adapt to changing circumstances?
Section D: Engagement mechanisms
-
10.
Could you tell me a bit about how your project provided feedback to the local community of their contribution?
-
11.
How were results relayed towards citizens in the local area? And by whom?
-
12.
Did your project think it was important to provide recognition to citizens engaged in the project?
-
13.
Was there a gamification or reward component to your project? How were incentives considered to keep citizens engaged and motivated?
Section E: Moving Forward
-
14.
If you could pinpoint two main challenges that your project experienced that are directly related to engaging users for your project, what would they be?
-
15.
What advice would you give to other projects that can help then in approaching an engagement strategy?
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
McCrory, G., Veeckman, C., Claeys, L. (2017). Citizen Science Is in the Air – Engagement Mechanisms from Technology-Mediated Citizen Science Projects Addressing Air Pollution. In: Kompatsiaris, I., et al. Internet Science. INSCI 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10673. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70284-1_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70284-1_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-70283-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-70284-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)