, Volume 44, Issue 8, pp 827–832 | Cite as

Nature apps: Waiting for the revolution

  • Paul JepsonEmail author
  • Richard J. Ladle


Apps are small task-orientated programs with the potential to integrate the computational and sensing capacities of smartphones with the power of cloud computing, social networking, and crowdsourcing. They have the potential to transform how humans interact with nature, cause a step change in the quantity and resolution of biodiversity data, democratize access to environmental knowledge, and reinvigorate ways of enjoying nature. To assess the extent to which this potential is being exploited in relation to nature, we conducted an automated search of the Google Play Store using 96 nature-related terms. This returned data on ~36 304 apps, of which ~6301 were nature-themed. We found that few of these fully exploit the full range of capabilities inherent in the technology and/or have successfully captured the public imagination. Such breakthroughs will only be achieved by increasing the frequency and quality of collaboration between environmental scientists, information engineers, computer scientists, and interested publics.


Mobile apps Applications Citizen science Biodiversity Biogeography Digital conservation 



We thank Simon Abele for his help in designing, coding and executing the scrape and the editors of Ambio’s Digital Conservation Special issue and three anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments which improved earlier drafts of this article. RJL is funded by CNPQ, grant number 311412/2011–4.


  1. Borden, K.A., A. Kapadia, A. Smith, and L. Whyte. 2013. Educational exploration of the zooniverse: Tools for formal and informal audience engagement. In Communicating science, ed. J. Barnes, C. Shupla, J.G. Manning, and M.G. Gibbs, 101–108. San Francisco: Astronomical Society of the Pacific.Google Scholar
  2. Bonsignore, E.M., D.L. Hansen, Z.O. Toups, L.E. Nacke, A. Salter, and W. Lutters. 2012. Mixed reality games. In Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on computer supported cooperative work companion, 7–8. ACM.Google Scholar
  3. Chapron, G. 2015. Wildlife in the cloud: A new approach for engaging stakeholders in wildlife management. Ambio (Suppl. 4). doi: 10.1007/s13280-015-0706-0.
  4. Burkhardt, J., T. Schaeck, H. Henn, S. Hepper, and K. Rindtorff. 2002. Pervasive computing: Technology and architecture of mobile internet applications. Boston: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  5. Chih-Chin, Y., and J.T. Huang. 2012. The era of cloud computer: Thru bio-detecting and open-resources to achieve the ubiquitous devices. IEEE International Conference on Consumer Electronics (ICCE) 2012: 580–583.Google Scholar
  6. Galán-Díaz, C.G., P. Edwards, J.D. Nelson, and R. van der Wal. 2015. Digital innovation through partnership between nature conservation organisations and academia: A qualitative impact assessment. Ambio (Suppl. 4). doi: 10.1007/s13280-015-0704-2.
  7. Gartner Inc. 2013a. Gartner Says Annual Smartphone Sales Surpassed Sales of Feature Phones for the First Time in 2013. Retrieved 6 June, 2014, from
  8. Gartner Inc. 2013b. Gartner Says Worldwide Tablet Sales Grew 68 Percent in 2013, With Android Capturing 62 Percent of the Market. Retrieved 6 June, 2014, from
  9. Hill, S. 2014. Games rule the iTunes store: Most popular genres revealed. Localize Direct. Accessed 8 Oct 2015.
  10. Jepson, P., and R.J. Ladle. 2010. Conservation: A beginner’s guide. Oxford: Oneworld Publications.Google Scholar
  11. Joppa, L.N. 2015. Technology for nature conservation: An industry perspective. Ambio (Suppl. 4). doi: 10.1007/s13280-015-0702-4.
  12. Kelling, S., D. Fink, F.A. La Sorte, A. Johnston, N.E. Bruns, and W.M. Hochacka. 2015. Taking a ‘Big Data’ approach to data quality in a citizen science project. Ambio (Suppl. 4). doi: 10.1007/s13280-015-0710-4.
  13. Koh, L.P., and S.A. Wich. 2012. Dawn of drone ecology: Low-cost autonomous aerial vehicles for conservation. Tropical Conservation Science 5: 121–132.Google Scholar
  14. Ladle, R., P. Jepson, A. Malhado, S. Jennings, and M. Barua. 2011. The causes and biogeographical significance of species’ rediscovery. Frontiers of Biogeography 3: 104–111.Google Scholar
  15. Lave, R. 2015. The future of environmental expertise. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 105: 244–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Sandbrook, C., W.M. Adams, and B. Monteferri. 2014. Digital games and biodiversity conservation. Conservation Letters. doi: 10.1111/conl.12113.Google Scholar
  17. Sandbrook, C. 2015. The social implications of using drones for biodiversity conservation. Ambio (Suppl. 4). doi: 10.1007/s13280-015-0714-0.
  18. Saylor, M. 2012. The mobile wave: How mobile intelligence will change everything. Philadelphia: Vangard Press.Google Scholar
  19. Silvertown, J. 2009. A new dawn for citizen science. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 24: 467–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Sliwa, J., and E. Benoist. 2011. Pervasive computing—The next technical revolution. In Proceedings of the 2011 4th international conference on developments in e-systems engineering (DeSE 2011) 621-626626.Google Scholar
  21. Walters, C.L., R. Freeman, A. Collen, C. Dietz, M.B. Fenton, G. Jones, M.K. Obrist, S.J. Puechmaille, et al. 2012. A continental-scale tool for acoustic identification of European bats. Journal of Applied Ecology 49: 1064–1074.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Zilli, D., O. Parson, G. Merrett, and A. Rogers. 2013. A hidden Markov model-based acoustic cicada detector for crowdsourced smartphone biodiversity monitoring. In 23rd international joint conference on artificial intelligence, Beijing, CN, 2945-2951. doi: 10.1049/cp.2012.0602.

Copyright information

© Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Geography and the EnvironmentOxford UniversityOxfordUK
  2. 2.Institute of Biological and Health SciencesFederal University of AlagoasMaceióBrazil

Personalised recommendations