Advertisement

Ambio

pp 1–9 | Cite as

The accuracy of volunteer surveyors for obtaining tree measurements in tropical forests

  • Barnabas Harrison
  • Thomas Edward MartinEmail author
  • Abdul Haris Mustari
Research Article

Abstract

Volunteer-led surveys are increasingly used to collect ecological information and may represent a means for obtaining the tree measurement datasets necessary to calculate carbon stocks in tropical forests in order to justify funding like REDD+. However, the accuracy of tree measurements collected by volunteers remains unassessed. Here, we examine how tree measurements collected by student volunteers vary compared to measurements collected by trained ecologists using identical methods. Measurements by both teams were collected at 11 habitat plots on Buton Island, Indonesia. Both teams counted similar numbers of trees per plot and obtained positively correlated circumference-at-breast-height measurement values at plot and individual tree scales of aggregation. Volunteer and ecologist-generated median carbon stock estimates differed by just 1.1%. We therefore suggest that with sufficient training and supervision volunteers can be used to obtain accurate tree measurement data for carbon stock calculations.

Keywords

Citizen science Habitat Indonesia Rainforest REDD+ 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Mick McCarthy and Bruce Carlisle for guidance, and Plume School, Sedburgh School, Coulsden College, Harrogate Ladies College and Newcastle College for their surveying efforts. We also thank RISTEK Indonesia for the necessary permits to complete this research, and two anonymous reviewers for their constructive and helpful comments.

References

  1. Agrawal, A., B. Nepstad, and A. Chhatre. 2011. Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 36: 373–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bancks, N., E.A. North, and G.R. Johnson. 2018. An analysis of agreement between volunteer- and researcher-collected urban tree inventory data. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry 44: 73–86.Google Scholar
  3. Bloniarz, D.V., and H.D.P. Ryan III. 1996. The use of volunteer initiatives in conducting urban forest resource inventories. Journal of Aboriculture 22: 75–82.Google Scholar
  4. Boudreau, S.A., and N.D. Yan. 2004. Auditing the accuracy of a volunteer-based surveillance program for an aquatic invader bythotrephes. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 91: 17–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bradshaw, C.J.A., N.S. Sodhi, and B.W. Brook. 2009. Tropical turmoil: A biodiversity tragedy in progress. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 7: 79–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brandon, A., G. Spyreas, B. Molano-Flores, C. Carroll, and J. Ellis. 2003. Can volunteers provide reliable data for forest vegetation surveys? Natural Areas Journal 23: 254–262.Google Scholar
  7. Brown, S. 1997. Estimating biomass and biomass change of tropical forests: A primer. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization.Google Scholar
  8. Brown, W.T., M.E. Krasny, and N. Schoch. 2001. Volunteer monitoring of non-indigenous invasive plant species in the Adirondack Park, New York, USA. Natural Areas Journal 21: 189–196.Google Scholar
  9. Burg, S., C. Rixen, V. Stöckli, and S. Wipf. 2015. Observation bias and its causes in botanical surveys on high-alpine summits. Journal of Vegetation Science 26: 191–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Butt, N., E. Slade, J. Thompson, Y. Malhi, and T. Riutta. 2013. Quantifying the sampling error in tree census measurements by volunteers and its effect on carbon stock estimates. Ecological Applications 23: 936–943.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cairns, M.A., S. Brown, E.H. Helmer, and G.A. Baumgardner. 1997. Root biomass allocation in the world’s upland forests. Oecologia 111: 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chave, J., C. Andalo, S. Brown, M.A. Cairns, J.Q. Chambers, Q.D. Eamus, H. Fölster, F. Fromard, et al. 2005. Tree allometry and improved estimation of carbon stocks and balance in tropical forests. Oecologia 145: 87–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cole, T.G., and J.J. Ewel. 2006. Allometric equations for four valuable tropical tree species. Forest Ecology and Management 229: 351–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Darwall, W.R.T., and N.K. Dulvy. 1996. An evaluation of the suitability of non-specialist volunteer researchers for coral reef fish surveys. Mafia Island, Tanzania—A case study. Biological Conservation 78: 223–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Delaney, D.G., C.D. Sperling, C.S. Adams, and B. Leung. 2008. Marine invasive species: Validation of citizen science and implications for national monitoring networks. Biological Invasions 10: 117–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dickinson, J.L., J. Shirk, D. Bonter, R. Bonney, R.L. Crain, J. Martin, T. Phillips, and K. Purcell. 2012. The current state of citizen science as a tool for ecological research and public engagement. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 10: 291–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dickinson, J.L., B. Zuckerberg, and D.N. Bonter. 2010. Citizen science as an ecological research tool: Challenges and benefits. Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics 41: 149–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fearnside, P.M. 2005. Deforestation in Brazilian Amazonia: History, rates, and consequences. Conservation Biology 19: 680–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Foody, G.M., M.E. Cutler, J. McMorrow, D. Pelz, H. Tangki, D.S. Boyd, and I. Douglas. 2001. Mapping the biomass of Bornean tropical rain forest from remotely sensed data. Global Ecology and Biogeography 10: 379–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Galloway, A.W.E., M.T. Tudor, and W.M.V. Haegen. 2006. The reliability of citizen science: A case study of Oregon White Oak stand surveys. Wildlife Society Bulletin 34: 1425–1429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gardner, T.A., J. Barlow, L.W. Parry, and C.A. Peres. 2007. Predicting the uncertain future of tropical forest species in a data vacuum. Biotropica 39: 25–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Globallometree. 2017. Globallometree: Assessing volume, biomass and carbon stocks of trees and forests. http://www.globallometree.org/. Accessed 23 Aug 2017
  23. Goetz, S.J., M. Hansen, R.A. Houghton, W. Walker, N. Laporte, and J. Busch. 2015. Measurement and monitoring needs, capabilities and potential for addressing reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation under REDD+. Environmental Research Letters 10: 123001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hansen, M.C., P.V. Potapov, R. Moore, M. Hancher, S.A. Turubanova, A. Tyukavina, D. Thau, S.V. Stehman, et al. 2013. High-resolution global maps of 21st-century forest cover change. Science 342: 850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Holck, M. 2008. Participatory forest monitoring: An assessment of the accuracy of simple cost–effective methods. Biodiversity and Conservation 17: 2023–2036.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2000. Land use, land-use change, and forestry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  27. James, A.N., K.J. Gaston, and A. Balmford. 1999. Balancing the Earths accounts. Nature 401: 323–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kosmala, M., A. Wiggins, A. Swanson, and B. Simmons. 2016. Assessing data quality in citizen science. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 14: 551–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kremen, C., K.S. Ullmann, and R.W. Thorp. 2011. Evaluating the quality of citizen-scientist data on pollinator communities. Conservation Biology 25: 607–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kurnianto, S., and D. Murdiyarso. 2010. Forest carbon database: A web-based carbon stock data repository and exchange system. CIFOR: Bogor, Indonesia.Google Scholar
  31. Lewandowski, E., and H. Specht. 2015. Influence of volunteer and project characteristics. on data quality of biological surveys. Conservation Biology 29: 713–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Martin, T.E., B. Harrison, and P.M. Wheeler. 2015. The case for REDD+ funding for the forests of Buton Island, SE Sulawesi, Indonesia—A summary. Old Bolingbroke, UK: Operation Wallacea.Google Scholar
  33. Martin, T.E., D.J. Kelly, N.T. Keogh, D. Heriyadi, H. Singer, and G.A. Blackburn. 2012. The avifauna of the Lambusango Forest Reserve, Buton Island, South-East Sulawesi (with additional sightings from Southern Buton). Forktail 28: 107–112.Google Scholar
  34. Martin, A.R., and S.C. Thomas. 2011. A reassessment of carbon content in tropical trees. PLoS One.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0023533.Google Scholar
  35. McNeill, D. 2015. Norway and REDD+ in Indonesia: The art of not governing? Forum for Development Studies 42: 113–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Milsom, J., J. Ali, and Sudarwono. 1999. Structure and collision history of the Buton continental fragment, Eastern Indonesia. AAPG Bulletin 83: 1666–1689.Google Scholar
  37. Narasimhan, P., I. Starr, J. Hayward, M. Noponen, and J. Durbin. 2014. Guidance for the use of the CCB standards. Arlington, Virginia: Climate, Community and Biodiversity Alliance and the Rainforest Alliance.Google Scholar
  38. Newman, C., C.D. Buesching, and D.W. Macdonald. 2003. Validating mammal monitoring methods and assessing the performance of volunteers in wildlife conservation - “Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodies?”. Biological Conservation 113: 189–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Niinioja, R., A.L. Holopainen, L. Lepistö, A. Rämö, and J. Turkka. 2004. Public participation in monitoring programmes as a tool for lakeshore monitoring: the example of Lake Pyhäjärvi, Karelia, Eastern Finland. Limnologica - Ecology and Management of Inland Waters 34: 154–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. O’Donovan, G. 2001. Report on the botanical and ecological status of the Kakenauwe and Lambusango Nature Reserves on Buton Island, Sulawesi. Old Bolingbroke, UK: Operation Wallacea.Google Scholar
  41. Phillips, O., T. Baker, T. Feldpausch, and R. Brienen. 2008. RAINFOR field manual for plot establishment and remeasurement. http://www.geog.leeds.ac.uk/projects/rainfor/manuals/RAINFOR%20field%20manual%20version%202008%20ENG.pdf. Accessed 14 June.
  42. Prater, A.J. 1981. Estuary Birds of Britain and Ireland. Calton, UK: T & AD Poyser.Google Scholar
  43. Ravindranath, N.H., and M. Ostwald. 2008. Carbon inventory methods: Handbook for greenhouse gas inventory, carbon mitigation and roundwood production projects. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Roman, L.A., B.C. Scharenbroch, J.P.A. Östberg, L.S. Mueller, J.G. Henning, A.K. Koeser, J.R. Sanders, D.R. Betza, et al. 2017. Data quality in citizen science urban tree inventories. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening 22: 124–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Silvertown, J. 2009. A new dawn for citizen science. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 24: 467–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Starr, J., C.M. Schweik, N. Bush, L. Fletcher, J. Finn, J. Fish, and C.T. Bargeron. 2014. Lights, camera…citizen science: assessing the effectiveness of smartphone-based video training in invasive plant identification. PLoS One.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0111433.Google Scholar
  47. Van der Werf, G.R., D.C. Morton, R.S. DeFries, J.G.J. Olivier, P.S. Kasibhatla, R.B. Jackson, G.J. Collatz, and J.T. Randerson. 2009. CO2 emissions from forest loss. Nature Geoscience 2: 737–738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Verified Carbon Standard. 2012. VCS Standard. Version 3. Washington DC: VCS.Google Scholar
  49. Watson, C. 2009. Forest carbon accounting: overview and principals. London: United Nations Development Programme.Google Scholar
  50. Whitten, T., M. Mustafa, and G.S. Henderson. 2002. The ecology of Sulawesi, 2nd ed. Yogyakarta: Gadjah Mada University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Widayati, A., and B. Carlisle. 2012. Impacts of rattan cane harvesting on vegetation structure and tree diversity of Conservation Forest in Buton, Indonesia. Forest Ecology and Management 266: 206–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wiggins, A. 2013. Free as in puppies: Compensating for ICT constraints in citizen science. In Proceedings of the ACM International conference on computer-supported cooperative work and social computing. San Antonio, USA.Google Scholar
  53. Xiang, W., J. Zhou, S. Ouyang, S. Zhang, P. Lei, J. Li, X. Deng, X. Fang, et al. 2016. Species-specific and general allometric equations for estimating tree biomass components of subtropical forests in southern China. European Journal of Forest Research 135: 963–979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Zar, J.H. 2010. Biostatistical analysis, 5th ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Barnabas Harrison
    • 1
  • Thomas Edward Martin
    • 2
    Email author
  • Abdul Haris Mustari
    • 3
  1. 1.LondonUK
  2. 2.Operation Wallacea LtdOld BolingbrokeUK
  3. 3.Faculty of ForestryDepartment of Conservation of Forest Resources and EcotourismBogorIndonesia

Personalised recommendations