314

www.frontiersinecology.org The Ecological Society of America

P
articipation in citizen science does not reflect the
demographics of the US. Individuals from groups
that have been historically underrepresented in science
(eg African Americans, Latinos, American Indians) par-
ticipate less than majority groups (Trumbull et al. 2000;
Evans et al. 2005), and affluent participants outnumber
less-affluent participants (Trumbull et al. 2000; Evans et
al. 2005). Members of certain ethnic, racial, and socio-
economic groups are therefore less likely to reap the
benefits of citizen-science programs, which include
interacting with scientists (Evans et al. 2005), practicing
scientific thinking (Trumbull et al. 2000), increasing
knowledge of a scientific discipline (Brossard et al. 2005;
Jolly 2009), valuing science (Wilderman et al. 2004), and
benefiting from associated preservation or sustainability
outcomes (Wilderman et al. 2004; Evans et al. 2005).
Given that one of the goals of many citizen-science
efforts is to encourage interest in scientific careers
among volunteer participants, the relatively low num-
bers of minority participants in citizen science may con-
tribute to reduced diversity in the current and future sci-
entific workforce.
This lack of participation in the informal arena of citi-
zen science compounds the disparity in educational out-
comes observed in formal K12 education. It also raises
doubts about the relevance of citizen-science campaigns
to diverse communities. Finally, to the extent that citizen
science is the result of federal investment, lack of partici-
pation by specific racial, ethnic, or socioeconomic groups
is not consistent with a democratic approach to science.
Lack of broad participation also affects the quality of
the citizen-science projects themselves. Studies have
shown that diversity benefits all learners, not just
those from the minority communities (Gurin 1999).
Furthermore, the introduction of new groups to the scien-
tific community has resulted in new perspectives on
research questions, interpretations, and methods (Bang et
al. 2007).
nExploring the lack of participation
Understanding the root causes for the lack of minority
participation in citizen science can help inform correc-
tive strategies. The causes vary, however, given the
breadth of activities encompassed in citizen science and
the diversity of the people who should be better repre-
sented. For instance, many barriers to individual partici-
pation involve family resources and engagement (Evans
et al. 2005).
Published evaluations of long-running citizen-science
efforts are a good place to begin looking for reasons for the
dearth of minority participation in citizen science. These
evaluations suggest that lack of access to natural settings
(Evans et al. 2005) as well as discomfort in those settings
(Levine et al. 2009) inhibit the participation of many
urban dwellers. For individuals with less formal education,
a lack of familiarity with science and scientific processes
can act as a hurdle (Evans et al. 2005). The challenge of
balancing participation in citizen science against other
responsibilities may be greater for low-income families,
those balancing multiple jobs, and families with limited
transportation options (Evans et al. 2005).
Research on methods for broadening attendance at sci-
ence centers and other informal venues is also relevant to
citizen-science programs. The challenge of balancing
work responsibilities with informal activities is a factor
contributing to the lack of socioeconomic and ethnic
diversity at science centers (Jolly 2009). The cultures and
norms of these centers (and perhaps those of citizen-sci-
ence projects) are sometimes unfamiliar (Jolly 2009) or
even unwelcoming (Levine et al. 2009) to members of
diverse communities.
The most extensive body of research addressing the
lack of diversity in science is related to participation in
college science majors. Many of the same barriers have
been identified unfamiliar, sometimes unwelcoming
customs and social practices, and less access to prepara-
tory experiences and to natural settings (Levine et al.
2009) but additional barriers are associated with a more
fundamental disconnect. Because science does not appear
CITIZEN SCIENCE
A framework for engaging diverse
communities in citizen science in the US
Rajul E Pandya
Citizen science is a powerful tool for connecting people to science, but in the US, such initiatives have not
connected as well to groups that have been historically underrepresented in science. Research suggests that
while several factors contribute to this lack of diverse participation in citizen science, the critical hurdle may
be an absence of alignment between community priorities and research objectives. Here, I discuss a partici-
patory framework for designing citizen-science programs that align with community priorities.
Front Ecol Environ 2012; 10(6): 314317, doi:10.1890/120007
University Corporation for Atmospheric Research, Spark UCAR
Science Education, Boulder, CO (pandya@ucar.edu)
RE Pandya Citizen science and diverse communities
315
The Ecological Society of America www.frontiersinecology.org
to address pressing community priorities or align with
community values, scientific careers and preparatory
experiences are eschewed in favor of better known career
paths or locally available opportunities (Riggs 2005;
Levine et al. 2009). Scientific approaches can be regarded
as incomplete and reductionist (ie focused on under-
standing a system by isolating the component parts) in a
way that contrasts with more integrative indigenous
world views (Riggs 2005; Levine et al. 2009), or as
divorced from social and ethical considerations (Levine
et al. 2009). Furthermore, some communities exposure to
science may be connected to negative experiences (eg the
study of geology connected to mining on indigenous
lands; Levine et al. 2009).
In summary, there are key mechanistic barriers, such as
lack of transportation, access to natural areas, and scien-
tific education, for why minority students choose employ-
ment in other fields over science careers. Research on
diversity in science suggests that another key hurdle to
broader participation is a disconnect between the norms
and priorities of the research community and the values,
aspirations, and cultures of many historically underrepre-
sented communities.
nSuccesses and suggestions
Citizen science can bridge this gap because it offers the
opportunity for communities and people to participate in
science, rather than simply to serve as recipients of out-
reach efforts. The most effective programs will engage
community members as active participants in every
aspect of the scientific process: defining the research
questions, collecting and analyzing the data, and translat-
ing scientific insights into policy decisions and actions.
Such programs will also connect scientific questions and
practices to community priorities, values, and norms.
A growing number of citizen-science programs focus, at
least in part, on urban ecology (eg Project Pigeonwatch,
Celebrate Urban Birds, Project BudBurst). Urban ecology
offers several advantages to many potential citizen scien-
tists: habitats are more accessible, species are familiar
(and thus participation does not require specialized
knowledge), and urban ecosystems tend to be highly
diverse. More importantly, the creation of an urban ecol-
ogy project responds to the priorities of urban communi-
ties, and so represents a step toward collaborative, com-
munity-based design of citizen-science efforts. In
addition, some programs (eg Celebrate Urban Birds;
Figure 1) actively partner with existing community orga-
nizations, providing a convenient means for introducing
scientific activities to individuals who may lack experi-
ence with the scientific process.
A program currently underway in the White Earth
Nation in Mahnomen, Minnesota, is an example of a cit-
izen-science project that originates from community par-
ticipation. While the project includes elements of tradi-
tional citizen science in one part of the project,
students and community members report on their crop
harvest and map wild rice stands the overall context is
one of larger priorities relating to identity, economic
security, health, and natural resource conservation. The
scientific leaders of the project are students and faculty at
White Earth Tribal and Community College, and the
topics for research include examining the link between
land-use changes and wild rice productivity, climate-
change impacts, and potential propagation of nearby
commercially grown rice (Figure 2).
Engagement with the local community is part of the col-
leges mandate to serve the community in an open and
transparent way. Data collected include oral histories, GIS
maps, local and regional weather observations, climate
simulations, and satellite imagery. Because the college is
closely connected to tribal leadership, there is a regular and
structured way for the community to contribute to project
management and be involved in all stages of the project.
Such examples notwithstanding, it is difficult to find
research-based recommendations for these participatory
approaches to citizen science or substantial documenta-
tion of their success. Here, therefore, I seek to borrow
approaches and practices for participatory community
engagement from the fields of public health (Israel et al.
1998), climate-change vulnerability assessment (Fazey et
al. 2010), and informal science education (Bell et al.
2009; Jolly 2009), and apply them to citizen science.
Instead of providing specific recommendations which
will necessarily depend on the individual practices, prior-
ities, values, and cultures of individual communities
this paper outlines a framework to consider when creating
citizen-science efforts. The framework focuses on inviting
community members to be partners in defining research
questions that advance both community priorities and
scientific and educational goals. It is meant to be useful to
scientists building focused citizen-science efforts in part-
nership with one or a few communities. Participation
that more accurately reflects US demographics will be
achieved not by a single project but by the combined
Figure 1. Participants in the Cornell Lab of Ornithology
Celebrate Urban Birds Art and Nature Workshop held in
February 2012.
C
e
l
e
b
r
a
t
e

U
r
b
a
n

B
i
r
d
s
Citizen science and diverse communities RE Pandya
316
www.frontiersinecology.org The Ecological Society of America
effect of a suite of place-based, culturally relevant, com-
munity-driven programs.
nA general framework
Align research and education with community
priorities
This requires meeting with multiple community members
early on in the process of developing a citizen-science
program and working together to articulate scientific
questions that support community goals (Bell et al. 2009).
Community can be broadly defined as a sense of com-
mon identity and need not be geographically constrained
(Israel et al. 1998). Political and social structures within a
community should be recognized, and scientific insights
may have political and social ramifications (Fazey et al.
2010). Although it is impossible to include every member
of the community in defining the project, it is important
to engage at least a representative cross-section; methods
for doing so include interviews with formal and informal
community leaders, broadly distributed questionnaires or
surveys, community forums, and targeted efforts to seek
input from members of marginalized groups.
There are several challenges in trying to identify commu-
nity-relevant problems. From a purely scientific perspec-
tive, the questions defined in this kind of process are often
hard to connect to a single scientific discipline, so this
process may require multidisciplinary teams of scientists.
Moving beyond science, desired outcomes of citizen-sci-
ence projects may include community action and policy
changes (Eden 2006). Because these challenges are unfa-
miliar to many scientists, it is helpful to design support
mechanisms for the scientific and educational team,
including time for reflection, mentoring, and training in
participatory methods (Button and Peterson 2009).
Plan for co-management of the project
Citizen-science programs should include a
process for balancing inevitable conflicts
between competing goals and create regular
opportunities and mechanisms for community
oversight. This may involve inviting commu-
nity leaders onto oversight or advisory commit-
tees (Jolly 2009), hosting regular informal inter-
action between scientists and local community
members (Fazey et al. 2010), and/or providing
advanced scientific training to a subset of com-
munity members (Button and Peterson 2009).
This can be achieved by partnering with exist-
ing local organizations, as in the Celebrate
Urban Birds program, or by leveraging existing
channels, as in the White Earth example, where
the connection between the college and tribal
leadership provided a means to guide citizen-
science efforts to align with and support cultural
practices and community values.
Engage the community at every step
Even after defining the scientific questions, on-the-
ground engagement with local communities should be
ongoing (Israel et al. 1998). In particular, community
members should be made participants in the scientific
analysis. This may require extensive training and employ-
ment (Fazey et al. 2010), but it is an essential component
for ensuring that co-ownership of the project and its
results are extended to all members of the community
(Israel et al. 1998) and may contribute to better research
outcomes (Bang et al. 2007). Community engagement
also provides a way to include entire families, rather than
individuals.
Community engagement can take several practical
forms, including the distribution of equipment and small
grants to local organizations, formal community presenta-
tions (especially effective when engaged community
members present to less-involved members), informal
gatherings, coauthored publications and curricula, and
briefings for decision makers.
Incorporate multiple kinds of knowledge
Successful participatory projects seek expertise from all
participants and build processes and procedures (such as
regular community meetings) to facilitate and validate
that expertise (Israel et al. 1998; Jolly 2009). The most
successful projects value traditional knowledge, historical
accounts, and participant observations in addition to sci-
entific data (Huntington 2000). This requires placing sci-
entists on an equal footing with other participants and
fostering an environment of co-learning (Israel et al.
1998). It does not mean omitting the science education
of participants, but it does imply that equal attention be
M

P
r
i
c
e
Figure 2. Wild rice observations and data collection are integrated into
learning to harvest in traditional ways.
RE Pandya Citizen science and diverse communities
317
The Ecological Society of America www.frontiersinecology.org
given to the cultural education of the participating scien-
tists (Riggs 2005).
It is increasingly common to incorporate traditional eco-
logical knowledge (defined by the Ecological Society of
Americas Traditional Ecological Knowledge Section as
adaptive ecological knowledge developed through an inti-
mate reciprocal relationship between a group of people and
a particular place over time; www.esa.org/tek/) into eco-
logical monitoring, management, and conservation pro-
grams (Berkes et al. 2000), which often include an element
of community engagement that resembles citizen science.
However, knowledge of an ecosystem is not limited to
indigenous populations (Huntington 2000), as demon-
strated by the examples of migrant and immigrant har-
vesters of non-timber forest products in the US Northwest
(Ballard and Huntsinger 2006) or fishermen in the
Louisiana Bayou (Button and Peterson 2009). Clearly,
efforts to include local knowledge should not be limited to
partnerships involving indigenous communities.
It is important to begin the project with all participants
not just the scientific experts agreeing on what counts
as data and how those data will be validated and shared,
both within and outside the project (Huntington 2000).
Particular care needs to be given to knowledge that is
sacred, culturally sensitive, or otherwise inappropriate for
broad dissemination. Several communities have drafted
general guidelines that define the terms and conditions
for their participation in research, and these should be
part of the discussion between scientists and community
members about any proposed citizen-science project.
Disseminate results widely
The most engaging programs disseminate research find-
ings not only in the form of scientific publications but
in ways that are designed to be relevant to community
priorities and allow new knowledge to be easily applied
(Eden 2006) to and for all partners, in appropriate lan-
guage and venues, and with ownership acknowledged
(Israel et al. 1998). As with all tasks, dissemination of
findings should be the shared responsibility of all project
participants; for instance, community participation in
scientific presentations has a positive impact on the over-
all relationship between the scientists and the commu-
nity (Button and Peterson 2009).
nConclusions
To broaden the reach and impact of citizen science, I
recommend that new efforts should be made to develop
participatory approaches, where community members are
partners in the design, implementation, and application
of research; where research questions are aligned with
community priorities; and where scientific knowledge is
placed alongside other ways of knowing and
making decisions. This approach has the potential to
broaden participation not only in citizen science but also
in science more generally, by addressing a historical and
ongoing disconnect between established scientific
research agendas and the priorities and needs of many
diverse communities.
nReferences
Ballard HL and Huntsinger L. 2006. Salal harvester local ecologi-
cal knowledge, harvest practices and understory management
on the Olympic Peninsula, Washington. Hum Ecol; doi:
10.1007/s10745-006-9048-7.
Bang M, Medin DL, and Atran S. 2007. Cultural mosaics and men-
tal models of nature. P Natl Acad Sci USA 104: 1386874.
Bell P, Lewenstein B, Shouse AW, and Feder M. 2009. Learning sci-
ence in informal environments: people, places and pursuits.
Washington, DC: National Research Council.
Berkes F and Colding J. 2000. Rediscovery of traditional ecological
knowledge as adaptive management. Ecol Appl 10: 125162.
Brossard D, Lewenstein B, and Bonney R. 2005. Scientific knowl-
edge and attitude change: the impact of a citizen science pro-
ject. Int J Sci Educ 27: 10991121.
Button GV and Peterson K. 2009. Participatory action research: com-
munity partnership with social and physical scientists in anthro-
pology and climate change. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
Eden S. 2006. Public participation in environmental policy: con-
sidering scientific, counter-scientific and non-scientific contri-
butions. Public Underst Sci 5: 183204.
Evans C, Abrams E, Reitsma R, et al. 2005. The Neighborhood
Nestwatch Program: participant outcomes of a citizen-science
ecological research project. Conserv Biol 19: 58994.
Fazey I, Kesby M, Evely A, et al. 2010. A three-tiered approach to
participatory vulnerability assessment in the Solomon Islands.
Global Environ Chang 20: 71328.
Gurin P. 1999. The compelling need for diversity in education. U
Mass Sch Educ J 32: 3662.
Huntington HP. 2000. Using traditional ecological knowledge in
science: methods and applications. Ecol Appl 10: 127074.
Israel BA, Schulz AJ, Parker EA, and Becker AB. 1998. Review of
community-based research: assessing partnership approaches to
improve public health. Annu Rev Publ Health 19: 173202.
Jolly EC. 2009. Confronting demographic denial: retaining rele-
vance in the new millennium. J Mus Educ 27: 24.
Levine R, Gonzlez R, and Martnez-Sussmann C. 2009. Learner
diversity in Earth system science. Paper prepared for the
Committee for the Review of the NOAA Education Program.
Washington, DC: National Research Council. www7.
nationalacademies.org/bose/NOAA%20Diversity.pdf. Viewed
12 Dec 2011.
Riggs EM. 2005. Field-based education and indigenous knowledge:
essential components of geoscience education for Native
American communities. Sci Educ 89: 296313.
Trumbull DJ, Bonney R, Bascom D, and Cabral A. 2000. Thinking
scientifically during participation in a citizen-science project.
Sci Educ 84: 26575.
Wilderman CC, Barron A, and Imgrund L. 2004. Top down or bot-
tom up? ALLARMs experience with two operational models
for community science. Proceedings of the 4th National
Monitoring Conference; 1720 May 2004; Chattanooga, TN.
Washington, DC: National Water Quality Monitoring
Council. http://acwi.gov/monitoring/conference/2004/pro-
ceedings_contents/13_titlepages/posters/poster_235.pdf.