Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Open Access Research Infrastructures are Critical for Improving the Accessibility and Utility of Citizen Science: A Case Study of Australia’s National Biodiversity Infrastructure, the Atlas of Living Australia (ALA) Cover

Open Access Research Infrastructures are Critical for Improving the Accessibility and Utility of Citizen Science: A Case Study of Australia’s National Biodiversity Infrastructure, the Atlas of Living Australia (ALA)

Citizen Science: Theory and Practice
Volume 8 (2023): Issue 1
By: Erin Roger,  Dax Kellie,  Cameron Slatyer,  Peter Brenton,  Olivia Torresan,  Elycia Wallis and  Andre Zerger  
Open Access
|Sep 2023

References

  1. 1ACSA. 2023. Australian Citizen Science Project Finder. Available at https://tinyurl.com/2xra3fw3 (Last accessed 23/06/2023).
    Back to article
  2. 2Atlas of Living Australia. 2023a. Available at https://www.ala.org.au (Last accessed 21/06/2023).
    Back to article
  3. 3Atlas of Living Australia Data Filters. 2023b. Available at https://github.com/AtlasOfLivingAustralia/ala-dataquality/wiki (Last accessed 26/6/2023).
    Back to article
  4. 4Atlas of Living Australia. 2023c. Available at https://www.ala.org.au/biocollect/ (Last accessed 28/06/2023).
    Back to article
  5. 5Bakker, F, Antonelli, A, Clarke, J, Cook, J, Edwards, S, Ericson, P, Faurby, S, Ferrand, N, Gelang, M, Gillespie, R, Irestedt, M, Lundin, K, Larsson, E, Matos-Maraví, P, Müller, J, von Proschwitz, T, Roderick, G, Schliep, A, Wahlberg, N and Källersjö, M. 2020. The Global Museum: natural history collections and the future of evolutionary science and public education. PeerJ, 8: e8225. DOI: 10.7717/peerj.8225
    Back to article
  6. 6Balázs, B, Mooney, P, Nováková, E, Bastin, L and Arsanjani, JJ. 2021. Data Quality in Citizen Science. In: Vohland, K, Land-Zandstra, A, Ceccaroni, L, Lemmens, R, Perelló, J, Ponti, M, Samson, R and Wagenknecht, K (eds.), The Science of Citizen Science. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. pp. 139–157. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-58278-4_8
    Back to article
  7. 7Belbin, L, Wallis, E, Hobern, D and Zerger, Z. 2021. The Atlas of Living Australia: History, current state and future directions. Biodiversity Data Journal, 9: e65023. DOI: 10.3897/BDJ.9.e65023
    Back to article
  8. 8Birdlife Australia. 2023. Available at https://birdata.birdlife.org.au/ (Last accessed 23/06/2023).
    Back to article
  9. 9Bonney, R, Shirk, JL, Phillips, TB, Wiggins, A, Ballard, HL, Miller-Rushing, AJ and Parrish, JK. 2014. Citizen science. Next steps for citizen science. Science, 343: 1436–1437. DOI: 10.1126/science.1251554
    Back to article
  10. 10Botella, C, Joly, A, Bonnet, P, Monestiez, P, and Munoz, F. 2018. Species distribution modeling based on the automated identification of citizen observations. Applications in Plant Sciences, 6(2): e1029. DOI: 10.1002/aps3.1029
    Back to article
  11. 11Bowser, A, Cooper, C, de Sherbinin, A, Wiggins, A, Brenton, P, Chuang, TR, Faustman, E, Haklay, M and Meloche, M. 2020. Still in Need of Norms: The State of the Data in Citizen Science. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 5(1): 18. DOI: 10.5334/cstp.303
    Back to article
  12. 12Brenton, P, von Gavel, S, Vogel, E and Lecoq, ME. 2018. Infrastructure enabling citizen science- an information supply chain perspective. In: Bonn, A, Haklay, M, Hecker, S, Bowser, A, Makuch, Z and Vogel, J (eds.), Citizen Science- Innovation in Open Science, Society and Policy. London: UCL Press.
    Back to article
  13. 13Callaghan, CT, Rowley, JJL, Cornwell, WK, Poore, AGB and Major, RE. 2019. Improving big citizen science data: Moving beyond haphazard sampling. PLoS Biology, 17(6): e3000357. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000357
    Back to article
  14. 14Ceccaroni, L, Bibby, J, Roger, E, Flemons, P, Michael, K, Fagan, L and Oliver, JL. 2019. Opportunities and Risks for Citizen Science in the Age of Artificial Intelligence. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 4(1): 29. DOI: 10.5334/cstp.241
    Back to article
  15. 15Chandler, M, See, L, Copas, K, Bonde, AMZ, Claramunt López, B, Danielsen, F, Kristoffer Legind, J, Masinde, S, Miller-Rushing, AJ, Newman, G, Rosemartin, A and Turak, E. 2017. Contribution of citizen science towards international biodiversity monitoring. Biological Conservation, 213(Part B): 280–294. DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2016.09.004
    Back to article
  16. 16Chapman, AD. 2020. Current Best Practices for Generalizing Sensitive Species Occurrence Data. Copenhagen: GBIF Secretariat. DOI: 10.15468/doc-5jp4-5g10
    Back to article
  17. 17CitSci. 2023. Available at https://citsci.org (Last accessed 22/06/2023).
    Back to article
  18. 18CSIRO. 2023. Available at https://www.csiro.au/en/ (Last accessed 14/08/2023).
    Back to article
  19. 19Department of Education. 2023. Available at https://www.education.gov.au/ncris (Last accessed 23/06/2023).
    Back to article
  20. 20de Sherbinin, A, Bowser, A, Chuang, TR, Cooper, C, Danielsen, F, Edmunds, R and Sivakumar, K. 2021. The critical importance of citizen science data. Frontiers in Climate, 3: 20–27. DOI: 10.3389/fclim.2021.650760
    Back to article
  21. 21Di Cecco, G, Barve, JV, Belitz, MW, Stucky, BJ, Guralnick, RP and Hurlbert, AH. 2021. Observing the Observers: How Participants Contribute Data to INaturalist and Implications for Biodiversity Science. BioScience, biab093. DOI: 10.1093/biosci/biab093
    Back to article
  22. 22DigiVol. 2023. Available at https://digivol.ala.org.au/ (Last accessed 26/06/2023).
    Back to article
  23. 23Dhindsa, A, Bhatia, S and Sohi, BS. 2021. A Novel Model for Building Digital Infrastructure for Biodiversity Studies. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1714: 012011. DOI: 10.1088/1742-6596/1714/1/012011
    Back to article
  24. 24EU-Citizen.Science. 2023. Available at https://moodle.eu-citizen.science/ (Last accessed 23/06/2023).
    Back to article
  25. 25European Commission. 2023. Research Infrastructures. Available at https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-open-calls/horizon-europe/research-infrastructures_en#:~:text=Research%20infrastructures%20are%20facilities%20that,archives%20or%20scientific%20data%20infrastructures (Last accessed 20/6/2023).
    Back to article
  26. 26Fraisl, D, Campbell, J, See, L, When, U, Wardlaw, J, Gold, M, Moorthy, I, Arias, R, Piera, J, Oliver, JL, Masó, J, Penker, M and Fritz, S. 2020. Mapping citizen science contributions to the UN sustainable development goals. Sustainability Science, 15: 1735–1751. DOI: 10.1007/s11625-020-00833-7
    Back to article
  27. 27FrogID. 2023. Available at https://www.frogid.net.au/ (Last accessed 23/06/2023).
    Back to article
  28. 28FrogWatch. South Australia (2023) Available at https://www.frogwatchsa.com.au/ (Last accessed 22/06/2023).
    Back to article
  29. 29GBIF. 2023. Unified Data Model. Available at https://www.gbif.org/new-data-model (Last accessed 23/06/2023).
    Back to article
  30. 30GBF. 2023. Available at https://www.cbd.int/gbf/ (Last accessed 03/08/2023).
    Back to article
  31. 31GIDA. 2023. Global Indigenous Data Alliance: Care Principles for Indigenous Data Governance. Available at https://www.gida-global.org/care (Last accessed 26/06/2023).
    Back to article
  32. 32Heberling, JM, Miller, JT, Noesgaard, D, Weingart, SB and Schigel, D. 2021. Data integration enables global biodiversity synthesis. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 118: e2018093118. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2018093118
    Back to article
  33. 33iNaturalist. 2023. Available at https://www.inaturalist.org/ (Last accessed 21/06/2023).
    Back to article
  34. 34iNaturalist Australia. 2023. Available at https://inaturalist.ala.org.au (Last acessed 22/06/2023).
    Back to article
  35. 35IUCN. 2023. Available at https://www.iucnredlist.org/ (Last accessed 14/08/2023).
    Back to article
  36. 36Johnson, N, Druckenmiller, ML, Danielsen, F and Pulsifer, PL. 2021. The Use of Digital Platforms for Community-Based Monitoring, BioScience, 71(5): 452–466. DOI: 10.1093/biosci/biaa162
    Back to article
  37. 37Keeso, A. 2014. Big data and environmental sustainability: a conversation starter. Smith School Working Paper Series, 2014–04. University of Oxford.
    Back to article
  38. 38Kullenberg, C and Kasperowski, D. 2016. What is citizen science?–A scientometric meta-analysis. PLoS ONE, 11(1): e0147152. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0147152
    Back to article
  39. 39Liberatore, A, Bowkett, E, MacLeod, CJ, Spurr, E and Longnecker, N. 2018. Social Media as a Platform for a Citizen Science Community of Practice. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 3(1): 1–14. DOI: 10.5334/cstp.108
    Back to article
  40. 40McClure, EC, Sievers, M, Brown, CJ, Buelow, CA, Ditria, EM, Hayes, MA, Pearson, RM, Tulloch, VJD, Unsworth, RKF and Connolly, RM. 2020. Artificial intelligence meets citizen science to supercharge ecological monitoring. Patterns, 1(7): 100109. DOI: 10.1016/j.patter.2020.100109
    Back to article
  41. 41Mesaglio, T and Callaghan, CT. 2021. An overview of the history, current contributions and future outlook of iNaturalist in Australia. Wildlife Research, 48(4): 289–303. DOI: 10.1071/WR20154
    Back to article
  42. 42Murray–Rust, P. 2008. Open Data in Science. Nature Preceedings. DOI: 10.1038/npre.2008.1526.1
    Back to article
  43. 43OSF. 2003. Open Science Framework. Available at https://osf.io/kh5rv/ (Last accessed 26/06/2023).
    Back to article
  44. 44Pelacho, M, Ruiz, G, Sanz, F, Tarancon, A and Clemente-Gallardo, J. 2021. Analysis of the evolution and collaboration networks of citizen science scientific publications. Scientometrics, 126: 225–257. DOI: 10.1007/s11192-020-03724-x
    Back to article
  45. 45Pitman, NCA, Suwa, T, Ulloa Ulloa, C, Miller, J, Solomon, J, Philipp, J, Vriesendorp, CF, … and de Souza, EH. 2021. Identifying Gaps in the Photographic Record of the Vascular Plant Flora of the Americas. Nature Plants, 7: 101–1014. DOI: 10.1038/s41477-021-00974-2
    Back to article
  46. 46Pocock, MJ, Tweddle, JC, Savage, J, Robinson, LD and Roy, HE. 2017. The diversity and evolution of ecological and environmental citizen science. PLoS One, 12: e0172579. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0172579
    Back to article
  47. 47Pocock, MJO, Chandler, M, Bonney, R, Thornhill, I, Albin, A, August, T, Backman, S, Brown, PMJ, Cunha, DGF, Grez, A, Jackson, C, Peters, M, Romer Raarijaon, N, Roy, HE, Zaviezo, T and Danielsen, F. 2018a. A Vision for Global Biodiversity Monitoring with Citizen Science. Advances in Ecological Research, 59: 169–223. DOI: 10.1016/bs.aecr.2018.06.003
    Back to article
  48. 48Pocock, MJO, Roy, HE, August, T, … and de Souza, EH. 2018b. Developing the global potential of citizen science: Assessing opportunities that benefit people, society and the environment in East Africa. Journal of Applied Ecology, 56: 274–281. DOI: 10.1111/1365-2664.13279
    Back to article
  49. 49R Core Team. 2022. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL https://www.R-project.org/
    Back to article
  50. 50Racine, V. 2017. Case: Big Data and Conservation Biology. Online Ethics Center for Engineer and Science. Available at https://onlineethics.org/cases/big-data-life-sciences-collection/case-big-data-conservation-biology (Last accessed 18/11/2021).
    Back to article
  51. 51Reeflife Survey. 2023. Available at https://reeflifesurvey.com/ (Last accessed 23/06/2023).
    Back to article
  52. 52Roger E and Kinsela, AS. 2023. Science communication is integral to attracting widespread participation in bushfire recovery citizen science. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 11: 1156078. DOI: 10.3389/fenvs.2023.1156078
    Back to article
  53. 53Roger, E, Turak, E and Tegart, P. 2019. Adopting Citizen Science as a Tool to Enhance Monitoring for an Environment Agency. Citizen Science Theory and Practice, 4(1): 1–9. DOI: 10.5334/cstp.231
    Back to article
  54. 54Santos-Fernandez, E and Mengersen, K. 2021. Understanding the reliability of citizen science observational data using item response models. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 12(8): 1533–1548. DOI: 10.1111/2041-210X.13623
    Back to article
  55. 55Shanley, LA, Parker, A, Schade, S and Bonn, A. 2019. Policy Perspectives on Citizen Science and Crowdsourcing. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 4(1): 30. DOI: 10.5334/cstp.293
    Back to article
  56. 56Tengö, M, Austin, BJ, Danielsen, F and Fernández-Llamazares, A. 2021. Creating Synergies between Citizen Science and Indigenous and Local Knowledge, BioScience, 71(5): 503–518. DOI: 10.1093/biosci/biab023
    Back to article
  57. 57TDWG. 2023. Available at https://dwc.tdwg.org/ (Last accessed 14/08/2023).
    Back to article
  58. 58Theobald, EJ, Ettinger, AK, Burgess, HK, DeBey, LB, Schmidt, NR, Froehlich, HE, Wagner, C, HilleRisLambers, J, Tewksbury, J, Harsch, MA and Parrish, JK. 2015. Global change and local solutions: Tapping the unrealized potential of citizen science for biodiversity research. Biological Conservation, 181: 236–244. DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2014.10.021
    Back to article
  59. 59Trogrlić, SR, Wright, GB, Adeloye, AJ, Duncan, MJ and Mwale, F. 2018. Taking stock of community-based flood risk management in Malawi: Different stakeholders, different perspectives. Environmental Hazards, 17(2): 107–127. DOI: 10.1080/17477891.2017.1381582
    Back to article
  60. 60Trouville, L, Lintott, C and Fortson, L. 2019. Citizen science as a Core Component of Research Infrastructure. Astro2020: Decadal Survey on Astronomy and Astrophysics, APC white papers, no. 144; Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, 5(7): id. 144. Bibcode: 2019BAAS…51g.144T.
    Back to article
  61. 61Tulloch, AIT, Possingham, HP, Joseph, LN, Szabo, J and Martin, TG. 2013. Realising the full potential of citizen science monitoring programs. Biological Conservation, 165: 128–138. September. DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2013.05.025
    Back to article
  62. 62WaterWatch. 2023. Available at https://www.waterwatch.org.au/ (Last accessed 23/06/2023).
    Back to article
  63. 63Westgate, M, Stevenson, M, Kellie, D and Newman, P. 2022. galah: Atlas of Living Australia (ALA) Data and Resources in R. R package version 1.4.0, https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=galah.
    Back to article
  64. 64Williamson, K, Kennan, MA, Johanson, G and Weckert, J. 2016. Data sharing for the advancement of science: Overcoming barriers for citizen scientists. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67: 2392–2403. DOI: 10.1002/asi.23564
    Back to article
  65. 65UNESCO. 2021. Recommendation on Open Science. Paris, France: UNESCO.
    Back to article
  66. 66Wieczorek, J, Bloom, D, Guralnick, R, Blum, S, Döring, M, Giovanni, R, Robertson, T and Vieglais, D. 2012. Darwin Core: An evolving community-developed biodiversity data standard. PLoS ONE, 7(1): e29715. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0029715
    Back to article
  67. 67Wilkinson, MD, Dumontier, M, Aalbersberg, IJ, Appleton, G, Axton, M, Baak, A and Mons, B. 2016. The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Scientific data, 3: 160018. DOI: 10.1038/sdata.2016.18
    Back to article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/cstp.564 | Journal eISSN: 2057-4991
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Submitted on: Sep 19, 2022
Accepted on: Sep 7, 2023
Published on: Sep 25, 2023
Published by: Ubiquity Press
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year
Keywords:
research infrastructure,
citizen science,
open science,
data,
environmental monitoring,
open access

© 2023 Erin Roger, Dax Kellie, Cameron Slatyer, Peter Brenton, Olivia Torresan, Elycia Wallis, Andre Zerger, published by Ubiquity Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 8 (2023): Issue 1Next article