- Convenors:
-
Pooja Khurana
(Marie Curie Alumni Association (MCAA))
Karen Stroobants (CultureBase Consulting)
Mostafa Moonir Shawrav (Marie Curie Alumni Association)
Send message to Convenors
- Format:
- Roundtable
Short Abstract
Citizen science brings diversity, equity, and real-world relevance to research, but current assessment systems often fail to recognise it. This session explores how to reform research evaluation to support inclusive, participatory, and impactful science.
Description
Citizen Science in Science and Society
Citizen science (CS) redefines how knowledge is created, shared and applied. Broader participation diversifies perspectives in research and enhances social relevance and accountability. In society, CS boosts scientific literacy, empowers communities and informs better decisions. Yet, despite its value, CS lacks structural support. Funding remains limited, particularly in disciplines not traditionally associated with participatory methods. Ignoring CS risks reinforces inequalities, eroding public trust and narrowing the evidence base for addressing complex challenges.
Research Assessment: The Systemic Lever of Change
Research assessment informs scientific and societal reform. Historically, what is rewarded in research is what is measured, and what is measured becomes the norm. When systems focus on individual outputs, journal impact factors, or traditional authorship, they marginalise the collaborative, process-driven nature of CS. This influences every level of the research cycle. The consequences extend beyond academia, reinforcing scientific, socio-economic and institutional inequalities.
Session Goal
As a CoARA member and partner in CoARA Boost project, MCAA seeks to advance systemic reform. This session explores how to:
1. Recognise diverse contributions: How can we value and reward all forms of participation in CS?
2. Align with Open Science: How does CS advance Open Science, and how can we assess its FAIRness?
3. Foster career development: How do we support researchers who champion participatory approaches?
Without intentional reform, assessment systems will continue to undermine the openness and inclusivity CS depends on. If we want research to be relevant and equitable, we must evolve how we evaluate it.
Accepted contributions
Short Abstract
Citizen science can democratize research assessment by co-creating value indicators that reflect social priorities, making evaluation in fields like telecommunications and biosensing more inclusive and legitimate.
Abstract
Citizen science holds considerable promise for the democratisation of research assessment by collaboratively developing value indicators that capture a broad spectrum of social priorities, thereby fostering more inclusive and legitimate evaluation processes in innovation sectors such as telecommunications and biosensing. Traditional assessment frameworks often emphasise expert-defined technical metrics, frequently overlooking the lived experiences and needs of affected communities, which compromises the relevance and equity of evaluation outcomes.
As innovation in technological areas advances, there is a growing imperative to adopt evaluation frameworks that transcend conventional technical benchmarks to incorporate social relevance and ethical responsibility. Nevertheless, these assessments typically rely on expert-driven metrics, such as Key Value Indicators (KVIs), that may marginalise community perspectives. Citizen science introduces a transformative approach by positioning citizens as active partners who contribute scientific, experiential, and local knowledge to the co-creation of KVIs. This participatory model shifts research evaluation away from purely technocratic paradigms towards processes that are reflexive, socially embedded, and attentive to dimensions such as fairness, trust, governance, and cultural context.
Implementing citizen science methodologies within these technologically complex domains entails challenges, including addressing power imbalances, overcoming disparities in access and technical literacy, and translating diverse social values into robust, measurable indicators. However, practical examples from 6G telecommunications and biosensing projects illustrate effective strategies for harmonising inclusivity with sound methodological standards. By adopting these participatory frameworks, citizen science substantially reinforces the legitimacy, inclusiveness, and societal responsiveness of research assessment, ensuring that innovation aligns with and serves the broader public interest.
Short Abstract
We would like to contribute to this roundtable from the perspective of (public) health where revision of research assessment is greatly needed in light of current and future health challenges. We work in Bridge2Health, a Dutch consortium for CS as one of the key methodologies in the health domain.
Abstract
We would like to contribute to this roundtable from the perspective of (public) health, a domain that is logically alert when it comes to amendments to ethical research assessment, but also that is in great need to revise these assessments. Current health challenges revolve around cost and personnel manageability, two aspects that could be greatly alleviated if more focus was on e.g. prevention. For prevention however, it is vital to include citizens/patients in research as they are the ones with intimate, experiential knowledge of their own urgencies and specific contexts. CS could also have a potentially huge effect on the vast lack of transfer between theory and practice that is pervasive in the (medical) health domain and which poses an enormous loss of finances and effort. In order to do this, future research will have to incorporate various systems and domains, of which we think the citizen should be the centre.
We approach the above from the perspective of Bridge2health, a Dutch consortium (2023-2030) working on a trajectory to position Citizen Science as one of the key methodologies in the health domain. We are three Universities of Applied Sciences combined and connect with practice and citizens in our experimental Living Labs in our respective regions. Our two other main foci are quality/ethical research assessment procedures and education of citizens/students/researchers and professionals in a wide variety of domains.
Short Abstract
This session explores how research assessment (RA) can better recognise citizen science. Drawing on insights from the CoARA Boost project and the Marie Curie Alumni Association’s survey on RA, the session highlights inclusive approaches to value collaboration, openness, and diverse contributions.
Abstract
Citizen science (CS) changes research by bringing public participation into diverse scientific efforts. However, current RA often struggle to fully recognise the contributions of citizen scientists and the collaborative nature of these projects. This session will explore how to evolve research assessment to embrace CS, focusing on three connected areas: recognising diverse contributions, aligning with Open Science principles, and fostering career development.
As an active participant in the Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (CoARA) and the CoARA Boost project, the MCAA works for systemic change in research evaluation. Drawing on insights from the CoARA Boost project, we will share emerging practices and tools that support recognition of diverse research contributions and promote responsible assessment aligned with the CoARA Agreement principles. The session will also explore the critical link between CS practices and Open Science principles. We'll discuss how to assess the FAIRness of CS data and how it promotes transparency and reproducibility in research. Building on the results of the recent large-scale MCAA survey on RA, we will also present evidence on researchers’ experiences and perceptions of how current systems value activities such as public engagement and CS.
Finally, drawing on the MCAA's commitment to researcher development, we will demonstrate how engaging with CS can enhance the skills, networks, and career prospects of researchers. We will discuss how to include CS activities in both academic and non-academic careers. This session aims to foster a dialogue on developing more inclusive and effective RA frameworks that accurately reflect the potential of CS.
Short Abstract
The session explores how citizen science can help monitor transformational adaptation by linking local risk perception, sense of place, and participation to tangible indicators of social and institutional change.
Abstract
Transformational adaptation extends beyond technical fixes, it involves shifts in how communities construct and interpret risks, relate to places, and act collectively. These social, cognitive and emotional dynamics often determine whether adaptation remains incremental or becomes genuinely transformative. Yet, they are rarely observed, leveraged, or monitored systematically. This contribution proposes an interactive session to explore how citizen science can help make these processes visible and measurable. Participants will examine three interconnected levers - risk perception, sense of place and participation - as both drivers and indicators of transformation. Using facilitation techniques such as the Nominal Group Technique (NGT) and Think-Pair-Share, adapted to group size, the session will combine short provocations, paired exchanges and collective synthesis. Participants will co-create a simple “matrix of transformation”, identifying criteria and examples that reflect real shifts in perception, belonging, and agency. Through narrative prompts and collaborative mapping to elicit diverse perspectives, particularly from peripheral or climatically exposed urban contexts. By treating citizen science as both a data practice and a reflective space, the workshop explores how people imagine, contest, and reconfigure their relationship with place and risk. In doing so, citizen scientists not only observe and monitor change but also transform the site itself and their own connection to it, fostering mutual and symbolic re-configuration.