- Convenors:
-
Muki Haklay
(Learning Planet Institute, Université Paris Cité)
Susanne Hecker (Museum für Naturkunde Berlin)
Send message to Convenors
- Format:
- Panel
Short Abstract
Facing crises, citizen science must shift from periphery to core research and policy. How can we build trust, promote inclusion, and produce concrete actions? We'll explore the role of citizen science in ERA, FP10, and national agendas, aiming for it to be an indispensable actor in Europe's future.
Description
In a time of geopolitical tension, democratic erosion, uncertain economic conditions, and environmental crisis, citizen science must evolve from a peripheral practice to a core component of research and policy in Europe. This panel invites a critical discussion on what is needed to realise that shift.
Rather than reaffirming its value, we ask: how can citizen science strategically contribute to building trust, promoting inclusion, and producing actionable evidence? What do we need to do so citizen science is viewed as essential by people from all political persuasions? We explore the roles citizen science can play in the European Research Area, the upcoming FP10 framework, and national innovation agendas.
Panelists will examine how citizen science is being embedded in research infrastructures, funding calls, and implementation mechanisms—while also facing challenges of equity, visibility, and sustainable support. We will draw from diverse perspectives to ask what it means for citizen science to be at the centre—not just as a method, but as a political and democratic practice.
By connecting to urgent domains like sustainability, public health, and cultural heritage, this session aims to articulate a bold vision: citizen science as an indispensable actor in shaping Europe’s scientific and societal future.
Accepted papers
Short Abstract
This presentation outlines the development of a university-wide citizen research panel at the University of Turku. We describe the panel´s design process, implementation and early experiences in fostering collaboration between researchers and citizens across disciplines.
Abstract
Citizen participation in research is increasingly recognised as essential for producing societally relevant, transparent, and impactful knowledge. In 2024, the University of Turku launched the project Science Belongs to Everyone! with the aim of bringing science and the university closer to citizens. To strengthen citizen involvement in research activities, it was decided to establish a university-wide citizen research panel to provide new opportunities for low-threshold collaboration.
This presentation describes the rationale, development process, and key design choices made in building the panel. Development steps included a survey of university staff, faculty visits and workshops, benchmarking comparable national and international initiatives, and co-development with a cross-disciplinary working group of researchers. These inputs informed decisions on the panel’s structure, recruitment, training for both citizens and researchers, and the support services provided.
The panel is designed as a flexible mechanism: researchers can submit task invitations at different stages of their projects, ranging from formulating a research question to helping with research communication. Local citizens, aged 15 and above join as volunteer panel members and choose which tasks to participate in. Specific online trainings were developed for both citizens and researchers to prepare them for collaboration.
By the end of September 2025, nearly 150 citizens had joined the panel after completing the required online training, and researchers had submitted three tasks. These early results demonstrate a strong interest on both sides and indicate the potential of the panel to serve as an innovative tool for advancing citizen involvement in a multidisciplinary university.
Short Abstract
By analysing the risks and trust-building strategies involved in embedding citizen science within German research and funding organisations, our talk illustrates the practical challenges and paths for transforming citizen science from a peripheral method into an integral research approach.
Abstract
Trust is often considered to be a potential outcome of citizen science. However, its role in navigating uncertainty in research settings is poorly understood, as well as the means by which it is created and maintained. We propose a novel perspective on trust in citizen science that is sensitive to those processes and apply it to the challenges of institutional embedding. As citizen science is entering research and funding structures, transformations present risks for the actors who drive them, such as those related to the planning of project outcomes, career prospects or performance measurement. Based on previous research and theoretical insights, we hypothesise that trust and control are used to navigate those risks.
The talk presents findings from an ongoing study we are conducting among German research and funding structures that conduct or support participatory or co-creative projects. Using a discourse analytical approach, we identify the areas of cooperation that involve risk and examine how practitioners and institutional actors establish trust and control in communication. To this end, we combine document analysis of guidelines and project reports with semi-structured interviews of project leads and institutional actors.
Our findings will inform both the debate on trust in citizen science and the challenges linked to citizen science becoming an integral research approach. We will illustrate strategies applied in the German context and hope to provide actionable insights for pathways for the sustainable implementation of citizen science.
Short Abstract
Participatory archaeology facilitates inclusive, democratic and multivocal debates and has the potential to provide people with a cognitive heritage preparedness against rising antidemocratic discourses. This can be further developed by strengthening knowledge networks on citizen science approaches.
Abstract
There is a current rise in authoritarian and anti-democratic movements globally, and Norway and many other countries experience external and internal pressure on democratic discourse. Contrary to this, archaeologists have worked for decades to establish practices that are inclusive, multivocal and democratic, such as participatory archaeologies. However, it constitutes a “wicked problem” to maintain open, accountable and transparent debates about heritage, identity and belonging in the face of totalitarian narratives and aggressive “alternative facts”.
In order to address this dilemma, participatory archaeology will have to move beyond notions of participation as inherently democratising and “good”. Drawing on experiences from Indigenous / Saami archaeology we can achieve more self-reflexive and purposeful approaches. Involvement in professional networks for dialogue about citizen science theory, methodology and ethics, such as ECSA and the network for citizen science in cultural history museums, SAMMEN FF, can also contribute to awareness and innovation in participatory archaeological knowledge production.
The disciplines’ strength is that it provides specified and tangible topics and arenas for democratic discourse that are also often emotionally meaningful to participants. Discussing and tolerating diverse perspectives on the lingering remains of the past that we are all surrounded by, wherever we live, can help build democratic literacy. The aim does not have to be consensus about heritage and the past but to tolerate dissensus and establish communities of disagreement. This practice can provide one source of social cohesion across our inevitably diverse local and national communities, amounting to what may be labelled a cognitive heritage preparedness.
Short Abstract
Observatree is a citizen science project reporting on tree pests and diseases. It has been running across Great Britain since 2012 with both government and NGO partners. We will describe how far we are along the journey to becoming “strategic infrastructure” and the challenges that still remain.
Abstract
We will describe the operating model for Observatree, focused on 200 trained volunteers spread across Great Britain (GB).
There have been 25 serious tree pest or disease introductions to GB since 1990, with ash dieback, the best known, costing an estimated £15 billion to manage. The Woodland Trust alone spends over £1.5 million a year on this issue across the 1000+ woods we own.
Observatree volunteers are trained to recognise and report 20+ priority pests or diseases. The project’s volunteer network is now part of the government’s emergency outbreak response plan.
We will share what we have learnt during this project about building trust between our partners in government and NGOs: strong interpersonal relationships, shared interests, increased confidence in data quality & spread plus increased credibility of the project over time.
Observatree models strong co-operation between the three GB countries, where environment is a devolved issue. Additionally, we have had the opportunity to share good practice into mainland Europe.
Around half of all tree pest and disease records to the government’s public reporting tool “Tree Alert” come from our volunteer cohort. We will describe how data from this tool is currently used and plans for future use to embed further into GB’s strategic infrastructure and policy.
We will also describe how we have achieved sustainable funding support following our initial five-year LIFE+ grant.
Inclusion is a work in progress with one group at a time, starting with a focus on a younger volunteer demographic.
Short Abstract
We analyse the role of sociotechnical infrastructure in aligning citizen science data with official air quality monitoring. The Dutch Measure Together project, receiving data from 4000+ sensors, balances local data and participatory approaches with evolving standardisation processes.
Abstract
Citizens are increasingly using low-cost sensors to measure their surroundings, for example air quality. Sensor measurements offer greater temporal and spatial resolution and have the potential to complement official monitoring practices. However, integration of citizen science (CS) data into official frameworks remains limited. CS data are often perceived as “messy”, with barriers such as concerns about data quality, lack of standard methodologies, and perceptions of unreliability. While these challenges are well-documented, the critical role of infrastructure in bridging CS data and institutional frameworks has received less attention. This study examines the Dutch case of Measure Together, a government-funded project and community that acts as a boundary organisation between CS initiatives and institutional air quality monitoring. The project currently receives data from over 4000 sensors, illustrating the scale and reach of citizen involvement. We explore how CS infrastructure emerges through relational, organisational, and technical factors aimed at making sense of CS data. We further analyse how this infrastructure is beginning to align with official monitoring, resulting in a hybrid infrastructure that combines local data and insights from CS with the standardised approaches of official monitoring. Our analysis highlights critical tensions, including conflicts between local and generic data, the action-oriented expectations of CS participants versus the long-term timelines of official infrastructure, and challenges around trust and standardisation. We conclude by identifying pathways to navigate these tensions, emphasizing the need for adaptive, participatory infrastructure that balances rigour with societal relevance.
Short Abstract
Can citizen science hubs contribute to embed citizen science in research infrastructures, funding calls, and implementation mechanisms? Dutch Citizen Science Hubs as a case and way to move towards embedding in core policy and research.
Abstract
The national funding programme Open Science the Netherlands has awarded five four-years grants in 2025 to expand Dutch citizen science hubs at research organisations. These hubs will build a strategic infrastructure to support knowledge exchange and share expertise and support for citizen science across the Netherlands. Furthermore, the hubs should play a role in the support to collect and manage (FAIR) data, communicate science effectively, design and monitor projects, and to address ethical and legal issues. The rewarded hubs differ in their focus, some are thematic oriented, others geographically.
At the panel, we want to present the case of the awarded hub PRO BONO (Citizen Science Network East of the Netherlands), which is part of the CS-NL network and the larger network of Dutch Citizen Science Hubs. How can hubs embed citizen science strategically in policy and research via e.g. an innovation agenda, funding mechanisms both at a national and a European level?