Send message to Authors

Short Abstract

A scoping review exploring how gamification supports citizen science by sustaining engagement and promoting behaviour change. It maps game elements, impact measures, and insights for scaling citizen science across diverse contexts.

Abstract

Citizen Science (CS) projects employ gamification, or the use of game design elements in non-game contexts, as a means to improve engagement and sustain participation with the project. While gamification is often employed to improve data collection, CS initiatives also aim to promote behaviour change and foster long-term engagement, both of which can be crucial for scaling efforts across different contexts. Evidence from fields such as education and digital health suggests gamification can influence positive behaviours, yet its potential in CS remains underexplored.

This scoping review maps out the evidence available in the field of gamified citizen science, identifies the game elements employed, and examines how their impact, particularly on behaviour change, has been assessed. Following the JBI guidelines, it targets qualitative, quantitative and mixed-method studies published in Scopus, Web of Science, PsychINFO, IEEE Xplore, ACM Digital Library, JSTOR and Medline databases, including all English language studies focused on examining a game-based approach to citizen science.

The review will synthesise emerging patterns in gamification strategies, how they have been used in efforts to upscale and sustain projects, and highlight how success has been measured; it also assesses their reported influence on volunteer engagement and its impact on behaviour. By clarifying the role of gamification as a strategy, this work contributes to discussions on sustaining and upscaling citizen science across regions and domains.

Send message to Authors

Short Abstract

Scaling citizen science is complex, involving growth, policy integration, and meaningful engagement. This study defines five strategies for scaling and introduces project-based personas developed through the CROPS project to design practical, user-centered protocols for scaling citizen science.

Abstract

Scaling citizen science to achieve diverse objectives related to growth, policy impact, and deeper, more meaningful engagement presents significant challenges, particularly when it comes to defining what “scaling” actually means.

Drawing on insights from a literature review, we use the term scaling to describe a broad set of strategies within citizen science:

- driving institutional change through citizen science initiatives (e.g., policy integration);

- replicating or expanding projects across multiple dimensions, including geography, timeframe, research scope, participants, data volume, and methodologies;

- fostering cultural shifts and lasting change by transforming values and beliefs, such as strengthening trust in science;

- achieving meaningful outcomes through intentional scaling down or simplification of projects; and

- implementing two or more of these strategies in combination.

Building on these five strategies, we have developed design protocols to support the effective scaling of citizen science projects. Using a user-centered design approach, we aimed to create practical, action-oriented guideline, helping project teams scale their initiatives successfully. As part of this process, we conducted a persona development exercise with five project-based personas, each representing a citizen science initiative aligned with one of the five scaling strategies described above.

In this panel session, we will present our approach, and the resulting personas used to develop scaling protocols and guidelines. Our goal is to gather feedback from citizen science leaders and practitioners to determine whether the five project-based personas created adequately capture the diversity and scope of the citizen science landscape, particularly in the context of scaling efforts.

Send message to Authors

Short Abstract

FunDive aims to embark citizen scientists across Europe on collating data on fungal occurrences to achieve shared conservation goals. Although various communication channels and activities are used, the degree of citizen scientist engagement varies greatly among countries and regions.

Abstract

To understand and monitor drivers of fungal diversity patterns, high-quality mapping of species distributions is needed. However, even in Europe, which has a long history of mycological research, the distribution of many species remains unknown or is only assessed at country level. The overall goal of FunDive, a collaborative project funded by Biodiversa+, is to develop and improve methods for mapping and monitoring fungal diversity, and to analyze drivers of its distribution patterns, also by encouraging citizen scientists (CS) to participate in generating fungal occurrence data across national borders. We created a central project webpage (https://fun-dive.eu/en/get-involved/), use a common biodiversity platform - PlutoF (https://plutof.ut.ee/) to integrate data, and developed a network of country-level coordinators who facilitate CS participation. We use different channels of communication (including social media posts, press releases in local languages, in-person meetings with mycological groups and societies), and activities (e.g., guided walks, joint forays, workshops, and individual engagement in targeted campaigns). Despite these efforts, the degree of CS involvement varied greatly depending on the country and region. Of the 3089 fungal records collated during the first season, most originated from Finland (642), followed by Italy (353), Poland (332), and Hungary (290). Although 29 out of 44 European countries contributed, several regions are still underrepresented. A better understanding of the factors affecting CS engagement in different European regions is needed to more effectively motivate people and encourage their active involvement in fungal diversity conservation efforts across the continent.

Send message to Authors

Short Abstract

The Natural History Museum’s Nature Overheard citizen science project was upscaled to engage diverse communities via a tiered participation model, from one-click online activities to fieldwork. We present what we learned from upscaling with delivery approaches from school loan boxes to partnerships.

Abstract

Natural history museums (NHMs) are uniquely positioned to upscale community and citizen science projects to engage participants from diverse backgrounds, across a wide range of urban and rural regions, in science and the natural world. Collaboration between research and education departments within NHMs, as well as with external organisations, can enhance outcomes for science, participants and the environment. However, meaningfully engaging large numbers of people is set against a desire to embed greater degrees of collaboration in the project lifecycle.

We present Nature Overheard, a project NHM London co-developed with students aged 11-12 years. We aimed to involve large numbers of people a) in determining the research focus of the project, b) at multiple stages of the research process, c) at a depth of engagement that matched their time/interest. To achieve this, NHM London adopted a tiered framework of participation, comprising multiple entry points, from entry-level activities, to carrying out a biological field survey and audio recording. To increase the audience’s size and diversity, and the project’s geographical reach, different delivery models were implemented, from loan boxes to schools, to work placements and external partnerships.

This presentation will share what strategies worked best for achieving local impact and relevance whilst up against large participation targets across the regions. It illustrates trade-offs between and depth of participant engagement, as well as control over the project’s scientific focus. We will reflect on the effectiveness of the different engagement strategies to inform how future efforts can upscale projects grounded in local interests.

Send message to Authors

Short Abstract

The NBFC promotes biodiversity monitoring, conservation and restoration in Italy. The creation of the Citizen Science WG, initiatives like the Biodiversity Sampling Week (BSW), and a national CS platform are inspiring a replicable European model and supporting a National CS Reference Center.

Abstract

The National Biodiversity Future Center is dedicated to the monitoring, conservation, restoration and valorization of biodiversity. Funded by the Italian NRRP, the consortium is made up of 48 partner institutions and over 2000 researchers.

Citizen Science is seen as a key avenue for the NBFC to maximize its societal impact. In May 2024 the NBFC Working Group on CS was founded, attracting around 150 scientists.

The activities carried out led to significant achievements. Among these: a two-day training course for early-career researchers and the funding of new Citizen Science projects across various regions and environments (marine, terrestrial, urban). through cascading grants.

In collaboration with the Citizen Science Italia association, the NBFC supported the creation of a National Citizen Science platform, based on the EU-citizen.science software. It ensures direct contact with the national CS network and maintains collaborative links with the European CS community.

Another major achievement was the Biodiversity Sampling Week (BSW), promoted by NBFC in May 2025, just before the World Biodiversity Day (May 22nd). The initiative successfully fostered participatory science, with over 120 CS initiatives and about 5000 participants across the country. Following this success, the ECSA biodiversity WG proposed to held an European BSW annually in the week preceding May 22nd, modeled after the Italian BSW.

Finally, NBFC is supporting dialogue with the Italian Ministry of University and Research to establish a National Reference Center for CS, aiming for a stable management structure providing services, identifying good practices, and supporting Citizen Science projects in the country.

Send message to Author

Short Abstract

The ScienceUs project will present insights, sharing tools and methods used to support the scaling journeys of the five selected projects, and highlighting good practices to strengthen the citizen science network and advance it across the EU.

Abstract

Scaling citizen science projects in climate change adaptation is key to creating solutions that are fair and inclusive. Grounded in people’s realities, these projects bring adaptation efforts closer to the communities, making actions more credible and trustworthy. Scaling them up is vital to amplify citizens’ voices, strengthen the legitimacy of participatory research, and ensure that policymakers receive clear evidence that matters.

In response to this, ScienceUs - an EU-funded project - aims to establish an EU-wide network of interconnected citizen science projects focused on climate adaptation, providing support tools for scaling these initiatives in other European regions. Through a structured three-phase support program (Seed-Flourish-Harvest), ScienceUs facilitates the scaling of 5 selected CS initiatives in the field of climate change adaptation. In the Flourish phase, (CoRe-ACTS, The Future is Climate, Blue-Green Tops, Acqua Sorgente, and Alleviating Energy Poverty) entered the unique learning environment of the Upscale Academy, where they receive funding, training, workshops, and tailored mentoring, facilitating effective upscaling and maximizing societal impact.

Within the Upscale Academy, projects develop an upscale strategy template and a stakeholder and project engagement map, ensuring a structured approach to scaling. ScienceUs constitutes an ecosystem for the selected projects, helping to amplify project visibility through networking events and communication activities, fostering connections across Europe and beyond. All selected initiatives directly contribute to the EU Mission “Adaptation to Climate Change,” linking local action to European policy priorities.

Send message to Authors

Short Abstract

We will present a new innovative evaluation tool for formally assessing citizen science cost-benefit, and show how it was applied to a portfolio of 14 marine citizen science projects, to support discussions about investment in citizen science.

Abstract

Recognising the multiple is important to fully understand the value of citizen science. By understanding the range of potential benefits of citizen science, project leaders can plan projects to achieve these multiple outcomes, and citizen science can be more fully valued by funders and decision-makers. However, in project evaluations of citizen science, formal consideration of the costs and benefits is often missing. We develop a tool for evaluation costs and benefits of citizen science and applied it to a case study of 14 marine citizen science projects in the UK (open water to benthic and coastal, and habitats, biodiversity and litter). The imputs to the tool were: monetary value of benefits (value of the time volunteered and benefits for health and wellbeing, and education and skills, albeit hard to quantify in monetary terms), costs for delivering the project, the cost of the alternative (to acheive the same goals), non-monetised risks and benefits. We found that: (1) citizen science requires investment (in our cases, typically costing EUR14-26 per volunteer hour); (2) many projects receive substantial in-kind investment (in our cases, typically covering 75% of the costs); (3) when considering the monetary costs and benefits, citizen science is typically net positive (in our cases, to the value of EUR5 per volunteer hour); (4) our respondents felt that the non-monetised risks and benefits were important and when they were included (in our cases) citizen science was typically twice as preferred as an alternative. Although our specific results should be treated with caution, the use of this framework provides a formal way of including these aspects in discussions with funders and decision-makers to help build the case for supporting and upscaling a sustainable portfolio of citizen science.

Send message to Author

Short Abstract

This study compares barriers to citizen science in Portugal between academia and civil society, highlighting differences in motivation, funding, and institutional recognition, and calling for collaborative, sustainable, and inclusive approaches.

Abstract

Citizen science has increasingly emerged in Portugal as a relevant approach to promote scientific literacy, public participation, and collaborative knowledge production. However, its consolidation still faces multiple institutional, operational, and social challenges. This study addresses the following research question: What are the main barriers to the development and growth of citizen science projects in Portugal, and how do these differ between initiatives promoted by academia and by civil society?

The analysis is based on 16 citizen science projects implemented in Portugal between 2016 and 2024, using data collected through semi-structured interviews with project coordinators and promoters from both academic and civic contexts.

Findings reveal clear contrasts between the two spheres. In civil society-led projects, the main barriers relate to sustaining citizen motivation, limited scientific literacy, and lack of funding and human resources. These constraints reflect the structural vulnerability of local initiatives and the difficulty of maintaining long-term engagement. In academically driven projects, the predominant barriers are institutional and cultural, including scientists’ distrust in citizen-generated data, the absence of formal academic recognition of citizen science for career progression, and slow data validation and management processes.

Despite these differences, both groups share common challenges, particularly the need for continuous funding and effective engagement and communication strategies with participants. The study concludes that the strengthening of citizen science in Portugal requires an intersectoral approach that integrates universities, municipalities, associations, and citizens, promoting more collaborative, sustainable, and inclusive models of participation in research.