Published March 9, 2026 | Version 1
Journal article Open

Delineating the contours of citizen science: Development of the ECSA characteristics of citizen science

Description

Citizen science is increasingly recognized as a valuable method in various research fields, but its definition remains challenging due to the diversity of approaches and practices. This paper introduces the "ECSA Characteristics of Citizen Science", which outline key elements of citizen science projects. It also connects these Characteristics to the ECSA 10 Principles of Citizen Science, which provide guidance on best practices. Additionally, the paper examines how different groups, such as policymakers and research funders, understand citizen science and highlights the differences in practices across disciplines. A strict definition of citizen science may limit creativity and participation, while a broad one could make it difficult to apply in specific contexts. The paper recommends a flexible, inclusive approach that allows different actors to define citizen science according to their own needs and contexts.

Files

openreseurope-5-25044.pdf

Files (1.3 MB)

Name Size Download all
md5:d2e8f20cb0c72a075385ceca92036a4d
1.3 MB Preview Download

Additional details

Cites
10.1073/pnas.1909278116 (DOI)
10.5334/cstp.691 (DOI)
10.3390/su15054496 (DOI)
10.1111/j.1365-2648.2009.05055.x (DOI)
10.5334/dsj-2020-043 (DOI)
10.1007/s10661-010-1582-5 (DOI)
10.1126/science.abi6487 (DOI)
10.5281/zenodo.7249085 (DOI)
10.17605/OSF.IO/XPR2N (DOI)
10.5334/cstp.96 (DOI)
10.5334/cstp.812 (DOI)
10.1007/s11625-020-00833-7 (DOI)
10.1038/s43586-022-00144-4 (DOI)
10.1007/s11625-023-01402-4 (DOI)
10.3389/fpubh.2023.1202188 (DOI)
10.1038/s41893-024-01489-2 (DOI)
10.1007/978-3-030-58278-4_10 (DOI)
10.1007/s11024-024-09529-z (DOI)
10.22323/2.20060201 (DOI)
10.22323/1.393.0024 (DOI)
10.1007/978-94-007-4587-2_7 (DOI)
10.5281/ZENODO.4281293 (DOI)
10.1098/rsos.202108 (DOI)
10.5281/zenodo.3859970 (DOI)
10.5281/zenodo.3758668 (DOI)
10.5281/zenodo.3758555 (DOI)
10.1073/pnas.1903393116 (DOI)
10.5334/cstp.294 (DOI)
10.1371/journal.pone.0147152 (DOI)
10.1016/j.chb.2015.09.036 (DOI)
10.33524/cjar.v13i2.37 (DOI)
10.3390/su14084676 (DOI)
10.1029/2022CSJ000026 (DOI)
10.3390/su13179534 (DOI)
10.1371/journal.pone.0172579 (DOI)
10.1057/s41599-022-01049-z (DOI)
10.1145/1864349.1864355 (DOI)
10.14324/111.9781787352339 (DOI)
10.23987/sts.59519 (DOI)
10.5281/zenodo.4085172 (DOI)
10.5751/ES-04705-170229 (DOI)
10.1002/geo2.10 (DOI)
10.23987/sts.60425 (DOI)
10.1093/bjsw/bch345 (DOI)
10.54677/MNMH8546 (DOI)
10.5281/ZENODO.7472827 (DOI)
10.1109/HICSS.2011.207 (DOI)
10.1080/21548455.2023.2261600 (DOI)
Is new version of
10.12688/openreseurope.19411.2 (DOI)

References

  • (2025).
  • (2025).
  • Auerbach J, Barthelmess EL, Cavalier D (2019). The problem with delineating narrow criteria for citizen science. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. doi:10.1073/pnas.1909278116
  • Beck S, Fraisl D, Poetz M (2024). Multi-disciplinary perspectives on citizen science—Synthesizing five paradigms of citizen involvement. Citiz Sci. doi:10.5334/cstp.691
  • Berti Suman A, Alblas E (2023). Exploring citizen science over time: sensing, technology and the law. Sustainability. doi:10.3390/su15054496
  • Bonney R (1996). Citizen science: a lab tradition. Living Bird.
  • Brauer PM, Hanning RM, Arocha JF (2009). Creating case scenarios or vignettes using factorial study design methods. J Adv Nurs. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2009.05055.x
  • Brovelli MA, Zhou Q, Ma A (2025).
  • Wissen B s (2024).
  • Burton VJ, Ambler A, Neilson R (2019). The Great GROW Experiment - challenges and opportunities for hypothesis and place-based citizen research in food growing. Place-Based Citizen-Science for Wellbeing.
  • Carroll SR, Garba I, Figueroa-Rodríguez OL (2020). The CARE principles for indigenous data governance. Data Sci J. doi:10.5334/dsj-2020-043
  • Cigliano JA, Phillips T, Elwood ER (2021).
  • (2025).
  • (2015).
  • Conrad CC, Hilchey KG (2011). A review of citizen science and community-based environmental monitoring: issues and opportunities. Environ Monit Assess. doi:10.1007/s10661-010-1582-5
  • Cooper CB, Hawn CL, Larson LR (2021). Inclusion in citizen science: the conundrum of rebranding. Science. doi:10.1126/science.abi6487
  • (2025).
  • (2022).
  • (2024).
  • Dörler D, Heigl F, Brounéus F (2022). Criteria for listing citizen science projects on citizen science online platforms. doi:10.5281/zenodo.7249085
  • Duží B, Trojan J, Butkevičienė E (2022). Citizen science in environmentally oriented social science research. trends, projects, and innovative technologies.
  • (2015). Ten principles of citizen science. doi:10.17605/OSF.IO/XPR2N
  • (2025).
  • Eitzel MV, Cappadonna JL, Santos-Lang C (2017). Citizen science terminology matters: exploring key terms. Citiz Sci. doi:10.5334/cstp.96
  • (2023).
  • (2022). The role of citizen science in the European green deal.
  • Fortson L, Crowston K, Kloetzer L (2024). Artificial Intelligence and the future of citizen science. Citiz Sci. doi:10.5334/cstp.812
  • Fraisl D, Campbell J, See L (2020a). Mapping citizen science contributions to the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Sustain Sci. doi:10.1007/s11625-020-00833-7
  • Fraisl D, Hager G, Bedessem B (2022). Citizen science in environmental and ecological sciences. Nat Rev Methods Primers. doi:10.1038/s43586-022-00144-4
  • Fraisl D, Hager G, See L (2020b). Framework report describing criteria and rationale for sharing and selecting state of the art citizen science resources. D3.1 of the EU-Citizen. Science project funded under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme GA No.
  • Fraisl D, See L, Bowers R (2023a). The contributions of citizen science to SDG monitoring and reporting on marine plastics. Sustain Sci. doi:10.1007/s11625-023-01402-4
  • Fraisl D, See L, Estevez D (2023b). Citizen science for monitoring the health and well-being related Sustainable Development Goals and the World Health Organization's Triple Billion Targets. Public Health. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2023.1202188
  • Fraisl D (2023).
  • Fraisl D, See L, Fritz S (2025). Leveraging the collaborative power of AI and citizen science for sustainable development. Nat Sustain. doi:10.1038/s41893-024-01489-2
  • Franzen M, Kloetzer L, Ponti M, Vohland K, Land-Zandstra A, Ceccaroni L, Lemmens R, Perelló J, Ponti M, Samson R, Wagenknecht K (2021). Machine learning in citizen science: promises and implications. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-58278-4_10
  • Fritz S, Fonte CC (2016). Citizen science and earth observation.
  • Fritz S, Fonte CC (2019).
  • Hacking N, Lewis J, Evans R (2024). Mapping approaches to 'Citizen Science' and 'Community Science' and everything In-between: the evolution of new epistemic territory?. Minerva. doi:10.1007/s11024-024-09529-z
  • Hager G, Gold M, Wehn U (2021a). Onto new horizons: insights from the WeObserve project to strengthen the awareness, acceptability and sustainability of Citizen Observatories in Europe. Journal of Science Communication. doi:10.22323/2.20060201
  • Hager G, Haywood BK (2025).
  • Hager G, Kieslinger B (2020). Würden sie das citizen science nennen? In. Österreichische Citizen Science Konferenz 2020.
  • Hager G, Kieslinger B, Hecker S (2021b). The characteristics of citizen science in a fishbowl. Proceedings of Austrian Citizen Science Conference 2020 — PoS (ACSC2020). doi:10.22323/1.393.0024
  • Haklay M, Sui D, Elwood S, Goodchild M (2013). Crowdsourcing Geographic Knowledge. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-4587-2_7
  • Haklay M, Fraisl D, Greshake Tzovaras B (2020a). doi:10.5281/ZENODO.4281293
  • Haklay M, Fraisl D, Greshake Tzovaras B (2021). Contours of citizen science: a vignette study. R Soc Open Sci. doi:10.1098/rsos.202108
  • Haklay M, Hecker S, Warin C (2020b). doi:10.5281/zenodo.3859970
  • Haklay M, Motion A, Balázs B (2020c). doi:10.5281/zenodo.3758668
  • Haklay M, Motion A, Balázs B (2020d). doi:10.5281/zenodo.3758555
  • Hecker S, Haklay M, Hager G (2021). Forum Citizen Science 2021.
  • Heigl F, Kieslinger B, Paul KT (2019). Opinion: toward an international definition of citizen science. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. doi:10.1073/pnas.1903393116
  • Heigl F, Kieslinger B, Paul KT (2020). Co-creating and implementing quality criteria for citizen science. Citiz Sci. doi:10.5334/cstp.294
  • Hoggart S (2021).
  • (2025).
  • Irwin A (1995). Citizen science: a study of people, expertise, and sustainable development.
  • Kullenberg C, Kasperowski D (2016). What Is Citizen Science?--A Scientometric Meta-Analysis. PLoS One. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0147152
  • Liu M, Conrad FG (2016). An experiment testing six formats of 101-point rating scales. Hum Behav. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.09.036
  • MacDonald C (2012). Understanding participatory action research: a qualitative resarch methodology option. Canadian Journal of Action Research. doi:10.33524/cjar.v13i2.37
  • Se MF (2024).
  • (2023).
  • (2024).
  • (2024).
  • Parkinson S, Woods SM, Sprinks J (2022). A practical approach to assessing the impact of citizen science towards the Sustainable Development Goals. Sustainability. doi:10.3390/su14084676
  • Parrish JK (2022). Searching for community in community science. Community Sci. doi:10.1029/2022CSJ000026
  • Pateman R, Tuhkanen H, Cinderby S (2021). Citizen science and the Sustainable Development Goals in Low and Middle Income Country Cities. Sustainability. doi:10.3390/su13179534
  • Pocock MJO, Tweddle JC, Savage J (2017). The diversity and evolution of ecological and environmental citizen science. PLoS One. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0172579
  • Ponti M, Seredko A (2022). Human-machine-learning integration and task allocation in citizen science. Humanit Soc Sci Commun. doi:10.1057/s41599-022-01049-z
  • Reddy S, Estrin D, Hansen M (2010). Examining micro-payments for participatory sensing data collections. Proceedings of the 12th ACM International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing. doi:10.1145/1864349.1864355
  • Robinson L, Cawthray J, West S, Hecker S, Haklay M, Bowser A, Makuch Z, Vogel J, Bonn A (2018). Citizen science: Innovation in open science, society and policy. doi:10.14324/111.9781787352339
  • Roser M, Ortiz-Ospina E (2016).
  • Schrögel P, Kolleck A (2018). The many faces of participation in science. Sci Technol Stud. doi:10.23987/sts.59519
  • Shanley LA (2015). Spatial data sovereignty and privacy in Indian country. doi:10.5281/zenodo.4085172
  • Shirk JL, Ballard HL, Wilderman CC (2012). Public participation in scientific research: a framework for deliberate design. Ecol Soc. doi:10.5751/ES-04705-170229
  • Sieber RE, Haklay M (2015). The epistemology(s) of volunteered geographic information: a critique. Geo. doi:10.1002/geo2.10
  • Strasser BJ, Baudry J, Mahr D (2018). "Citizen Science"? Rethinking science and public participation. Sci Technol Stud. doi:10.23987/sts.60425
  • (2022). 10 Swiss citizen science principles. Bern.
  • Taylor BJ (2006). Factorial surveys: using vignettes to study professional judgement. Br J Soc Work. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bch345
  • (2025).
  • (2019).
  • (2017).
  • (2021). doi:10.54677/MNMH8546
  • ReLeaf U (2025).
  • (2025).
  • Wehn U (2021). Citizen science terminology & typology, marine citizen science community of practice thematic workshop #1.
  • Wehn U, Goebel C, Bowser A (2020). Global citizen science perspectives on open science. Short Paper for UNESCO Advisory Body on the Open Science Recommendation.
  • Wehn U, Hepburn L (2022). Guidance for the implementation of the UNESCO Open Science Recommendation re. "Opening science to society". (FINAL). Zenodo. doi:10.5281/ZENODO.7472827
  • Wiggins A, Crowston K (2011). doi:10.1109/HICSS.2011.207
  • (2025).
  • Wu Y, Benaglia MF (2024). Mapping the evolution path of citizen science in education: a bibliometric analysis. International Journal of Science Education, Part B. doi:10.1080/21548455.2023.2261600
  • (2025).