| Title |
A review of citizen science and community-based environmental monitoring: issues and opportunities
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, July 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10661-010-1582-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Cathy C. Conrad, Krista G. Hilchey |
| Abstract |
Worldwide, decision-makers and nongovernment organizations are increasing their use of citizen volunteers to enhance their ability to monitor and manage natural resources, track species at risk, and conserve protected areas. We reviewed the last 10 years of relevant citizen science literature for areas of consensus, divergence, and knowledge gaps. Different community-based monitoring (CBM) activities and governance structures were examined and contrasted. Literature was examined for evidence of common benefits, challenges, and recommendations for successful citizen science. Two major gaps were identified: (1) a need to compare and contrast the success (and the situations that induce success) of CBM programs which present sound evidence of citizen scientists influencing positive environmental changes in the local ecosystems they monitor and (2) more case studies showing use of CBM data by decision-makers or the barriers to linkages and how these might be overcome. If new research focuses on these gaps, and on the differences of opinions that exist, we will have a much better understanding of the social, economic, and ecological benefits of citizen science. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,967 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 27 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 12 | <1% |
| Germany | 7 | <1% |
| Australia | 7 | <1% |
| Canada | 4 | <1% |
| Japan | 3 | <1% |
| Portugal | 3 | <1% |
| France | 3 | <1% |
| Finland | 3 | <1% |
| Other | 19 | <1% |
| Unknown | 1879 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 416 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 317 | 16% |
| Researcher | 309 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 211 | 11% |
| Other | 92 | 5% |
| Other | 283 | 14% |
| Unknown | 339 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 540 | 27% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 429 | 22% |
| Social Sciences | 190 | 10% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 71 | 4% |
| Engineering | 69 | 4% |
| Other | 242 | 12% |
| Unknown | 426 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 March 2024.
All research outputs
#1,698,057
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
#70
of 3,192 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,136
of 99,258 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
#1
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,192 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 99,258 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.