Questions That Won't Go Away in Participatory Research

Long, Jonathan W.; Ballard, Heidi L.; Fisher, Lawrence A.; Belsky, Jill M.

doi:10.1080/08941920.2015.1024368

Cited by 35 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The criterion that an activity should be considered participatory or qualify as citizen science only if it is done by an unpaid volunteer has been discussed in the participatory literature. Collaboration with job-corps programs intersects with an ongoing discussion about whether an activity should be considered participatory or qualify as citizen science only if it is done by unpaid volunteers (Long et al 2015). We believe the focus should be on engaging people who are not professional scientists, rather than compensation, to avoid restricting participation to upper-middle-class members of society who make up the traditional volunteer pool.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating environmental education, citizen science, and stewardship through naturalist programs

Merenlender

Crall

Drill³

et al. 2016

Conservation Biology

131

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Amateur naturalists have played an important role in the study and conservation of nature since the 17th century. Today, naturalist groups make important contributions to bridge the gap between conservation science and practice around the world. We examined data from 2 regional naturalist programs to understand participant motivations, barriers, and perspectives as well as the actions they take to advance science, stewardship, and community engagement. These programs provide certification-based natural history and conservation science training for adults that is followed by volunteer service in citizen science, education, and stewardship. Studies in California and Virginia include quantitative and qualitative evaluation data collected through pre- and postcourse surveys, interviews, and long-term tracking of volunteer hours. Motivations of participants focused on learning about the local environment and plants and animals, connecting with nature, becoming certified, and spending time with people who have similar interests. Over half the participants surveyed were over 50 years old, two-thirds were women, and a majority reported household incomes of over $50,000 (60% in California, 85% in Virginia), and <20% of those surveyed in both states described themselves as nonwhite. Thus, these programs need to improve participation by a wider spectrum of the public. We interviewed younger and underrepresented adults to examine barriers to participation in citizen science. The primary barrier was lack of time due to the need to work and focus on career advancement. Survey data revealed that participants' ecological knowledge, scientific skills, and belief in their ability to address environmental issues increased after training. Documented conservation actions taken by the participants include invasive plant management, habitat restoration, and cleanups of natural areas and streams. Long-term data from Virginia on volunteer hours dedicated to environmental citizen science show an increase from 14% in 2007 to 32% in 2014. In general, participants in the naturalist programs we examined increased their content knowledge about ecosystems, had greater confidence in conserving them, and continued to engage as citizen scientists after completing the program.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating environmental education, citizen science, and stewardship through naturalist programs

Merenlender

Crall

Drill³

et al. 2016

Conservation Biology

131

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Heather Castleden and colleagues (Castleden, Morgan, and Neimanis 2010) conducted research on the perspectives of academics working with indigenous communities in Canada about listing communities or individual collaborators as coauthors. While acknowledging potential benefits of coauthorship, they identified risks including falsely assumed support of research findings, opening rifts in the community (see also Long et al ), time lost in reaching consensus, loss of academic freedom, decrease in likelihood of publication, difficulties determining criteria for authorship, issues with specifying individual versus community authorship, decreased authorial prestige, and reduced chances of academic tenure and promotion. Vafeas (:332) noted higher rates of single authorship by junior faculty members, implying that early‐career pressures or the tenure process may create incentives not to share authorship with others, particularly nonacademic coauthors.…”

Section: Authorshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Participatory research, an increasingly important methodology, recognizes that “all people create knowledge” (Fortmann :1). Participatory researchers frequently advocate the inclusion of nonacademic collaborators “in all aspects of the research process” (Long et al :251). Given the importance of various forms of “popular knowledge” (e.g., indigenous knowledge, farmer knowledge, local knowledge, traditional knowledge) and alternative modes of knowledge creation to participatory researchers, we wondered whether authors of participatory research publications would recognize their nonacademic collaborators through coauthorship or with an explicit acknowledgment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Where Are the Missing Coauthors? Authorship Practices in Participatory Research

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Originally marginal, participatory research has become an increasingly important methodology in the social, biophysical, and interdisciplinary sciences. The overall increase in publications based on participatory research has raised questions about crediting the contributions of nonacademic collaborators. Using qualitative and quantitative methods, we analyzed trends and patterns in authorship and acknowledgment practices in a sample of 262 journal articles reporting on participatory research on rural livelihoods published from 1975 to 2013. Six percent of the researchers recognized the intellectual contributions of their nonacademic collaborators with coauthorship and 51 percent with acknowledgment. Through interviews with lead authors of coauthored articles, we analyzed factors that shaped whether authorship was shared with nonacademic collaborators. Despite facing numerous barriers, researchers were motivated to coauthor in order to recognize intellectual contributions, practice research ethics, and work toward epistemic decolonization. We argue that coauthorship can be an important component of epistemic justice in participatory research and encourage participatory researchers to discuss authorship with their nonacademic collaborators as a routine component of engaged scholarship. We also note that nonacademics’ contributions to scientific knowledge need to be taken into account in understandings of the practice of science.

show abstract

“…Participants and promotoras both cited the time required to do project tasks as the greatest barrier to participation. Designing for relationship building, which inherently requires participant time, while also honoring participant time constraints may be a challenge in participatory research "that won't go away" (Long et al 2016). Strategies from other CS projects include using tiered levels of participation (e.g., Ablah et al 2016) to simultaneously make participation accessible for those with limited time and resources, and provide those with more time the option to get more deeply involved.…”

Section: Design For Time and Technology Constraintsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Engaging Diverse Citizen Scientists for Environmental Health: Recommendations from Participants and <i>Promotoras</i>

Davis

Ramírez‐Andreotta

Buxner

2020

CSTP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Citizen science (CS) has been rapidly gaining popularity over the past several decades (Pocock et al. 2017), as public participation can increase both the scale of environmental research and public engagement in environmental issues. Benefits also have been demonstrated for CS participants themselves, including increased understanding of science, awareness of the local environment, and confidence to participate in scientific activities (

show abstract

Questions That Won't Go Away in Participatory Research

Cited by 35 publications

References 16 publications

Evaluating environmental education, citizen science, and stewardship through naturalist programs

Evaluating environmental education, citizen science, and stewardship through naturalist programs

Where Are the Missing Coauthors? Authorship Practices in Participatory Research

Engaging Diverse Citizen Scientists for Environmental Health: Recommendations from Participants and <i>Promotoras</i>

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About