The role of digital data entry in participatory environmental monitoring

Abstract

Many argue that monitoring conducted exclusively by scientists is insufficient to address ongoing environmental challenges. One solution entails the use of mobile digital devices in participatory monitoring (PM) programs. But how digital data entry affects programs with varying levels of stakeholder participation, from nonscientists collecting field data to nonscientists administering every step of a monitoring program, remains unclear. We reviewed the successes, in terms of management interventions and sustainability, of 107 monitoring programs described in the literature (hereafter programs) and compared these with case studies from our PM experiences in Australia, Canada, Ethiopia, Ghana, Greenland, and Vietnam (hereafter cases). Our literature review showed that participatory programs were less likely to use digital devices, and 2 of our 3 more participatory cases were also slow to adopt digital data entry. Programs that were participatory and used digital devices were more likely to report management actions, which was consistent with cases in Ethiopia, Greenland, and Australia. Programs engaging volunteers were more frequently reported as ongoing, but those involving digital data entry were less often sustained when data collectors were volunteers. For the Vietnamese and Canadian cases, sustainability was undermined by a mismatch in stakeholder objectives. In the Ghanaian case, complex field protocols diminished monitoring sustainability. Innovative technologies attract interest, but the foundation of effective participatory adaptive monitoring depends more on collaboratively defined questions, objectives, conceptual models, and monitoring approaches. When this foundation is built through effective partnerships, digital data entry can enable the collection of more data of higher quality. Without this foundation, or when implemented ineffectively or unnecessarily, digital data entry can be an additional expense that distracts from core monitoring objectives and undermines project sustainability. The appropriate role of digital data entry in PM likely depends more on the context in which it is used and less on the technology itself.

From local scenarios to national maps: a participatory framework for envisioning the future of Tanzania

“…We deem our scenario assumptions valid within the 2025 time frame, while in the longer term other emerging processes could significantly affect socioeconomic and environmental trajectories, in particular natural gas and oil extraction, rural-to-urban migration, introduction of PES schemes, IT development, climate change, and capacity building. Our outputs should be interpreted jointly as an expression of a large, though limited, number of stakeholders, at the time (2014) and at the scale (macro-regions) of the workshops, and should be used along with, and not in replacement of, other analytical approaches, particularly those that harness representation at local scales (e.g., Enfors et al 2008, Tschakert and Dietrich 2010, Brammer et al 2016). …”

Assessing the Claims of Participatory Measurement, Reporting and Verification (PMRV) in Achieving REDD+ Outcomes: A Systematic Review

“…However, there is also concern that dependence on networked electronic devices carries the risks of frequent equipment failures in remote settings and of improper use [5, 21]. A recent review found digital data entry can contribute to the success of participatory monitoring when combined with stakeholder participation, but it may have detrimental effects on the sustainability of the monitoring if it is not effectively implemented [43]. Thus, the increased ease of reporting gained from the use of those devices should be considered against the risks.…”

Participatory monitoring to connect local and global priorities for forest restoration

“…Advantages of these tools over pen and paper include fewer errors, improved accuracy, shorter processing time, and more useful data for analysis and decision making. Digital tools may also help bridge the gap between participatory and scientific monitoring when the technical aspects of sampling and data analyses are automated (Laake et al 2013;Pratihast et al 2014;Bellfield et al 2015;Brammer et al 2016). There are disadvantages too, such as the cost of training and technical support, and thus dependence on outside resources, and alienation of groups who may be less familiar with digital tools (Brammer et al 2016).…”

“…; Brammer et al. ). There are disadvantages too, such as the cost of training and technical support, and thus dependence on outside resources, and alienation of groups who may be less familiar with digital tools (Brammer et al.…”

“…There are disadvantages too, such as the cost of training and technical support, and thus dependence on outside resources, and alienation of groups who may be less familiar with digital tools (Brammer et al. ). Photo point monitoring at the plot level or at the landscape scale is considered a simple yet effective way for local people to collect information that can be discussed and analyzed collaboratively (Danielsen et al.…”