What is the scientific evidence on the linkages between citizen science engagement levels and protected areas’ governance outcomes? A systematic map and qualitative synthesis

IF 2.2 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION Journal for Nature Conservation Pub Date : 2024-09-07 DOI:10.1016/j.jnc.2024.126712
Monika Suškevičs , Joanna Tamar Storie , Carmen Kilvits , Mart Külvik
{"title":"What is the scientific evidence on the linkages between citizen science engagement levels and protected areas’ governance outcomes? A systematic map and qualitative synthesis","authors":"Monika Suškevičs ,&nbsp;Joanna Tamar Storie ,&nbsp;Carmen Kilvits ,&nbsp;Mart Külvik","doi":"10.1016/j.jnc.2024.126712","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Citizen science (CS) entails different citizen engagement levels in research. It is not well-known how these levels affect protected area (PA) governance. This review systematically maps and analyses how the empirical scientific literature has constructed the links between three CS engagement levels (contributory, collaborative, co-created CS) and their outcomes for protected areas’ governance. From our search results (5486 records), 63 articles dealt with the topic in-depth. The most common engagement level was contributory CS. Almost all collaborative and co-created CS projects were conducted outside Europe or North America. All CS levels support the strategy-formation phase of the governance cycle, whereas collaborative CS supports the monitoring and evaluation phase, and co-created CS the practical implementation. The collaborative/co-created CS supports legislative, cooperation-based, and information instruments, whereas economic instruments are not well-recognised by any CS level. Collaborative and co-created CS target a more diverse set of actors and governance levels, than contributory CS. Collaborative and co-created CS often mention project funding and collaboration as factors to achieve the outcomes, whereas contributory CS frequently mentions CS cost-effectiveness. In our total sample, CS is mainly conducted in national parks and Marine Protected Areas and targets simple monitoring objects. It shows a knowledge gap for other PA types and points to the need to diversify monitoring indicators. We suggest PA managers explore the potential of collaborative and co-created CS, especially in the European and North American context, as these CS levels support a more complex set of practice-oriented governance outcomes needed for strategic adaptive PA management.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":54898,"journal":{"name":"Journal for Nature Conservation","volume":"82 ","pages":"Article 126712"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal for Nature Conservation","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1617138124001614","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Citizen science (CS) entails different citizen engagement levels in research. It is not well-known how these levels affect protected area (PA) governance. This review systematically maps and analyses how the empirical scientific literature has constructed the links between three CS engagement levels (contributory, collaborative, co-created CS) and their outcomes for protected areas’ governance. From our search results (5486 records), 63 articles dealt with the topic in-depth. The most common engagement level was contributory CS. Almost all collaborative and co-created CS projects were conducted outside Europe or North America. All CS levels support the strategy-formation phase of the governance cycle, whereas collaborative CS supports the monitoring and evaluation phase, and co-created CS the practical implementation. The collaborative/co-created CS supports legislative, cooperation-based, and information instruments, whereas economic instruments are not well-recognised by any CS level. Collaborative and co-created CS target a more diverse set of actors and governance levels, than contributory CS. Collaborative and co-created CS often mention project funding and collaboration as factors to achieve the outcomes, whereas contributory CS frequently mentions CS cost-effectiveness. In our total sample, CS is mainly conducted in national parks and Marine Protected Areas and targets simple monitoring objects. It shows a knowledge gap for other PA types and points to the need to diversify monitoring indicators. We suggest PA managers explore the potential of collaborative and co-created CS, especially in the European and North American context, as these CS levels support a more complex set of practice-oriented governance outcomes needed for strategic adaptive PA management.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
公民科学参与水平与保护区治理成果之间的联系有哪些科学证据?系统地图和定性综述
公民科学(CS)需要不同层次的公民参与研究。这些水平如何影响保护区(PA)的治理尚不为人所知。本综述系统地描绘和分析了实证科学文献如何构建三种公民科学参与水平(贡献式公民科学、合作式公民科学、共同创造式公民科学)之间的联系及其对保护区治理的影响。在我们的搜索结果(5486 条记录)中,有 63 篇文章对该主题进行了深入探讨。最常见的参与水平是贡献型 CS。几乎所有合作型和共建型 CS 项目都是在欧洲或北美以外地区开展的。所有级别的 CS 都支持治理周期的战略制定阶段,而协作型 CS 支持监测和评估阶段,共同创建型 CS 支持实际实施阶段。合作/共同创建的 CS 支持立法、基于合作和信息的手段,而经济手段并没有得到任何 CS 层面的充分认可。与 "贡献型 CS "相比,"合作型 CS "和 "共同创造型 CS "的目标群体和治理水平更加多样化。合作式和共同创造式 CS 经常提到项目资金和合作是取得成果的因素,而捐助式 CS 则经常提到 CS 的成本效益。在我们的全部样本中,CS 主要在国家公园和海洋保护区开展,目标是简单的监测对象。这表明其他类型的保护区还存在知识差距,需要使监测指标多样化。我们建议保护区管理者探索合作和共创 CS 的潜力,尤其是在欧洲和北美地区,因为这些 CS 层次支持一套更复杂的以实践为导向的治理成果,而这正是战略性适应性保护区管理所需要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal for Nature Conservation
Journal for Nature Conservation 环境科学-生态学
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
5.00%
发文量
151
审稿时长
7.9 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal for Nature Conservation addresses concepts, methods and techniques for nature conservation. This international and interdisciplinary journal encourages collaboration between scientists and practitioners, including the integration of biodiversity issues with social and economic concepts. Therefore, conceptual, technical and methodological papers, as well as reviews, research papers, and short communications are welcomed from a wide range of disciplines, including theoretical ecology, landscape ecology, restoration ecology, ecological modelling, and others, provided that there is a clear connection and immediate relevance to nature conservation. Manuscripts without any immediate conservation context, such as inventories, distribution modelling, genetic studies, animal behaviour, plant physiology, will not be considered for this journal; though such data may be useful for conservationists and managers in the future, this is outside of the current scope of the journal.
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board Corrigendum to “Surviving the Tide: Assessing Guiana dolphin persistence amidst growing threats in a protected estuary in South-eastern Brazil” [J. Nature Conserv. 82 (2024) 126713] From virtue to sin: Is the installation of bat boxes an effective conservation measure or a potential pitfall for vulnerable bat species? Paying for green tide management or participating in cleanup activities? Testing and controlling for payment vehicle bias in the valuation of ecological damage caused by green tides Predicting climate driven habitat shifts for the Egyptian vulture in Punjab, Pakistan
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1