Scholarlink

<p>In an era of systemic risks from natural and human-induced hazards, we need approaches that address such risks at different governance levels, including those at the community level. Citizen science (CS)—public participation in research—is one such approach that has the potential to benefit risk assessment and management. Building on systematic evidence synthesis methodologies, we examine the individual and collective benefits from CS to environmental risk assessment and management. From systematic search results (9277 records), we found 133 publications dealing with the topic in-depth. Results show that CS is increasingly being recognised for risk assessment and management and several individual-level benefits (e.g., improved scientific skills) support outcomes for communities (e.g., increased community capacity). Identified knowledge gaps include (i) unidentified potential of CS for different risk governance phases, and (ii) scattered evidence of CS community outcomes in different geographic regions. We conclude that CS can increase resilience amongst vulnerable communities.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Citizen science contributions to environmental risks assessment and management: A systematic map and qualitative evidence synthesis

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年11月27日

查看全文
  • Monika Suškevičs,
  • Chidiebere Christy Obi,
  • Joanna Tamar Storie,
  • Carmen Kilvits,
  • Anton Shkaruba,
  • Ghieth Alkhateeb

摘要

In an era of systemic risks from natural and human-induced hazards, we need approaches that address such risks at different governance levels, including those at the community level. Citizen science (CS)—public participation in research—is one such approach that has the potential to benefit risk assessment and management. Building on systematic evidence synthesis methodologies, we examine the individual and collective benefits from CS to environmental risk assessment and management. From systematic search results (9277 records), we found 133 publications dealing with the topic in-depth. Results show that CS is increasingly being recognised for risk assessment and management and several individual-level benefits (e.g., improved scientific skills) support outcomes for communities (e.g., increased community capacity). Identified knowledge gaps include (i) unidentified potential of CS for different risk governance phases, and (ii) scattered evidence of CS community outcomes in different geographic regions. We conclude that CS can increase resilience amongst vulnerable communities.