The risks and rewards of community science for threatened species monitoring

• DOI: 10.1111/csp2.12788
• Publication Date: 2022-08-08T09:40:24Z
• Authors: Peter Soroye; Brandon P. M. Edw...; Rachel T. Buxton; Jeffrey P. Ethier; Acacia Frempong‐M...; Hannah E. Keefe; Albana Berberi; Maisy Roach‐Kraje...; Allison D. Binley; Jaimie G. Vincent; Hsien‐Yung Lin; Steven J. Cooke; Joseph R. Bennett
• Keywords: 0106 biological sciences; Ecology; iNaturalist; General. Including nature conservation, geographical distribution; species assessments; QH1-199.5; 15. Life on land; 01 natural sciences; participatory monitoring; community science; citizen science; outreach; QH540-549.5

AbstractFinding ways of efficiently monitoring threatened species can be critical to effective conservation. The global proliferation of community science (also called citizen science) programs, like iNaturalist, presents a potential alternative or complement to conventional threatened species monitoring. Using a case study of ~700,000 observations of >10,000 IUCN Red List Threatened species within iNaturalist observations, we illustrate the potential risks and rewards of using community science to monitor threatened species. Poor data quality and risks of sending untrained volunteers to sample species that are sensitive to disturbance or harvesting are key barriers to overcome. Yet community science can expand the breadth of monitoring at little extra cost, while indirectly benefiting conservation through outreach and education. We conclude with a list of actionable recommendations to further mitigate the risks and capitalize on the rewards of community science as a threatened species monitoring tool.