Arboriculture & Urban Forestry 44(2): March 2018 Table 1. Terms related to public participation in the science and management of natural resources. Term Definition Citizen science “[P]artnerships between scientists and non-scientists in which authentic data are collected, shared, and analyzed” (Jordan et al. 2012), while in the ecological sciences, a citizen scientist is sometimes considered “a volunteer who collects and/or processes data as part of a scientific enquiry” (Silvertown 2009). Civic ecology “[A] field of interdisciplinary study concerned with individual, community, and environmental outcomes of community-based environmental stewardship practices, and the interactions of such practices with people and other organisms, communities, governance institutions, and the ecosys- tems in which those practices take place” and “civic ecology practices are self-organizing steward- ship initiatives, oſten taking place in cities” (Krasny and Tidball 2012). Civic science "Civic science alludes to a changing relationship between science, expert knowledge and citizens in democratic societies. In this perspective, citizens and the public have a state in the science- politics interface, which can no longer be viewed as an exclusive domain for scientific experts and policy-makers only," with dimensions of civic science emphasizing public participation, enhancing representation of marginalized voices, and democratization of the scientific process (Bäckstrand 2003). Community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) Community-based participatory research (CBPR) “[A] mechanism to address both environmental and socio-economic goals and to balance the exploitation and conservation of valued ecosystem components”, which “requires some degree of devolution of decision-making power and authority over natural resources to communities and community-based organizations” (Armitage 2005, and citations therein). “[A] collaborative approach to research that equitably involves all partners in the research process and recognizes the strengths that each brings. CBPR begins with a research topic of importance to the community with the aim of combining knowledge and action for social change to improve community health and eliminate health disparities” (Kellogg 2001, qtd. in Minkler and Wallerstein 2008). Co-management Crowdsourcing Knowledge co-production “[T]he sharing of power and responsibility between the government and local resource users” (Berkes 2009). “[T]he practice of obtaining information or input into a task or project by enlisting the services of a large number of people, either paid or unpaid” (OED 2017), either via the internet, or in ecology and conservation, crowdsourcing can also involve field data (Dickinson et al. 2010). “[T]he collaborative process of bringing a plurality of knowledge sources and types together to address a defined problem and build an integrated or systems-oriented understanding of that problem” (Armitage et al. 2011), typically related to co-management of natural resources. PAPERS IN THIS SPECIAL ISSUE The papers in this special issue include both Origi- nal Research and Short Communication articles. We are using Short Communication articles as practitioner notes for urban forestry professionals and researchers to share evidence-based evalua- tions of their program, addressing topics such as best practices for citizen science, data quality, pro- grammatic motivations for engaging volunteers, cost-effectiveness, and cross-program compari- sons (such articles are designated with †). We briefly summarize below the six articles featured in this special issue. These articles span topics of civic science program operations and process, in- cluding projects initiated by municipalities and researchers as well as collegial projects initiated by amateurs; resident and volunteer attitudes, mo- tivations, and participation; and volunteer data quality and training. Additional articles are an- ticipated in a forthcoming, second special issue. Crown et al. (this issue †) provides a municipal urban forest management perspective on citizen- science inventories. The project described is Trees- Count! 2015, the third decadal volunteer street tree inventory in New York City, New York, U.S., led by the city’s Department of Parks and Recreation. This article details how the data were collected and compares outcomes to the previous invento- ries. The authors discuss technological tools that can enhance both participation and accuracy, and conclude with numerous recommendations for those seeking to do similar work. Providing further insight into this city’s street tree inventory, Johnson et al. (this issue) investigated volunteer motiva- tions for participation, analyzing these motivations by participant demographics. Similar to other ©2018 International Society of Arboriculture 43
March 2018
| Title Name |
Pages |
Delete |
Url |
| Empty |
Search Text Block
Page #page_num
#doc_title
Hi $receivername|$receiveremail,
$sendername|$senderemail wrote these comments for you:
$message
$sendername|$senderemail would like for you to view the following digital edition.
Please click on the page below to be directed to the digital edition:
$thumbnail$pagenum
$link$pagenum
Your form submission was a success. You will be contacted by Washington Gas with follow-up information regarding your request.
This process might take longer please wait
