IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i8p6654-d1123578.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Technological Affordance and the Realities of Citizen Science Projects Developed in Challenging Territories

Author

Listed:
  • Fábio Grigoletto

    (Center for Nature Sciences, Campus Lagoa do Sino, Federal University of São Carlos, Buri 18290-000, SP, Brazil)

  • Fernanda Antunes de Oliveira

    (Center for Studies in Public Administration and Government, School of Business Administration of São Paulo, Getúlio Vargas Foundation, São Paulo 01313-902, SP, Brazil)

  • Caio Caradi Momesso

    (Center for Studies in Public Administration and Government, School of Business Administration of São Paulo, Getúlio Vargas Foundation, São Paulo 01313-902, SP, Brazil)

  • Ibrahim Kamel Rodrigues Nehemy

    (Institute of Biology, State University of Campinas, Campinas 13083-862, SP, Brazil)

  • João Emílio de Almeida Junior

    (Laboratory of Biogeography and Natural History of Amphibians and Reptiles (Mapinguari), Federal University of Mato Grosso do Sul, Campo Grande 79002970, MS, Brazil)

  • Vinícius de Avelar São Pedro

    (Center for Nature Sciences, Campus Lagoa do Sino, Federal University of São Carlos, Buri 18290-000, SP, Brazil)

  • Roberto Greco

    (Department of Science and Technology Policy, Institute of Geosciences, University of Campinas (Unicamp), Campinas 13083-855, SP, Brazil)

  • Mário Aquino Alves

    (Center for Studies in Public Administration and Government, School of Business Administration of São Paulo, Getúlio Vargas Foundation, São Paulo 01313-902, SP, Brazil)

  • Tim Edwards

    (Cardiff Business School, Cardiff University, Cardiff CF10 3EU, UK)

Abstract

Citizen science has established itself as an important approach to the co-production of knowledge and public participation in scientific research. Combined with digital technologies and online tools, the approach has been celebrated as a path toward the democratization of science. However, only a few studies have investigated the role digital technologies play in shaping interactions between people and nature. Additionally, the role of context in shaping online and face-to-face participation in citizen science projects has yet to receive much attention. This article takes a citizen science initiative in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest in the state of São Paulo as an illustrative case of the emergence of unanticipated consequences of digital technologies. The emergence of a socio-material practice of animal identification through a popular instant-messaging app is described, allowing a better understanding of the role of digital technologies and the context framing citizen participation in challenging environments.

Suggested Citation

  • Fábio Grigoletto & Fernanda Antunes de Oliveira & Caio Caradi Momesso & Ibrahim Kamel Rodrigues Nehemy & João Emílio de Almeida Junior & Vinícius de Avelar São Pedro & Roberto Greco & Mário Aquino Alv, 2023. "Technological Affordance and the Realities of Citizen Science Projects Developed in Challenging Territories," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-15, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:8:p:6654-:d:1123578
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/8/6654/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/8/6654/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Forrest Fleischman & Eric Coleman & Harry Fischer & Prakash Kashwan & Marion Pfeifer & Vijay Ramprasad & Claudia Rodriguez Solorzano & Joseph W. Veldman, 2022. "Restoration prioritization must be informed by marginalized people," Nature, Nature, vol. 607(7918), pages 5-6, July.
    2. Sheila Jasanoff, 2003. "(No?) Accounting for expertise," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(3), pages 157-162, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Markus Dressel, 2022. "Models of science and society: transcending the antagonism," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-15, December.
    2. Gupta, Aarti, 2011. "An evolving science-society contract in India: The search for legitimacy in anticipatory risk governance," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 736-741.
    3. Himick, Darlene & Brivot, Marion & Henri, Jean-François, 2016. "An ethical perspective on accounting standard setting: Professional and lay-experts’ contribution to GASB’s Pension Project," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 22-38.
    4. Danilo Urzedo & Zarrin Tasnim Sworna & Andrew J. Hoskins & Cathy J. Robinson, 2024. "AI chatbots contribute to global conservation injustices," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-8, December.
    5. Warren Pearce & Sujatha Raman, 2014. "The new randomised controlled trials (RCT) movement in public policy: challenges of epistemic governance," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 47(4), pages 387-402, December.
    6. Abelson, Julia & Giacomini, Mita & Lehoux, Pascale & Gauvin, Francois-Pierre, 2007. "Bringing `the public' into health technology assessment and coverage policy decisions: From principles to practice," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 37-50, June.
    7. Peter D. Gluckman & Anne Bardsley & Matthias Kaiser, 2021. "Brokerage at the science–policy interface: from conceptual framework to practical guidance," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-10, December.
    8. Warren Pearce, 2020. "Trouble in the trough: how uncertainties were downplayed in the UK’s science advice on Covid-19," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-6, December.
    9. Timotijevic, L. & Barnett, J. & Raats, M.M., 2011. "Engagement, representativeness and legitimacy in the development of food and nutrition policy," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 490-498, August.
    10. Luis Pérez-González, 2020. "‘Is climate science taking over the science?’: A corpus-based study of competing stances on bias, dogma and expertise in the blogosphere," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-16, December.
    11. Max Ajl, 2023. "Peripheral Labour and Accumulation on a World Scale in the Green Transitions," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-10, May.
    12. Joseph F. Brazel & Christopher P. Agoglia, 2007. "An Examination of Auditor Planning Judgements in a Complex Accounting Information System Environment," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(4), pages 1059-1083, December.
    13. Lowe, Philip & Phillipson, Jeremy & Proctor, Amy & Gkartzios, Menelaos, 2019. "Expertise in rural development: A conceptual and empirical analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 28-37.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:8:p:6654-:d:1123578. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.