IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i19p8720-d1760147.html

Reframing Citizen Participation: Turning Barriers into Guiding Enablers

Author

Listed:
  • Paivi Abernethy

    (School of Environment, Resources and Sustainability, University of Waterloo, 200 University Ave W, Waterloo, ON N2L 3G1, Canada
    Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), Latokartanonkaari 9, 00790 Helsinki, Finland
    School of Public Health and Social Policy, University of Victoria, 3800 Finnerty Road, Victoria, BC V8P 5C2, Canada)

  • Katriina Soini

    (Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), Latokartanonkaari 9, 00790 Helsinki, Finland)

  • Joy Ommer

    (Kajo Services, Sládkovičova 228/8, 014 01 Bytča, Slovakia)

  • Janne Artell

    (Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), Latokartanonkaari 9, 00790 Helsinki, Finland)

  • Titta Tapiola

    (Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), Latokartanonkaari 9, 00790 Helsinki, Finland)

  • Antonio Parodi

    (CIMA Research Foundation, 17100 Savona, Italy)

Abstract

Citizen science is increasingly recognized as a potential catalyst for sustainability transitions, climate action, and behavioral change by fostering collaboration between scientists and the public. While it offers benefits such as mutual learning, awareness raising, and improved outcomes, sustaining long-term diverse engagement remains a challenge. Research to date has largely emphasized data outcomes and initial participation, often overlooking the relational, social, and practical dimensions crucial for continued involvement. A disconnect persists between researchers’ data-driven goals and participants’ personal motivations, compounded by insufficient training and institutional support for engagement. This paper presents a novel framework for enhancing citizen engagement, drawing on a state-of-the-art literature review and focus group insights from the H2020 I-CHANGE project. It identifies enablers for and barriers to participation, reframing the latter as opportunities for support. The findings are organized into four themes: (1) call for participation, focusing on intrinsic motivation and local relevance; (2) project design, highlighting inclusive tools and communication; (3) a collaborative process, emphasizing trust, clarity, and support; and (4) participation benefits, including meaning, recognition, and social connection. This study underscores the need to build trust, foster relationality, and align expectations. It proposes practical engagement criteria and calls for deeper exploration of the relational foundations of citizen science.

Suggested Citation

  • Paivi Abernethy & Katriina Soini & Joy Ommer & Janne Artell & Titta Tapiola & Antonio Parodi, 2025. "Reframing Citizen Participation: Turning Barriers into Guiding Enablers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-21, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:19:p:8720-:d:1760147
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/19/8720/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/19/8720/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christian Pohl & Stephan Rist & Anne Zimmermann & Patricia Fry & Ghana S Gurung & Flurina Schneider & Chinwe Ifejika Speranza & Boniface Kiteme & Sébastian Boillat & Elvira Serrano & Gertrude Hirsch H, 2010. "Researchers' roles in knowledge co-production: experience from sustainability research in Kenya, Switzerland, Bolivia and Nepal," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(4), pages 267-281, May.
    2. Elena Pagliarino & Secondo Rolfo, 2021. "Examining Researchers’ Attitudes, Barriers, and Opportunities for Participatory Research: The Case of the Riso-Biosystems Project on Organic Rice," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-24, April.
    3. Robert Gifford & Christine Kormos & Amanda McIntyre, 2011. "Behavioral dimensions of climate change: drivers, responses, barriers, and interventions," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(6), pages 801-827, November.
    4. Cash, David & Clark, William & Alcock, Frank & Dickson, Nancy & Eckley, Noelle & Jager, Jill, 2002. "Salience, Credibility, Legitimacy and Boundaries: Linking Research, Assessment and Decision Making," Working Paper Series rwp02-046, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    5. Sauermann, Henry & Vohland, Katrin & Antoniou, Vyron & Balázs, Bálint & Göbel, Claudia & Karatzas, Kostas & Mooney, Peter & Perelló, Josep & Ponti, Marisa & Samson, Roeland & Winter, Silvia, 2020. "Citizen science and sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(5).
    6. Michalis A. Vasiliades & Andreas Ch. Hadjichambis & Demetra Paraskeva-Hadjichambi & Anastasia Adamou & Yiannis Georgiou, 2021. "A Systematic Literature Review on the Participation Aspects of Environmental and Nature-Based Citizen Science Initiatives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-27, July.
    7. Gaventa, John & Barrett, Gregory, 2012. "Mapping the Outcomes of Citizen Engagement," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(12), pages 2399-2410.
    8. Jill K. Clark & Molly Bean & Samina Raja & Scott Loveridge & Julia Freedgood & Kimberley Hodgson, 2017. "Cooperative extension and food system change: goals, strategies and resources," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(2), pages 301-316, June.
    9. Thompson, Mary Anne & Owen, Susan & Lindsay, Jan M. & Leonard, Graham S. & Cronin, Shane J., 2017. "Scientist and stakeholder perspectives of transdisciplinary research: Early attitudes, expectations, and tensions," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 30-39.
    10. Grilli, Gianluca & Curtis, John, 2021. "Encouraging pro-environmental behaviours: A review of methods and approaches," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    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. Koch, Susanne, 2018. "“Identifying enabling factors of science-policy interaction in a developing country context: A case study of South Africa's environment sector”," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 36-45.
    2. Siebenhüner, Bernd, 2018. "Conflicts in Transdisciplinary Research: Reviewing Literature and Analysing a Case of Climate Adaptation in Northwestern Germany," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 117-127.
    3. Stina Hansson & Merritt Polk, 2018. "Assessing the impact of transdisciplinary research: The usefulness of relevance, credibility, and legitimacy for understanding the link between process and impact," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 27(2), pages 132-144.
    4. Antonio J. Castro & Cristina Quintas-Soriano & Jodi Brandt & Carla L. Atkinson & Colden V. Baxter & Morey Burnham & Benis N. Egoh & Marina García-Llorente & Jason P. Julian & Berta Martín-López & Feli, 2018. "Applying Place-Based Social-Ecological Research to Address Water Scarcity: Insights for Future Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-13, May.
    5. Kristjanson, Patti & Reid, Robin & Dickson, Nancy & Clark, William C. & Vishnubhotla, Prasad & Romney, Dannie & Bezkorowajnyj, Peter & Said, Mohammed & Kaelo, Dickson & Makui, Ogeli & Nkedianye, David, 2008. "Linking International Agricultural Research Knowledge with Action for Sustainable Poverty Alleviation: What Works?," Working Paper Series rwp08-045, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    6. Artur José Sitoe & Seunghoo Lim, 2024. "Understanding citizens' perception of channels for participating in administration based on their motivation in an authoritarian regime: The case of Gaza Province, Mozambique," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(1), pages 606-625, January.
    7. Juerges, Nataly & Jahn, Stephanie, 2020. "German forest management stakeholders at the science-society interface: Their views on problem definition, knowledge production and research utilization," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    8. Matthias Bürgi & Panna Ali & Afroza Chowdhury & Andreas Heinimann & Cornelia Hett & Felix Kienast & Manoranjan Kumar Mondal & Bishnu Raj Upreti & Peter H. Verburg, 2017. "Integrated Landscape Approach: Closing the Gap between Theory and Application," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-13, August.
    9. Jarke-Neuert, Johannes & Perino, Grischa & Schwickert, Henrike, 2021. "Free-Riding for Future: Field Experimental Evidence of Strategic Substitutability in Climate Protest," SocArXiv sh6dm, Center for Open Science.
    10. O’Connor John, 2022. "Strengthening the science–policy interface in Ireland," Administration, Sciendo, vol. 70(4), pages 29-52, December.
    11. Josep Lloret & Rafael Abós-Herràndiz & Sílvia Alemany & Rosario Allué & Joan Bartra & Maria Basagaña & Elisa Berdalet & Mònica Campàs & Arnau Carreño & Montserrat Demestre & Jorge Diogène & Eva Fontde, 2020. "The Roses Ocean and Human Health Chair: A New Way to Engage the Public in Oceans and Human Health Challenges," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-19, July.
    12. Grilli, Gianluca & Curtis, John, 2021. "An evaluation of public initiatives to change behaviours that affect water quality," Papers WP696, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    13. Anne-Sophie Schaltegger & Bianca Vienni-Baptista, 2026. "Value landscapes in interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research and assessment: exploring indeterminacies and disconnects," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 13(1), pages 1-17, December.
    14. de Renzio, Paolo & Wehner, Joachim, 2017. "The impacts of fiscal openness," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 82521, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    15. Nicholas A Cradock-Henry & Joanna Fountain & Franca Buelow, 2018. "Transformations for Resilient Rural Futures: The Case of Kaikōura, Aotearoa-New Zealand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-19, June.
    16. Taru Peltola & Sanna-Riikka Saarela & Juha M & Tapio Litmanen & Jani Lukkarinen & Ismo Pölönen & Outi Ratamäki & Heli Saarikoski & Miikka Salo & Suvi Vikström, 2023. "Researcher roles in collaborative governance interventions," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 50(5), pages 871-880.
    17. Hubeau, Marianne & Marchand, Fleur & Coteur, Ine & Mondelaers, Koen & Debruyne, Lies & Van Huylenbroeck, Guido, 2017. "A new agri-food systems sustainability approach to identify shared transformation pathways towards sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 52-63.
    18. Aguirre-Bastos, Carlos & Weber, Matthias K., 2018. "Foresight for shaping national innovation systems in developing economies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 186-196.
    19. Zeigermann, Ulrike & Böcher, Michael, 2020. "Challenges for bridging the gap between knowledge and governance in sustainability policy – The case of OECD ‘Focal Points’ for Policy Coherence for Development," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    20. Nolan, Anne & Hoy, Aislinn, 2023. "Clean Air Together Dublin: Impact on air quality awareness, attitudes and behaviour," Research Series, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI), number SUSTAT120.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:17:y:2025:i:19:p:8720-:d:1760147. 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.