Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31493019›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental monitoring and assessment2019

Civilian science: the potential of participatory environmental monitoring in areas affected by armed conflicts.

Doug Weir, Dan McQuillan, Robert A Francis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental monitoring and assessment, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Doug WeirThe Conflict and Environment Observatory, The Chapel, Scout Road, Hebden Bridge, West Yorkshire, HX7 5HZ, UK.
Dan McQuillanDepartment of Computing, Goldsmiths, University of London, New Cross, London, SE14 6NW, UK.
Robert A FrancisDepartment of Geography, King's College London, Strand Campus, Bush House (North East Wing), 30 Aldwych, London, WC2B 4BG, UK. robert.francis@kcl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4598-0861

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Legal and policy initiatives to address the environmental dimensions of armed conflicts and their impact on people, ecosystems and sustainable development are highly dependent on the availability of environmental data from conflict-affected areas. Socio-political and security conditions in these areas often impede data collection, while traditional models of post-conflict environmental assessments are limited in scope. In response, an increasing range of actors is utilising remote sensing and open source data collection to identify and estimate health and ecological risks during and after conflicts. This paper considers the role of participatory citizen science methodologies in complementing both remote monitoring and post-conflict assessments. It examines existing models and mechanisms for environmental data collection and utilisation in conflict contexts, and the extent to which the core values and principles of citizen science are transferable. We find that 'civilian science' is feasible and could be well-suited to conflict conditions. In addition to addressing gaps in data collection, it may also empower communities affected by environmental degradation, enhance their environmental human rights, supplement the often limited monitoring capacity of governmental agencies and facilitate cooperation and peacebuilding. The paper concludes by proposing methodological approaches for three common forms of environmental degradation associated with armed conflicts.

Indexed as

Armed ConflictsCommunity ParticipationData CollectionEcosystemEnvironmental MonitoringHumansSustainable DevelopmentArmed conflictAssessmentCitizen scienceDataEnvironmentMonitoringPeacebuildingWarfare

Identifiers

PMID31493019
PMCPMC6731190

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.