Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42033466›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental management2026

Consolidating Dispersed Knowledge About Citizen Science and Citizen Observatories: Experiences from the Four WeObserve Communities of Practice.

Uta Wehn, Dilek Fraisl, Joan Masó Pau, Mohammad Gharesifard, Linda See, Gerid Hager, Jessica L Oliver, Tova Crystal, Raquel Ajates, Ane Bilbao and 13 more

Erratum issuedAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental management, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

23 authors.

Uta WehnCWTS - Centre for Science & Technology Studies, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands. u.w.c.wehn@cwts.leidenuniv.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1420-9721
Dilek FraislInternational Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Laxenburg, Austria.
Joan Masó PauCREAF, Barcelona, Spain.
Mohammad GharesifardUniversity of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Linda SeeInternational Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Laxenburg, Austria.
Gerid HagerInternational Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Laxenburg, Austria.
Jessica L OliverAustralian Citizen Science Association Inc. (ACSA), Maleny, QLD, Australia.
Tova CrystalIHE Delft Institute for Water Education, Delft, The Netherlands.
Raquel AjatesConsejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, Madrid, Spain.
Ane BilbaoBiotechnology Department, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands.
Eglė ButkevičienėKaunas University of Technology, Kaunas, Lithuania.
Carlo Andrea BiraghiPolitecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy.
Jillian CampbellSecretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, UNEP, Montreal, Canada.
Laurent DurieuxFrench National Research Institute for Sustainable Development, Paris, France.
Eugenio GervasiniEuropean Commission, Joint Research Centre, Ispra, Italy.
Margaret GoldCWTS - Centre for Science & Technology Studies, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Gitte KraghAarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
Andreas MatheusSecure Dimensions GmbH, Munich, Germany.
Stephen Mac FeelyOECD, Boulogne Billancourt, France.
Lukas MocekSensor.Community, Stuttgart, Germany.
Maina MuniafuUnited States International University-Africa, Nairobi, Kenya.
Lea ShanleyInternational Computer Science Institute, Berkeley, CA, USA.
Ali YousefiIsfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran.

Funding

European Union 101086421European Union 776740
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A strong Community of Practice (CoP) can be powerful in supporting people to share, generate, and disseminate knowledge. This study evaluates the use of the Communities of Practice (CoP) approach for effective knowledge consolidation in the field of citizen science. Our paper offers an analysis of four CoPs that were set up as part of the European-based 3-year WeObserve project, with distinct themes of (1) co-design & citizen engagement; (2) impact and value for governance; (3) interoperability and standards; and (4) the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Participation across the four CoPs fluctuated during their three-year life-time. Three key outcomes emerged from the CoPs. First, a joint identity and understanding were created within and across CoPs through the creation of an inception report by each CoP and through the creation of Citizen observatory (CO) vocabulary, which also served to differentiate such observatories from citizen science (CS) initiatives. Next, scientific papers and technical reports were cooperatively produced by CoP members that represent a synthesis of CoP members' knowledge. Essential ingredients to the success of these CoPs also included extensive stakeholder engagement and the CoPs being steered by the underpinning values of the CS community. The impacts of the WeObserve CoPs range from the uptake of jointly produced publications, novel cooperative CS projects, new CoPs, joint grant proposals, and the integration of citizen science data into SDG monitoring. This evaluation highlights the diverse and transformative potential of CoPs for citizen science practice.

Indexed as

Citizen ScienceCommunity ParticipationCommunity of PracticeConservation of Natural ResourcesHumansSustainable DevelopmentUnited NationsCitizen observatoryCitizen scienceCommunity of practiceEvaluationImpactSustainable Development Goals

Identifiers

PMID42033466
PMCPMC13110208

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.