From Subjects to Partners: Rethinking Research Methodologies through Citizen Science
Keywords:
Citizen Science, participation, integration, inter-disciplinarity, trans-disciplinarity, occupational medicine, biomonitoring, human biomonitoring.Abstract
The article will first introduce a general definition of Citizen Science (section 1), followed by an excursion of its foundations and of the different understandings and ways of applying it, with examples drawn from diverse research and policy areas (section 2). It will then focus more closely on the field of health and the environment (section 3), including occupational medicine (subsection 3.1), community response to environmental risks (section 3.2), biomonitoring (sub-section 3.3), and human biomonitoring (subsection 3.4). Section 4 will address some of the advantages (section 4.1) and challenges (section 4.2) of adopting CS in research and policy. Finally, section 5 will trace the legislative and normative background of participatory approaches and points to the challenges ahead.
References
1. Irwin A. Citizen Science. A Study of People, Expertise and Sustainable Development. 1st ed.; Routledge: London, UK and New York, USA, 1995.
2. Bonney, R. 1996. Citizen science: a lab tradition. Living Bird. 1996;15(5):7-15.
3. Kaiser M. From value-freedom to responsible research and innovation? Post-normal and transdisciplinary pathways. In The Fragility of Responsibility: Norway’s Transformative Agenda for Research, Innovation and Business; De Grandis G, Blanchard A, Eds.; De Gruyter: Berlin, DE, Boston, USA, 2025, pp. 27-48. Doi: 10.1515/9783111397719-003
4. Sobel D. Longitude. Fourth Estate, London, UK, 1995. ISBN: 978-0-8027-1529-6
5. Nature’s Calendar. Available online: https://naturescalendar.woodlandtrust.org.uk/ (Last Accessed on 25.09.2025).
6. Funtowicz SO, Ravetz JR. Science for the post-normal age. Futures. 1993;25(7):739-755. (Republished with a forward: Commonplace. May 2020) Doi: 10.21428/6ffd8432.8a99dd09
7. Ten Principles of Citizen Science. Available online: https://www.ecsa.ngo/10-principles/ (Last Accessed on 25.09.2025).
8. Fraisl D, Haklay M, Hager G, et al. Delineating the contours of citizen science: Development of the ECSA characteristics of citizen science. Open Research Europe. 2025;5:128.
9. Haklay M, Fraisl D, Greshake Tzovaras B, et al. Contours of citizen science: a vignette study. R Soc Open Sci. 2021;8:202108. Doi: 10.1098/rsos.202108
10. Haklay M, König A, Moustard F, Aspee N. Citizen science and Post-Normal Science’s extended peer community: Identifying overlaps. Futures. 2023;150:103178. Doi: 10.1016/j.futures.2023.103178
11. Woolley JP, McGowan ML, Teare HJA, et al. Citizen science or scientific citizenship? Disentangling the uses of public engagement rhetoric in national research initiatives. BMC Med Ethics. 2016;17(33). Doi: 10.1186/s12910-016-0117-1
12. Arnstein S. A ladder of citizen participation. J Am Plan Assoc. 1969;85:24-34. Doi: 10.1186/s12910-016-0117-1.
13. GalaxyZoo. Available online: https://zoo4.galaxyzoo.org/ (Last Accessed on 25.09.2025).
14. Maccacaro GA. Per una medicina da rinnovare – Scritti 1966/76. 1st ed. Giangiacomo Feltrinelli, Milano, Italy, 1979.
15. Assennato G, Navarro V. Workers' participation and control in Italy: the case of occupational medicine. Int J Health Serv. 1980;10(2):217-32.
16. Reich MR, Goldman RH. Italian occupational health: concepts, conflicts, implications. Am J Public Health. 1984;74(9):1031-41.
17. Berlinguer G, Biocca M. Recent developments in occupational health policy in Italy. Int J Health Serv. 1987;17(3):455-74.
18. Bodini L. La nascita dei primi SMAL in Lombardia. In Per una storiografia italiana della prevenzione occupazionale ed ambientale. 1st ed.; Grieco A, Bertazzi PA, Eds. Franco Angeli, Milano, Italy, 1997; pp. 74-89.
19. Carnevale F, Baldasseroni A. A History of Union Struggles for Control of the Work Environment in Italy. Int J of Occupat and Environ Health. 2005;11(1):6-11.
20. Mara L. Scienza, salute e ambiente. L’esperienza di Giulio Maccacaro e di Medicina Democratica. In: Il '68 e la scienza in Italia. Pristem/Storia. 2011;27/28:49-72. https://matematica.unibocconi.eu/pristem/storia-27-28
21. Carnevale F. Health, safety and the work environment in the 20th century: The Italian case. In Occupational Health in the 20th and 21st Centuries: On the denial of the right to health and freedom from sickness. Gallo O, E. Castaño, Eds. Escuela Nacional Sindical, Medellín, Colombia 2017; pp. 317-342.
22. Gibbs LM. Love Canal. My Story. State University of New Yorik Press: Albany, NY, USA 1982.
23. Fjelland R. When laypeople are right and experts are wrong: Lessons from Love Canal. HYLE – Int J for Philosophy of Chemistry. 2016;22:105-125.
24. Brown P. Popular Epidemiology Revisited. Current Sociology. 1997;45(3):137-156.
25. Bay Area Lyme Foundation. Available online: https://www.bayarealyme.org/about-lyme/history-lyme-disease/ (Last Accessed on 25.09.2025).
26. Epstein S. The Construction of Lay Expertise: AIDS Activism and the Forging of Credibility in the Reform of Clinical Trials. Science, Technology, & Human Values. 1995;20(4):408-437.
27. PatientsLikeMe. Available online: https://www.patientslikeme.com (Last Accessed on 25.09.2025).
28. Skloot RL. The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks. Crown, 2010. ISBN 978-1-4000-5217-2.
29. Ershova A, Makeeva I, Malgina E, et al. Combining citizen and conventional science for microplastics monitoring in the White Sea basin (Russian Arctic). Mar Pollut Bull. 202;173(Part A) :112955. Doi : 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2021.112955
30. Kwiatkowski RE. Indigenous community based participatory research and health impact assessment: A Canadian example. Envir Impact Assessment Review. 2011;31:445-450.
31. Keune K, Morrens B, Loots I. Risk communication and human biomonitoring: which practical lessons from the Belgian experience are of use for the EU perspective? Environ Health. 2008; 7(Suppl 1):S11. Doi: 10.1186/1476-069X-7-S1-S11
32. Exley K, Cano N, Aerts D, et al. Communication in a Human biomonitoring study: Focus group work, public engagement and lessons learnt in 17 European countries. Env Res. 2015;141:31. Doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2014.12.003
33. Reynders H, Colles A, Morrens B, et al. The added value of a surveillance human biomonitoring program: The case of FLEHS in Flanders (Belgium). Int J Hyg Environ Health. 2017;220:46-54.
34. Uhl M, Santos RR, Costa J, et al. Chemical Exposure: European Citizens’ Perspectives, Trust, and Concerns on Human Biomonitoring Initiatives, Information Needs, and Scientific Results. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18 :1532. Doi : 10.3390/ijerph1804153
35. Matisāne L, Knudsen LE, Lobo Vicente J, et al. Citizens’ Perception and Concerns on Chemical Exposures and Human Biomonitoring—Results from a Harmonized Qualitative Study in Seven European Countries. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19:6414.
36. Zare JM, Hopf NB, Louro H, et al. Developing human biomonitoring as a 21st century toolbox within the European exposure science strategy 2020–2030. Environ Internat. 2022;168:107476. Doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2022.107476
37. Roos R. It is a sham process with participation. Ten forms of citizen participation for sustainable development in the Norwegian Arctic, Pre-print 2024. Earth ArXiv. Doi: 10.31223/X5WF1B
38. HBM4-EU. European Human Biomonitoring Initiative Available online: https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/733032 (Last Accessed on 25.09.2025).
39. PARC. Partnership for the Assessment of Risks from Chemicals. Available online: https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101057014 (Last Accessed on 25.09.2025).
40. Kolossa-Gehring M, Kim Pack L, Hülck K, Gehring T. HBM4EU from the Coordinator’s perspective: lessons learnt from managing a large-scale EU project Int J Hyg Environ Health. 247(2023):114072. Doi: 10.1016/j.ijheh.2022.114072
41. Gilles L, Govartis E, Rodriguez Martin L, et al. Harmonization of Human Biomonitoring Studies in Europe: Characteristics of the HBM4EU-Aligned Studies Participants. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19:6787. Doi: 10.3390/ijerph19116787
42. Froeling F, Gignac F, Hoek G, et al. Narrative review of citizen science in environmental epidemiology: Setting the stage for co-created research projects in environmental epidemiology. Environ Internat. 2021;152:106470, ISSN: 0160-4120. Doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2021.106470
43. Ficorilli A, Maccani G, Balestrini M, et al. Investigating the process of ethical approval in citizen science research: the case of Public Health. JCOM. 2021.20(06):A04. Doi: https://doi.org/10.22323/2.20060204
44. De Marchi B, Ficorilli A, Biggeri A. Research is in the air in Valle del Serchio. Futures. 2022;137:102906. ISSN: 0016-3287. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2022.102906
45. Froeling F, Gignac F, Toran R, Ortiz R. Implementing co-created citizen science in five environmental epidemiological studies in the CitieS-Health project. Environ Res. 2024;240(Pt 2):117469. Doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2023.117469
46. Kocman D, Righi V, Errandonea L, Maccani G. Toolkit for conducting citizen science activities in environmental epidemiology. Front Environ Sci. 2023;11. Doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2023.1177413
47. One Health Citizen Science. Available online: https://partecipa.poliste.com/assemblies/OHCS/f/104/?locale=it (Last Accessed on 25.09.2025).
48. Dumez B, Van Damme K, Casteleyn L. Research on ethics in two large Human Biomonitoring projects ECNIS and NewGeneris: a bottom up approach. Environ Health. 2008;7(Suppl 1):S7. Doi: 10.1186/1476-069X-7-S1-S7
49. Creager A. Human bodies as chemical sensors: A history of biomonitoring for environmental health and regulation. Stud Hist Philos Sci. 2018;70-81. Doi: 10.1016/j.shpsa.2018.05.010
50. Bauer S. Societal and ethical issues in human biomonitoring – a view from science studies. Environ Health. 2008;7(Suppl 1):S10. Doi: 10.1186/1476-069X-7-S1-S10
51. Washburn, R. The Social Significance of Human Biomonitoring. Sociol Compass. 2013;7(2): 162–179. Doi: 10.1111/soc4.12012
52. English PB, Richardson MJ, Garzón-Galvis C. From Crowdsourcing to Extreme Citizen Science: Participatory Research for Environmental Health. Annu Rev Public Health. 2018;39:335-50. Doi: 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-040617-013702
53. Den Broeder L, Devilee J, Van Oers H, et al. Citizen Science for public health. Health Promot Int. 2018;33(3):505-514. Doi: 10.1093/heapro/daw086
54. Morello-Frosch R, Green Brody J, Brown P, et al. Toxic ignorance and right-to-know in biomonitoring results communication: a survey of scientists and study participants. Environ Health. 2009;8(6). Doi: 10.1186/1476-069X-8-6
55. Council Directive 82/501/EEC of 24 June 1982 on the major-accident hazards of certain industrial activities. OJ L. 1982;230:5.8.1982, 1–18 (EN). Amended in 87 and in 88, repealed and substituted by a new directive in 1996 and in 2012. Currently in force is Directive 2012/18/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances (so called Seveso 3). OJ L. 2012;197: 24.7.2012, 1–37 (EN).
56. Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency. OJ L. 2006, 396, 30.12.2006, 1–849 (EN).
57. Green paper on Citizen Science for Europe: Towards a society of empowered citizens and enhanced research. Available online: file:///C:/Users/bruna/Downloads/green_paper%20on%20citizen%20science%202013_4122.pdf (Last Accessed on 25.09.2025).
58. European Commission Competence Centre on Participatory and deliberative Democracy Available. Available online: https://knowledge4policy.ec.europa.eu/participatory-democracy_en (Last Accessed on 25.09.2025).
59. Haraway DJ. Staying with the Trouble: Making Kin in the Chthulucene. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. 2016.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Bruna De Marchi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
All Journal's articles are Open Access papers distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Reproductions with commercial intent will require written permission and payment of royalties.
This work is licensed under a CC BY-NC 4.0 Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
