Digitalization of the sphere of citizen science in Russia. Prospects and barriers to development

   The article examines the digitalization issues of scientific volunteering and the digitalization prospects of this industry using the example of various online initiatives of citizen science. The effectiveness problem of digital technologies for the implementation of citizen science projects is considered in the context of the experience of implementing specific programs of various volunteer projects in this area. The article analyzes the websites, documents and activity of five research projects in the field of citizen science on technical, natural science and humanitarian initiatives. The conducted research made it possible to determine the positive role of citizen science digitalization. However, the problems of digital gaps, as well as the insufficient digitalization of citizen science projects, create barriers to the full implementation of such projects, which also have a significant educational function. At the same time, the study also notes the important role of creating networks of such projects and expanding the large range participation of interested persons in such projects, which will contribute to the systematic and structural development of citizen science digital initiatives in the future. Of particular importance for the development of such initiatives is the volunteers’ involvement, as well as various interested persons, and the participation expansion in such initiatives of participants from small towns and the accessibility creation of such projects.

1. Cappa F., Franco S., Rosso F. (2022), “Citizens and cities: Leveraging citizen science and big data for sustainable urban development”, Business Strategy and the Environment, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 648–667.

2. Chernavin Yu. A. (2021), “Digital Society: theoretical contours of the emerging paradigm”, Digital Sociology, no.2, pp.4–12 (in Russian).

3. Dafis L. L., Hughes L. M., James R. (2014), “What’s Welsh for “Crowdsourcing”? Citizen Science and Community Engagement at the National Library of Wales”, Crowdsourcing our cultural heritage. Pp.139–159.

4. Dougherty D., Dunne D. D. (2012), “Digital science and knowledge boundaries in complex innovation”, Organization Science, vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 1467–1484.

5. Gobble M. A. M. (2018), “Digitalization, digitization, and innovation”, Research-Technology Management, vol. 61, no. 4, pp. 56–59.

6. Greenhill A. et al. (2016), “Playing with science: Exploring how game activity motivates users participation on an online citizen science platform”, Aslib Journal of Information Management. vol. 68, no. 3, pp. 306–325.

7. Hill A. et al. (2012), “The notes from nature tool for unlocking biodiversity records from museum records through citizen science”, Zoo Keys, no. 209, p. 219.

8. Irwin A. (2015), “Citizen science and scientific citizenship: Same words, different meanings”, Science communication today, pp. 29–38.

9. Katapally T. R. (2020), “A global digital citizen science policy to tackle pandemics like Covid-19”, Journal of Medical Internet Research, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. e19357. doi: 10.2196/19357

10. Khitskov E. A. et al. (2017), “Digital transformation of society: problems entering in the digital economy”, Eurasian Journal of Analytical Chemistry, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 855–873.

11. Kimura A. H., Kinchy A. (2016), “Citizen science: Probing the virtues and contexts of participatory research”, Engaging Science, Technology, and Society, vol. 2, pp. 331–361.

12. Kishimoto K., Kobori H. (2021), “Covid-19 pandemic drives changes in participation in citizen science project “City Nature Challenge” in Tokyo”, Biological Conservation, vol. 255, pp. 1–8. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2021.109001

13. Michel J. G. (2020), “Could Machines Replace Human Scientists? Digitalization and Scientific Discoveries”, Artificial Intelligence. Brill mentis, pp. 361–376.

14. Nielsen W. et al. (2020), “Digital explanation as assessment in university science”, Research in Science Education, vol. 50, pp. 2391–2418.

15. Palacin V. et al. (2021), “Drivers of participation in digital citizen science: Case Studies on Järviwiki and safecast”, Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, vol. 5, no. 1. doi: 10.5334/cstp.290

16. Palacin V. et al. (2021), “Human values and digital citizen science interactions”, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, vol. 149, pp. 1–14. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2021.102605

17. Paleco C. et al. (2021), “Inclusiveness and diversity in citizen science”, The science of citizen science, pp. 261–281. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-58278-4_14

18. Piskunova E. V. (2011), “Social partnership: citizen responsibility and the possibility of development”, Universum: Vestnik gercenovskogo universiteta, no 2, pp. 30–24 (in Russian).

19. Polshakova N. V., Kolomeichenko A. S., Yakovlev A. S. (2020), “Digitalization of research activities as the main tool for monitoring the scientific and technical work of the university”, Vestnik agrarnoj nauki, no 82, pp. 122–129 (in Russian).

20. Salmi H. (2020), What is Digital History? John Wiley & Sons. P. 156

21. Slobotchikov O. N., Kirsanov K. A., Popova S. A. (2020), “The formation of the civilization of knowledge and risk and the problems of digitalization in Russia”, Vestnik evrazijskoj nauki, no.1, pp.64 (in Russian).

22. Volkova A. V. (2019), “The potential of “civil science” in socio-political development”, Socialno-politicheskie issledovaniya, no 1, pp. 41–50 (in Russian).

23. Wynn J. (2017), Citizen science in the digital age: Rhetoric, science, and public engagement, University of Alabama Press.