Civic Technology and Community Science
a new model for public participation in environmental decisions
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18617/liinc.v13i1.3899Keywords:
Community Science, Open Source Practices, Open Science Network, Environmental ResearchAbstract
From its inception, Public Lab has been an open community developing and utilizing civic technologies in pursuit of community-defined questions and to address community-identified environmental concerns. Organized as a global community with nonprofit offices in several U.S. states, Public Lab introduces a model of community science, which incorporates open source practices including transparent collaboration and iterative design, along with deliberative democratic governance, and practitioner empowerment through critical making supported by an open science network. Community science can enable community members to collect, interpret, and apply their own data to effect local change or participate in broader environmental research and decision-making. The authors conceptualize a tiered approach to project development, with tiers delineated by the scope of community objectives and the role of community science in achieving those objectives. Tier 1 includes performative science used to engage the public but without direct application toward community goals. Tier 2 involves community science created and conducted by members for community-relevant outcomes. Tier 3 incorporates institutional partners, building upon community data through collaborative process to achieve community goals with broader implications. Examples of Public Lab projects from each tier demonstrate the versatility of community science, and the potential opportunity for community science to facilitate public participation in environmental decision-making on multiple levels.
References
Ashkenas, R. (2015). There’s a Difference Between Cooperation and Collaboration. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from Harvard Business Review: https://hbr.org/2015/04/theres-a-difference-between-cooperation-and-collaboration
Bessette, J.M. (1980). Deliberative Democracy: The Majority Principle in Republican Government. In R.A. Goldwin & W.A. Schambra (Eds.), How Democratic Is the Constitution? (pp.102-116) Washington: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research.
Bilton, N. (2010). Taking on the Gulf Oil Spill with Kites and Cameras. Retrieved from the New York Times: http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/06/09/hacking-the-gulf-oil-spill-with-kites-and-cameras/?_r=0
Blair, D. (2014). Coqui BBv1.0. Retrieved from Public Lab: https://publiclab.org/notes/donblair/09-30-2014/coqui-bbv1-0
Christensen, Clayton. (2013). The Innovator’s Dilemma: When new technologies cause great firms to fail. Cambridge: Harvard Business Review Press.
Clauds, Firas and Mustafa10. (2015). Lessons from Mapping Bourj Al Shamali Refugee Camp in Lebanon. Retrieved from Public Lab: https://publiclab.org/notes/claudsmm/08-23-2015/lessons-from-mapping-bourj-al-shamali-refugee-camp
Coleman, G. (2013). Coding Freedom: The ethics and aesthetics of hacking. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Collins, H. (2014). Are we all scientific experts now? Cambridge: Polity Press
D’Ignazio, C. (2016). Environmental Data Comedy Workshop at Middlebury College. Retreived from PublicLab.org: https://publiclab.org/notes/kanarinka/01-22-2016/environmental-data-comedy-workshop-at-middlebury-college
Diebner, H.H. (2006). Performative Science and Beyond: Involving the Process in Research. Vienna: Springer Vienna Architecture.
DigitalGov. (2016). Federal Crowdsourcing and Citizen Science. Retrieved from DigitalGov: https://www.digitalgov.gov/communities/federal-crowdsourcing-and-citizen-science/
DiSalvo, C. (2009). Design and the Construction of Publics. Design Issues, 25(1), 48-63.
Dosemagen, S. (2016). Personal communication with Scott Eustis between April and August 2016.
Eaves, D. (2014). Building Power Through Data Sharing: Issues and opportunities for environmental health and justice funders. Retrieved from Health and Environmental Funders Network: http://www.hefn.org/learn/resource/building_power_through_data_sharing_issues_opportunities_environmental_health_justice
Environmental Protection Agency. (2015). Draft EJ 2020 Action Agenda Framework. Retrieved from EPA.gov: http://www3.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/resources/policy/ej2020/draft-framework.pdf
Epstein, S. (1995). The Construction of Lay Expertise: AIDS activism and the forging of credibility in the reform of clinical trials. Science, Technology and Human Values, 20(4), 408-437.
Fischer, F. (2000). Citizens, Experts and Environment: The politics of local knowledge. Durham: Duke University Press.
Fisher, W.R. (1987). Human Communication as Narration: Toward a philosophy of reason, value and action. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.
Fortun, K. and Fortun, M. (2005). Scientific Imaginaries and Ethical Plateaus in Contemporary U.S. Toxicology. American Anthropologist 107(1), 43-54.
Gehrke, G., Warren, J., Dosemagen, S., Blair, D. (2015). Intended Purposes for Different Tools and Techniques. Retrieved from Public Lab: https://publiclab.org/notes/gretchengehrke/10-07-2015/intended-purposes-for-different-tools-and-techniques
Gulf Restoration Network. (2015). The Fight Against the RAM Coal Export Terminal. Retrieved from Gulf Restoration Network: http://healthygulf.org/our-work/energy-climate-change/coast-not-coal
Hoffman, K. (2011). From Science Based Legal Advocacy to Community Organizing: Opportunities and obstacles to transforming patterns of expertise and access. In G. Ottinger and B.R. Cohen (Eds.), Technoscience and Environmental Justice (pp.41-62). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Howe, J. (2006). The Rise of Crowdsourcing. Retrieved from Wired: http://www.wired.com/2006/06/crowds/
Interdisciplinary Laboratory for Art Nature and Dance. (2012). iLab Residency Archive. Retrieved from iLab: http://www.ilandart.org/ilab/higher-ed/
Kavis, M. (2015). Forget big data-- small data is driving the Internet of Things. Retrieved from Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikekavis/2015/02/25/forget-big-data-small-data-is-driving-the-internet-of-things/#2715e4857a0b2cc03ad9661b
Kinsella, W.J. (2004). Public Expertise: A foundation for citizen participation in energy and environmental decisions. In S.P DePoe, J.W. Delicath and M.F.A. Elsenbeer (Eds.), Communication and Participation in Environmental Decision Making (pp. 83-95). Albany: State University of New York Press.
Kelty, C. (2008). Two Bits: The cultural significance of software. Durham: Duke University Press.
Kuhn, T. (1996). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Latour, B. (1987). Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
McClintock, A. (2012). Slow Violence and the BP Spill Crisis in the Gulf of Mexico: Militarizing Environmental Catastrophe. Hemispheric Institute E-Misferica. Volume 9.1-9.2. Retrieved from: http://hemisphericinstitute.org/hemi/en/e-misferica-91/mcclintock
Ottinger, G. (2011). Rupturing Engineering Education: Opportunities for transforming expert identities through community-based projects. In G. Ottinger and B.R. Cohen (Eds.), Technoscience and Environmental Justice (pp. 229-249). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Phillips, M. (2010). Photographers say BP restricts access to oil spill. Retrieved from Newsweek: http://www.newsweek.com/photographers-say-bp-restricts-access-oil-spill-72849
Peters, J. (2010). Efforts to limit the flow of spill news. Retrieved from New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/10/us/10access.html?pagewanted=all
Pollock. (2013). Forget Big data, small data is the real revolution. Retrieved from Open Knowledge Blog: http://blog.okfn.org/2013/04/22/forget-big-data-small-data-is-the-real-revolution/
Preston, E. (2015). Handmade Boats Bring Citizen Science to the Mystic River. Retrieved from the Boston Globe: http://www.betaboston.com/news/2015/09/16/handmade-boats-take-tour-of-citizen-science/
Ratto, M. (2011). Critical Making: Conceptual and material studies in technology and social life. The Information Society 27(4), 252-260.
Resnick, M., Berg, R., Eisenberg, M. (2000). Beyond Black Boxes: Bringing transparency and aesthetics back into science. Journal of the Learning Sciences 9(1), 1-21.
Saraceno, T. (2016). Aerocene. Retrieved from: http://www.aerocene.com/
Shirk, J. L., Ballard, H. L. Wilderman, C. C., Phillips, T., Wiggins, A., Jordan, R., McCallie, E., Minarchek, M., Lewenstein, B. V., Krasny, M. E., and Bonney, R. (2012). Public participation in scientific research: a framework for deliberate design. Ecology and Society 17(2): 29.
Sutter, J.D. (2010). Citizens Monitor Gulf Coast after Oil Spill. Retrieved from CNN: http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/05/06/crowdsource.gulf.oil/index.html
Toyama, K. (2015). Geek Heresy: Rescuing social change from the cult of technology. New York: PublicAffairs.
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. (2015). Consent Decree: Gulf Restoration Network, et al. v. United Bulk Terminals Davant, LLC - Case 14-cv-00608. Retrieved from: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9TzfQJ7Qw4GcHdFMkVzM1NXbkxJV1p5bXo0aHp6RnIzS2p3/view
Warren, J. and Dosemagen, S. (2011). Reimagining the Data Lifecycle. Retrieved from Public Lab: https://publiclab.org/notes/warren/07-01-2014/reimagining-the-data-lifecycle
Warren, J. (2013). The Promise of ‘Small’ Data. Retrieved from TechPresident: http://techpresident.com/news/24176/backchannel-promise-small-data
Williams, R., Kilaru, V., E. Snyder, A. Kaufman, T. Dye, A. Rutter, A. Russell, and H. Hafner. (2014). Air Sensor Guidebook. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Wisconsin DNR. (2016). DNR funds volunteer monitoring efforts. Retrieved from Wisconsin DNR: http://dnr.wi.gov/news/Weekly/Article/?id=3672
Wylie, S., Kirk, J., Dosemagen, S., and Ratto, M. (2014). Institutions for Civic Technoscience: How Critical Making is Transforming Environmental Research. The Information Society, Special issue: Critical Making as Research Program. 30(2),116-126.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Shannon Dosemagen, Gretchen Gehrke
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant Liinc em Revista the right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The authors have permission and are encouraged to deposit their manuscripts and versios of record (VoR) in their personal web pages or institutional repositories, generic repositories etc., before (pre-print) or after (post-print) the publication in Liinc em Revista, according to its open access depositing policy registered in the Directory of Editorial Policies of Brazilian Journals (DIADORIM), kindly providing a link to the article published on Liinc's website.
Liinc em Revista, published by Instituto Brasileiro de Informação em Ciência e Tecnologia, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License – CC BY 4.0 
