Corresponding author: Florian T. Wetzel (
Academic editor:
The second EU BON Stakeholder Roundtable took place on 27 November 2014 at the Museum für Naturkunde in Berlin. The roundtable was dedicated to explore ways in which EU BON can support citizen science (CS) activities. EU BON is building an integrated biodiversity information platform in order to serve science, policy and administration. Also citizen scientists and related projects and networks are important stakeholders. Moreover, citizen scientists can play an essential role for biodiversity networks, as they support the increase of knowledge in the field of biodiversity in various aspects: they may debate research questions, most often they collect data in the field, and they may interpret data and publish their results.
At the stakeholder roundtable in Berlin, various stakeholders from the field of citizen science were invited to discuss possibilities of interactions and the role of EU BON for supporting citizen science on a European scale. EU BON products could help CS stakeholders in various ways, e.g. with tools for the standardization of data and training on widely used and accepted data collection standards, as well as tools for the visualization/interpretation of data. Also best-practice examples and guidelines could help for developing a sound projects design as well as for data curation, storage and reward mechanisms for the community (e.g. by making data citable, publication of data papers etc.).
The discussions and break-out groups gave valuable impulses for the development of the EU BON portal and citizen science gateway, for data mobilization from different communities, and the linkage to the European Citizen Science Association (ECSA) and its activities. The main outcomes and results of the workshop are outlined and summarized in this roundtable report.
In this compilation of the EU BON Stakeholder Roundtable (RT) reports we want to provide a summarized overview, providing shared experiences gained in three different workshops that were organized by the EU BON project from 2013-2015, with altogether more than 100 participants from over 20 countries (ranging from Norway to Israel, and from the United States to Estonia).
Here we summarize the results of the second Stakeholder Roundtable - in addition to this report, also the summaries of the first (
EU BON - Building the European Biodiversity Observation Network (
The RT aimed to exchange ideas and discuss highly relevant issues with relevant stakeholders, from policy, citizen science and local/regional stakeholders in order to inform EU BON and adapt the working programme. Topics of the discussions were related to biodiversity information and its open-access and availability, data workflows and integration of citizen science as well as science-policy interfaces. We will start with a brief general overview of the project, particularly describing the overall framework and role of the stakeholder engagement in the policy and dialogue work package. Secondly, we provide detailed reports of each of the roundtables, outlining its aims, intentions, discussions as well as results and recommendations that were drafted based on the roundtable discussions, world café sessions and working groups which are now published for the first time in the new series of new series of EU BON Project Outcomes.
The Stakeholder Roundtables are a specific task and part of a Work Package (WP6, see Fig.
More specifically, the aims of the RT are defined in the description of work as follows: “
To address different stakeholders groups, the aims, guiding questions and invited groups were specifically adjusted in each of the workshops, resulting in three roundtables:
EU BON is building a large integrated biodiversity information infrastructure in order to serve science, policy and administration as well as citizen scientists. Citizen scientists support the increase of knowledge in various aspects, they may debate research questions, most often they collect data, they may interpret data and publish their results.
The aim of the second EU BON Stakeholder Roundtable on Citizen Science (CS) was to explore how and with which means EU BON can support citizen science activities. Many partners and interested stakeholders participated in the stakeholder roundtable, coming from different European research institutions, Natural History Museums, SMEs or representatives from European Institutions like European Commission DG Research & Innovation, the European Environmental Agency or the JRC and EU-funded Citizen Science projects (see Suppl. material
The aim of the roundtable on Citizen Science was to explore how and with which means EU BON can support citizen science activities. EU BON may serve citizen scientists in many aspects, and here the citizen science community and biodiversity data community was given a forum to exchange ideas and develop perspectives. The roundtable was intended to bring together data providers as well as the user community and opened the discussion on the future of workflows. An introductory talk was held by
The second EU BON Stakeholder Roundtable started with the session “Setting the scene” with a welcome address by
As representative from DG Research and Innovation (European Commission),
The next session targeted the question of how EU BON can possibly support data mobilization of and for citizen scientists.
The session after the lunch break was called “A spotlight on some (meta)data provider“ and
Key success factors can be grouped into the following success factors (Fig.
In the session “Synergies of European Citizen Science projects” there was a presentation of several EU-funded Citizen Science projects, the approach of ESA and, with GBIF, of one of the largest data providers of species occurrence records.
The session was followed by a part where EU-funded Citizen Science projects presented their approach. The session started with
The last session was split into three break-out groups that focused on specific citizen science related topics:
How can we improve existing citizen science schemes? Who are the main users of the projected EU BON biodiversity portal, who will be using it and why? How can we enhance data mobilization?
After the group-specific discussions took place, all participants gathered in the main meeting room to first present the results and outcomes and discuss them with the whole audience.
Main points have been the acknowledgement of valuable impulses such as Digital Query Identifiers (DOI) or the different visualization opportunities for the development of the EU BON biodiversity portal. ECSA is seen as a key possibility for data mobilization from different communities, and ECSA may also support the link to support environmental policy. As there are many cross-cutting issues between EU BON CS activities and ECSA, a working group has been established where members of both networks will exchange ideas.
The Roundtable was ended by
After the official ending of the roundtable, the EU BON partners met for a brief meeting to summarize the lessons learnt from the conference and to outline the important next steps based on the experiences and new insights of the day.
It was agreed that further work will be needed to include the user requirements and view of stakeholders (like citizen scientists) in the design process of the EU BON Biodiversity Portal. User needs need to be defined, there will be also a focus on some main stakeholders to develop products they need and to increase the efforts with regards to visualization and (citizen) data integration for the portal. Generally, more data provider need to be harvested and their data need to feed in the Biodiversity Portal (i.e. also more APIs are required to make additional file types searchable, e.g. EML files). For transferring Citizen Science data of small and medium projects with limited technological capabilities, EU BON could assist and help to publish the data by using the GBIF-IPT tool. The EU BON portal will not only be a portal for data, but also for protocols and standards. It should adjust to user requirements, and a vivid and long-lasting network should be created. The prototype of the data portal needs to be further tested and a ‘hands-on’ physical meeting should take place in 2015 to refine the existing approach (presumably at the facilities of Simbiotica).
Also for the Citizen Science gateway there will be further work coming up in the next months, particularly to implement the current plans for the citizen science gateway and test the approach for different projects and with different kind of datasets. The ECSA-Portal may be finished too late for EU BON purposes and a tailored solution for the project might be needed. A physical meeting in spring 2015 will be held for further elaborating the EU BON Citizen science gateway.
Generally, the internal EU BON follow-up showed the importance of involving all the different tasks and working groups (WP) for the EU BON citizen science gateway and the portal activities. An intensified communication among the WPs on that issues is needed. EU BON should focus more on match-making with scientists and scientific organizations and offer them the data for further analysis. Another important point in the discussion was to consider that not only occurrence data for data mobilization in EU BON is important but also other kind of data (e.g. on species trait, genetic data). In EU BON, the partners should further think of how to improve current CS projects and focus on integration (data, applications, networking) and less on facilities. The CS projects and their data should be linked to the larger aggregators (e.g. GBIF) but also the projects and people should be linked to tools to create their own portals; the EU BON CS gateway should also serve as an entry point where people can meet and exchange experiences. In general, the sustainability of EU BON and its products will have to be considered and a strategy is needed which infrastructures could continue to host the portal and tools. For the CS data itself, a thorough quality testing of the data is needed, e.g. by getting the community involved to assess the data before it is being shared.
During the course of the roundtable, there have been intensive discussions from EU BON partners with CS stakeholders in various fields, from policy, CS networks and European research institutions. CS activities of EU BON were presented and important insights from the participants will also improve the current plans of the project with regards to its CS activities. Main points have been the acknowledgement of valuable impulses for the development of the EU BON biodiversity portal such as Digital Query Identifiers or the different visualization opportunities. ECSA is seen as a key possibility for data mobilization from different communities, and ECSA may also support the link to support especially environmental policy.
In addition to the conclusions of the roundtables stated above, there are some general lessons learnt from the three stakeholder roundtables:
The project EU BON started slightly overambitious – the discussions showed that the project will not serve all demands of all stakeholders. However, the roundtables gave good hints for strategic partners that are key for the further work of the project, e.g. the Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS), the Long Term Ecological Research Network (LTER) and the Group on Earth Observations - Biodiversity Observation Network (GEO BON). The stakeholder roundtables require a careful preparation: Feedback on topics and the planned sessions from the project partners are a precondition in order to get useful results out of the meetings and discussions. A profound expertise with regards to the main institutions and actors in the field of biodiversity data, biodiversity data analysis and policy is needed, as well as time to find key-people in the field. It is not always possible to get the desired stakeholders to the roundtable, due to manifold reasons: There are (still) language barriers existing, resources are often limited (e.g. travel money and time), and there is no joint understanding of added value of EU BON existing. Mediators are needed for a proper stakeholder engagement process – they have to get in touch with the stakeholder and brief the people beforehand, they should also show relevance of biodiversity networks and direct benefits that emerge from such processes. Mediators could be partners on a regional level, for example institutions that are bot involved in science and policy (regional environmental agencies), well-established networks covering many European countries (e.g. European Citizen Science Association) or main actors in the field or specific contact persons that work across different levels (i.e. on local as well as on more general/European level). It is important to have physical meetings organized in an open way, i.e. that the agenda, topics and discussions points could still be adjusted during the meeting. In the course of the roundtables it turned out that some discussions during the meeting where more fruitful than others, and more time should be spent on agenda items where dynamic interactions occurred which, in the end, resulted in valuable workshop results (i.e. nice best-practice examples, input for guidelines or recommendations. It is also important to have some dedicated time for social interactions included, where people can share their thoughts, develop ideas and a further work plan to solve the given tasks and generally learn from each other. Limit the number and time for presentations and talks at the meetings; they are needed in order to present the main activities and work of participating institutions and projects. However, the experience gained in the roundtables showed that discussions and interactive sessions mostly produced the main results and key findings as well as possible solutions. It is important to reflect oneself when organizing roundtables and to adjust the presentations, language and examples used – they should be adjusted to the audience and stakeholders that participate. It is crucial to adjust presentations according to stakeholder knowledge/skills/interests, and not to give presentations in a usual “scientific” manner. It is also helpful to include a demo or training sessions: Show (visually) the products (portal, maps) and tools. Focus on some main products – e.g. what is essential for a BON and what do the key stakeholders really need in terms of EU BON products : 1. portal, 2. tools, 3. EBVs, 4. data mobilization, 5. visualisation of products. Think ahead: Sustainability is important – which products are needed in the future and need to be provided sustainably? The long-term goals and vision with regards to the projects products need to be integrated in the process in an early stage. In order to incorporate a demand and stakeholder-driven perspective it needs to be discussed with partners and the dialogue with stakeholders should already start in the project preparation phase. Time is needed for (individual) discussions, it is important not invite too many actors and schedule too many topics in a stakeholder roundtable. Hence it is more productive to focus on some aspects than to cover the whole thematic field in the sessions/discussions.
The policy needs long-term biodiversity data for reporting on the progress, state and trends of biodiversity and the effects of biodiversity-related policy (conservation, nature-based solutions, ecosystem services, use of natural resources). One of the core services of EU BON, in the view of policy actors, is the long-term provision of biodiversity data (e.g. species occurrences, traits) and a proper and scientifically sound data analysis and storage. As raw data are very heterogeneous and need huge data storages (‘big data’, for example for satellite-derived data), a profound thematic and technical expertise in various fields is needed, to integrate and standardize data from several research areas, to make this data openly available and derive information and ultimately knowledge that satisfy the needs of policy actors. Participants from European authorities stated in the roundtables (e.g. EC, EEA etc.), that politicians do need maps and visualized products that are easily understandable. There are many interactions of citizens with scientists, and many citizen-science initiatives. However, the interactions of citizen science and European policy and its actors need to be strengthened. BONs can facilitate in this process but also supply tools and infrastructure for data handling, data standardization and curation and upload - in order to provide free access of data. The role of BONs for local stakeholders (protected areas, research sites in the field, conservation manager) is firstly to provide an overarching framework and, together with European policy, act as an acknowledged authority for reliable biodiversity data that provides policy-relevant information or downscaled data for the local level/sites. The discussions at the roundtables showed that the main users of EU BON will be scientists, trained professionals at governments and authorities on regional, national and European level. BONs are both social and technological networks – and strengthening interactions with key stakeholders is essential, both with end-users from European policy, national and international authorities, researchers and data providers from the local level.
This paper was supported by the EU BON project which is a 7th Framework Programme funded by the European Union under Contract No. 308454. We thank the involved institutions and the participants for their contributions. Thanks to Nils Valland from the Norwegian Biodiversity Information Centre for providing two illustrative figures. We would also like to express our gratitude to the Museum fuer Naturkunde in Berlin for hosting the roundtable.
EU BON Work Packages (WP) with the three sections (a) Data Sources and Infrastructure, (b) Science and Application and (c) Policy and Dialogue. The Stakeholder Roundtables are a specific task in the WP 6 that targets the stakeholder engagement and science-policy dialogue (credits: Pensoft).
Setting the scene for the roundtable on Citizen Science (credits: Carola Radtke).
Examples of citizen science projects and initiatives/tools from the EU BON consortium (Christoph Häuser and Florian Wetzel, MfN, 2014)
Species occurrence data records (in millions, x-axis) from CS sources, counted and freely available in Europe (Nils Valland, NBIC, updated in March 2016).
Key success factors for citizen science projects (Nils Valland, NBIC, 2014).
Participants at the 2nd EU BON Stakeholder Roundtable (credits: Carola Radtke, MfN)
2nd EU BON Stakeholder Roundtable – Acronyms
Data type: Acronym list
File: oo_82264.pdf