Beyond the Grassroots:

Two Trajectories of
“Citizen Sciencization” in
Environmental Governance RESEARCH PAPER

MICHIEL VAN OUDHEUSDEN

YASUHITO ABE
*Author affiliations can be found in the back matter of this article

ABSTRACT CORRESPONDING AUTHOR:

Michiel Van Oudheusden
Grassroots, bottom-up citizen science is a burgeoning form of public engagement with University of Cambridge, GB
science, in which citizens mobilize scientific data to address local and global concerns. [email protected]
Contrary to top-down citizen science projects in which citizens collect data for experts,
these grassroots initiatives typically unfold in do-it-ourselves fashion, thereby challenging
formally-sanctioned, expert-centric citizen science approaches. This article illustrates
KEYWORDS:
these points through a comparative analysis of two potentially paradigmatic sites for
Citizen sciencization; data;
environmental grassroots citizen science: Safecast (radiation pollution; Japan) and environment; governance;
CuriousNoses (air pollution; Flanders, Belgium). These cases are selected on the basis of grassroots
their anchors in local self-organized communities, with each case initiated by citizens
instead of by formal institutions. Adopting a relational account of these sites as being TO CITE THIS ARTICLE:
shaped through both top-down and bottom-up imperatives, we draw out key features Van Oudheusden, M and Abe,
(defining moments, key actors, discourses, devices) in the constitution of these networks Y. 2021. Beyond the Grassroots:
as credible, potentially influential actors in affairs of environmental governance. We Two Trajectories of “Citizen
Sciencization” in Environmental
introduce the notion of “citizen sciencization” as a way of understanding and exploring
Governance. Citizen Science:
these processes against the backdrop of changing science-society relationships in Japan Theory and Practice, 6(1): 13,
and Europe. pp. 1–15. DOI: https://doi.
org/10.5334/cstp.377
Van Oudheusden and Abe Citizen Science: Theory and Practice DOI: 10.5334/cstp.377 2

INTRODUCTION potentially paradigmatic site for grassroots citizen science

globally, with Safecast maintaining the largest open
We are presently witnessing an explosion of grassroots dataset of background radiation measurements ever
citizen science initiatives covering a range of pressing collected, and CuriousNoses influencing environmental
environmental issues, such as air pollution, virus outbreaks, policies in Flanders and Europe. Both initiatives represent
and climate change. Contrary to expert-led citizen science possible alternatives to dominant, top-down technocratic
projects in which citizens collect data for professional environmental policy approaches by enacting new modes
scientists, these initiatives typically take the form of of collective environmental stewardship that stretch across
bottom-up, community-driven practices that facilitate disciplines, networks, and communities. Enabled by digital
citizen engagement with scientific tools and data to address technologies and embedded in robust, supportive social
local and global concerns (Bonney et al. 2009; Gabrys et al. networks, citizen scientists in these networks often succeed
2016). Thanks to the internet and modern crowd-sourcing in articulating scientifically plausible and socially relevant
technologies, they are rapidly spreading across the globe, alternatives for pressing environmental and health issues.
emerging in developed countries and among remote They speak credibly about the environment by producing
communities living under extreme conditions such as their own hard scientific data and by adhering to scientific
disaster environments, where human safety is at risk and measurement protocols, even if they must still justify
ecosystems are visibly threatened (Stevens et al. 2014). the role of citizens in producing scientific findings (Berti
As these grassroots networks grow in size, scope, Suman et al. 2020). They form alliances with policymakers,
and geographical reach, they potentially reconfigure scientists, and journalists, as well as with activists and local
relations between science and society. By developing communities, with the aim of inciting long-lasting societal
innovative ways of assessing environmental risks using change. Arguably, these strategies enable these citizen
their own technologies (e.g., self-assembled pollution scientists to reconstitute themselves as “a new species
monitoring devices), citizens in these networks highlight of expert” that is reminiscent of earlier social movements
discrepancies between expert and lay appreciations of situated between formal experts and wider publics (Epstein
risk, initiate contextual learning about their habitats, and 2000, p. 18).
involve broader publics in the definition of problems, data By comparing these two sites, we seek to provide a
collection, and analysis. Using digital tools, they increase contextual understanding of how grassroots (bottom-up)
pressure on public authorities and scientists to open citizen science emerges as a significant, potentially influential
science and science policymaking to society. In these actor in environmental governance locally, regionally, or
ways, they challenge the authority of formal institutions, globally. Our aim is not so much to generalize from the
opting instead for inclusive governance, understood as the particular but to highlight what is of broader scholarly
participation of more stakeholders in policymaking and significance and social relevance, as citizens develop similar
knowledge production (Irwin 1995; Stilgoe et al. 2006). responses to environmental challenges. Using illustrations
This article takes these observations as its entry points to and examples, we seek to illuminate how citizen science
assess how grassroots citizen scientists mobilize discourses emerges out of contextually located spaces, sites, and
and data to tackle environmental threats; and how this practices, which are also open and networked as well as
mobilization can elicit enduring societal change, for dynamic and changing. Accordingly, throughout this article,
instance in the form of public-awareness raising, behavioral we recurrently use the term trajectory to direct attention to
change, and changes to environmental policies and policy how Safecast and CuriousNoses developed historically and
making. These aims are attempted through a comparative culturally, and how these initiatives may mature from the
analysis of two emergent sites for environmental grassroots level of smart, innovative interventions in local affairs to
citizen science: the Tokyo-based volunteer organization a potentially more durable and strategic level of enduring
Safecast, which measures and monitors radiation pollution impact nationally or globally (de Waal and de Lange 2019).
in the environment; and CuriousNoses, a large-scale Our work complements scholarship on public
citizen science project that has monitored air quality engagement in science and technology (Wynne 2007;
across Flanders (the northern, Dutch-speaking region of Chilvers and Kearnes 2016), data activism (Ruppert et al.
Belgium). These cases are selected on the basis of their 2017; Beraldo and Milan 2019), social movements and
anchors in local self-organized communities committed science democratization (Hess 2005; Hess et al. 2008;
to tackling pressing environmental concerns, with each McFarlane 2009), and research into the “many modes of
case initiated by citizens instead of by formal institutions citizen science,” which are now emerging (Kasperowski and
(e.g., government agencies, professional research groups, Kullenberg 2019, p. 2). As noted elsewhere, the general,
and industry organizations). Each is a pioneer and a westernized rubric of citizen science risks subsuming the
Van Oudheusden and Abe Citizen Science: Theory and Practice DOI: 10.5334/cstp.377 3

sheer variety of citizen practices under one, presently TWO TRAJECTORIES INTO
trendy, catch-all phrase (Kenens et al. 2020). Dominant ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION
and institutionally sanctioned notions of citizen science GOVERNANCE
(e.g., contributory, collaborative, co-creative citizen
science) risk concealing different types of expertise and In this section we introduce the two grassroots citizen
citizenship, as in these approaches experts select (or science initiatives on which this article builds and illustrate
discount) grassroots data depending on their institutional how they have developed since their inception. For each
stakes and perspectives. Hence, these forms do not initiative, we provide key features in the constitution of
engage with the full range of possibilities to validate and these networks as potentially credible actors in affairs
act on citizen-gathered data (Gabrys 2017). Taking a cross- of environmental governance, and indicate how these
national and cross-cultural comparative perspective across networks are further evolving.
issues of environmental concern can help to shed light on
these questions and develop empirically and theoretically SAFECAST JAPAN
informed responses to them, particularly as research on On 11 March 2011, a massive earthquake and resulting
citizen science often takes the form of a single case study tsunami hit the Tohoku region of Japan, leading to reactor
analysis, or cases are compared within one country (Abe meltdowns at the nuclear power plant of Fukushima
2014; 2015; Hemmi and Graham 2013). Daiichi, operated by Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO).
To put these considerations in perspective, we draw out With the lack of publicly available information on radiation
key features (defining moments, key actors, devices) in leaking into the environment, citizens without prior
the constitution of Safecast and CuriousNoses as credible knowledge of radioactive contamination—activist-artist
actors in affairs of environmental governance beyond the Sean Bonner (Los Angeles), financial entrepreneur Pieter
formally credentialed (See the section “Two Trajectories Franken (Tokyo), and a former director of MIT Media Lab,
into Environmental Pollution Governance”); and we draw Joi Ito (Cambridge)—mobilized their networks to collect
out similarities and differences between them (See the data on radioactive materials. At the time, measurement
section “Side-by-Side Comparison”). Our analysis builds on devices were not widely available in Japan, and with
fieldwork conducted in Japan and Belgium (2014–2020) an imminent need for reliable and actionable data on
in the form of ethnographic research; in-depth interviews radiation pollution, these citizens quickly built a prototype
with citizen scientists, policy makers, scientists, journalists, of measurement device for data collection using do-it-
and others; and document and media content analyses.1 yourself (DIY) practices rooted in hacker culture and its
Drawing on our findings, we introduce the notion of citizen ethos of playfully tinkering with technologies beyond their
sciencization as a way of exploring the various enactments intended aims and limitations.
by which organizations, institutions, behaviors, and A series of such practices led to the establishment
technologies become constituted as citizen sciences; thus of Safecast (initially RDTN.org) on 24 April 2011 as an
giving us a sense of how the citizen sciences are collectively environmental citizen science network for radiation
shaped. Key in this conceptualization is the encounter measurement after Fukushima (Bonner 2011). Although
between various actors and actions, their discourses, Safecast initially started small, it quickly began attracting a
materials, and knowledges at a time of ongoing struggles variety of international volunteers with different expertise,
over environmental issues and public participation in from web-engineers to designers and artists.
science. As we illustrate below, these encounters are fluid From the start, Safecast has been concerned about
and multidirectional: Citizen scientists may intentionally the lack of transparency in official communication about
distance themselves from activists and advocacy groups radioactive contamination, as the Japanese government
with the aim of achieving wider social recognition (Van hesitated to inform the Japanese public about radiation
Brussel and Huyse 2018). Governments and credentialed risks to avoid sparking mass panic (NAIIC 2012). In Tokyo,
scientists may in turn accommodate grassroots citizen people rushed to purchase radiation measurement
science language and tools for scientific or educational devices, with high demand meeting inadequate supply.
reasons, or seek to facilitate a more active scientific Confronted with a lack of trustworthy information,
citizenship, with members of the public generating reliable Safecast members began experimenting with citizen-
scientific knowledge (Irwin 2015). The meanings and driven radiation measurement devices and transformed
practices of citizen science are thus actively explored an existing Geiger-Müller counter into a portable device for
and negotiated by various citizen science stakeholders outdoor use. The bGeigie, as this counter is called (short for
in manners that blur conventional top-down/bottom-up Bento Geiger Counter), is based on open hardware and sold
distinctions (See the section “Citizen Sciencization”). as a kit containing supplied parts so that users can build the
Van Oudheusden and Abe Citizen Science: Theory and Practice DOI: 10.5334/cstp.377 4

device themselves. Safecast ran several bGeigie workshops effectiveness, and consequently also their credibility,
to instruct citizens on how to assemble the device and making them redundant. For government authorities
measure radiation in the air reliably, whilst encouraging and agencies, crowdsourcing certainly is the “genie
participants to learn by doing. that will not go back in the bottle”. It is necessary
The bGeigie sparked the interest of citizens in Japan and to accept that this technology is here to stay and
elsewhere, with volunteers around the globe collecting that empowerment of the public is not necessarily a
data on radiation levels in the air and sharing these data negative development.
on the Safecast website in the form of easily accessible
radiation data maps, which are recurrently checked and Without explicitly mentioning Safecast, the report
updated by Safecast members. At the time of writing, acknowledges the instrumental potential of crowdsourcing
Safecast maintains the largest open dataset of background in disaster situations (as crowdsourcing can “help to instill
radiation measurements ever collected, comprising more confidence in information from official sources”), while also
than 150 million data points (Bonner 2020). indicating that citizen data practices decisively challenge
With this massive, citizen-generated data production the authority of formal institutions (“the genie will not go
system rapidly being developed, formal institutions, both back in the bottle”; “it is necessary to accept…”). Whereas
international and domestic, began taking notice. In an the report frames the crowdsourcing of data as a potential
official statement released in 2013, the United Nations resource for public authorities and experts, it also underlines
Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation the need for public authorities to respect the independence
(UNSCEAR) referred to Safecast’s data as one of the of crowdsourcing “public groups,” as these groups must not
“datasets provided to the Committee that were used for “be seen to work too closely with authorities” if they are to
the assessment” (UNSCEAR 2013, p. 98). remain effective and credible in the eyes of the public.
Meanwhile, in the USA, institutions such as the RAND This by and large favorable reception of citizen-driven
Corporation and the Defense Agency DARPA expressed data crowdsourcing constitutes one of several defining
an interest in Safecast’s radiation mapping devices and moments in Safecast’s international trajectory, as the
measurements (e.g., Tang 2015); while in Europe, the network gained wider policy recognition in affairs of
French radiological protection agency IRSN and the Belgian radiological protection and nuclear safety alongside formal
Nuclear Research Centre SCK-CEN each involved Safecast experts and authorities.
members in workshops and conferences about the role of Other international exchanges deserve notice here,
data crowdsourcing in the management of radiation risks. including a joint ICTP (International Centre for Theoretical
Although many experts in these institutes remain skeptical Physics)-IAEA workshop with Safecast volunteers held in
of the data produced by citizens, there also appears to March 2017 in Trieste (Italy), in which workshop participants
be growing recognition among them that crowdsourcing (decision-makers, scientists, technologists, and journalists)
can fill informational gaps (Van Oudheusden et al. 2020; constructed, tested, and used Safecast’s bGeigies. As
Hultquist and Cervone 2018). Particularly noteworthy recounted to us by a former IAEA representative, the
here is Safecast’s 2014 visit to an International Atomic IAEA organized these exchanges primarily for educational
Energy Agency (IAEA) International Experts’ Meeting purposes, with the aim of “teaching about basic
(IEM6), at which Safecast members Joe Moross and Azby instrumentation,” such as open-source hardware, software
Brown presented their radiation data measurement tools, tools, and geographical information system maps.
protocols, and results to a largely “skeptical audience” of The IAEA’s bearing towards Safecast—perhaps best
radiation protection specialists and mandated experts described as receptive but cautious—contrasts starkly
[SC 20/02/2018].2 Although several meeting participants with the dismissive responses of citizen-driven radiation
voiced concerns about the scientific reliability and validity monitoring, as voiced by the Japanese central government
of Safecast-generated data and crowdsourcing more and the Japan Atomic Energy Agency (Kenens et al. 2020),
generally, the Chairperson in his summary report (IAEA and appears more in sync with the unfolding relationships
2014) notes: between Safecast and a range of local and regional
institutions inside Japan. The latter includes a collaboration
But crowdsourcing, for example in the collection and in 2013 with Kōriyama City (one of the largest cities in the
dissemination of radiation data, can also help to instill Fukushima Prefecture) and the Kōriyama branch of Japan
confidence in information from official sources. But Post designed to measure radiation levels across the city,
to continue to be effective, these public groups need among others. Four years later, TEPCO invited Safecast
to maintain their independence; to be seen to work members to bring bGeigies inside the Fukushima Daiichi
too closely with the authorities will diminish their nuclear power plant, which is remarkable given Safecast’s
Van Oudheusden and Abe Citizen Science: Theory and Practice DOI: 10.5334/cstp.377 5

harsh criticism of how the power company handled the again with the aims of reliably mapping air pollution,
Fukushima Daiichi crisis (the_Stig 2012). estimating the effects of exposure of air pollution on
Safecast’s growing recognition from international and public health, and providing evidence-based health and
some domestic institutions coincides with increasing environmental recommendations to policymakers. To
media exposure. In past years, both international media maximize societal impact, the organizers invited citizens
(e.g., the Economist, British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), to measure nitrogen dioxide (NO2) levels in their street for
and the Los Angeles Times) and domestic media (e.g., Asahi the duration of one month (May 2018). Despite charging
Shimbun, Fukushima Minyu, and Japan’s public broadcasting participants €10 for their testing kits, organizers faced an
agency NHK) have reported on Safecast’s data and data overwhelming public response and even had to turn down
practices (e.g., Abe 2019). Furthermore, Safecast members requests to participate unexpectedly. Selected participants
have published a scholarly journal article for the radiological were instructed to attach two Palmes diffusion tubes to a
research community, entitled “Safecast: successful citizen- V-shaped placard with the CuriousNoses logo outside their
science for radiation measurement and communication home, as a means of standardizing the measurements and
after Fukushima,” in the Journal of Radiological Protection. maximizing the campaign’s public visibility. As organizers
Today, Safecast frequently holds information sessions recurrently emphasized, all collected data would be
for schools, companies, and community groups (including quality controlled and calibrated with NO2 measurements
local citizen radiation monitoring groups), and continues to collected at official reference monitoring stations operated
engage with various types of data production practices in by the Flanders Environment Agency (VMM), after which
Japan and other countries. At present, Safecast members the data would be made publicly available. As in other
are developing tools to measure air pollution with a community-led air projects, the data would also be used to
particular focus on particulate matter (PM2.5) and collecting validate and improve existing measurement methods and
various kinds of data on Covid-19. The network’s activities models, rendering such data ever more “powerful” (Haklay
have thus been expanded to include other environmental and Eleta 2019, p. 574).
and public health concerns. It is important to note the partnership between
campaign organizers and VMM, as well as the collaboration
CURIOUSNOSES—FLANDERS, BELGIUM with Flemish universities (University of Antwerp; Institute
The roots of the CuriousNoses are found in Antwerp, one for Labour and Society HIVA, KU Leuven), research
of the biggest and most densely populated Belgian cities, institutes (Flemish Institute for Technological Research,
which is also among the most congested and traffic- VITO), and the unique collaboration with the mass media
polluted in Europe. In 2014, local community groups, (the newspaper De Standaard). By developing alliances
including Ringland Academy (a think tank within the broader with these renowned scientific and public institutions,
Ringland citizen movement) and the citizen movement CuriousNoses initiators positioned themselves between
Ademloos (which translates as “out of breath” or “gasping and among citizens, experts, and authorities. In this
for air”), pooled resources with academics in a concerted process, they publicly distanced themselves from advocacy
effort to improve mobility, quality of life, and environmental groups (Ringland in particular) as a way of securing public
sustainability in and around the city. Unlike other protest acceptance and to avoid accusations of partisanship,
movements, these groups advanced a new municipal vision while retaining good working relationships with grassroots
of Antwerp, including a “capping” of the traffic-packed ring activists (Geenen et al. 2019, p. 113) [CN founding member
road, with parts of the highway to be moved underground 13/11/2020].
in a tunnel. Although controversial, the proposal gradually Among other factors, this tactical positioning within
achieved buy-in at the policy level, as citizens and other society helps to explain the widespread appeal and impact
stakeholders (e.g., city administrators) joined these of the CuriousNoses campaign in Flanders. As Huib Huyse, a
movements’ cause for sustainable urban renewal. social scientist closely involved in both campaigns, conveyed
CuriousNoses (based on a wordplay in Dutch, “nosing to us, “[CuriousNoses] was founded on frustration”
around”) sprung from this early grassroots mobilization as because the results of citizen science projects are rarely
a first-of-its-kind citizen science project on air quality (Van adopted by policymakers or are simply ignored; hence, “we
Brussel and Huyse 2018). After an initial measurement worked hard to produce credible, hard data.” Hard data
campaign in 2016 in the city of Antwerp with 2,000 citizens, here denote quantitative data that are reproducible and
project initiators and volunteer professionals (scientists, verifiable through the application of scientifically validated,
urban planners, and communication specialists, among universally shared and standardized measurement
others), launched a second campaign in 2018, this time techniques. Based on their previous experiences in citizen
involving 20,000 citizens across the whole of Flanders, movements, insights acquired after the first CuriousNoses
Van Oudheusden and Abe Citizen Science: Theory and Practice DOI: 10.5334/cstp.377 6

campaign, and supplementary research, campaign campaign also encouraged residents to explore more
initiators reasoned that to achieve the desired policy sustainable modes of transport to commute to work (e.g.,
and research impact, they would have to wield data in bike, train); and some Flemings have even relocated to
such a way “that no one will question the findings” [CN regions within the country with ostensibly less air pollution.
26/06/2019]. Accordingly, as two of the campaign’s leading These observations, which are derived from longitudinal
figures, Huyse and Filip Meysman (a biogeochemist at the survey data and are reported on in the media, suggest
University of Antwerp), have repeatedly stressed, they that the campaign induced behavioral change among
were not willing to compromise on scientific relevance for segments of the population (Renson 2019).
the sake of citizen participation; what counted instead was Without seeking to overstate its importance, we
the delivery of policy-influential insights based on rigorous conclude that the CuriousNoses campaign has stimulated
scientific assessment (Geenen et al. 2019, p. 113; Gijsel et environmental awareness and behavioral change, and
al. 2019, p. 102). influenced the Flemish policy agenda, in part because
In short, CuriousNoses initiators sought to generate of its remarkable transformation from the grassroots
societal impact by spurring a more strategic form of citizen to the “middle up” (Berti Suman 2020, p. 425). Initially
engagement in which citizens, academics, and government construed as a citizen movement and subsequently as a
collaborate in the collection of policy-relevant data (Van campaign to mitigate air pollution in the municipality of
Brussel and Huyse 2018). As indicated earlier, these Antwerp, CuriousNoses now exemplifies environmental
combined efforts proved highly effective. CuriousNoses citizen science for the whole of Flanders. The campaign
culminated in the most successful citizen-led air pollution has generated several spin-offs, including citizen
campaign to date. Thanks in large part to the active science projects on municipal traffic congestion (e.g.,
involvement of the Flemish newspaper De Standaard, Straatvinken), citizen science projects in Flemish schools,
CuriousNoses stimulated massive public and media interest and a Brussels remake of the 2018 campaign, as reported
in air pollution (data) in Flanders and in other parts of in De Standaard (Renson 2020). There is also tangential
Europe. Even conservative Flemish policymakers, habitually evidence that CuriousNoses influenced the Flemish
opposed to environmental policies and at best indifferent government’s 2018 decision to erect Flanders’ first citizen
to citizen participation, acknowledged that “ignoring the science knowledge center, Scivil [Interview civil servant
campaign has become near impossible” [Interview with 05/06/2019]. More remarkably perhaps, as members of
government advisor 30/01/2019]. Following the publication VMM have confided to the first author, various experts first
of the campaign results in 2018, air quality even became a saw citizen science as a potential threat to their work but
major topic in the local elections, and its importance was have come to appreciate it as “an opportunity” to collect
amplified during the so-called climate strikes organized by more data while “engaging with the public,” and as “an
students around climate issues. In these protests, several invitation [to us] to do better” [Interviews with civil servants
students were spotted with CuriousNoses signs (Huyse et 20/05/2019, 27/08/2019]. These testimonies suggest that
al. 2019). Although public support for new environmental CuriousNoses effectively expanded incumbent institutes’
policies waned in the run-up to the federal elections (when scientific expertise.
several political parties openly challenged the feasibility Although not exhaustive, these examples are indicative
and desirability of the demands of Youth for Climate), of how citizen science crowdsourcing platforms can achieve
clean air remained an item on the Flemish policy agenda. societal impact by mobilizing relatively simple technologies
With citizen demands for climate action increasingly and by leveraging the power of numbers to produce
heard across Europe (Schaefer et al. 2020) and confronted scientific data on a mass scale, which formal institutions
with European climate decrees to tackle environmental must take seriously.
pollution, Flemish policy and research institutes are
developing sustainable mobility scenarios with civil society
groups, with the aim of reducing air pollution and global SIDE-BY-SIDE COMPARISON
warming. Low Emission Zones (LEZs) have emerged in
cities such as Ghent and Antwerp, which prohibit certain Having concisely outlined the two citizen science
vehicles from entering the city center because they emit trajectories, we can now place them side by side, with a view
too many toxic substances. Although the emergence of towards comparing their core features and considering the
LEZs predates the CuriousNoses campaign, resident groups implications these have for institutional reception, from the
and municipalities drew on the campaign’s findings to push choice of these networks to self-identify as citizen science
for tighter traffic pollution regulation and the development organizations to the kinds of data being produced and how
of alternatives for car use (e.g., Stad Gent 2018). The these data are acted on.
Van Oudheusden and Abe Citizen Science: Theory and Practice DOI: 10.5334/cstp.377 7

CONVERGENCES multiple registers of communication to build a presence in

As should be clear by now, both initiatives emerged from established news media and on social media.
the grassroots in the face of a pressing environmental These communication processes are visibly and
matter of concern. Taking this matter of concern as the expressly mediated by scientific data, tools, and technical
primary entry point and key defining moment is central instruments, which facilitate broader public participation in
to understanding why and how these networks have science and which structure members’ engagements with
developed as they have, and the type of citizen science credentialed experts, decision-makers, and others. The
with which they are concerned. The two cases described notion of data-driven research is key, with Safecast claiming
here seek to provide resources for citizens or communities to be “pro data” (rather than pro- or antinuclear) and
to settle controversies that existing institutions (e.g., therefore apolitical (Safecast 2019); and with CuriousNoses
powerplant operators, government agencies, scientific producing hard data, as we have seen. Thus, in both cases,
institutions, oversight bodies) are unwilling or unable to scientific data are the central focus, providing both groups
manage on their own, typically because data are scarce or with a crucial measure of legitimacy among experts (and
are not openly accessible (or both). Hence, citizen groups wider society) and a critical means of underpinning their
develop new ways to get this kind of information (Berti demands for environmental change and decisive action.
Suman 2020, p. 428). In the approach taken by Safecast, the data are collected
This voluntarist, problem-oriented approach to citizen and aggregated, and outliers (rare values in the dataset,
science contrasts with a top-down citizen science setup, which can distort statistical analyses) are removed or cross-
in which scientists or other formally credentialed experts checked. To enable feedback from experts and to ensure
invite citizens to gather data for them, and which rarely transparency, the data collection methods are posted
challenges existing power relations or impels large-scale online and the radiation data maps are made available to
collective social action. The contrast is palpable in how all. Crucially, data points on the maps may include official
Safecast and CuriousNoses mobilize technologies, citizens, data (e.g., data taken from government sources) alongside
data, and discourses, including their choice to adopt the citizen-generated data to allow for comparison between
citizen science label at all. To paraphrase a founding member data sets. In the case of CuriousNoses, project initiators
of CuriousNoses, there was “no grand scheme to initiate a routinely involved credentialed scientists in the calibration
citizen science project on air pollution.” Rather, the term and validation of citizen-generated data to avoid having
was decided on because it “appeared useful at the time” these data discounted by experts or authorities. Hence,
[CN 26/06/2019]. Safecast’s founding members have made both approaches draw on the same mechanism of
similar assertions, arguing, “We chose the term ‘citizen legitimization: the data acquire credibility and persuasive
science’ as a way of generating findings that will carry both power through crowdsourcing and the rigorous application
scientific value and community value” [SC 28/01/2020]; and of scientifically validated methods, enabling impartial
“(W)e started solving the problem before we realized that measurement and shared observation by experts and
we were creating an organization” [SC 29/07/2015]. Thus, nonexperts alike (Jasanoff 2017). These mechanisms are
in both cases, members pragmatically considered which amplified through processes of data visualization from
designations were readily available to them to structure a below, as users access and collectively feed data into online
collective response to an urgent problem. data maps, thereby making visible what would otherwise
The structuring of these networks around a tangible likely remain concealed (Berti Suman 2020, p. 429).
problem comes with a well-communicated sense of By closely adhering to scientific rigor and precision in
urgency, with repeated appeals made by citizen scientists data collection, and by aggregating and sharing data
to all societal stakeholders (both state and nonstate) openly, these citizen science groups emerge as advocates
to act. Seeking to appeal to both wider segments of of modern technology and open science. Upon developing
society and specific groups, CuriousNoses members have scientific and technical competence, they obtain an
explicitly linked air pollution to concerns about livability, unusual capacity to contest scientific experts on their own
well-being, and climate change. Safecast members see grounds, not by discrediting science (as some radical social
radiation pollution as connected not only to safeguarding movements seek to do), but by openly questioning and
people’s health but also to information transparency supplementing dominant expert-centric research priorities,
and the communication of data without restriction. In research methods, technology devices, etc. (Hess et al.
short, both networks have sought to address an array 2008, p. 478). This distinguishes them from avowedly more
of environmental issues and audiences (lay citizens, activist organizations such as Ringland and Greenpeace; and
civil society organizations, scientists, public authorities, as is the case with Safecast, from antinuclear movements.
etc.) under the generic rubric of citizen science, using Establishing the scientific credibility of data (practices) is
Van Oudheusden and Abe Citizen Science: Theory and Practice DOI: 10.5334/cstp.377 8

thus not merely a description of, but an explanation for, the Flanders rather than on Brussels or Wallonia.4 Region-wide
scientific and societal relevance of these citizen initiatives citizen participation in the campaign spurred the Flemish
and their continuation and survival in cultures that value government and its agencies to promote citizen science in
modern science and technology.3 areas of research, education, and government (Scivil 2020).
This brings us to the roles citizen scientists assume in This policy-wide endorsement builds on a longer Flemish
such cultures as initiators, orchestrators, or facilitators of tradition of public participation in science and technology
scientific citizenship. Whereas the term citizen science and aligns with the European Union’s science policy of
unsettles conventional distinctions between citizen and responsible research and innovation, which seeks to
scientist, we may ask what types of citizenship and science involve all societal stakeholders in science and technology
are being enacted from the bottom up. Clearly, members of innovation. It may also be indicative of a growing
CuriousNoses and Safecast are not ordinary citizens in the acceptance among policy elites and administrations that
sense of average persons; rather, they are well-educated, “citizens will take science into their own hands if they have
technology-savvy, and resourceful individuals embedded to” [Interview with Flemish MP 26/02/2019].
in lively—usually urban—community organizations The situation in Japan is markedly different. Although
and robust networks, comprising universities and other Japan equally has a long tradition of citizen participation
knowledge institutes. Although they are commonly in science (Nakayama 1991, pp. 14–25), policy references
referred to as bottom-up or grassroots organizations, to citizen science are few and scattered, and generally
these networks are initiated by professionals participating reflect a commitment to one-way science communication
as citizens who mobilize wider publics around matters with only limited public involvement (Van Oudheusden et
of concern. These professionals redefine their roles by al. 2020; Cabinet Office 2016). Furthermore, whereas in
bringing in particular sets of expertise and learning new western societies citizenship is conceived of as a virtue that
skills along the way. This may impel them to move closer underpins democracy, the notion conjures connotations of
towards institutions when, for instance, these institutions anti-governmental, antinuclear left-wing activism in the
express an interest in collaboration; or conversely, reaffirm context of citizen-led radiation monitoring in Japan (Abe
their ties with local community groups. 2020; Kenens et al. 2020). These connotations are as much
For the purpose of this article, we highlight the arduous political as they are cultural. Historically, nuclear-related
emotional labor that goes into building and nurturing these concerns, such as nuclear safety, have sparked more public
relationships with stakeholders, particularly credentialed controversy than air pollution. The latter is a lingering, long-
experts. Safecast has gained access to international term problem that is continuously present and cannot be
organizations such as IAEA and local actors such as TEPCO managed away within the foreseeable future; whereas
by establishing interpersonal connections with members radiation pollution can be made to appear under control
of these institutions. In the case of CuriousNoses, the until a new incident takes place.
Antwerp-born director of the European Environment These different temporal and spatial realities have
Agency advocated the CuriousNoses cause on the European implications for how citizen-generated data are received
stage. Although this type of relational, diplomatic work and appreciated by experts and authorities. The criticisms
tends to go largely unnoticed, it can be generative of new levelled at CuriousNoses emerge within a policy and
encounters and encourage new collective forms of science research context that is now widely supportive of
governance. (contributory) citizen science; hence, it is largely confined
to what is being measured and more precisely, what is
DIVERGENCES being missed, such as particulate matter components of
Turning now to dissimilarities between the networks, air pollution [e.g., VMM Workshop 13/11/2018]. By contrast,
we are drawn to how different historical and cultural establishment experts (e.g., scientists, regulators, and
circumstances contribute to shaping grassroots citizen decision-makers) have questioned the scientific validity
science locally and globally. Given Safecast’s setup as an and reliability of Safecast’s data, as well as the normative
international volunteer organization rooted in global hacker commitments of opening nuclear policies and practices
culture and DIY networks, it is unsurprising that its scope of to public scrutiny (Abe 2015; Van Oudheusden 2020). In
activity reaches beyond Japan to the global stage (Palacin addition, Safecast has been accused of enacting a “hidden
et al. 2020). This international orientation is reflected in the pro-nuclear agenda,” specifically in cases where data
organization’s choice to use English as its working language generated by its members has contradicted claims made
and for public outreach purposes (although the Safecast by antinuclear activists (Brown et al. 2016).
website also provides basic information in Japanese). By These appraisals again underline the centrality of data
contrast, the CuriousNoses campaign has centered solely on to these citizen science groups and raise questions about
Van Oudheusden and Abe Citizen Science: Theory and Practice DOI: 10.5334/cstp.377 9

their data politics (Beraldo and Milan 2019). Whereas thrive in both these environments but that citizen scientists
in the CuriousNoses approach, data are crowdsourced must adapt their approach to fit the demands of the
and presented to policymakers with the aim of inciting decision-making setting.
collective action on air pollution, Safecast’s approach is When setting the two cases side by side (see Table 1), we
to create an open data process that generates actionable see a distinct form of citizen science emerging, with trained
data related to environment, health, and safety. As noted and self-learning citizen scientists committed to rigorous
elsewhere (Abe 2015, pp. 126–127), Safecast endorses the scientific assessment and the provision of socially relevant
principle that the data will find its audience. This imperative and policy-relevant insights, which in turn summon
leaves a great deal of agency (e.g., a decision to relocate stakeholders (individual citizens, civil society groups, and
based on one’s interpretation of the data) to the discretion policymakers) to act. Although these trajectories are not
of the individual user. With CuriousNoses, the data are comprehensive or complete, they give us a good sense
not held separate from formal policymaking but pressed of how and why citizen science materializes from the
into the process of region-wide consensus building on the bottom up, and how it may come to matter in affairs of
problem of environmental pollution. This is evidenced by environmental governance locally, regionally, or globally.
the prevalence of inclusive terms such as ambassadorship
and community orchestration in CuriousNoses discourse
and the development of close partnerships with formal CITIZEN SCIENCIZATION
institutions, which laid the groundwork for a joint campaign
for the whole of Flanders. Following Jasanoff (2017), the Building on our comparison, we now introduce the notion of
differences described here may reflect divergent civic citizen sciencization to think through and explore the ways
epistemologies—cultural norms of evidence testing in which grassroots citizen science initiatives potentially
and public persuasion. Whereas European decision- achieve wider and enduring societal influence. Responding
making environments are typically structured around to a key question in the studies of social movements—Who
the integration of all relevant aspects of a problem into a does the shaping? (Hess et al. 2008, p. 473)—we underline
robust whole (e.g., through collective bargaining among the fluid, two-way integration and mutual attuning of
stakeholders), decision-making environments elsewhere concepts, data and tools, and organizational forms. This
(e.g., USA) are more conducive to adversarial forms of understanding is deeply embedded in social movement
evidence-making in which data are mobilized to settle theory and various strands of Science and Technology
(or unsettle) scientific controversies.5 From our analysis of Studies (STS), including Actor-Network Theory (ANT),
the two cases, we infer that grassroots citizen science can which posits that social and natural realities are forged

SAFECAST CURIOUSNOSES

Key defining moment 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster Air pollution–related events in the 1990s linked to
large-scale road construction projects in Antwerp

Main concern Radiation risks and information transparency Air pollution, primarily traffic-related emissions (NO2)

Scale Global focus Regional focus (Flanders)

Initiators Technology entrepreneurs and volunteers from Ringland members (Antwerp-based citizen movement)
USA, Japan, and the Netherlands and professionals (scientists, designers, and urban
architects)

Funding sources Momoko Ito Foundation, Knight Foundation, Project partners (75% of total cost); citizens charged
Shuttleworth Foundation, crowdfunding, and €10 for testing kit
others

Approach to data “Pro data:” data collected by citizens and, ideally, Hard data collected by citizens and validated by
validated with professional experts professional experts

Core values Independence, innovation, transparency, Community, engagement, sustainability

openness

Relation to formal institutions Informal collaborations with local and regional Formal collaboration with Flemish universities, research
institutions in Japan and across the world; centers, mass media, and supported by Flemish
agenda-setting for international action government; agenda-setting in Flanders

Table 1 Safecast and CuriousNoses side by side.

Van Oudheusden and Abe Citizen Science: Theory and Practice DOI: 10.5334/cstp.377 10

through constantly shifting networks of relationships experts (Haklay 2013); and problematizes overly optimistic
involving human actors and nonhuman actants, such and pessimistic renditions of public participation in science
as technologies. Rather than taking a network (e.g., a and technology. Critics rightly point out that grassroots
market) as a pregiven structure (which is the default citizen science can end up reinforcing the very state- or
approach in sociology), ANT urges us to account for how industry-sanctioned forms of governance it is meant
a network emerges through the engagements, behaviors, to challenge (Mirowski 2017), while ignoring that it can
and activities of its constituents; i.e., how the network is equally play an empowering “boundary-bridging role,”
performed (or enacted) through the actions of involved for instance through the supplementation of official data
actors and actants (Çalışkan and Callon 2009). standards with citizen assessments (Ottinger 2010, p. 251)
Taking inspiration from these frameworks, citizen or by generating institutional receptivity towards other
sciencization denotes a space of encounter where actors knowledge production processes, be they indigenous, local,
and actants interact and co-enact citizenship, science, or speculative (Gabrys 2017). This is not to say that citizen
and citizen-science. As we have seen, formal institutions science elicits only beneficial outcomes, as some of its
engage with citizen science discourses, data, and devices promoters suggest. Void of power and friction, too positive
for political, scientific, or educational reasons. In turn, conceptions fail to account for value struggles and the
citizen scientists accommodate formal institutional clash of interests in participation (Van Oudheusden 2014).
pressures, for instance by choosing to generate hard data Rather than viewing citizen science as being virtuous or
that can be scientifically measured and validated, or by flawed, we propose a more empirically grounded, textured,
intentionally dissociating from activist groups to avoid dynamic, and relational view, which recognizes both science
political polarization. Thus, the meaning and practice and citizenship as inevitably messy, essentially contested,
of citizen science are not predetermined; rather, these and unfinished processes (Chilvers and Kearnes 2016, p. 33).
features are actively (re)constituted and (re)negotiated by As we have sought to illustrate, citizen science processes
actors within the historical and cultural contexts to which can—and typically do—play out in many directions and
they belong. These encounters may generate new, hybrid occupy many spaces, even simultaneously. Their ongoing
meanings and relationships, as actors not only confront contestation attests to the emergence of citizen science
existing features but also adjust to various constraints as a vibrant and potentially generative practice, as citizens
and opportunities such as the global rise of environmental offer new insights and resources, and develop new forms
participation and the expression of new forms of citizenship of scientific, social, and democratic credibility. This explains
(e.g., urban, ecological, universal, and scientific), for which why citizen science is relevant today, and why stakeholders
citizen science can provide a fruitful bedrock. of all sorts (public authorities, professional scientists, civil
Bringing a more contextual and symmetrical analysis to society groups, social scientists, and other citizens) are
bear on change processes involving citizens, science, and increasingly taking notice of its varied impetuses, aims,
data practices provides a much-needed corrective to linear manifestations, and impacts.
and deterministic conceptions of change, which underlie
many present-day academic and policy debates about the
real and potential impacts of citizen science, its professed CONCLUSION
“institutional uptake” or its “mainstreaming” (Sanz et al.
2014; EC 2020). By positing the unidirectional integration of Through a comparison of two cases, this article sheds light
alternatives into dominant (e.g., formal) frameworks, these on how grassroots citizen science emerges as a significant,
conceptions ultimately fall short of accounting for multi- potentially influential actor in environmental governance
way dynamics, and thus for the complexity of the citizen locally, regionally, or globally. It introduces the notion of
sciences. Citizen sciencization is therefore distinct from citizen sciencization as a way of envisioning and exploring
(if not antithetical to) the notion of scientization, which the historical, cultural, and political processes of emergence
for us denotes the application of science to a problem or and (re)configuration of citizen science against the backdrop
the action of making scientific, leaving insufficient room of changing science-society relationships in Japan, Europe,
for other actors, sources, and sites as makers of forms of and across the globe. Drawing on social movement studies,
knowledge (see Kolawole 2019). STS, and citizen science literatures, the paper states the
Sensitizing ourselves to how agents and actions case for a more symmetrical and relational approach when
together shape their engagements also urges us to studying citizen science, with due attention for the dynamic
reconsider conventional typologies of citizen science, such interplay of bottom-up and top-down imperatives. This
as ladders and pyramids of citizen participation in science, focus on movement and multi-directionality urges us to
which exclude a citizen science without credentialed be precise about the changing conditions and potentially
Van Oudheusden and Abe Citizen Science: Theory and Practice DOI: 10.5334/cstp.377 11

legitimate difficulties and constraints of citizen science matters of concern can be difficult to reconcile (de Waal
processes, as well as the opportunities these processes and de Lange 2019), the citizen science initiatives described
engender for collective change. The mutual shaping of here open opportunities for enduring transformation,
citizen science is easily overlooked when drawing on as various stakeholders negotiate their knowledges,
deterministic or binary lines of thinking, such as institutional expectations, and values. As evidenced by research on
uptake and mainstreaming, which posit the unidirectional sociotechnical controversies, these interactions need not
incorporation of alternatives into dominant frameworks always be agreeable, as conflicts oblige various sides in a
and structures. As social movement scholars remind us, dispute to accommodate the relevance of contending views
the shaping of civic movements and trajectories matters if they wish to remain influential and credible (Rip 1986).
to the scoping of new “fields of shared action” that are yet As we highlight in this article, innovative, resourceful, and
to find their subjects (Melucci 1996, p. 6). Grassroots citizen collaborative grassroots citizen initiatives can be successful
science is constitutive of this shaping, as it increasingly at gaining credibility and legitimacy among a wider array
interferes with, and occasionally hijacks, dominant of societal stakeholders. For members of formal institutions
approaches to data governance in ways that effectively who may feel challenged (or in some cases, threatened)
challenge the status quo (Beraldo and Milan 2019). These by them, well-organized, resourceful citizen scientists
processes of intervention and reception inevitably vary are a force to reckon with as these citizens redesign the
even within a single case or context, as we have seen. It field of power, competence, and expertise in matters of
is therefore important to pay sustained attention to them environmental concern.
with the aim of offering a more systemic understanding of
the interactions between institutional actors and grassroots
civic initiatives in democratic societies. As a sensitizing tool, DATA ACCESSIBILITY STATEMENT
citizen sciencization can facilitate these aims, offering us a
lens through which to explore citizen science in fluid and The dataset generated during and/or analyzed during
relational terms, and thus as a process that procures varied the current study is not publicly available due to privacy
forms, depending on historical and cultural conditions. As restrictions, but some data are available from the
we have sought to illustrate, initiatives such as Safecast corresponding author on reasonable request.
and CuriousNoses have matured and continue to develop,
as these networks refocus their attention on other
environmental concerns and give impetus to new civic NOTES
initiatives. These and related developments constitute a 1 We held and transcribed semi-structured interviews in Japanese,
topic for future research, as does the question of whether English, and Dutch. We asked research participants about key
themes, including the history of the grassroots initiative under
and how grassroots citizen science can deliver on its aims consideration, the rationales that sustain it, and the people
of inciting durable environmental change. and moments that defined its existence. From a concern with
securing credible interpretations, some research participants were
Although we have singled out two cases for in-depth interviewed several times. Of the six participants who responded
analysis and comparison, our approach is relevant to to an initial draft of this paper (which we circulated in November
2020), all affirmed the accuracy of our interpretations, although
other citizen science processes. Given the participatory
four added valuable comments, which led us to further develop or
disposition of citizen science, the realities of any citizen emphasize particular points.
science endeavor are bound to be shaped by how various 2 Square brackets indicate that quotes are taken from interviews
with members of Safecast (SC) or CuriousNoses (CN), unless
stakeholders engage with the challenge of participation
indicated otherwise.
in its social, technological, and political dimensions (Rey- 3 Various STS scholars have taken issue with Safecast’s data
Mazón et al. 2018). Participation is thus actively made, narrative, arguing that data are not neutral but inherently political,
because they are shaped by prior assumptions about what we,
unmade, and remade, at least in contexts that are
as a society, know and value (e.g., Kuchinskaya 2019). Yet, as
sufficiently democratic to allow for civic organization from Safecast members have argued, presenting data as apolitical can
below. By acknowledging this transformative potential of prove useful when navigating a deeply controversial arena such
as radiological protection. CuriousNoses members acknowledge
citizen science, we seek to contribute to the development of that their work becomes political by challenging established
socially relevant and environmentally concerned research, approaches, while simultaneously seeking to sidestep politics
“along partisan lines” [CN 25/10/2018].
based on the understanding that complex, intractable
4 As mentioned earlier, a CuriousNoses campaign is under way in
problems require a multi-stakeholder approach, whereby Brussels. In 2018, Greenpeace Belgium made an appeal to launch a
more concerned parties are heard and none are willfully similar campaign in Wallonia.

excluded. Whereas the rationales of institutions and the 5 Jasanoff (2017) terms the European approach the “view from
everywhere” and the American approach the “view from nowhere.”
fluid, networked assemblages of civic movements around
Van Oudheusden and Abe Citizen Science: Theory and Practice DOI: 10.5334/cstp.377 12

ETHICS AND CONSENT Abe, Y. 2019. Making civic media in the post-Fukushima Japanese
media ecology. In: Hunsinger, J and Schrock, A (eds.), Making
Participants cited in this paper consented to having Our World: The Hacker and Maker Movements in Context,
their views included in the research study, with some 37–53. New York: Peter Lang.
interviewees asking us to guarantee their anonymity. We Abe, Y. 2020. Citizen before science: R-DAN and its monitorial
each obtained approval from Institutional Review Boards ethic after the Chernobyl. In: Fathisalout-Bollon, M and
(Sociology Ethics Committee, University of Cambridge; Berti Suman, A (eds.), Legal, social and ethical perspectives
University Park Institutional Review Board, University of on health & technology, 55–79. Paris: Sovoie Mont Blanc
Southern California UPIRB # UP-14-00343) for our research. University Press and Lextenso Editions.
Beraldo, D and Milan, S. 2019. From data politics to the
contentious politics of data. Big Data & Society, 6(2). DOI:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951719885967
Berti Suman, A. 2020. Making visible politically masked risks: the
We are grateful to the research participants who gave haze case of bottom-up data visualization. In: Kennedy, H
generously of their time and shared their experiences and Engebretsen, M (eds.), Data visualization in society, 425–
and insights with us. We thank Go Yoshizawa, Nozomi 440. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. DOI: https://
Mizushima, Robbe Geysmans, Joke Kenens, Catrinel doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvzgb8c7.31
Turcanu, and Ine Van Hoyweghen for their input. Berti Suman, A, Schade, S and Abe, Y. 2020. Exploring
legitimization strategies for contested uses of citizen-
generated data for policy. Journal of Human Rights and
FUNDING INFORMATION Environment, 11: 74–102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/
jhre.2020.03.04
The first author’s research is funded by the European Bonner, S. 2011. RDTN is now Safecast, 24 April. Available at
Commission’s Horizon 2020 MSCA-IF-2018 research https://safecast.org/2011/04/rdtn-is-now-safecast/ [Last
funding scheme (grant number 836989); the second accessed on 19/11/2020].
author’s research is partially supported by the Japan Bonner, S. 2020. 150,000,000 Data Points, 23 September.
Society for the Promotion of Science KAKENHI (grant Available at https://safecast.org/2020/09/150000000-data-
number 16K21476). points/ [Last accessed on 19/11/2020].
Bonney, R, Ballard, H, Jordan, R, McCallie, E, Phillips, T, Shirk,
J and Wilderman, CC. 2009. Public Participation in Scientific
COMPETING INTERESTS Research: Defining the Field and Assessing Its Potential
for Informal Science Education. Washington, DC: CAISE
The authors have no competing interests to declare. Inquiry Group, Center for Advancement of Informal Science
Education (CAISE).
Brown, A, Franken, P, Bonner, S, Dolezal, N and Moross, J.
AUTHOR AFFILIATIONS 2016. Safecast: successful citizen-science for radiation
measurement and communication after Fukushima. Journal
Michiel Van Oudheusden    orcid.org/0000-0003-3748-0469
University of Cambridge, GB of Radiological Protection, 36(2): 82–101. DOI: https://doi.
org/10.1088/0952-4746/36/2/S82
Yasuhito Abe    orcid.org/0000-0002-2964-3355
Komazawa University, JP Cabinet Office. 2016. Fifth science and technology master plan
2016–2020. Tokyo: Cabinet Office. Available at https://www8.
cao.go.jp/cstp/kihonkeikaku/5honbun.pdf [Last accessed on
REFERENCES 19/11/2020].
Çalışkan, K and Callon, M. 2009. Economization, Part 1:
Abe, Y. 2014. Safecast or the production of collective intelligence Shifting Attention from the Economy Towards Processes of
on radiation risks after 3.11. Japan Focus, 12(7,5). Available Economization. Economy and Society, 38(3): 369–398. DOI:
at http://www.japanfocus.org/-Yasuhito-_Abe_/4077 [Last https://doi.org/10.1080/03085140903020580
accessed on 19/11/2020]. Chilvers, J and Kearnes, M. 2016. Remaking Participation. Science,
Abe, Y. 2015. Measuring for what: networked citizen science environment and emergent publics. Abingdon/New York:
movements after the Fukushima nuclear accident. Thesis Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203797
(PhD), University of Southern California. 693
Van Oudheusden and Abe Citizen Science: Theory and Practice DOI: 10.5334/cstp.377 13

de Waal, M and de Lange, M. 2019. Introduction – The Hacker, Hultquist, C and Cervone, G. 2018. Citizen monitoring during
the City and Their Institutions: From Grassroots Urbanism hazards: validation of Fukushima radiation measurements.
to Systemic Change. In: de Lange, M and de Waal, M (eds.), GeoJournal, 83: 189–206. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/
The Hackable City, 1–22. Springer: Singapore. DOI: https://doi. s10708-017-9767-x
org/10.1007/978-981-13-2694-3_1 Huyse, H, Bachus, K, Merlevede, T, Delanoeije, J and Heidi
Epstein, SG. 2000. Democracy, Expertise, and AIDS Treatment Knipprath, H. 2019. Societal Impact of the Citizen Science
Activism. In: Kleinman, D (ed.), Science, Technology, and Project “CurieuzeNeuzen Vlaanderen”: Final report. HIVA-KU
Democracy, 15–32. Leuven, Leuven. Available at https://hiva.kuleuven.be/nl/
European Commission (EC). 2020. Citizen Science and onderzoek/thema/klimaatendo/p/projecten/CurieuzeNeuzen_
Citizen Engagement – Achievements in Horizon 2020 and Vlaanderen [last accessed 19/11/2020].
recommendations on the way forward. Brussels, Belgium: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). 2014. IAEA report
EC Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. on radiation protection after the Fukushima Daiichi accident:
Available at https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/ promoting confidence and understanding. Vienna, Austria:
research_and_innovation/research_by_area/documents/ IAEA. Available at https://www.iaea.org/publications/11089/
ec_rtd_swafs_report-citizen_science.pdf [last accessed on iaea-report-on-radiation-protection-after-the-fukushima-
19/11/2020]. daiichi-accident-promoting-confidence-and-understanding-0
Gabrys, J. 2017. Citizen Sensing, Air Pollution and Fracking: From [last accessed 19/11/2020].
‘Caring about Your Air’ to Speculative Practices of Evidencing Irwin, A. 1995. Citizen science: a study of people, expertise and
Harm. Sociological Review monograph series, 65(2): 179–192. sustainable development. Routledge: New York.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0081176917710421 Jasanoff, S. 2017. Virtual, visible, and actionable: Data
Gabrys, J, Pritchard, H and Barratt, B. 2016. Just good enough assemblages and the sightlines of justice. Big Data & Society,
data: figuring data citizenships through air pollution sensing 4(2). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951717724477
and data stories. Big Data & Society, 3(2): 1–14. DOI: https:// Kasperowski, D and Kullenberg, C. 2019. The many Modes of
doi.org/10.1177/2053951716679677 Citizen Science. Science & Technology Studies, 32(2): 2–7. DOI:
Geenen, K, Janssens, V and Vermeulen, S. 2019. Het https://doi.org/10.23987/sts.74404
Ringlandboek. Antwerp: Ringland. Kenens, J, Van Oudheusden, M, Yoshizawa, G and Van
Gijsel, L, Huyse, T and Van Hoyweghen, I. 2019. Citizen Science – Hoyweghen, I. 2020. Science by, with and for citizens:
Hoe burgers de wetenschap uitdagen. Kalmthout: Pelckmans rethinking ‘citizen science’ after the 2011 Fukushima disaster.
Pro. Palgrave Communications, 6(58). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/
Haklay, M. 2013. Citizen science and volunteered geographic s41599-020-0434-3
information – overview and typology of participation. In: Kolawole, OD. 2019. Science, Social Scientisation and
Sui, DZ, Elwood, S and Goodchild, MF (eds.), Crowdsourcing Hybridisation of Knowledges. Science as Culture, 28(3):
geographic knowledge: volunteered geographic information 391–401. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09505431.2019.1645
(VGI) in theory and practice, 105–122. Springer: Berlin. DOI: 825
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4587-2_7 Kuchinskaya, O. 2019. Citizen Science and the Politics
Haklay, M and Eleta, I. 2019. On the front line of community- of Environmental Data. Science, Technology, &
led air quality monitoring. In: Integrating Human Health into Human Values, 44(5): 871–880. DOI: https://doi.
Urban and Transport Planning, 563–580. Springer: Cham. DOI: org/10.1177/0162243919858669
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74983-9_27 McFarlane, C. 2009. Translocal assemblages: Space, power and
Hemmi, A and Graham, I. 2013. Hacker science versus closed social movements. Geoforum, 40: 561–567. DOI: https://doi.
science: Buidling environmental monitoring infrastructure. org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2009.05.003
Information, Communication & Society, 17: 1–13. DOI: https:// Melucci, A. 1996. Challenging Codes. Collective Action in the
doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2013.848918 Information Age. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Hess, D. 2005. Technology-and product-oriented movements: DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511520891
Approximating social movement studies and science and Mirowski, P. 2017. Against citizen science. AEON, 20 November
technology studies. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 30: [online access at https://aeon.co/essays/is-grassroots-citizen-
515–535. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243905276499 science-a-front-for-big-business last accessed 19/11/2020].
Hess, D, Breyman, S, Campbell, N and Martin, B. 2008. Nakayama, S. 1991. Science, technology and society in postwar
Science, Technology, and Social Movements. In: Hackett, E, Japan. London: Kegan Paul International.
Amsterdamska, O, Lynch, M and Wacjman, J (eds.), Handbook National Diet of Japan (NAIIC). 2012. The official report of
of Science and Technology Studies, 473–498. Mass.: MIT the Fukushima nuclear accident independent investigation
Press. commission (executive summary). Tokyo, Japan: NAICC.
Van Oudheusden and Abe Citizen Science: Theory and Practice DOI: 10.5334/cstp.377 14

Available at http://www.nirs.org/fukushima/naiic_report.pdf Stevens, M, Vitos, M, Altenbuchner, J, Conquest, G, Lewis, J

[last accessed on 19/11/2020]. and Haklay, M. 2014. Taking Participatory Citizen Science
Ottinger, G. 2010. Buckets of resistance: Standards and the to Extremes. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 13(2): 20–29. DOI:
effectiveness of citizen science. Science, Technology, https://doi.org/10.1109/MPRV.2014.37
& Human Values, 35(2): 244–270. DOI: https://doi. Stilgoe, J, Irwin, A and Jones, K. 2006. The Received Wisdom:
org/10.1177/0162243909337121 Opening up Expert Advice. London: Demos.
Palacin, V, Gilbert, S, Orchard, S, Eaton, A, Ferrario, MA and Tang, V. 2015. Defense advanced research projects agency SIGMA
Happonen, A. 2020. Drivers of Participation in Digital Citizen program information page. Available at www.darpa.mil/
Science: Case Studies on Järviwiki and Safecast. Citizen program/sigma [last accessed 12 November 2020].
Science: Theory and Practice, 5(1): 22. DOI: https://doi. the_Stig. 2012. TEPCO cheating on radiation levels by using
org/10.5334/cstp.290 “improved” monitoring posts. Available at https://safecast.
Renson, I. 2019. ‘CurieuzeNeuzen’ verhuizen voor schonere lucht. org/2012/07/tepco-cheating-on-radiation-levels-by-using-
De Standaard, 19 December [online access at https://www. improved-monitoring-posts-2/ [last accessed on 19/11/
standaard.be/cnt/dmf20191218_04773666 last accessed on 2020].
19/11/2020]. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic
Renson, I. 2020. Brussel krijgt eigen CurieuzeNeuzen. De Radiation (UNSCEAR). 2013. Report to the General Assembly
Standaard, 19 October [online access at https://www. with Scientific Annexes Volume I: Scientific Annex A. New
standaard.be/cnt/dmf20201019_95287722 last accessed on York: UNSCEAR. Available at https://www.unscear.org/docs/
19/11/2020]. reports/2013/13-85418_Report_2013_Annex_A.pdf [last
Rey-Mazón, P, Keysar, H, Dosemagen, S and Blair, D. 2018. accessed on 19/11/2020].
Public Lab: Community-Based Approaches to Urban and Van Brussel, S and Huyse, H. 2018. Citizen science on speed?
Environmental Health and Justice. Science and Engineering Realising the triple objective of scientific rigour, policy
Ethics, 24: 971–997. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-018- influence and deep citizen engagement in a large-scale
0059-8 citizen science project on ambient air quality in Antwerp.
Rip, A. 1986. Controversies as Informal Technology Assessment. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 62(3):
Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization, 8: 340–371. DOI: 534–551. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2018.1428
https://doi.org/10.1177/107554708600800216 183
Ruppert, E, Isin, E and Bigo, D. 2017. Data politics. Big Data & Van Oudheusden, M. 2014. Where are the politics in responsible
Society, 1–7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951717717749 innovation? European governance, technology assessments,
Safecast. 2019. About Safecast. Available at https://blog.safecast. and beyond. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 1(1): 67–86.
org/about/ [last accessed on 19/11/2020]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2014.882
Sanz, FS, Holocher-Ertl, T, Kieslinger, B, García, FS and Silva, CG. 097
2014. EU White Paper on Citizen Science for Europe. Zaragoza, Van Oudheusden, M. 2020. Residents Rallied to Measure
Spain: Socientize. Available at https://ec.europa.eu/futurium/ Radiation After Fukushima. Nine Years Later, Many Scientists
en/system/files/ged/socientize_white_paper_on_citizen_ Still Ignore Their Data. Discover, 10 March [online access
science.pdf [last accessed on 19/11/2020]. at https://www.discovermagazine.com/environment/
Schaefer, T, Kieslinger, B and Fabian, CM. 2020. Citizen-Based Air residents-rallied-to-measure-radiation-after-fukushima-9-
Quality Monitoring: The Impact on Individual Citizen Scientists years-later-many last accessed on 19/11/2020].
and How to Leverage the Benefits to Affect Whole Regions. Van Oudheusden, M, Kenens, J, Yoshizawa, G, Mizushima, N and
Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 5(1): 6. DOI: https://doi. Van Hoyweghen, I. 2020. Developing pathways for nuclear
org/10.5334/cstp.245 science, technology and innovation governance: Reflections
Scivil (Vlaamse Kenniscentrum voor Citizen Science). 2020. on a Japanese-Belgian research project on citizen science
About Scivil. Available at https://www.scivil.be/about-scivil after Fukushima [in Japanese]. Kagaku Gijutsu Shakairon
[last accessed on 19/11/2020]. Kenkyu, 18: 58–72.
Stad Gent. 2018. Resultaten van CurieuzeNeuzen Vlaanderen Wynne, B. 2007. Public Participation in Science and Technology:
voor Gent, 8 October. Available at https://stad.gent/nl/ Performing and Obscuring a Political-conceptual Category
over-gent-en-het-stadsbestuur/nieuws-evenementen/ Mistake. East Asian Science, Technology and Society:
resultaten-van-curieuzeneuzen-vlaanderen-voor-gent [last An International Journal, 1(1): 99–110. DOI: https://doi.
accessed on 19/11/2020]. org/10.1007/s12280-007-9004-7
Van Oudheusden and Abe Citizen Science: Theory and Practice DOI: 10.5334/cstp.377 15

TO CITE THIS ARTICLE:

Van Oudheusden, M and Abe, Y. 2021. Beyond the Grassroots: Two Trajectories of “Citizen Sciencization” in Environmental Governance.
Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 6(1): 13, pp. 1–15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/cstp.377

Submitted: 19 November 2020 Accepted: 11 February 2021 Published: 14 April 2021

COPYRIGHT:
© 2021 The Author(s). This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source
are credited. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Citizen Science: Theory and Practice is a peer-reviewed open access journal published by Ubiquity Press.