Learning and the transformative potential of citizen science.

The number of collaborative initiatives between scientists and volunteers (i.e., citizen science) is increasing across many research fields. The promise of societal transformation together with scientific breakthroughs contributes to the current popularity of citizen science (CS) in the policy domain. We examined the transformative capacity of citizen science in particular learning through environmental CS as conservation tool. We reviewed the CS and social-learning literature and examined 14 conservation projects across Europe that involved collaborative CS. We also developed a template that can be used to explore learning arrangements (i.e., learning events and materials) in CS projects and to explain how the desired outcomes can be achieved through CS learning. We found that recent studies aiming to define CS for analytical purposes often fail to improve the conceptual clarity of CS; CS programs may have transformative potential, especially for the development of individual skills, but such transformation is not necessarily occurring at the organizational and institutional levels; empirical evidence on simple learning outcomes, but the assertion of transformative effects of CS learning is often based on assumptions rather than empirical observation; and it is unanimous that learning in CS is considered important, but in practice it often goes unreported or unevaluated. In conclusion, we point to the need for reliable and transparent measurement of transformative effects for democratization of knowledge production.

Effort for money? Farmers' rationale for participation in agri-environment measures with different implementation complexity.

European agri-environment programmes are based on the common principle that farmers deliver environmental services for which society pays. Due to the voluntary nature of agri-environment measures (AEM), the issue of farmers' motives or reasons for participation has been an important topic of investigation in past years. The present paper examines farmers' rationale for participation in AEM against the backdrop of continued debate over whether to develop relatively simple measures that can be readily applied by many farmers or give greater priority to measures that are more targeted - i.e. to the specific management requirement of particular habitats or species - but are often more complex. The paper draws on empirical material from a case study in the Dyle valley, Belgium, including in-depth interviews, expert consultations and a mail survey. It was sought not only to identify and quantify the importance of separate reasons for participation, but also to reveal how these reasons and other elements of relevance were logically interrelated in the explanation that farmers themselves give for their participation. As a result, six modes or styles of participation were identified: opportunistic, calculative, compensatory, optimising, catalysing and engaged. The analyses suggest that there were notable differences in that both separate reasons for and modes of participation do vary with the complexity of the measures' requirements. Overall, the study demonstrates that participation in AEM is not simply a matter of weighing the money against the effort for adoption. Whereas money is an important driver for participation (in particular, for those adopting complex AEM) it plays widely differing roles depending on the level of farmers' reasoning (farm enterprise, single practice or landscape feature) and the importance they give to other considerations (environmental effect, production potential of land, goodness of fit, etc.). Practical implications are drawn for both policy makers and programme managers who develop and make available tailor-made support.

Mobilisation capacity for agri-environmental management.

The integration of environmental concerns into agricultural policies - through agri-environment measures (AEM) - has seen a fast development across Europe. This paper conceives AEM as an evolving instrument, a product that takes shape, gets diffused and taken up in, by and through networks of relations. Success then depends on the mobilisation or active participation of all those who may support and develop it. Using the examples of the Flanders' and Walloon regions of Belgium, the paper sets out to examine the mechanisms by which mobilisation for agri-environmental management develops, and by doing so, to gain a better understanding of mobilisation capacity as a concept to be used for evaluating policy implementation in this area. The study follows AEM along the various trajectories of implementation (design, distribution, application). The findings reveal how mobilisation capacity is gradually built-up by the interplay between AEM and the networks it connects to. The case illustrates well how such interactions occur all the way from administration offices to farmers' fields, and that their nature can be very different (e.g., formal and informal, durable and short-lived, expected and unexpected). It is concluded that in evaluating actor-networks, one should look at them in an open and fluid manner, that is, not to privilege any particular configuration or form of attachment over the other, not take intentions and objectives as a starting point but instead address the opportunities for synergies, and be aware that any network built around the instrument may change its content and the way it functions.