Economics Dictionary of ArgumentsHome
| |||
|
| |||
| Citizen science: Citizen science involves non-professionals participating in scientific research, often collecting data, conducting experiments, or contributing to projects led by professional scientists. It fosters public engagement and contributes to scientific knowledge._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. | |||
| Author | Concept | Summary/Quotes | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Paul N. Edwards on Citizen Science - Dictionary of Arguments
Edwards I 580 Citizen Science/Edwards: citizen science websites, and others like them, represent remarkable new possibilities for open access and citizen involvement in climate monitoring and modeling. On its face this seems salutary, and perhaps it will be. Yet such projects pull in multiple directions, not all of which lead to improvement in the quality of climate science. For example, while the National Science Foundation and numerous other agencies promote and even require data sharing, the paradigmatic case of such sharing is re-use of data by other scientists—not auditing by amateurs, no matter how knowledgeable and well educated they may be. The more open you make your science, the more effort you must expend to provide your data and to assist people in interpreting it. In the case of climate change, that effort can become onerous, even overwhelming; it can stop you from doing science at all. The “hockey stick” case (>Hockey stick controversy/Edwards) dragged Michael Mann and his co-authors into a years-long morass of hearings, letters, and public defenses of their data and methods, during which they could have been doing research. Yet if you close your science up, excluding outsiders by refusing them access to data and Edwards I 581 methods, not only will you raise suspicions and open yourself to accusations of elitism; you also may miss real scientific benefits from unusual critiques and creative ideas “outside the box” of your field’s traditions. Climate Audit’s detection of errors in the GISS temperature data and Clear Climate Code’s discovery of bugs in GISTEMP are clearly beneficial, as GISS has acknowledged. But SurfaceStations.org went beyond surveying stations. It analyzed the survey results, then posted graphics and published a report indicating a large warm bias in the US Historical Climatology Network. Perhaps the survey is accurate, but in the absence of peer review this conclusion remains highly uncertain, and the rationale for posting those results on a public website is highly questionable. Similarly, the value of citizens’ interventions in the “hockey stick” controversy is not clear. >Hockey stick controversy/Edwards. Climatology/citizen science/Edwards: Blogs and citizen science initially appear to increase the transparency of climate knowledge. On their face, they look like another mode of infrastructural inversion. They can certainly contribute to extending “ownership” of the knowledge-production process, which can broaden consensus. But on closer examination, their effects so far are decidedly mixed. Some have contributed new insight, helping to improve the scientific infrastructure by inverting it. At least as often, however, they promote confusion, suspicion, false information, and received ideas. Edwards I 582 To the extent that these new forms can be brought within some framework of credentialing and peer review, they may contribute substantially to climate knowledge. To the extent that they undermine those processes—and the danger that they will do so, at least in the near term, is great - they represent ideological and political strategies rather than knowledge projects. >IPCC/Edwards._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. Translations: Dictionary of Arguments The note [Concept/Author], [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] resp. "problem:"/"solution:", "old:"/"new:" and "thesis:" is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition. |
Edwards I Paul N. Edwards A Vast Machine: Computer Models, Climate Data, and the Politics of Global Warming Cambridge 2013 |
||
> Counter arguments against Edwards
> Counter arguments in relation to Citizen Science
