Scaling Participation: A Genealogical, Relational, and Reparative Analysis of Standardisation in Marine Citizen Science: Rethinking Quality and the Governmental Paradox Between Past, Present, and Future
Translated title
Scaling Participation: A Genealogical, Relational, and Reparative Analysis of Standardisation in Marine Citizen Science
Authors
Alexandersen, Nonie Mulcahy ; Chen, Guodong
Term
4. term
Education
Publication year
2026
Submitted on
2026-01-09
Pages
80
Abstract
This thesis examines how expert communities in marine citizen science manage a paradox: the standards and validation practices that make citizens’ observations usable for science and government can also narrow what counts as legitimate knowledge and participation. Using the European OBAMA-NEXT initiative as the main case, it treats standardisation as a socio-technical process—shaped by people, institutions and technologies—rather than a purely technical task. The analysis combines a genealogical sensibility, relational thinking about how scales are made, and a reparative orientation to design that aims to improve rather than only critique. It traces how protocols, categories and platform design determine whose observations can circulate, and on what terms. The study draws on expert interviews, thematic workshops, archival material and participant observation to examine the discourses and decisions through which participation is configured in expert forums. It shows how inclusion is built into professional infrastructures that distribute authority and labour while presenting themselves as neutral measures of data quality. Current arrangements often position citizens mainly as data collectors rather than knowledge producers, even as democratising rhetoric frames citizen science as epistemically and politically transformative. Comparability is achieved through practical ‘cuts’ that stabilise categories and reduce variability, allowing data to travel across scales—but at the cost of some epistemic possibilities. To move beyond critique, the thesis proposes a Trinary System that replaces ladder-like participation models with three equally legitimate purposes for citizen involvement. This offers a way to broaden what counts as meaningful participation without abandoning the infrastructural need for comparability in marine environmental monitoring. The thesis concludes that the paradox is a constitutive tension that can be handled more transparently and inclusively through careful redesign of standards.
Afhandlingen undersøger, hvordan ekspertmiljøer i marin borgerforskning håndterer et paradoks: De standarder og valideringspraksisser, der gør borgeres observationer brugbare for videnskab og forvaltning, kan samtidig indskrænke, hvad der tæller som legitim viden og deltagelse. Med det europæiske OBAMA-NEXT-initiativ som hovedcase behandles standardisering som en socioteknisk proces—formet af mennesker, institutioner og teknologi—frem for en rent teknisk opgave. Analysen kombinerer et historisk blik (genealogisk), relationel tænkning om, hvordan skalaer skabes, og et reparativt designperspektiv, der fokuserer på at forbedre frem for blot at kritisere. Afhandlingen følger, hvordan protokoller, kategorier og platformdesign afgør, hvis observationer kan cirkulere, og på hvilke betingelser. Undersøgelsen bygger på interviews med eksperter, tematiske workshops, arkivmateriale og deltagerobservation for at belyse de diskurser og beslutninger, hvorigennem borgeres deltagelse bliver konfigureret i ekspertfora. Analysen viser, hvordan inklusion bliver indbygget i professionelle infrastrukturer, der fordeler autoritet og arbejde, samtidig med at de fremstår som neutrale mål for datakvalitet. De nuværende ordninger placerer ofte borgere primært som dataindsamlere frem for videnproducenter, selv om demokratiserende fortællinger fremstiller borgerforskning som vidensmæssigt og politisk forandrende. Sammenlignelighed opnås gennem praktiske ‘snit’, der stabiliserer kategorier og reducerer variation, så data kan bevæge sig på tværs af skalaer—men på bekostning af nogle erkendelsesmuligheder. For at komme videre end kritik foreslår afhandlingen et Trinary System, der erstatter stige-lignende deltagelsesmodeller med tre ligeværdige formål for borgerdeltagelse. Forslaget udvider, hvad der kan tælle som meningsfuld deltagelse, uden at opgive behovet for sammenlignelighed i marin miljøovervågning. Afhandlingen konkluderer, at paradokset er en grundlæggende spænding, der kan håndteres mere transparent og inkluderende gennem omhyggeligt redesign af standarder.
[This apstract has been rewritten with the help of AI based on the project's original abstract]