Earth Observation for Citizen Science Validation, or Citizen Science for Earth Observation Validation? The Role of Quality Assurance of Volunteered Observations

Didier G. Leibovici, Jamie Williams, Julian F. Rosser, Crona Hodges, Colin Chapman, Chris Higgins and Mike J. Jackson
Additional contact information
Didier G. Leibovici: Nottingham Geospatial Science, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2TU, UK
Jamie Williams: Environment Systems Ltd., Aberystwyth SY23 3AH, UK
Julian F. Rosser: Nottingham Geospatial Science, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2TU, UK
Crona Hodges: Earth Observation Group, Aberystwyth University Penglais, Aberystwyth SY23 3JG, UK
Colin Chapman: Welsh Government, Aberystwyth SY23 3UR, UK
Chris Higgins: EDINA, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH3 9DR, UK
Mike J. Jackson: Nottingham Geospatial Science, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2TU, UK

Data, 2017, vol. 2, issue 4, 1-20

Abstract: Environmental policy involving citizen science (CS) is of growing interest. In support of this open data stream of information, validation or quality assessment of the CS geo-located data to their appropriate usage for evidence-based policy making needs a flexible and easily adaptable data curation process ensuring transparency. Addressing these needs, this paper describes an approach for automatic quality assurance as proposed by the Citizen OBservatory WEB (COBWEB) FP7 project. This approach is based upon a workflow composition that combines different quality controls, each belonging to seven categories or “pillars”. Each pillar focuses on a specific dimension in the types of reasoning algorithms for CS data qualification. These pillars attribute values to a range of quality elements belonging to three complementary quality models. Additional data from various sources, such as Earth Observation (EO) data, are often included as part of the inputs of quality controls within the pillars. However, qualified CS data can also contribute to the validation of EO data. Therefore, the question of validation can be considered as “two sides of the same coin”. Based on an invasive species CS study, concerning Fallopia japonica (Japanese knotweed), the paper discusses the flexibility and usefulness of qualifying CS data, either when using an EO data product for the validation within the quality assurance process, or validating an EO data product that describes the risk of occurrence of the plant. Both validation paths are found to be improved by quality assurance of the CS data. Addressing the reliability of CS open data, issues and limitations of the role of quality assurance for validation, due to the quality of secondary data used within the automatic workflow, are described, e.g., error propagation, paving the route to improvements in the approach.

Keywords: citizen science; volunteered geographical information; metadata; data quality; quality assurance; scientific workflow; provenance; metaquality; open data (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: C8 C80 C81 C82 C83 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2017
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2306-5729/2/4/35/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2306-5729/2/4/35/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jdataj:v:2:y:2017:i:4:p:35-:d:116113

Access Statistics for this article

Data is currently edited by Ms. Cecilia Yang

More articles in Data from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().