Test 1 impact summary

This is an impact report of the citizen science project Test - Georgia Fields. The scores displayed summarise the results of the assessment process designed by the MICS project. For more information on how they were calculated, visit https://mics.tools

Beta

Project Information

Project start date:
June 2022
Project Contacts:
Georgia Fields -
Impact Assesment progress:
100% complete

Rules-based scores

These scores are calculated based on a set of rules written to combine a specific set of impact metrics on the same theme into a single indicator. A higher score means the project is carrying out more activities related to the theme of the indicator and is, therefore, more likely to have a higher positive impact in this area. Rule-based scores are only calculated for specific themes. Overall assessments can be found below in the machine-learning--based scoring. Descriptions and explanations of impact indicators are provided at about.mics.tools/indicators (e.g., the score is low on economic productivity because the project did not include specific aspects related to improving efficiency). Different scores trigger different recommendations presented in the following section. Also, scores are not linked to project objectives; they try to capture a broad range of impacts even if the project does not consider or care about all of them. All scores are out of 42.

Impact Indicators Impact score (max 42) Overall average
Society Activeness 26 25
Involvement 16 10
Governance Policy 25 4
Sustainable Development Goals 22 14
Economy Economic productivity 42 9
Financial sustainability 10 14
Environment Environmental awareness 33 28
Environmental footprint 42 37
Science and technology Scientific productivity 18 16
Interdiscplinary science 32 33

Recommendations

The following recommendations are determined by the scores the project received in the previous section. The recommendations are based on citizen-science best practice as defined in the current scientific literature and how other projects have taken action to improve their impact in specific areas. Of course, following these recommendations does not guarantee the project will suddenly have a higher impact; it all depends on the specific context of each project, but the might provide helpful inspiration.

Society Activeness

The activeness of participants within a project is an important aspect of citizen science. Activeness depends on participants being aware that they are contributing to a project, having a lot of responsibility in the project, and being satisfied with the process of participation. This project should ensure that all aspects of activeness have been considered.

Involvement

The degree of involvement of participants in a project is an important aspect of citizen science, and includes involving participants in multiple stages of the project, offering them multiple activities to take part in, and offering different levels of involvements depending on individual interests and availability. This project could consider whether there are more stages of the project that participants could be involved in for example by considering co-design or co-evaluation.

Governance Policy

The project might not look like it has the highest score for policy influence, but the answers given suggest it is actually among the more successful citizen-science projects in terms of policy. The most commonly considered impact on policy is citizen-science data as a source of information for decision makers. But citizen science can also directly impact policy as an object of research policy or as a policy instrument (read more in this paper). Policy influence can also include affecting organisational policy not just governmental policy. It might be helpful to consider how the project is influencing policy currently and whether any of the other forms of policy influence could also be achieved in the project. The project might find further inspiration from example projects in this report.

Economy Economic productivity

It is great that the project has produced outputs that contribute to the economy through industry, commerce, innovation or technological development. If you haven't already, it might be worth considering any legal implications through a dedicated IPR plan.

Financial sustainability

If the project wants to improve its financial sustainability, it could consider creating an exploitation plan. To reduce recurring investments in technology and the cost per observation, the project could consider using open-source software and tools.

Financial sustainability

You are on the right path! It is clear that the project has considered its financial sustainability into the future. However, there could be more to do. If one does not already exist, an exploitation plan could help sustain project outputs, whilst considering open-source software and tools could reduce costs.

Environment Environmental footprint

The project has taken actions to improve its environmental footprint by decreasing its material footprint, reducing its polluting emissions, using a sustainable procurement policy, and including pro-environmental actions for participants (such as litter picking). Congratulations!

Environmental awareness

The project clearly promotes environmental awareness, by educating participants on environmental challenges, or by contributing to participants' awareness of the natural environment through dissemination activities. Want to be able to measure participants' higher awareness, or increased stewardship? You might want to consider this paper.

Science and technology Interdiscplinary science

By working across multiple disciplines , this project is making efforts to promote interdisciplinary ways of working. There is evidence that interdisciplinarity is statistically significantly and positively associated with research impact (Okamura, 2019), largely through the engagement of a wider audience. Keep up the good work!

Machine Learning Scores

The following scores were calculated using a statistically-driven machine-learning approach, a type of AI that learns to perform a task by analysing patterns in data. This is an experimental approach to citizen-science impact assessment, and the exact reasoning behind the scores is not explainable. The scores represent a best guess of the impact the project is having in each domain. How can you use the score? Well, this platform gives a common framework for impact assessment so you can use the scores: to see how the project's impact evolves over time; to compare the project with others; to report to funders and participants; or for your organisation's internal reporting. All scores are out of 42.

Society 8 Society 8 Governance 23 Governance 23 Economy 24 Economy 24 Environment 27 Environment 27 Science and technology 18 Science and technology 18 max. 42
Total Score 20/42