Study demonstrates role of public participation in environmental policy decision-making

As updates to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) usher in a new era requiring inclusive environmental reviews with robust public engagement, a new University of Florida study, titled “Citizen science as a valuable tool for environmental review” unveils a significant rise in the use of citizen science data within across the United States.

An environmental impact statement (EIS), as mandated by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), serves as a tool for decision makers to understand environmental consequences and to choose actions that minimize those adverse effects on the environment, particularly for major federal projects such as infrastructure development, energy production, and land management activities. The study, published in Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, demonstrates how observations and data collected by people contributing to platforms like iNaturalist and eBird can significantly enhance environmental decision-making, particularly in areas of biodiversity conservation, species monitoring and ecosystem health assessment. The study used the University of Arizona’s NEPAccess platform, the most comprehensive source of information about NEPA in the country.

“Citizen science is rapidly evolving to become a critical component of environmental review and contributing directly to policy through environmental impact statements,” said lead author Corey Callaghan, an assistant professor of wildlife ecology at the UF/IFAS Fort Lauderdale Research and Education Center. “Our findings show that data collected by the public can play a significant role in documenting the presence of species, which is essential for mitigating biodiversity loss as part of the environmental review process.”

NEPA revisions adopted in July emphasize streamlined processes and greater public engagement, which could provide agencies greater ability to use data from platforms like iNaturalist and eBird. The study found that by leveraging crowd-sourced data from the public, government agencies could make environmental assessments more robust, filling gaps left by traditional methods.

From 2012 to 2022, 228 out of 1,355 environmental impact statements referenced or used citizen-science data, highlighting a growing recognition of the value that community-contributed data bring to environmental assessments. The proportion of the impact statements incorporating these data surged to 40 percent in 2022, reflecting a trend toward embracing citizen participation in environmental decision-making.

Among the agencies involved, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management were the most frequent users of citizen science data.

A closer look revealed that 64% of the relevant environmental impact statements employed citizen science directly to inform key decisions, predominantly using eBird data to document the presence or absence of species in specific areas. Conversely, 19% utilized this data indirectly as supplementary information, while 20% encouraged future citizen science involvement to enhance local engagement with natural resources.

Another key finding in the study is the potential for enhanced decision-making. By integrating citizen science with traditional methods, environmental review processes can become more comprehensive, transparent and defensible. This supports NEPA’s goals of improving environmental protection while balancing economic development.

Laura López-Hoffman, the study’s senior author from the University of Arizona, and an expert in NEPA, emphasized the importance of integrating citizen science into regulatory frameworks.

“NEPA’s vision is harmony between people and the environment; what better way to promote harmony than by having citizen scientists help produce the data used in environmental reviews?” she said.

Researchers point out that while the data can provide critical insights, it is essential to account for potential biases and ensure the scientific integrity of these contributions. As the role of citizen science continues to expand in environmental reviews, the findings emphasize the necessity for policymakers to consider how these data can effectively inform future assessments and foster a collaborative approach to biodiversity conservation.

“We hope our findings will encourage further dialogue among policymakers, environmental consultants and the public on how citizen science can best be utilized to support sustainable development and biodiversity conservation,” said Callaghan. “By leveraging platforms, policymakers and environmental consultants can access comprehensive biodiversity data that spans years and covers vast geographies, creating more transparent, inclusive, and scientifically sound decision-making processes.”