My interest in the environmental volunteering community was sparked by my time volunteering at the Wildlife Trust after I had completed my first degree. Later, during my PhD research, I heavily relied on volunteer-generated data to study how species, particularly butterflies in the UK, are responding to climate change. These long-term records allow me, and many other researchers, to track changes in species distributions and inform conservation practices, highlighting the crucial role of volunteer contributions. This led me to delve deeper and learn more about these biological recording communities, how they operate, and who is included and who isn’t.

Biological recording is the process of collecting observations of wildlife, including details on what was seen, where, and when. Most of this data in the UK is generated by volunteers, many of whom are experts but participate in a non-professional capacity. This practice has a rich history in the UK, dating back to the 19th century. Volunteers can participate in both structured schemes, which follow set protocols, and unstructured schemes, which are more flexible. Species observed on a walk through a nature reserve, your local neighbourhood or in your garden can be recorded, including via one of the many biological recording apps available today. 

Biological recording is a form of citizen science, and these records are essential for scientific research, helping to monitor species trends and inform conservation efforts. The data collected are used in various ways, from understanding species ecology and monitoring trends to informing habitat management and planning decisions.

Additionally, taking part in biological recording can offer personal benefits to volunteers, such as increased well-being from being active outdoors, socializing with others, developing new skills, and forming a deeper connection to nature.

Inclusivity is a key challenge. Our research has shown that marginalized groups in UK society are underrepresented among environmental citizen science participants. This limits their access to the benefits of volunteering, such as improving well-being and developing skills, that I mentioned before. Literature tells us that people who are more marginalized in society often have lower well-being and poorer health. With that in mind, people who currently aren’t participating could potentially benefit the most from doing so.

Deprived areas also tend to have lower environmental quality, and so this lack of diversity may lead to biases in datasets, as neighbourhoods with poorer environmental conditions may be the focus of less recording effort. That’s why improving inclusivity is crucial for enhancing both access to benefits from volunteering and the robustness of the data collected.

When we first started exploring the issue of who was participating in citizen science, we realized there hadn’t been much research done in this area. Our research has focused on trying to better understand who is and who is not participating in citizen science and why. We have also begun to understand how motivations for participation differ between demographic groups, as this information could be used to tailor recruitment strategies. Through various citizen science projects we have led, we have also developed and evaluated ways of engaging diverse audiences.

Our work with Butterfly Conservation was through a knowledge exchange project, focusing on inclusivity in volunteer biological recording. The aim of these types of projects is to exchange knowledge between academic and non-academic institutes. We began with a co-design workshop with Butterfly Conservation staff to understand their priorities for building knowledge in this area. Following this, I conducted a literature review and analyzed interviews I did with volunteer recorders as part of the DECIDE project. These provided insights into barriers and enablers to volunteering.

To facilitate further knowledge exchange, we organized a workshop with major UK conservation NGOs who facilitate volunteer biological recording projects. This workshop aimed to share our research findings and discuss strategies for increasing inclusivity. We covered progress in DEI (Diversity, Equity and Inclusion) work, understanding participant demographics and motivations, and improving resource accessibility.

There are several strategies that have been identified that can help make citizen science projects, such as biological recording activities, more inclusive. These include being careful about the way opportunities are advertised. Literature suggests that directly asking people to participate and partnering with facilitator organizations—groups that already work with the communities you want to reach—can significantly increase engagement with currently underrepresented groups. This targeted outreach approach ensures that the invitation to participate reaches a broader and more diverse audience.

Second, understanding the motivations and interests of potential participants is essential. Emerging research indicates that motivations differ between demographic groups. By including this information in the design of projects, organizations can make their programs more appealing to a diverse range of participants. Aligning activities with the interests and priorities of different groups, and co-creating activities with the communities themselves, can further ensure that the projects meet their specific needs and preferences.

By focusing on these strategies, organizations can better understand and reach underrepresented groups, making their citizen science projects more inclusive. However, there are still many unknowns about how to do this effectively, and we are only at the beginning of understanding the best approaches. Collaboration across organizations to share experiences, knowledge and resources is crucial, and I’m looking forward to continuing this work to enhance inclusivity in biological recording volunteering spaces!