Chris Hesselbein (Author)
Crowdfunding for science has been hailed both as an important means of funding early-career scholars and innovative research projects, and as a novel approach to communicating with and enabling participation by members of the public. The experiences of scientists who have sought crowdfunding and the opportunities and challenges that this entails are analyzed to critically examine claims (by platforms and in previous studies) about the democratizing potential of crowdfunding for ‘opening up’ research funding and ‘engaging’ members of the public in scientific research. Interview accounts of scientists indicate that crowdfunding can provide crucial support for under-resourced researchers as well as research projects, and that it offers a relatively unique opportunity for communicating science and enabling public participation in several aspects of the scientific research process. However, these accounts also reveal that seeking crowdfunding gives rise to several practical, social, and professional issues, such as increasing the burden of labour on already disadvantaged researchers, straining relationships with colleagues, tarnishing one’s professional status, and ultimately exacerbating inequalities among scientists. Moreover, the ostensible promise of crowdfunding for enhancing science communication and public engagement in science is undercut by the failure of both crowdfunding platforms and campaigners to take the potential non-monetary contributions or expertise of non-scientists seriously. Rather than acknowledging the potential for two-way dialogue and public participation that crowdfunding platforms can potentially provide, public input is formatted as a financial transaction, which reduces the ability of publics to influence crowdfunded projects in a meaningful manner and therefore greatly diminishes their democratic potential.
...More
Article
Kärnfelta, Johan;
(2014)
Knut Lundmark, Meteors and an Early Swedish Crowdsourcing Experiment
Article
Jérôme Baudry;
Élise Tancoigne;
Bruno J Strasser;
(June 2022)
Turning crowds into communities: The collectives of online citizen science
Article
Courtney Addison;
Hallam Stevens;
(May 2022)
Crowdfunding Conservation Science: Tracing the Participatory Dynamics of Native Parrot Genome Sequencing
Article
Sarah Blacker;
Aya H Kimura;
Abby Kinchy;
(October 2021)
When citizen science is public relations
Article
Petra Benyei;
Manuel Pardo-de-Santayana;
Laura Aceituno-Mata;
Laura Calvet-Mir;
María Carrascosa-García;
Marta Rivera-Ferre;
Antonio Perdomo-Molina;
Victoria Reyes-García;
(July 2021)
Participation in Citizen Science: Insights from the CONECT-e Case Study
Article
Aleta Quinn;
(2021)
Transparency and secrecy in citizen science: Lessons from herping
Article
Jones, Mark Peter;
(2009)
Entrepreneurial Science: The Rules of the Game
Thesis
Perorazio, Thomas E.;
(2009)
Curiosity and Commercialization: Faculty Perspectives on Sponsored Research, Academic Science and Research Agendas
Article
Tizian Zumthurm;
Stefan Krebs;
(April 2022)
Collecting Middle-Class Memories? The Pandemic, Technology, and Crowdsourced Archives
Article
Sara Spike;
(2020)
Mayflowers and Sleeping Johnnies: Nature-Study, Local Knowledge, and A. H. MacKay’s Phenological Research in Rural Nova Scotia, 1892-1925
Article
Stephen C. Rea;
Hanzelle Kleeman;
Qin Zhu;
Benjamin Gilbert;
Chuan Yue;
(2020)
Crowdsourcing as a Tool for Research: Methodological, Fair, and Political Considerations
Article
Chen, Shun-Ling;
(June 2019)
How Empowering Is Citizen Science? Access, Credits, and Governance for the Crowd
Article
Annemarie de Wildt;
Errol Boom;
(2022)
Creating an Online Community: Corona in the City
Article
Tomasz Panecki;
(2014)
Creating a Common Symbol Classification for a New Historical Geoportal of Poland
Article
Alex Nading;
(2016)
Evidentiary Symbiosis: On Paraethnography in Human–Microbe Relations
Article
Jayson A. Altieri;
(2020)
Government Girls: Crowd-Sourcing Aircraft in World War II
Article
Littmann, Mark;
Suomela, Todd;
(2014)
Crowdsourcing, the Great Meteor Storm of 1833, and the Founding of Meteor Science
Article
Samantha Blickhan;
Eleanor Bird;
Andrew Lacey;
Alexis Wolf;
(2024)
The benefits of ‘slow’ development: towards a best practice for sustainable technical infrastructure through the Davy Notebooks Project
Article
Anna Froese;
Natalie Mevissen;
(2020)
Failure through Success: Co-construction Processes of Imaginaries (of Participation) and Group Development
Article
Carmen McLeod;
Sarah Hartley;
(July 2018)
Responsibility and Laboratory Animal Research Governance
Be the first to comment!