The urgency behind the paper stems from the escalating ecological crisis and the growing recognition that the way humanity values nature shapes how it is protected or destroyed. People value nature in profoundly different ways: instrumentally, for the material benefits it provides; intrinsically, for its existence independent of any human observer; and relationally, through the meanings, identities and social bonds that arise from human–nature interactions. The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, or IPBES, emphasized in its 2022 Methodological Assessment of the Diverse Values and Valuation of Nature that most current valuation processes capture only a narrow slice of these values, typically monetary and quantitative ones, which can produce environmental injustices and conflicts while ignoring worldviews of indigenous peoples and local communities.

To translate plural valuation into practice, researchers have identified four values-centered leverage points for transformative change: recognizing the diverse values of nature in valuation methods; embedding those values into decision-making; reforming policies, rights and regulations to internalize nature’s values; and shifting the deeper societal norms, beliefs and goals that underpin how people relate to nature and to each other. Drawing on leverage point theory popularized by Donella Meadows, the authors note that these intervention points cascade in depth—shallower points are easier to act on but yield less change, while deeper points are harder to activate but hold far greater transformative potential when engaged.

The new perspective, the product of two expert workshops hosted by the Open Universiteit in 2022 and 2023, systematically maps how citizen science can strengthen interventions at each of these leverage points. At the first point, recognizing diverse values, citizen science initiatives such as Drinkable Rivers, Curieuze Neuzen in Belgium, and the Dutch Network Ecological Monitoring demonstrate that the questions citizens ask and the species or landscapes they monitor often reflect deeply held values and concerns. Because participants are drawn from varied localities, socio-economic backgrounds and identities, their involvement can widen the spectrum of values that enter formal valuation, though the authors caution that environmental citizen science remains biased toward quantitative data collection, overrepresenting instrumental and intrinsic values while leaving relational values largely implicit.

Measuring relational values—attachments to places, species and nature in general—requires methodological innovation. The researchers point to emerging approaches such as citizens’ written letters to trees, micronarratives and behavioral data on species preferences, which can be combined with ecological measurements to illuminate socio-ecological interactions. They also flag a fundamental trade-off: methods capable of capturing rich detail about people’s values tend to be more complex and time-consuming, reducing the volume of data collected, while high-volume approaches may flatten the very diversity of values that plural valuation seeks to reveal.

At the second leverage point, embedding valuation into inclusive decision-making, the evidence is striking. Citizen-collected air quality data from the Louisiana Bucket Brigade in the United States and the Samen Meten program run by the Dutch national public health institute have shaped governmental policy agendas. In Europe, citizen observatories deliberately link citizens, scientists and decision-makers in shared monitoring of local environments. The authors document cases where citizen science has even entered the courtroom: plastic pollution data gathered by volunteers contributed to a petrochemical company being found liable, and species observations by Swedish citizens have been used in environmental court cases. Participation also reshapes personal decisions, with studies showing that citizen scientists adopt more biodiversity-friendly gardening practices and strengthen their personal connection to nature—effects that ripple outward through the communities and social networks these initiatives create.

Yet the path is not without obstacles. Doubts about the quality of citizen-generated data among scientists and policymakers, persistent power dynamics in decision-making circles, and a lack of agency, skills or resources among decision-makers all constrain uptake. Studies further reveal a persistent demographic skew: citizen science participants tend to be white, highly educated, older and more affluent, which narrows the knowledge produced and limits environmental justice. At the third, deeper leverage point of institutional reform, the authors highlight structural embedding efforts such as the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework’s agreement to involve citizens in knowledge co-creation and the more4nature initiative, which seeks to institutionalize collaboration between citizen science projects and authorities responsible for policy implementation and monitoring. But they also warn that institutionalization carries risks: when data flow into analytical pipelines, ties with the volunteers who collected them can weaken, and the sense of pride and emotional enrichment that motivates citizen scientists can erode if their knowledge becomes an untraceable instrument.

The deepest leverage point—shifting societal norms and paradigms—is where citizen science may hold its most profound potential. Empirical studies show that participation strengthens place attachment, nature connectedness and nature-noticing over both short and long timescales. Communities formed around monitoring projects build shared values and collective action, and so-called citizen science ambassadors inspire pro-environmental attitudes in their social circles. The authors caution, however, that it is methodologically difficult to distinguish values genuinely transformed by participation from values participants already held, and some longitudinal studies find no attitude change because participants began with strongly positive orientations toward nature. Measuring such shifts demands new approaches that explicitly track emotional connectedness and underlying norms.

From this analysis the team distills three overarching recommendations. First, recognize and measure: relational values must be made explicit in citizen science design, supported by new quantitative and qualitative methods, since they are both key motivations for participation and outcomes strengthened by it. Second, embrace diversity: plural valuation calls for plural publics, meaning the full variety of citizen science formats—from top-down governmental programs to grassroots community-led efforts—should be cultivated, with flexible roles that allow citizens, scientists and policymakers to grow into varied responsibilities. Third, pursue structural integration: case-by-case policy engagement is growing, but lasting change requires structural funding, long-term collaborations, storytelling that showcases how citizen science has informed decisions, and open science principles that ease institutionalization into policy processes.

The authors conclude that uniting citizen science and plural valuation is not merely an academic win–win but a necessary foundation for inclusive, effective environmental action and conservation. As governments worldwide struggle to meet biodiversity targets amid widening distrust in institutions, the perspective suggests a practical and democratizing pathway: the millions of volunteers already counting birds, measuring rivers and sensing air pollution are not just collecting data—they are articulating, practicing and fostering a richer, more plural vision of what nature is worth, and in doing so, they may be pulling the deepest levers of transformative change.

Subject of Research: Integrating citizen science with plural valuation of nature to leverage transformative change

Article Title: Uniting citizen science and plural valuation: Potential for leveraging transformative change

Article References: Verploegen, H., Dyke, A. J., Ganzevoort, W., Hugé, J., Jacobs, S., Neuteleers, S., Prats López, M., Verschuuren, B., & Wehn, U. (2026). Uniting citizen science and plural valuation: Potential for leveraging transformative change. Ambio. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-026-02458-z

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s13280-026-02458-z

Keywords: citizen science, plural valuation, transformative change, relational values, environmental policy, IPBES, leverage points, biodiversity, nature connectedness, environmental justice, Uniting, citizen

The award ceremony took place on June 2, 2026, during the opening of the Ecsite Conference in Gothenburg, Sweden, one of Europe’s most significant assemblies dedicated to science communication and public involvement. The recognition of Oeiras Experimenta highlights the project’s excellence in fostering collaboration between scientists and citizens, with an emphasis on creating actionable scientific knowledge aimed at addressing urgent environmental and societal challenges. The accolade also signifies a commitment to inclusive science, inviting communities of diverse backgrounds to actively participate in the scientific process.

A delegation representing the Portuguese project was present at the ceremony, including Pedro Patacho, Councilor for Education, Science, and Innovation for the Municipality of Oeiras; Elisabete Brigadeiro, Head of the Science and Innovation Office at the Municipality; Maria João Leão, Coordinator of the Ciência + Cidadã program at ITQB NOVA; and Marta Daniela Santos, Communications Coordinator at ITQB NOVA. These representatives embody the collaborative spirit and cross-sectoral partnerships fundamental to the project’s success, symbolizing the integrated efforts of local governance, research institutions, and the engaged public.

Oeiras Experimenta stands as a paradigm of how citizen science can be harnessed to tackle climate change and food sustainability. The project engages a broad spectrum of contributors, including seasoned researchers from multiple ITQB NOVA laboratories, citizen scientists spanning various ages and social groups, educational institutions, local associations, artists, students, and public officials. This multidisciplinary and participatory framework reinforces the notion that science is a shared societal endeavor, vital for crafting resilient solutions amid escalating environmental pressures.

Central to Oeiras Experimenta’s mission is the conviction that science is not a remote activity confined to laboratories but a communal resource shaped through dialogue and experimentation. Maria João Leão, leading the Science + Citizen program, emphasized that the award is a tribute to the collective engagement of researchers and citizens working to generate knowledge that is socially relevant and inclusive. This philosophy challenges traditional top-down science communication models by fostering active, hands-on participation and democratizing access to scientific inquiry.

Ana Sanchez, Vice Dean of ITQB NOVA, underscores the transformative impact of the project, attributing its success to the enthusiasm and curiosity of citizens who choose to engage with scientific processes in meaningful and innovative ways. By promoting active science practice among diverse community members, Oeiras Experimenta creates a new narrative around science engagement, one that is grounded in co-creation and shared responsibility for the planet’s future.

The international impact of this project is further reinforced by commendations from eminent figures in the science engagement field. Helen Jones, Chair of the Mariano Gago Ecsite Awards jury and Global Director of Engagement at the Science Museum Group, highlighted the project’s practical and multidisciplinary methodology, which encourages ‘learning by doing’. Jones praised Oeiras Experimenta for its potential to be replicated globally, providing an inspirational model for other organizations within the Ecsite network and beyond.

Pedro Patacho reflected on the significance of the award, particularly in the context of honoring Mariano Gago, a visionary who integrated science into political discourse in Portugal. Gago is remembered for fostering participatory and informed societies through science, and Oeiras Experimenta’s recognition under his name underscores science’s evolving role as a cornerstone of public policy and societal progress. This relationship between science and governance is essential for addressing complex global challenges with informed, evidence-based strategies.

Elisabete Brigadeiro further elucidated the project’s broader societal implications, pointing to the dynamic interaction between scientific inquiry, citizen involvement, and policymaking. This triadic collaboration catalyzes the generation of concrete, locally relevant solutions for climate change mitigation and adaptation, illustrating how science can transcend theoretical boundaries to become a powerful tool for innovation and inclusive decision-making.

Founded in 2015, the Mariano Gago Ecsite Awards celebrate groundbreaking initiatives in science engagement that embody the values championed by José Mariano Gago, a luminary who profoundly shaped science policy in Portugal and Europe. By recognizing Oeiras Experimenta, the award acknowledges the project’s excellence in cultivating public understanding, active participation, and the creation of knowledge systems that address pressing environmental challenges through a multifaceted and community-driven approach.

Oeiras Experimenta exemplifies the future of science communication, where citizen scientists are empowered to contribute meaningfully to research that directly affects their lives and environments. Through combining rigorous scientific methodologies with community involvement and innovative educational frameworks, the project transforms abstract concepts of sustainability into tangible, pragmatic actions that resonate across local and international arenas.

The success of Oeiras Experimenta serves as an inspiring reminder that tackling global challenges necessitates not only scientific expertise but also inclusive models of collaboration where knowledge is co-produced and shared. This project is a testament to the power of engaged science, bridging diverse sectors and demographics, and charting a path toward a more resilient, sustainable future.

Subject of Research: Climate-resilient crops and sustainable food production through participatory citizen science.

Article Title: Oeiras Experimenta Garners Prestigious Mariano Gago Ecsite Award for Excellence in Science Engagement 2026

News Publication Date: June 2, 2026

Web References: https://mediasvc.eurekalert.org/Api/v1/Multimedia/d7cc168b-402f-49d3-a752-1d09efade049/Rendition/low-res/Content/Public

Image Credits: Ecsite

Keywords: Science engagement, citizen science, climate change, sustainable food production, public participation, science communication, climate-resilient crops, living lab, science education, participatory research, interdisciplinary collaboration, science-policy interface