Julia von Gönner

Zusammenfassung: Die Erforschung biologischer Vielfalt ist angesichts der Biodiversitätskrise eine zentrale Aufgabe. Citizen Science ergänzt die konventionelle Forschung dabei auf vielfältige Weise: etwa durch großflächige Datenerhebung, Datenauswertung oder den Aufbau von Artenkenntnis bei engagierten Teilnehmenden. Viele Projekte beinhalten neben den wissenschaftlichen Zielen auch Umweltbildung und stärken die Identifikation der Teilnehmenden mit lokalen Ökosystemen. Damit fördern sie weiteres Engagement im Naturschutz. Das folgende Kapitel stellt verschiedene Projekte vor, die zur Biodiversitätsforschung beitragen. Im Mittelpunkt stehen praxisnahe Einblicke in die Bandbreite der Themen sowie der Dimensionen Wissenschaft, Teilnehmende und Wirkung. Dabei beschreiben wir prozessbezogene Merkmale, wie wissenschaftliche Zielsetzungen, Formen der Beteiligung, Methoden der Datenerhebung und Wirkung des erhaltenen Wissens. Hiermit ermutigen wir Anwender:innen aus der Forschung, aus Behörden und Naturschutzverbänden, sowie aus der Zivilgesellschaft, die Potenziale von Citizen Science passgenau zu nutzen.

Riparian Wetland conservation and restoration in Europe increasingly rely on nature-based solutions, yet biodiversity monitoring of their implementation remains fragmented across scales, methods and policy frameworks. This paper synthesises current approaches in wetland monitoring and proposes an integrated, adaptive framework linking long-term, system-orientated observation with short- to medium-term, intervention-focused restoration monitoring. Combining site-based surveys with standardised, multi-scale assessments enables differentiation of natural variability from human pressures, detection of tipping points in species sensitivity to climate pressures and evaluation of restoration outcomes under EU policies, such as the WFD, the Habitats and Birds Directives and the Nature Restoration Regulation. Besides conventional biodiversity monitoring, we highlight innovations that address critical monitoring gaps: artificial intelligence–supported remote sensing using satellites and unmanned aerial vehicles, sensor networks for near-real-time hydrological observations, environmental DNA metabarcoding and citizen-science approaches. Essential biodiversity variables and essential ecosystem-service variables are emphasised as integrative indicators that connect ecological integrity, ecosystem functioning and human well-being. Finally, we outline the enabling conditions for a harmonised European wetland monitoring architecture, supported by major environmental research infrastructures that provide long-term ecological data, advanced digital tools and integrated assessments essential for evidence-based, climate-resilient restoration. Highlights Riparian wetland conservation and restoration in Europe increasingly use nature-based solutions, but biodiversity monitoring remains fragmented across scales, methods and policies. Standardised, multi-scale assessments combined with site-based surveys help distinguish natural variability from human pressures. Integrated monitoring supports early detection of tipping points in species responses to climate change. Innovative monitoring tools are highlighted, including AI-supported remote sensing (satellites and UAVs), sensor networks, eDNA metabarcoding and citizen science. Major environmental research infrastructures are identified as key supports for long-term data, digital tools and evidence-based, climate-resilient restoration. The approach enables evaluation of restoration outcomes under key EU policies (WFD, Habitats and Birds Directives, Nature Restoration Regulation).

Citizen science has great potential to foster ecological knowledge, skills and collective action for biodiversity conservation. To date, however, there are few experimental studies of behaviour change outcomes induced by citizen science. We assessed the effects of citizen science in ecological stream monitoring on participants' individual and collective behaviour and action intentions to protect streams beyond the immediate scope of the citizen science project. For this we applied a three‐wave, quasi‐experimental survey design with a citizen science treatment group (N = 213 participants of the project FLOW in Germany) and two control groups (waiting control group: N = 92, panel control group: N = 250). In addition, we analysed citizen science effects on potential predictors of freshwater conservation behaviour, such as knowledge, skills, awareness of stream stressors and group identification. Results of linear mixed‐model analysis showed that, compared to the control groups, citizen scientists significantly increased their objective stream‐related knowledge, their self‐reported stream monitoring skills and their awareness of stream stressors. These changes remained stable 6 weeks after the citizen science intervention. Notably, citizen scientists also reported increased identification with their citizen science project group and higher levels of collective and personal behaviour to protect streams at posttest (e.g. contacting local politicians with ideas for stream protection or using biodegradable detergents). Analysis revealed that increases in group identification and collective stream protection behaviour were significantly correlated. We could show that the citizen science intervention was particularly effective for participants with high intrinsic motivation and for those with low prior knowledge and experience in stream monitoring. Synthesis and applications. Citizen science can serve as a useful tool to promote ecological understanding, awareness and collective action to conserve freshwater streams. By fostering volunteer skills and community building, citizen science projects can empower participants with different levels of experience to engage in freshwater monitoring and protection. Decision makers should actively support approaches for citizen participation in freshwater monitoring, recognising that collective engagement of diverse community members is needed to finally meet the European Water Framework Directive's goal of restoring the good ecological status of freshwater ecosystems. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

Agricultural pesticides, nutrients, and habitat degradation are major causes of insect declines in lowland streams. To effectively conserve and restore stream habitats, standardized stream monitoring data and societal support for freshwater protection are needed. Here, we sampled 137 small stream sites across Germany, 83% of which were located in agricultural catchments, with more than 900 citizen scientists in 96 monitoring groups. Sampling was carried out according to Water Framework Directive standards as part of the citizen science freshwater monitoring program FLOW in spring and summer 2021, 2022 and 2023. The biological indicator SPEAR _pesticides was used to assess pesticide exposure and effects based on benthic invertebrate community composition. Overall, 58% of the monitored agricultural stream sites did not achieve a good ecological status in terms of macroinvertebrate community composition and indicated high pesticide exposure (SPEAR _pesticides status class: 29% ‘moderate’, 19% ‘poor’, 11% ‘bad’). The indicated pesticide pressure in streams was related to the proportion of agricultural land in the catchment area (R ² =0.23, ppesticides index (R ² =0.79, p2 =0.72, p<0.001) by citizen scientists and professionals. Such citizen-driven monitoring of the status of watercourses could play a crucial role in monitoring and implementing the objective of the European Water Framework Directive, thus contributing to restoring and protecting freshwater ecosystems. Graphical Highlights: - Assessment of ecological status of small agricultural streams in Germany - Pesticides affected invertebrates (bioindicator SPEAR) in 58% of agricultural streams - Failure to reach good hydromorphological status in 65% of agricultural streams - Citizen science monitoring achieves high data accuracy - Citizen science can support European Water Framework Directive monitoring

Citizen science (CS) can foster transformative impact for science, citizen empowerment and socio-political processes. To unleash this impact, a clearer understanding of its current status and challenges for its development is needed. Using quantitative indicators developed in a collaborative stakeholder process, our study provides a comprehensive overview of the current status of CS in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. Our online survey with 340 responses focused on CS impact through (1) scientific practices, (2) participant learning and empowerment, and (3) socio-political processes. With regard to scientific impact, we found that data quality control is an established component of CS practice, while publication of CS data and results has not yet been achieved by all project coordinators (55%). Key benefits for citizen scientists were the experience of collective impact (“making a difference together with others”) as well as gaining new knowledge. For the citizen scientists’ learning outcomes, different forms of social learning, such as systematic feedback or personal mentoring, were essential. While the majority of respondents attributed an important value to CS for decision-making, only few were confident that CS data were indeed utilized as evidence by decision-makers. Based on these results, we recommend (1) that project coordinators and researchers strengthen scientific impact by fostering data management and publications, (2) that project coordinators and citizen scientists enhance participant impact by promoting social learning opportunities and (3) that project initiators and CS networks foster socio-political impact through early engagement with decision-makers and alignment with ongoing policy processes. In this way, CS can evolve its transformative impact.