Where next for macroecology: citizen macroecology?

ISSN 1948-6596 news and update symposium summary Where next for macroecology: citizen macroecology? 2 nd annual symposium of the British Ecological Society’s Macroecology Special Interest Group – Sheffield, UK, 10 th –11 th July 2013 Introduction Following the success of the first meeting of the British Ecological Society’s (BES) Macroecology Special Interest Group in 2012 (see Keith et al. 2012), the second annual meeting of the group took place at the University of Sheffield in July The main themes were the ‘big data’ ap- proach to testing general theory in macroecology, the role of citizen science, and the drafting of a ‘manifesto for macroecology’. There was an overt focus on the current limitations of macroecology, centred on a set of five ‘provocations’ that were put forward early on and returned to repeatedly. These were statements (designed to provoke): (1) that macroecology is now limited by theory, not data availability; (2) that we cannot study natural systems without consideration of human influ- ences; (3) that meaningful predictions of ecosys- tem-level responses to climate change cannot be generated through modelling, because we can never model every interaction; (4) that functional groups, rather than species, are the meaningful units for macroecological analysis; and (5) that macroecology needs a ‘flagship project’. The meeting’s keynote speaker was Ethan White (Utah State University, USA), who focused on one poten- tial flagship: the pursuit of a unifying theory. The other talks were a mix of 5-minute presentations by delegates interspersed with a few longer con- tributions on topics related to collecting and ana- lysing large datasets. The main point emerging from the discus- sions and presentations was that, contrary to the first provocation, macroecology is still strongly limited by data availability, especially data with fine-scale coverage over large spatial extents and, ideally, through time. Citizen science frequently arose as a possible avenue for resolving the data deficit. Indeed, macroecology and citizen science inherently have much in common. Citizen macroecology Citizen science—the contribution to scientific re- search by non-specialists—has the potential to enable fine-grained data collection over large spa- tial extents and through time, beyond what would be feasible by scientists alone, given our limited time and resources (Devictor et al. 2010, Tulloch et al. 2013). We consider much of the ecological and biogeographical research undertaken as 'citizen science' to be macroecology, and argue that macroecology should harness its potential more. Done well, citizen science promotes public interest in, and awareness of, science. In turn, ac- tive public engagement can strengthen the impact of the research (Dickinson et al. 2012). The discus- sions in Sheffield identified a need for greater public engagement with macroecological re- search, suggesting that macroecologists would do well to engage with citizen science sooner rather than later. Below we outline, and then discuss in the wider context, three areas of citizen science rep- resenting a selection of the research presented at the Sheffield meeting: (i) developing citizen sci- ence projects and engaging the public; (ii) the op- portunities and challenges surrounding the use of volunteer-collected data; and (iii) digitising mu- seum collections for macroecology. Developing Citizen Science Projects Heather Sugden (University of Newcastle, UK) de- scribed a very successful ongoing citizen science project. The Big Sea Survey 1 is a project in which volunteers in the North East of England have filled a large data gap for intertidal species’ occurrences along a 150 km stretch of the local coastline. The success of this project stems in part from the flexi- 1 http://www.bigseasurvey. co.uk/, last accessed 21/01/2014 frontiers of biogeography 6.1, 2014 — © 2014 the authors; journal compilation © 2014 The International Biogeography Society