Abstract
Residents of the twenty-first century’s city are often confronted with challenges to their health and wellbeing deriving from, among others, environmental health risks. Urban actors tend to respond to risk through various innovative solutions when they are in a situation of stress or shock. An emerging practice, i.e. ‘Citizen Sensing’, shows that the citizens are increasingly both willing and capable of monitoring these risks themselves and push for a change in their governance. When non-expert citizens take advantage of technology to monitor environmental risk, two possible outcomes are conceivable. Either, the pre-existing institutional patterns for governing such risks are de-legitimized, or the two systems converge and strengthen each other. This chapter investigates two cases, the AiREAS air monitoring case (Eindhoven, the Netherlands), and the Safecast radiation monitoring case (Fukushima, Japan), the first standing as an example of multi-stakeholder cooperation involving citizens, public and private actors, the second illustrating a conflict between the citizens and the institutions. Factors particularly favorable for a successful program are: the existence of a real problem; the credibility of the Citizen Sensing initiative; its data quality and reliability; the commitment to a public good; public and media support; and—in certain instances—an initial distrustful attitude.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
Inspiration from the Vespucci Training School on “Digital Transformations in Citizen Science and Social Innovation” that the author attended, Fiesole, Italy, January 21–25, 2019. Part of the group work available at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338422628_What_factors_determine_the_success_and_failure_of_social_innovation_triggered_by_stress_or_shock. Accessed March 8, 2020.
- 2.
The web-survey and (in person and phone/Skype) interviews have been performed as part of the PhD research of the author (start date September 2017, defense date May 8, 2020). The web-survey is available on Qualtrics at https://tilburglawschool.eu.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_37MhcbbyoiU8Qg5. Ethical clearance for the data collection has been granted by Tilburg Law School (TLS-ERB #2018/01 issued on 12 June 2018).
- 3.
The web-survey and (in person and phone/Skype) interviews have been performed as part of the PhD research of the author (start date September 2017, defense date May 8, 2020). The web-survey is available on Qualtrics at https://tilburglawschool.eu.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_50e6PvHGAeEKCIB. The survey has also been translated and offered in Japanese (credit: Taisei Tatsumi). Ethical clearance for the data collection has been granted by Tilburg Law School (TLS-ERB #2018/01 issued on 12 June 2018).
- 4.
See report by ‘World Nuclear Association’ at http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/safety-and-security/safety-of-plants/fukushima-accident.aspx. Accessed September 18, 2018.
- 5.
Data and observations gathered during fieldwork on the Safecast case (Japan, April–May 2019). Ethical clearance for the fieldwork has been granted by Tilburg Law School (TLS-ERB #2018/01 issued on 12 June 2018).
- 6.
See https://blog.safecast.org/2018/09/safecast-at-soma-future-lab-2018/; https://www.amway.nl/en/. Accessed September 24, 2019.
References
Abe, Y. 2015. Measuring for What: Networked citizen science movements after the Fukushima nuclear accident. Dissertation defended at the University of Southern California.
Abe, Y. (2017). Mina no Data Site (MDS) and the culture of measurement after Fukushima. Unmediated: Politics and Communication, 1, 68–72.
Abe, Y. (2019). Making civic media in the post-Fukushima media ecology. In J. Hunsinger & A. Schrock (Eds.), Making our world: The hacker and maker movements in context. New York: Peter Lung.
Baumont, G. (2018). Nuclear crisis preparedness lessons learned from Fukushima Daiichi. In M. Bourrier & C. Bieder (Eds.), Risk communication for the future. New York: Springer.
Berti Suman, A. (2018a). The smart transition: An opportunity for a sensor-based public-health risk governance? International Review of Law, Computers & Technology, 32(2–3), 257–274. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600869.2018.1463961.
Berti Suman, A. (2018b). Challenging risk governance patterns through citizen sensing: The Schiphol Airport case. International Review of Law, Computers & Technology, 32(1), 155–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600869.2018.1429186.
Berti Suman, A. (2019). The role of information in multilateral governance of environmental health risk: Lessons from the Equatorial Asian Haze case. Special Issue on Multilateral Governance of Technological Risk, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2019.1617338.
Berti Suman, A., & Van Geenhuizen, M. (2019). Not just noise monitoring: Rethinking citizen sensing for risk-related problem-solving. Environmental Planning and Management. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2019.1598852.
Brown, A., et al. (2016). Safecast: Successful citizen-science for radiation measurement and communication after Fukushima. Journal of Radiological Protection, 36(2), S82–S101.
Close, J. P., et al. (2016). AiREAS: Sustainocracy for a healthy city. The invisible made visible phase 1. Springer Briefs on Case Studies of Sustainable Development. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26940-5.
Coleman, J. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
Corfee-Morlot, J., Cochran, I., Hallegatte, S., et al. (2011). Multilevel risk governance and urban adaptation policy. Climatic Change, 104(1), 169–197. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-010-9980-9.
Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust. London: Hamish Hamilton.
Gabrys, J., Pritchard, H., & Barratt, B. (2016). Just good enough data: Figuring data citizenships through air pollution sensing and data stories. Big Data & Society, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951716679677.
GFDRR – The Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery. (2018). Identifying success factors in crowdsourced geographic information use in government. Washington, DC: GFDRR.
Glaeser, E. L., Laibson, D. I., Scheinkman, J. A., & Soutter, C. L. (2000). Measuring trust. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 3(115), 811–846. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355300554926.
Hallow, B., Roetman, P. E. J., Walter, M., & Daniels, C. B. (2015). Citizen Science for policy development: The case of koala management in South Australia. Environmental Science & Policy, 47, 126–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2014.10.007.
Hamm, N. A. S., van Lochem, M., Hoek, G., Otjes, R. P., van der Sterren, S., & Verhoeven, H. (2016). The invisible made visible: Science and technology. In J. P. Close, et al. (Eds.), AiREAS: Sustainocracy for a healthy city. The invisible made visible phase 1. Springer Briefs on Case Studies of Sustainable Development. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26940-5.
Hemmi, A., & Graham, I. (2014). Hacker science versus closed science: Building environmental monitoring infrastructure. Information, Communication & Society, 17(7). https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2013.848918.
Making Sense Project. (2018). Citizen Sensing. A toolkit. ISBN/EAN: 978-90-828215-0. Retrieved May 10, 2019 from http://making-sense.eu/publication_categories/toolkit/
Piattoni, S. (2010). The theory of multi-level governance: Conceptual, empirical, and normative challenges. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Putnam, R. (1993). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Renn, O., & Klinke, A. (2016). Risk perception and its impacts on risk governance. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Environmental Science. Oxford University Press USA.
Renn, O., Klinke, A., & van Asselt, M. (2011). Adaptive and integrative governance on risk and uncertainty. Journal of Risk Research, 15(3), 273–292. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2011.636838.
Van Brussel, S., & Huyse, H. (2018). Citizen science on speed? Realising the triple objective of scientific rigour, policy influence and deep citizen engagement in a large-scale citizen science project on ambient air quality in Antwerp. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2018.1428183.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Berti Suman, A. (2020). Multi-Stakeholder Cooperation for Safe and Healthy Urban Environments: The Case of Citizen Sensing. In: van Montfort, C., Michels, A. (eds) Partnerships for Livable Cities. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-40060-6_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-40060-6_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-40059-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-40060-6
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)