Survey on economic assessment of the improvement of the quality of environment: the case of the fight against floods in Cotonou (Benin Living Standard Survey)

This study aims to analyze households' attitude toward flood risk in Cotonou in the sense to identify whether they are willing or not to leave the flood-prone zones. Moreover, the attitudes toward the management of wastes and dirty water are analyzed. The data used in this study were obtained from two sources: the survey implemented during March 2011 on one hundred and fifty randomly selected households living in flood-prone areas of Cotonou, and Benin Living Standard Survey of 2006 (Part relative to Cotonou on 1,586 households). Moreover, climate data were used in this study. Multinomial probability model is used for the econometric analysis of the attitude toward flood risk. While the attitudes toward the management of wastes and dirty water are analyzed through a simple logit. The results show that 55.3% of households agreed to go elsewhere while 44.7% refused [we are better-off here (10.67%), due to the proximity of the activities (19.33), the best way is to build infrastructures that will protect against flood and family house (14.67%)]. The authorities have to rethink an alternative policy to what they have been doing such as building socio-economic houses outside Cotonou and propose to the households that are living the areas prone to inundation. Moreover, access to formal education has to be reinforced.

The science of citizen science

Biodiversity citizen science projects are growing in number, size, and scope, and are gaining recognition as valuable data sources that build public engagement. Yet publication rates indicate that citizen science is still infrequently used as a primary tool for conservation research and the causes of this apparent disconnect have not been quantitatively evaluated. To uncover the barriers to the use of citizen science as a research tool, we surveyed professional biodiversity scientists (n = 423) and citizen science project managers (n = 125). We conducted three analyses using non-parametric recursive modeling (random forest), using questions that addressed: scientists' perceptions and preferences regarding citizen science, scientists' requirements for their own data, and the actual practices of citizen science projects. For all three analyses we identified the most important factors that influence the probability of publication using citizen science data. Four general barriers emerged: a narrow awareness among scientists of citizen science projects that match their needs; the fact that not all biodiversity science is well-suited for citizen science; inconsistency in data quality across citizen science projects; and bias among scientists for certain data sources (institutions and ages/education levels of data collectors). Notably, we find limited evidence to suggest a relationship between citizen science projects that satisfy scientists' biases and data quality or probability of publication. These results illuminate the need for greater visibility of citizen science practices with respect to the requirements of biodiversity science and show that addressing bias among scientists could improve application of citizen science in conservation.