Xiao, N; Xia, B; Buys, L; Chen, Q and Volz, K (2025) A citespace-assisted overview of citizen science research in the built environment field. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 32(13), pp. 336-361. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
This study aims to provide an overview of how Citizen Science (CS) has been applied in the Built Environment (BE) field, highlighting research trends, participation levels, challenges, and future opportunities. A total of 107 relevant articles were identified from Taylor & Francis Online, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. A combination of bibliometric analysis (using CiteSpace software) and Content Analysis was conducted to reveal a broad picture of the research landscape. Findings The study found that 107 articles were published across 52 journals, primarily in urban planning and health-related domains. The United States and the United Kingdom lead global CS collaboration, while many regions remain underrepresented. CS projects in BE are typically small-scale (=50 participants), with contributory CS being the most common (45.79%). The CS research focuses on enhancing community engagement, addressing health-related BE issues, and improving urban design. However, research gaps remain in mental well-being, social networks, and policy support. Key challenges include sustaining long-term engagement, addressing technical skill gaps, ensuring data quality, and improving demographic representativeness. The review is limited to English-language articles and focuses on formal CS projects. Future research could expand to include more diverse databases, apply advanced computational methods like NLP, and conduct comparative analyses across regions and participation models. This review systematically maps the landscape of CS research in the BE field, clarifies citizen participation levels, highlights regional disparities, and proposes actionable directions for improving research design, digital tool integration, and policy mechanisms that can support the formal inclusion of CS research in urban planning and decision-making processes.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | bibliometric analysis; built environment; citizen science; research hotspots; research themes |
| Index terms: | disparity, built environment, research design, decision-making process, community engagement, database, urban planning, collaboration, citizen participation, integration, well-being, content analysis, social network, science, United Kingdom, journal, bibliometric analysis, comparative analysis, United States, maps, technical skill, urban design |
| Subjects: | professional development, management, infrastructure and transport systems, sociology, decision analysis, organizational analysis, data management, research evaluation and metrics, community and social dimensions, mental health and wellbeing, research design and methodology, participation process, data analysis and analytics, urban design, Geography, spatial and geospatial analysis, social justice, specialized education, research dissemination and communication, urban planning |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Digital Applications, Urban Studies, Design Practice, Governance, Stakeholder Management, Information Management, Research Practice, Education, Ethics, Risk Management, Geographical Context, Health and Safety |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here