The reliability of citizen science in plan formulation: evidence from Askar, the Kingdom of Bahrain

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to address the following questions: To what extent is residents’ perception of the state of their environment consistent with findings based on samples from the field? Are the locals aware of the drivers and pressures that led to the present state of the environment? Are they aware of the impacts? If so, are they able to recommend responses? Design/methodology/approach To examine the extent to depend on citizens’ opinion in decision-making, the researcher juxtaposed results from data gathered and analysed from the field assessing the quality of the marine environment, coastal zone and levels of both noise and air pollution. The researcher collected datum from focus group meetings, questionnaire and review of newspapers and magazines. The researcher used Qualitative Data Analysis QDA software to analyse qualitative data. Findings The results of the survey and the focus group meetings indicated that the citizens’ perceptions are, to some extent, in line with the results that the Arabian Gulf University (AGU) team concluded from the field survey. Citizens do not feel the urgency of conserving water because the government has been meeting growing demand by increasing the supply of water. The participants identified drivers and pressures that led to the present state of the environment. They were not able to differentiate between the state of the environment and the impacts of environmental degradation. Originality/value Citizens’ opinion is a valuable tool as an input at the various stages of plan formulation. Citizens’ views can bring an issue to experts’ attention and shed light on the qualitative aspect, such as meaning or value, that the quantitative data fail to reveal. However, the planning process must not depend entirely on citizen’s views. Experts must combine citizens’ opinions with scientific facts that result from in situ monitoring and laboratory analysis.