{"id":147267,"date":"2016-05-09T13:07:06","date_gmt":"2016-05-09T12:07:06","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.madrimasd.org\/blogs\/universo\/?p=147267"},"modified":"2016-05-09T13:07:06","modified_gmt":"2016-05-09T12:07:06","slug":"investigacion-participativa-y-mapeo-de-suelos","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.madrimasd.org\/blogs\/universo\/2016\/05\/09\/147267","title":{"rendered":"Investigaci\u00f3n participativa y mapeo de suelos"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"investigacion-participativa-mapa-suelos\"\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Investigaci\u00f3n participativa en la Ciencia del Suelo: Fuente: CGIAR<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n

En la \u00a0IUSS Alert 30 de agosto de 2015 se comentaba como, en una breve rese\u00f1a de Nature, un edaf\u00f3logo defend\u00eda en un art\u00edculo de Geoderma el valor de la denominada<\/strong> <\/span><\/span>investigaci\u00f3n participativa<\/span><\/a> (l\u00e9ase aquella que se elabora con la participaci\u00f3n ciudadana) en materia de cartograf\u00eda de suelos<\/span><\/strong>. Y nadie lo duda. Lo que extra\u00f1a<\/strong> <\/span>en este caso es que se mencione como una idea novedosa, cuando ya se ha demostrado desde hace d\u00e9cadas, tanto por expertos de la FAO<\/span><\/strong> (por ejemplos, algunas disertaciones que escuche\u00a0personalmente a <\/span>Seppe Deckers<\/span><\/a>), como por<\/span><\/strong> <\/span>los estudiosos de la etnoedafolog\u00eda<\/span><\/a>\u00a0de los que ya he hablado en diferentes ocasiones. Ya os lo hemos informado en\u00a0numerosas ocasiones, por lo que no incidiremos en el tema. Lamentablemente, los amigos del establishment logran publicar lo obvio y consabido como novedad, ya que los editores as\u00ed se lo permiten<\/strong><\/span>, por cuanto un documento as\u00ed\u00a0 a la mayor\u00eda de nosotros nos los rechazar\u00edan, alegando \u201ccualquier argumento que esgriman los adl\u00e1teres que hacen de revisores\u201d. Y este es el caso que os mostramos hoy. Nature<\/strong><\/span> cita un estudio publicado en Geoderma<\/strong><\/span> \u00a0por Rossiter, (ITC, Holanda), que no es precisamente un experto en el tema, ni mucho menos. Ya tuvimos una agria controversia con este colega en algunos post hace a\u00f1os, cuyos enlaces os dejo al final de este. Se ha demostrado que, con la ayuda de los campesinos, los expertos logran mejorar, no algo, sino mucho, la calidad de los mapas de suelos que actualmente realizamos los expertos<\/span><\/strong>. Tambi\u00e9n vimos como la clasificaci\u00f3n Maya de los suelos en zonas de Karst era considerada m\u00e1s apropiada y precisa que las taxonom\u00edas modernas de la FAO.\u00a0Por lo tanto, Rossiter no dijo nada nuevo (de hecho aqu\u00ed hemos defendido la participaci\u00f3n ciudadana en la materia antes que \u00e9l, como otros colegas), nada digno de resaltar que no fuera archiconocido. <\/span>En ciencias del suelo la investigaci\u00f3n participativa se lleva realizando d\u00e9cadas antes de que se acu\u00f1ara el t\u00e9rmino<\/span><\/a>. Un ejemplo paradigm\u00e1tico nos lo ofreci\u00f3 <\/span>Antonio Bello<\/span><\/a> en sus estudios agroecol\u00f3gicos. La novedad en este caso deviene que una revista como Nature,<\/strong><\/span> escoja un tema<\/span> tan poco valorado por esa editorial\u00a0como<\/span> lo es el de la\u00a0cartograf\u00eda de suelos con vistas a ensalzar el valor de este tipo de ciencia con la participaci\u00f3n de los usuarios\/ciudadanos\/aficionados<\/span><\/strong>. Quiz\u00e1s la raz\u00f3n resida en que durante ese a\u00f1os nos encontr\u00e1bamos\u00a0en el <\/span>A\u00f1o Internacional de los Suelos<\/span><\/a>. Sea como sea, se trata de una referencia bienvenida, aunque me temo que se olvide fugazmente, o que despi<\/span>erte alguna atenci\u00f3n. En cualquier caso avala la tesis ampliamente defendida en este blog y por otros colegas que\u00a0<\/span><\/strong>con toda seguridad abundaron en este asunto mucho antes de que al Dr. Rossiter se le pasara por la cabeza. No utilizo la figura del investigador mentado para atizarle personalmente, ya que este tipo de papers<\/em>, en la actualidad, son de moneda com\u00fan en todos los \u00e1mbitos de la ciencia. Simplemente es lo que hay. Cuando alguien lanza un vocablo con gancho medi\u00e1tico, \u00a0la prensa y muchos investigadores parecen tomarlo como el punto cero<\/strong> <\/span>de una nueva disciplina o l\u00ednea de investigaci\u00f3n. Empero la realidad es muy distinta (el oportunismo medi\u00e1tico distorsiona pues la historia de la ciencia<\/span><\/strong>). Sin embargo, si sirve de algo para concienciar a la ciudadan\u00eda sobre la vital importancia del recurso suelo.\u00a0Mir\u00e9moslo pues por su lado positivo, ya que el negativo ah\u00ed queda. Os dejo abajo el material para que pod\u00e9is abundar en esta noticia<\/strong><\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n

Juan Jos\u00e9 Ib\u00e1\u00f1ez \u00a0<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Rise of the citizen scientist<\/span><\/strong><\/a> (Nature)<\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

From the oceans to the soil, technology is changing the part that amateurs can play in research. But this greater involvement raises concerns that must be addressed.<\/span><\/p>\n

Science is not just for scientists these days. Going on a scuba-diving holiday this summer? Share the temperature data from your dive computer with researchers eager to plug holes in sparse records for inshore areas. Nervous about possible pollution from a nearby fracking project<\/strong>? Ease your concerns by helping to collect and analyse air samples as part of a monitoring project. Stuck at home as the rain pours down? Log on to the Internet and spend a couple of hours folding proteins and RNA to help university scientists work out how biology does it.<\/span><\/p>\n

Citizen science has come a long way from the first distributed-computing projects that<\/span><\/strong> hoovered up spare processing power on home computers to perform calculations or search for alien signals. And it has progressed further still since the earliest <\/span>public surveys of wildlife<\/strong>: it was way back in 1900 that the Audubon Society persuaded Americans to exchange their Christmas tradition of shooting birds for a more productive effort to count them instead.<\/span><\/p>\n

Some professional scientists are sniffy about the role of amateurs, but as an increasing number of academic papers makes clear, the results can be valuable and can help both to generate data and to inform policy<\/strong>.<\/span><\/p>\n

A paper in Geoderma <\/em>entitled \u2018Can citizen science assist digital soil mapping?<\/strong>\u2019 (<\/span>D.\u00a0G.\u00a0Rossiter et\u00a0al. Geoderma<\/em> 259\u2013260,<\/strong> 71\u201380; 2015<\/a>) makes the case that, yes, non-specialists can help expert soil scientists to track quality, properties and types of soil. It goes further: these amateur soil researchers should be recruited to help with existing and future national surveys<\/strong>. Civil engineers and construction workers routinely view the subsoil, and digging foundations for buildings and trenches for pipelines offers a unique look at the spatial variability of different layers. An army of geocachers \u2014 twenty-first-century treasure hunters \u2014 visit harsh terrain and difficult-to-access places, and could collect soil data. And they routinely use satellite navigation to record their journeys<\/strong>.<\/span><\/p>\n

Technology can make scientists of us all. Data churned out by the rapid spread of consumer gadgets equipped with satellite navigation, cameras and a suite of other sensors, and the ease of sharing the results digitally, are driving the boom in citizen science. Volunteers can already identify whale songs from recordings, report litter and invasive species<\/strong>, and send in the skeletons of fish they have caught and consumed. But there is more to being a scientist, of course, than collecting and sharing data \u2014 especially if the results are to be used to help determine policy.<\/span><\/p>\n

Critics have raised concerns about data quality<\/strong>, and some studies do find that volunteers are less able to identify plant species than are academics and land managers. And there are issues around how to reward and recognize the contribution of volunteers, and around ensuring that data are shared or kept confidential as appropriate. But these problems seem relatively simple to address \u2014 not least because they reflect points \u2014 from authorship to data quality and access \u2014 that the professional scientific community is already wrestling with.<\/span><\/p>\n

More troubling, perhaps, is the potential for conflicts of interest. One reason that some citizen scientists volunteer is to advance their political objectives. Opponents of fracking, for example, might help to track possible pollution because they want to gather evidence of harmful effects. When Australian scientists asked people who had volunteered to monitor koala populations how the animals should be managed, they found that the citizen scientists had strong views on protection that did not reflect broader public opinion.<\/span><\/p>\n

Scientists and funders are right to encourage the shift from passive citizen science \u2014 number crunching \u2014 to more-active roles, including sample collection. But as increased scrutiny falls on the reliability of the work of professional scientists, full transparency about the motives and ambitions of amateurs is essential.<\/span><\/p>\n

Journal name: Nature<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Volume: 524, Pages: <\/strong>265; Date published: (20 August 2015); <\/strong><\/span>DOI: 10.1038\/524265a<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Related stories and links<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

From nature.com<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Conservation management: Citizen science is not enough on its own<\/strong><\/a>(13 May 2015); <\/span>Environment: China needs more monitoring apps<\/strong><\/a><\/strong>(22 April 2015); <\/span>Citizen science: Amateur experts<\/strong><\/a><\/strong>(10 April 2013)<\/span><\/p>\n

Alerta IUSS<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

An article in Nature reflects a paper in Geoderma entitled \u2018Can citizen science assist digital soil mapping?<\/strong>\u2019 (D. G. Rossiter et al. Geoderma 259\u2013260, 71\u201380; 2015) which makes the case that, non-specialists can help expert soil scientists to track quality, properties and types of soil<\/strong>. It goes further: these amateur soil researchers should be recruited to help with existing and future national surveys<\/strong>. Civil engineers and construction workers routinely view the subsoil, and digging foundations for buildings and trenches for pipelines offers a unique look at the spatial variability of different layers. An army of geocachers \u2014 twenty-first-century treasure hunters \u2014 visit harsh terrain and difficult-to-access places, and could collect soil data. And they routinely use satellite navigation to record their journeys. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0See full article here: <\/span>http:\/\/www.nature.com\/news\/rise-of-the-citizen-scientist-1.18192?WT.mc_id=FBK_NATURE_1508_FHEDITORIALCITIZENSCI_PORTFOLIO<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n

Algunos post de nuestras controversias con Rossiter<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Privatizando el Procom\u00fan de las Comunidades Cient\u00edficas. El Caso de la Edafolog\u00eda (Contestando a Rossiter sobre el \u201cPresunto\u201d Nuevo Mapa Digital de los suelos del Mundo)<\/a><\/p>\n

Sobre el Mapa Digital de los Suelos del Mundo: Contestando a D. G. Rossiter y A. Hartemink<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u00a0 Investigaci\u00f3n participativa en la Ciencia del Suelo: Fuente: CGIAR En la \u00a0IUSS Alert 30 de agosto de 2015 se comentaba como, en una breve rese\u00f1a de Nature, un edaf\u00f3logo defend\u00eda en un art\u00edculo de Geoderma el valor de la denominada investigaci\u00f3n participativa (l\u00e9ase aquella que se elabora con la participaci\u00f3n ciudadana) en materia de cartograf\u00eda de suelos. Y nadie lo duda. Lo que extra\u00f1a en este caso es que se mencione como una idea novedosa, cuando ya se ha demostrado desde hace d\u00e9cadas, tanto por expertos de la FAO (por ejemplos, algunas disertaciones que escuche\u00a0personalmente a Seppe Deckers), como\u2026<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":26,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"ngg_post_thumbnail":0},"categories":[603,591,599,597,604,587,601],"tags":[10129,46853,46775,2040,46852],"blocksy_meta":{"styles_descriptor":{"styles":{"desktop":"","tablet":"","mobile":""},"google_fonts":[],"version":4}},"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.madrimasd.org\/blogs\/universo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/147267"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.madrimasd.org\/blogs\/universo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.madrimasd.org\/blogs\/universo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.madrimasd.org\/blogs\/universo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/26"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.madrimasd.org\/blogs\/universo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=147267"}],"version-history":[{"count":8,"href":"https:\/\/www.madrimasd.org\/blogs\/universo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/147267\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":148151,"href":"https:\/\/www.madrimasd.org\/blogs\/universo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/147267\/revisions\/148151"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.madrimasd.org\/blogs\/universo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=147267"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.madrimasd.org\/blogs\/universo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=147267"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.madrimasd.org\/blogs\/universo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=147267"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}