Citizen science (CS) has been an increasingly utilized means by which scientists leverage members of the public to increase the amount of data collected and analyzed. However, the underrepresentation of individuals from certain socio-cultural groups can have consequences that can manifest in the scientific outcomes of those CS projects such as biases in the data. Additionally, this underrepresentation can potentially affect long-term viability and support of CS as a community of practice. CS programs that promote greater inclusivity would likely provide opportunities for communities to define, investigate, and address pressing issues in collaboration with professional scientists. In this paper we discuss a CS project that sought to include underrepresented communities in Baltimore, Maryland using Pandya's framework for inclusive CS. While the project met all of its scientific research goals, translating the CS for broader social outcomes in the community proved challenging. Here we highlight perspectives from local community members and research personnel about the barriers to CS engagement, challenges in translating scientific outcomes to social justice efforts, and opportunities to address these barriers in CS program development and design.

Ecology must attract and retain diverse talented people to produce innovative research and relevant solutions to 21st‐century environmental problems. Careers and culture form the foundation of scientific advancement, and substantial progress has been made over recent decades in both realms. Yet, important challenges persist in expanding career paths, inclusion of underrepresented groups, and communication with the public. The ESA Student Section organized a horizon scanning exercise to address the following goals: (1) to identify challenges that 21st‐century ecologists contend with or expect to contend with in careers and outreach to society, (2) to anticipate opportunities to help ecologists meet challenges, and (3) to identify concrete steps that could be taken by individual laboratories, institutions, and the ESA to foster progress. In spring 2016, the ESA Student Section solicited input from student members and organized a working group to assess the state of the discipline and to envision how we might cultivate a more inclusive and effective community. We identified three major challenges. First, PhDs are produced faster than academic positions become available and disconnects between academia and other sectors may keep early‐career ecologists from realizing the breadth of available positions. We propose an online jobs hub to make non‐academic sectors more accessible to ecologists. We also suggest students develop skills portfolios to prepare for non‐academic positions. Second, the composition of people who are ecologists differs from broader society, partially due to implicit biases and institutional barriers. We propose steps to reduce attrition of diversity in ecology that include countering implicit biases and creating mentorship networks. We offer steps to improve recruitment by increasing awareness of ecology among high school students and undergraduates and providing opportunities to engage in ecological research. Finally, ecology is only relevant if the public perceives it to be. We must improve science communication and begin cultivating trust. We propose that ad hoc communication by all ecologists is insufficient; translational ecologists should be hired in every department and formal training in translational ecology is necessary. We hope this paper catalyzes critical thinking and partnerships among students, professional ecologists, and the ESA to ensure the future of ecology is vibrant.

Effective communication of science to the general public is important for numerous reasons, including support for policy, funding, informed public decision making, among others. Prior research has found that scientists participating in public policy and public communication must frame their communication efforts in order to connect with audiences. A frame is the mechanism that individuals use to understand and interpret the world around them. Framing can encourage specific interpretations and reference points for a particular issue or event; especially when meaning is negotiated between the media and public audiences. In this study, we looked at the effect of framing within an environmental conservation context. To do this we had survey respondents rank common issues, among them being environmental conservation, from most important to least important for the government to address. We framed environmental conservation using three synonymous terms (environmental security, ecosystem services, and environmental quality) to assess whether there was an effect on rankings dependent on how we framed environmental conservation. We also investigated the effect of individuals’ personality characteristics (identity frame) on those environmental conservation rankings. We found that individuals who self-identified as environmentalist were positively associated with ranking highly (most important) environmental conservation when it was framed as either environmental quality or ecosystem services, but not when it was framed as environmental security. Conversely, those individuals who did not rank themselves highly as self-identified environmentalists were positively associated with environmental conservation when it was framed as environmental security. This research suggests that framing audience specific messages can engender audience support in hot-button issues such as environmental conservation and climate change.

Climate change education is of great interest to many in higher education. What is missing, however, is a sense of how students view climate change especially with respect to specific impacts such as changes to food systems. We designed a survey, which focused on climate change, food systems, and GMOs. We administered this survey in a large introductory undergraduate environmental science class and compared responses to demographic information. We found that students were knowledgeable in some areas more than others; especially when considering climate change drivers and mitigating factors. We also found that students were largely concerned about climate change impacts and wanted to understand the socio-environmental solutions that might help to mitigate potential impact. These same students, however, seemed optimistic that solutions could be found and implemented. Finally, while little demographic trends emerged, students who were more knowledgeable in one area (e.g., GMOS) tended to be knowledgeable in other areas.