Integrated, Coordinated, Open, and Networked (ICON) Scientific and Societal Relevance

This article is composed of three independent commentaries about the state and future of Integrated, Coordinated, Open, and Networked (ICON) principles in the Science and Society section of the American Geophysical Union (Goldman et al., 2022, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021EA002099). The ICON approach pioneers a new way of doing science that Integrates physical, chemical, biological, or social attributes across scales, Coordinates with consistent protocols and methods to enable transferability, is Open through the research lifecycle with findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable principles, and ensures mutual benefit to Network across a broad range of stakeholders. Scientific discoveries, rapid scientific and technological advancements, and solutions improve our ability to face challenges and benefit society. Without innovative approaches and integrity, we cannot solve the challenges of the 21st century, such as educational, agricultural, and health equity as well as climate change and environmental sustainability. Many societal challenges require evolved frameworks and measures to address complex problems. Here, we present three independent commentaries that discuss the connection of science to three broad areas of society and present challenges and untapped opportunities in these areas. The broad areas are Citizen Science, Collaboration across Natural Sciences and Social Sciences, and Education Policy which embody the ICON processes that can create a better understanding of the role of science in society and sustainable development. The ICON processes described in these broad areas offer universal lessons and can be adapted to other areas of impact in society.

It is important to note that although they are not the only areas of science and society that are relevant to ICON principles, they offer a starting point for exploration and consideration. This article belongs to a collection of structured commentaries  spanning geosciences on the state and future of ICON science.

Citizen Science
While there is no consensus on a single definition of citizen science (Fan & Chen, 2019;Kullenberg & Kasperowski, 2016), in this article we define citizen science as the participation of non-scientists community volunteers in scientific research. The field of Science and Society seeks to implement this strategy because citizen science is an opportunity to incorporate the community into scientific research directly and can be profoundly successful in bridging the gap between the two, ultimately leading to the engagement of a broader range of stakeholders and coproduction of knowledge that links science to societal needs. However, this only works if it is done in a meaningful way. To have a truly successful project that includes citizen science, the volunteers should be involved in all the stages of the research, from the planning phase to the discussion of the results, as this is more likely to include aspects that are important to the community and thus lead to more engaged volunteers (Pandya, 2012;Starkey et al., 2017).

Integration
Currently, the utilization of citizen science in various disciplines is not well defined, and each discipline has its own approach, creating difficulties in integrating the two. Some domains of science, like Natural resources Encourage network of partnerships between minority-serving and historically-advantaged institutions and conservation, have many studies with enormous scope in citizen science to inform research, while other disciplines, such as engineering and astronomy, may require observations and resources that involve complex protocols related to the safety and skill in operation of the instrument. Starkey et al. (2017) showed value in using the local network of community-based observations collected alongside traditional observations over spatial and temporal scales relevant to the hydrological modeling process. De Coster et al. (2015) showed the usefulness of volunteer data collection to study the underlying mechanism of the House Sparrow decline in Flanders, Belgium, and raise public awareness of the natural environment. The field of Science and Society can therefore leverage this type of integration to enable connections between different sections of society to advance scientific research and influence policy decisions.

Coordination
Scientists are generally not trained in incorporating citizen science effectively (Buytaert et al., 2014). This divide can be seen even more clearly in social science and humanities, where there are no standardized procedures to incorporate citizens into the research (Albert et al., 2021;Heinisch et al., 2021). The lack of coordination presents an opportunity for professional organizations across disciplines to define what characterizes citizen science, develop protocols for implementing it in research, and provide opportunities for training (Lorke et al., 2019). Access to hybrid training platforms, including online citizen science, in the formal and informal environment plays an important role in providing training opportunities across disciplines for a new model of doing science which can ultimately enable the coproduction of knowledge by breaking down the barriers of accessibility to research and acceptability of citizen science.

Open Access
Open access to the entire research process, including regular meetings to share data, project updates, and to solicit feedback and continuing access to data from an appropriate repository after the project's conclusion, ensures a complete understanding of the project. Without open access, participants can be left wondering what they volunteered for and how the research will affect their lives or improve their environment. The researchers gain knowledge from the community, and increased research transparency builds a better rapport between researchers and community volunteers (Bela et al., 2016).

Figure 1.
A framework of three broad areas that represent science and society and how they embody Integrated, Coordinated, Open, and Networked principles in the cross-disciplinary initiatives and the people-centric approach to foster science and improve the connections between science and society.

Network
The coproduction of society and science knowledge base builds trust in scientific studies and research results (Buytaert et al., 2014). Proper communication, increased access, and equitable opportunity for participation, and consideration of direct and indirect costs to participants during the design phase, even if these seem minimal to the researchers, may remove barriers to community volunteering and involving multiple stakeholders in the scientific research and policymaking (Pandya, 2012;Weeser et al., 2018). Ultimately, a network of stakeholders can generate a knowledgeable contribution to solve the complex reality that may affect the livelihood of the community.

Collaborations Across Natural and Social Sciences
The field of Science and Society seeks to facilitate and enable collaborations between natural and social sciences. Social sciences offer inherent opportunities in scientific research and policymaking to solve critical societal challenges. The paradigmatic orientation that natural sciences are the key to protecting nature from human influences lacks the leverage of social sciences to solve our most complex problems such as the most complex coupled socio-environmental problems exacerbated by climate change. Social sciences tend to be viewed as a discipline that only provides outreach and education to interdisciplinary or transdisciplinary research rather than a synergistic piece to advance our understanding of complex socio-environmental problems. This can ultimately impact the research quality, such as the ethics protocols, sampling, research designs, methodologies, and insufficient data analysis associated with driving research questions.

Integration
There are several challenges in fully embracing the integration of social sciences with natural science research to address our most pressing environmental problems. The primary challenge is the lack of a unifying framework for understanding the reciprocal nature of human-environmental interactions. Ostrom's social-ecological systems framework is one of many frameworks that bridge the divide between social and environmental systems using a governance lens to understand human-environmental relationships (McGinnis & Ostrom, 2014;Ostrom, 2007Ostrom, , 2009). Additionally, the integration is limited due to the differences in lexicons between sciences, which create barriers to communication. Natural scientists may also not weigh the qualitative data that focuses on experience and thoughts as heavily as they do quantitative data. The ICON approach can provide a framework for interdisciplinary studies that includes the strengths of respective disciplines and a broader scope of contribution to research projects.

Coordination
Social scientists are not well-connected with natural scientists in the research process. Social science is often ad-hoc to a research grant instead of an integral piece used to advance solving coupled socio-environmental challenges. Even when social science is utilized in the research process, the expertise and experiences of social science professionals are often not fully leveraged to solve critical problems and are mainly treated as a parallel effort. The World Climate Research Program is one example that contributes to understanding the multi-scale dynamic interactions between natural and social systems and engages productively through these partnerships to promote science education and policymaking (https://www.wcrp-climate.org/about-wcrp/wcrp-overview). Ultimately, leveraging ICON principles to enable coordinated efforts to study interactions between nature and human society, such as climate impact assessment in global change research programs, break down methodological and disciplinary gaps in tackling complex socio-environmental problems (Mooney et al., 2013).

Open
Differences in data types and methodologies often limit the open use of data across natural and social science. The SESMAD project is one example that bridges case study examples of complex human-environmental interactions (SESMAD, 2014). Some other examples would be the National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center (https://www.sesync.org) and the National Science Foundation's Dynamics of Integrated Socio-Environmental System program. One limitation to continuing these efforts is the lack of a widely used data platform for sharing qualitative social sciences datasets that address contextual relevance, privacy, and ethical concerns. The ICON principles can enable successful open dissemination of qualitative data and the creation of new scientific models that excludes personally identifiable information, respects privacy, and acknowledge credits. An open collaborative framework can bridge the divide among the disciplines to address the most pressing problems of our times.

Network
Networking in research requires significant time, patience, and energy to generate data, collect samples, and contribute to the other phases of the research lifecycle. Engaging different stakeholders in data within the collaborative efforts also require authorship ethics and extensive communication across groups to build trust and rapport. Sometimes these efforts limit the rapid generation of mutually beneficial research that benefits the interconnected communities. Additionally, when the study is completed, the challenge of investing significant time and resources to publish results remains. Further, it can be challenging to obtain peer-review congruent with the topic and diverse methodologies used within integrated social and natural science research. The field of Science and Society believes that collaborative networking can help bridge some of these gaps. Several collaborative networks (CN), such as Virtual Organization, have been studied by different disciplines, including computer science, engineering, economy, etc., to reach scientific excellence that leverages the knowledge base of CN (Camarinha-Matos & Afsarmanesh, 2005). Professional societies also have an essential role in launching journals or publishing platforms that can address the challenge of seeking critical peer-review and timely publication of collaborative research works.

Education Policy
The field of Science and Society seeks discussion and collaboration with multiple stakeholders for the sustainable development of scientific, social, ethical, and educational attributes that connects science and society. An effective education policy requires commitment from all stakeholders-including federal agencies, state and local governments, academia, and the private and public sector to create an equitable, inclusive, and welcoming path for all sections of society.

Integration
It is critically important that our education goals and policies reflect on the various Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) education indicators and the factors that have led to that performance in STEM skill sets and workforce (OECD, 2016(OECD, , 2018(OECD, , 2021National Science Board andNational Science Foundation, 2020, 2022). Technology integration is transforming the educational landscape in the 21st century (Groff, 2013). Today, our schools and educational enterprises need a framework of policies and collaborations that prioritizes easy access to digital infrastructure to all, including remote sections of society, and integrate the science learning approach across the spatial and temporal scales. The ICON principles support the integration of science innovations and the latest technological advancements, such as artificial intelligence and data science, into educational resources and interaction with students to meet the needs of both theoretical and experimental science education (Murphy, 2019;Weitekamp et al., 2020).

Coordination
We need to build science innovation that is coordinated and generates interoperable data across disciplines to understand complex problems and sustainable solutions. Society benefits from a stronger education system and mutually beneficial relationships between universities and industry in transferring knowledge and getting a skilled workforce addressing some of the challenging issues of our time (Salleh & Omar, 2013). We can benefit from the strengthened and collaborative partnership between technological enterprises and the education sector to invest in training schools and educational technology, better science labs at our educational institutions, and community engagement in learning, education, and advocacy (Dodgson, 1993;Education Technology Market Size, Share & Trends Analysis Report, 2022). Currently, the data comparisons and trends of STEM indicators used by local, state, and federal policymakers, businesses, universities, and many others to inform their decisions indicate the under-representation of minorities and women in STEM (National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, 2021; National Science Board and National Science Foundation, 2020, 2022; U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2019). In scientific research and planning, it is essential to welcome and engage minority groups, indigenous populations, and women in STEM disciplines. Universities and colleges can help engage 21st-century students in science by coordinating support for innovative educational platforms, diversity, equity, inclusion, and a more robust pipeline to STEM-related jobs that benefit society.

Open
The open science approach creates 21st-century science and global policies that help develop new initiatives and equip the scientific community with tools to bring change. The ICON open science philosophy based on the FAIR guiding principles foster inclusion, equity, access, and sharing across the disciplines (Wilkinson et al., 2016).
Some currently existing open-source initiatives, such as NumFOCUS and GitHub, promote open practices in research, education, data, and codes and provide the necessary tools and resources to solve complex problems.
The principles in open science must be guided by the people-centric governance models in good data management and preservation that add transparency and inclusion throughout the research life cycle. We also need a cultural shift from producing science hidden behind the paywalls to sharing science with open access that will shift the pace of scientific progress. The transparent, accountable, and reproducible science framework can help save billions of dollars by accelerating discovery communication.

Network
The ICON principles consider "Networked" in the context of shared efforts to create mutually beneficial research for the scientific and stakeholder community. For an educational policy, it has become essential to develop educational partnerships and networks for the progress and prosperity of nations as the global economy brings nations closer together. We can learn from each other's education model or science policies as a nation in this interconnected global world. The United States 2-year community college model is one example that offers untapped opportunities to provide affordable access to workforce education and a bridge to higher education degree programs, and grants certifications and diplomas. Community colleges offer a forum for the impactful use of our resources as they address the educational needs of many students of all ages, education levels, and socio-economic backgrounds (https://achievingthedream.org/our-work/). Unfortunately, community college education lacks adequate support to conduct scientific research and help raise public science knowledge. One solution to boost the impact of science in our society would be a network of partnerships between minority-serving institutions (MSI) and historically-advantaged institutions. The partnerships can involve hosting STEM seminars presented by early-career scientists at community colleges or MSI. The undergraduate summer student internships for community college or MSI students mentored and sponsored by scientists or faculty at progressive and historically-advantaged institutions hold an essential aspect of science-encouraging beginning scientists to be inspired by and learn from the best in the field.

Conclusion and Outlook of Science and Society
Science contributes to the advancement of society while societal needs drive science priorities; however, there are often disconnects between the two. A framework like ICON can help bridge these gaps. Integration of a wide range of inputs, Coordination with a variety of stakeholders and developers, an Open research framework fostering inclusiveness and transparency, and a tightly knit Network that engages all involved in the research will result in a more seamless integration of science and society, paving the way for effective and efficient solutions of several critical challenges we are facing today. The ICON principles enhance our understanding of scientific principles, social values, ethical aspects, and how science influence and transform our lives for the better. Citizen science, collaborations across natural and social sciences, and education policy are three components of science and society that offer ideas that can be applied to other topics and areas for more growth and development.