Citizen science practitioners often find that public authorities operate according to different timelines, expectations, and decision-making structures than community-based projects. Communities and public authorities may share interests in participation, relevance, and evidence quality, although the emphasis placed on particular considerations may differ depending on roles, responsibilities, and decision-making contexts. Public authorities may additionally require clarity around governance arrangements, implementation feasibility, and alignment with policy priorities (Turrini et al., 2018; Göbel et al., 2019).

Practitioners may find it useful to reflect on how communication can be adapted for different audiences while remaining consistent with project values and realities. This does not mean overstating impact or simplifying uncertainty, but rather presenting information in ways that are relevant, credible, and actionable for institutional audiences.

When engaging public authorities, practitioners may find it helpful to communicate:

• why the issue matters locally;

• what evidence has been generated;

• how communities have participated;

• what practical implications or opportunities exist;

• where limitations and uncertainties remain.

In many cases, sustained relationships and repeated engagement matter more than one-off presentations or reports.

Click here to go to the next page