Logging truck drivers spend countless hours on the road, travelling deep into remote forests. They often see wildlife, yet no one asks them about it \u2014 because spotting animals isn\u2019t part of their job. Our programmes change that, allowing anyone with an interest in tropical wildlife to contribute their observations.<\/p>\n Since then, I have relied heavily on community-sourced information to monitor wildlife populations within company concessions and ensure that emerging threats are quickly detected and addressed.<\/p>\n I began by creating the first orangutan distribution maps<\/a> in the 1990s through village interviews, later expanding the approach to 700 villages in 2008 to better understand local perceptions of forests and wildlife.<\/a><\/p>\n From 2019 to 2025, I ran an oil-palm-plantation\u2013based citizen-science pilot<\/a> that generated nearly 190,000 wildlife records from 4,000 workers.<\/p>\n These experiences show that some of the most valuable ecological knowledge rests with the people who live closest to the forest \u2014 not the scientists who visit only once a year.<\/p>\n How does citizen science work?<\/p>\n Building on that insight, Emily (who co-wrote this article with me) and I introduced a new version of the model for broader study<\/a> in four villages in the Kapuas Hulu district of West Kalimantan. There, the local community manages the forest under a social forestry scheme.<\/p>\n We worked directly with them. Anyone with a smartphone can record wildlife sightings using our simple mobile app named Kehatiku (which in Indonesian means both \u201cto my heart\u201d and \u201cmy biodiversity\u201d). Observations \u2014 from orangutan photos to gibbon audio clips \u2014 are then uploaded with GPS coordinates.<\/p>\n Each record then goes through a multi-stage verification process: an AI-assisted screen check for duplicate images and location mismatches, followed by review from our team of verifiers and species experts, who cross-reference field guides.<\/p>\n Once a record is verified, we issue a payment to the observer \u2014 ranging from around US$0.60 for a bird-call recording to about US$6 for a clear photo or video of a wild orangutan.<\/p>\n Since the citizen science program launched in 2023<\/a>, 567 participants have recorded more than 58,000 wildlife observations from community forests \u2014 at roughly one-twentieth the cost of conventional surveys. The program creates both income and incentives to protect wildlife and their habitats.<\/p>\n What the data reveal?<\/p>\n So far, the data show unexpectedly high numbers of orangutans, gibbons, and many other species in these community forests, including several of global conservation concern.<\/p>\n The most frequently reported wildlife in the four Kapuas Hulu villages includes orangutans (with 9,766 nest records), white-rumped shamas, sun bear signs, long-tailed macaques, and stingless bees.<\/p>\n Direct sightings of Bornean orangutans and regular recordings of gibbon calls confirm that these species persist outside protected areas \u2014 even within agricultural landscapes bordering the villages.<\/p>\n This information is invaluable to understand how threatened mammals survive in mixed-use forests, where formal surveys are rare or expensive. We are currently doing critical testing as to whether the data are strong enough to generate statistically robust occupancy estimates \u2014 showing how wildlife species use village forest areas.<\/p>\n For plantations, we can already translate these findings into a living index<\/a>, an important tool for developing data-driven conservation policies and interventions.<\/p>\n Wildlife observations recorded by local community members using their own smartphones. Clockwise from top left: Bornean orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus), Harlequin tree frog (Rhacophorus pardalis), Blyth\u2019s frogmouth (Batrachostomus affinis), and Horsfield\u2019s tarsier (Cephalopachus bancanus). Shifting behaviour and social impact<\/p>\n In early 2025, we also collaborated with a local partner to conduct social baseline surveys to assess the program\u2019s socioeconomic impact.<\/p>\n Initial survey results suggest a shift in perception is already underway. More than 70% of residents across the four pilot villages had heard of the initiative, and nearly two-thirds said they are interested in joining.<\/p>\n About a third already earn income from verified wildlife observations \u2014 typically US$30 to US$180 every three months, a meaningful supplement in communities where most households live on less than US$120 per month.<\/p>\n More importantly, attitudes toward wildlife are shifting. Where songbirds were once trapped and sold to traders, many villagers now choose to leave them in the forest \u2014 realising it\u2019s more profitable to record the birds\u2019 presence and get paid for it.<\/p>\n A model for inclusive, low-cost monitoring<\/p>\n Financial incentives have clearly boosted engagement. Observation rates rose from about 17 per village per month during the voluntary phase to more than 6,000 per month once payments were introduced.<\/p>\n At an average cost of just US$0.85 per observation, this approach is far cheaper than traditional transect or camera-trap surveys, which can cost US$300 per camera<\/a> or more.<\/a><\/p>\n Not only does it reduce logistical costs, but relying on local observers also makes it possible to cover vast, remote areas.<\/p>\n And unlike short-term research projects, this one runs year-round \u2014 because the motivation, and the data, come from the community itself.<\/p>\n The programme also strengthens local governance. Regular meetings and WhatsApp groups allow residents to discuss verification results, propose rule changes, and collectively decide how to manage conflicts over shared rewards. We also close the information loop by translating wildlife observations into insights communities can use to guide their decisions.<\/p>\n These interactions, along with transparent payment records, are boosting accountability and participation in broader village decision-making. This transparency has helped build strong trust within the community.<\/p>\n On one occasion, when a participant submitted an internet-sourced photo as fake evidence, the peers insisted on removing them from the project \u2014 a proof that data integrity now matters at the community level.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/file-20251114-56-esy11x.jpeg\")
<\/a><\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/file-20251115-56-3pfemi.png\")
<\/a><\/p>\n
\n Author provided (no reuse)<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/file-20251114-56-xbmopf.png\")
<\/a><\/p>\n