During 2024 / 2025 two reports were carried out to help understand iNaturalistUK users and their observation records.
The findings and final reports come from a study conducted as part of the RENEW project, funded by the Natural Environment Research Council. The research was led by Emma Squire and Devmini Bandara from the RENEW team at the University of Exeter as part of their doctoral studies, in collaboration with the NBN Trust.
The two reports can be downloaded from the links below with executive summaries provided on this page to present the key findings.
iNaturalistUK Observation Records (2008-2023) Analysis Report
iNaturalistUK Survey 2024: NBN Trust Question Summaries Report
iNaturalistUK Observation Records (2008-2023) Analysis Report – Executive Summary
This report analyses 4.8 million iNaturalist observations made in the UK between 2008 and December 2023. It explores user behaviour, spatiotemporal patterns, taxonomic trends, and data quality, using additional UK datasets (land cover, population density, deprivation indices) to contextualise patterns.
1. User Activity & Engagement
Rapid Growth After 2018
- Observations and users increased sharply after iNaturalist’s global launch in 2018 and especially after iNaturalistUK launched in 2021.
- By 2023: 4.8M observations and 126,000 users.
Most Users Are Low-Activity
- Top 10% of users contribute 85% of all records
- Top 1% contribute over half (53%)
- Median user: 5 observations of 5 species
Upload Timing
- 65% uploaded on the same day as observed
- 20% within a week
- 10% uploaded a year or more later
User Retention
- Most users contribute only in their first year
- Long-term retention is low
2. Spatiotemporal Patterns
Seasonality
- Unsurprisingly, summer dominates observations every year
- Winter consistently lowest (10–20%)
- Taxon-specific patterns:
- Fungi & protozoans peak in autumn
- Birds peak in spring
Day of Week
- Clear weekend bias: more observations on Saturday & Sunday
Time of Day
- Highest percentage of observations: 8:00am – 2:00pm, peak activity 10:00am
- Very few observations overnight
Spatial Distribution
- Strong concentration of recordings in urban/suburban England, especially London, Midlands, NW England.
- Sparse data in Northern Scotland and Northern Ireland
Environmental & Social Biases
- 39% of observations come from built-up areas and gardens
- Coastal, freshwater, saltwater, mountain, heath and bog, and coniferous woodland, contribute less than 5%
- 82% of observations occur in most densely populated areas.
- Most observations from moderately deprived areas
3. Taxonomic Patterns
Which Groups Are Most Observed?
- Insects and Plants dominate both in total observations and number of unique species:
- Insects: 4,979 species
- Plants: 2,876 species
- Fungi: 1,475 species
Least Observed Groups
- Protozoans, Chromista, and some vertebrate groups have very low species counts (<500 species each).
4. Data Quality, location accuracy and Licensing
Data Quality
- 66% Research Grade (highest percentage: reptiles, amphibians, birds)
- 30% Needs ID (Arachnids, protzoans, fungi)
- 4% Casual (Notable percentage: mammals, birds)
Location accuracy
- 35% of total records indicate high precision in location reporting
5. Licensing
- 57% of total records and most research grade records fall under the CC-BY-NC licence (default license) type.
- 41% of users have not assigned any license to their records.
Key takeaways
Whilst the report should be read in full to understand the exact findings it is fair to say that:
- Participation is highly uneven – a small group of dedicated users produce most of the data.
- Observations are strongly shaped by human behaviour, not just biodiversity:
- When people are outside (summer, weekends, daytime)
- Where people live (urban areas, high population density)
- Taxonomic coverage is broad but uneven, with insects and plants dominating
- Data quality is generally high, with two-thirds of observations reaching research grade
- Long term retention is low, suggesting a huge opportunity to encourage an already engaged group of users to continue.
iNaturalistUK Survey 2024: NBN Trust Question Summaries Report – Executive summary
This study represents one of the first comprehensive efforts to explore the users of the iNaturalistUK platform, aiming to understand who the users are, how they engage with the platform, and what motivates their participation. It details the results of the analysis based on data collected through the iNaturalistUK user survey 2024.
The survey was distributed to ~47,000 registered UK users aged 18+ and resulted in 2,587 responses.
1. Socio‑demographic profile of users
Age
The sample is significantly older than the UK population:
- Over 30% are aged 65+ compared to a much smaller proportion nationally.
- Adults aged 18 – 44 are underrepresented, suggesting lower engagement among younger users
Gender
- Gender distribution is almost exactly balanced: 49% male, 49% female, 2% other. This closely mirrors UK population data.
Sexual Orientation & Marital Status
- 80% identify as heterosexual
- 52% are married, a higher proportion than the UK average
- Only 17% are single, lower than national figures
Ethnicity
- The sample is overwhelmingly White:
- 92% White English, Welsh, Scottish, Northern Irish, British or any other white background
- Representation from Asian, Black, Mixed, and other ethnic groups is very low (<5% combined).
Education
- Users are highly educated:
- 72% hold a university degree or higher (far above national levels).
- 63% do not have a professional or academic background in ecology or environmental fields, 33% do
Income & Employment
- Financial stability is high:
- 53% “living comfortably”
- 33% “coping”
- 11% financial hardship
- Employment patterns:
- 29% full‑time employed
- 35% retired or not employed
- Higher representation in part‑time, self‑employed
- Less than 5% – students, caregivers, unemployed
- Many work in:
- Professional/scientific/technical roles (17%)
- Education (16%)
- Conservation (13%)
Health & Access to Nature
- 70% report no limiting physical or mental health conditions, 26% do
- Access to nature‑enabling resources is high:
- 85% have a private garden
- 78% have access to a vehicle
- 26% own a dog
2. Spatial distribution of respondents
Respondents are spread across the UK, but with clear geographic patterns:
- Highest concentrations in London, the Midlands and Bristol
- Lower participation in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland
- The distribution mirrors population density and urbanisation patterns
This suggests that iNaturalistUK engagement is strongest in urban and suburban areas, similar to patterns seen in observation data.
3. Participation in and motivation for iNaturalist use
Connection to Nature
- Over 95% agree that nature makes them happy, is important to them, and that they treat nature with respect
- 90% feel part of nature, though fewer strongly agree (38%)
How Users Found iNaturalist
- Word of mouth is the most common route (24%)
- Conservation groups (13%), social media (12%), and internet searches (11%) are also important
- Very few discovered it through NBN Trust channels or public presentations
User Identity
Users identify strongly with nature‑related roles:
- 67% nature enthusiasts/hobbyists
- 39% learners
- 35% citizen scientists
- 28% naturalists
- Environmentalist, conservationist, and ecologist identities also feature
Awareness of Scientific Contribution
- 93% know their sightings contribute to science and research.
Licensing Choices
After being informed about licensing:
- 36% plan to update their licence to CC0 or CC‑BY
- 25% have already done so
- 27% need more information
- 12% do not plan to change
This suggests strong willingness to support open biodiversity data when users understand the implications.
Community Engagement
- Most respondents do not actively interact with the iNaturalist community (forums, projects, leaderboards)
- However, many still feel part of the community, even without active participation.
- Feeling part of the community is not essential for most users’ engagement.
Platform Use and feedback
Users primarily use iNaturalist to:
- Record sightings for personal use (62%)
- Contribute to biodiversity monitoring (58%)
- A third submit sightings, but do not identify or evaluate others’ records. Reasons being lack of knowledge (20%), lack of confidence (15%), lack of time (10%)
- 50% of respondents are motivated by feedback received
- Majority submit sightings via the iNaturalist app
Involvement and motivation
- 67% recommend iNaturalist to others
- 62% say their identification skills have improved
- 23% expressed interest in undertaking a training course related to species identification
- 8% have already participated in such training
- 6% have joined a national recording scheme / society
Important motivations for using iNaturalist are to help wildlife, contribute to science and learn something new. There were mixed responses regarding motivations such as getting more exercise and supporting health and well-being with 25% stating they were not important at all.
Motivations such as sharing knowledge, enhancing personal development, meeting people and having fun were also of low importance for using iNaturalist.
Barriers to use
There were no clear barriers to using iNaturalist with the only notable responses being lack of time, weather, knowledge and not understanding the value of the contributions.
Other ways of recording nature
Respondent indicated low awareness and usage of other wildlife recording platforms, local environmental records centres, and focused societies for recording and submitting wildlife sightings. There was moderate awareness, but low usage of other biodiversity recording apps and conservation organisations. The highest engagement was with events such as BioBlitz, Big Butterfly Count or Big Garden Birdwatch.
Key takeaways
Whilst the report should be read in full to understand the exact findings, it is fair to say that the iNaturalistUK user base is:
- Older, highly educated and predominantly White
- Deeply connected to nature
- Motivated by personal enjoyment, learning, and contributing to science
- Concentrated in urban and suburban England
- Less engaged in community features, but still feeling part of the platform
The findings highlight both the strengths of the iNaturalistUK community – high motivation, strong nature connection, willingness to share data – and the challenges, including demographic and geographic under representation.