On 5 November, Plovdiv University (PU) hosted the premiere of the film “The Music of the Universe”: science as a shared space. The event was organised by the Faculty of Chemistry, the Faculty of Philosophy and History, and the Jean Monnet Centre. The film presents METER.AC as an example of citizen science: a network of sensors and people that monitors the air and the atmosphere and makes scientific observations accessible to the public.
“The Music of the Universe” is a popular-science account of the meaning of science and the power of the METER.AC project. It shows how a decentralised network of nearly 300 stations captures global and local phenomena. These range from the sound waves of the Hunga Tonga volcanic eruption to the surprising finding that the main air pollutant in Bulgaria is household heating with solid fuel, not cars.
METER.AC is a large-scale citizen science initiative for independent monitoring of air quality and weather conditions in Bulgaria. It runs on automatic stations that volunteers install and maintain in their homes. Each station measures key indicators in real time: the concentration of fine particulate matter, temperature, humidity and atmospheric pressure. Citizen participation is the backbone of the project. Volunteers share their personal resources (internet and electricity) to provide transparent, objective and freely accessible information to the public.
The citizen science model overturns the traditional hierarchy of scientific research and raises serious questions about the limits of scientific knowledge and society’s role in it. The main debate, also raised by the chemistry community, is whether citizens should only collect data mechanically (for example, by setting up air sensors) or whether they are also able to help interpret it. Sceptics worry about a lack of expertise and about subjectivity in the analysis. Supporters of the model argue that when people are trained and have accessible tools, their local perspective and understanding of their surroundings enrich scientific interpretation. In this way, they help uncover specific local problems that scientists in laboratories could easily miss.
The discussion presents citizen science as a bridge that turns scientific knowledge into a tool for social and political change. Professional scientists now share responsibility not only for the accuracy of the data but also for communicating it in an accessible way. This requires close collaboration between chemists, who ensure methodological rigour and the quality of the measurements, and sociologists, who analyse the social impact and mobilise people. This partnership is key to narrowing the distance between science and society. The objective data that citizens collect puts direct pressure on political leaders and compels them to make decisions based on real evidence rather than on economic or party interests.
Citizen science matters because it fundamentally changes the relationship between knowledge and power: it turns scientific research from a closed laboratory activity into a shared democratic process. It shows that society is no longer a passive observer of scientific progress but an active participant that can produce legitimate evidence and demand change. Still, the model leaves open a fundamental question about the balance of power and the division of roles. How exactly should chemists, sociologists and citizens divide their responsibilities so that citizen science can keep its strict academic rigour and also reach its full potential for social change?
Radoslava Ivanova,
European Studies, Programmes and Projects
