202
J. Maaß
land use governance can be seen as an approach for taking a broader view on a
complex subject. Serious games can be used as a tool to come to better informed
conclusions; the idea of co-design in the context of land use as a scarce resource and
in meeting sustainability goals was especially fruitful. This was true not only within
various administrative levels—to broaden the view on one specific problem—but
also in a context, e.g. with local stakeholders, to use serious games as a participatory
co-creation tool. As an example to actively involve additionally practical experience
for a broader view on a complex subject, serious games can involve farmers in the
process of agroecosystem design and identify factors and patterns of local-level
decision-making to openly discuss and share their ideas (Speelman et al. 2014).
This is just one option how serious games can add value to sustainable land
management due to their discursive design and the wide selection of participants. The
serious game enabled the participants as a group to come to a better understanding of
the problem by combining views from different (occupational) backgrounds, public
institutions, panels, or other more formalised structures that would not meet in the
traditional course of planning and policy; this thus enhanced the formal process at
an early stage.
A broader understanding of the problem via serious games does not necessarily
lead to a “better” solution for a problem in the sense of increased efficiency, but it
may enable decision-makers to consider more facets and thus raise the group’s level
of knowledge through the inherently communicative design of a serious game.
To determine all important aspects of a complex problem, planning in such a broad
context is necessary, but it depends on many variables. Exploring such problems
with tools such as serious games, which are not standard procedure or formalised,
can add value to the whole process. Nevertheless, the non-standard design requires
individual commitment. To embed such commitment into more formal structures or
procedures might in some sense be counterproductive, but should be understood as
acknowledged evidence for the usefulness of serious games as a tool for improving
administrative and political processes.
The complex context of sustainable land use also lends itself to serious games.
Many serious games utilise dynamic computer-based elements to create scenarios
for the participants or to demonstrate decision results or the outcomes of the session.
Participants of eLAN stressed the need for more exchange about complex problems. Another example of exchange and format on complex land use problems was
LandYOUs, where participants explored dimensions of sustainability with respect
to economic, social and environmental conditions, while being continuously threatened by global trade fluctuations and limited resources as described in Schulze et al.
(2015) and Seppelt et al. (2014).
Different formats for exchange and exploration besides the standard methods and
boards of professional planning must still be discussed further to facilitate crossborder solutions adequate for the problem. The developments of the past ten years
have shown that serious games are increasingly seen as collaborative tools to enhance
planning decisions and sustainable land management. Research by den Haan and van
der Voort (2018) has offered a glimpse of the possibilities, citing examples of more
than 40 serious games around the world in the field of sustainable land management.
J. Maaß
land use governance can be seen as an approach for taking a broader view on a
complex subject. Serious games can be used as a tool to come to better informed
conclusions; the idea of co-design in the context of land use as a scarce resource and
in meeting sustainability goals was especially fruitful. This was true not only within
various administrative levels—to broaden the view on one specific problem—but
also in a context, e.g. with local stakeholders, to use serious games as a participatory
co-creation tool. As an example to actively involve additionally practical experience
for a broader view on a complex subject, serious games can involve farmers in the
process of agroecosystem design and identify factors and patterns of local-level
decision-making to openly discuss and share their ideas (Speelman et al. 2014).
This is just one option how serious games can add value to sustainable land
management due to their discursive design and the wide selection of participants. The
serious game enabled the participants as a group to come to a better understanding of
the problem by combining views from different (occupational) backgrounds, public
institutions, panels, or other more formalised structures that would not meet in the
traditional course of planning and policy; this thus enhanced the formal process at
an early stage.
A broader understanding of the problem via serious games does not necessarily
lead to a “better” solution for a problem in the sense of increased efficiency, but it
may enable decision-makers to consider more facets and thus raise the group’s level
of knowledge through the inherently communicative design of a serious game.
To determine all important aspects of a complex problem, planning in such a broad
context is necessary, but it depends on many variables. Exploring such problems
with tools such as serious games, which are not standard procedure or formalised,
can add value to the whole process. Nevertheless, the non-standard design requires
individual commitment. To embed such commitment into more formal structures or
procedures might in some sense be counterproductive, but should be understood as
acknowledged evidence for the usefulness of serious games as a tool for improving
administrative and political processes.
The complex context of sustainable land use also lends itself to serious games.
Many serious games utilise dynamic computer-based elements to create scenarios
for the participants or to demonstrate decision results or the outcomes of the session.
Participants of eLAN stressed the need for more exchange about complex problems. Another example of exchange and format on complex land use problems was
LandYOUs, where participants explored dimensions of sustainability with respect
to economic, social and environmental conditions, while being continuously threatened by global trade fluctuations and limited resources as described in Schulze et al.
(2015) and Seppelt et al. (2014).
Different formats for exchange and exploration besides the standard methods and
boards of professional planning must still be discussed further to facilitate crossborder solutions adequate for the problem. The developments of the past ten years
have shown that serious games are increasingly seen as collaborative tools to enhance
planning decisions and sustainable land management. Research by den Haan and van
der Voort (2018) has offered a glimpse of the possibilities, citing examples of more
than 40 serious games around the world in the field of sustainable land management.