=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-3669/paper13
|storemode=property
|title=Using serious games for (social) engagement in vision development for circular business parks
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3669/paper13.pdf
|volume=Vol-3669
|authors=Joline Carlijn Frens,Geertje Bekebrede,Jaco Quist
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/gamifin/FrensBQ24
}}
==Using serious games for (social) engagement in vision development for circular business parks==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3669/paper13.pdf
Using serious games for (social) engagement in vision
development for circular business parks
Joline C. Frens1, Geertje Bekebrede1 and Jaco Quist1
1 Delft University of Technology, Faculty Technology, Policy, Management, Jaffalaan 5, 2628 BX Delft, Netherlands
Abstract
In order to support transition to a circular economy, visions and strategies need to be developed for
which participatory backcasting can be used. This paper reports on the effects of using serious games
as a possible supporting (social) engagement and design tool for vision development in participatory
backcasting and has been applied to circular business and industry parks. In order to test the effects on
(social) engagement, a new framework was developed and used to evaluate engagement by measuring
the game experience, perceived influence, and learning, as well as the social connections within these
constructs. The effect of the vision design was measured using participant satisfaction and a vision
analysis, identifying transformative elements and guiding goals and targets. The results show that a
serious game is a suitable tool to support (social) engagement in participatory backcasting. As a design
tool, it is suitable for the development of transformative elements, but the used game was not able to
create guiding goals and targets.
Keywords
Serious games, participatory backcasting, future vision, circular economy, circular business parks,
(social) engagement evaluation1
and thoughts directed toward and aroused by the
1. Introduction mediated activity to achieve a specific objective” [1, p.
496].
Due to the ecological consequences and increased The aim of this paper is to explore how serious
resource insecurity caused by the depletion of natural games can be used as a design and (social) engagement
resources of the incumbent linear economy, the tool to support the development of a shared vision. The
Netherlands aims for a fully circular economy (CE) in research question is: What is the effect of using a
2050 [2]. To guide this transition from a linear to a serious game as a (social) engagement and design tool
circular economy, visions and strategies need to be during the development of the future vision step of
developed. One approach enabling actors to create participatory backcasting? The research was
visions and strategies is participatory backcasting (e.g. contextualised for the topic of circular business and
[3]), while relevant related approaches include industry parks, as their current circularity is very
transition management [4] and visioning [5]. During limited while their circularity potential is huge. The
the process of participatory backcasting, stakeholders paper is organized as follows. It provides theoretical
develop a shared future vision, after which strategies and literature background in Section 2, methodology
can be defined on how this future can become reality in Section 3, results in Section 4, discussion in Section
[3]. 5 and conclusions and recommendations in Section 6.
Within participatory backcasting, the process of
vision development can be supported by several tools,
including (social) engagement and vision design tools. 2. Background
However, gaming-based tools have been limitedly
combined with participatory backcasting, though Participatory backcasting is an approach to long-term
some examples can be found in the scientific literature vision and strategy development. The approach is
[6-13]. By expanding the available tools for vision based on creating a desirable future (vision) and
development in participatory backcasting, both looking back from that future to the present followed
researchers and practitioners will get a broader choice by creating a strategy towards the vision [14]. In this
to select an appropriate tool for the vision research, the methodological framework for
development stage in the process. Engagement is participatory backcasting of Quist [15] is used. In this,
defined as “the willingness to have emotions, affect, the participatory backcasting process consists of five
8th International GamiFIN Conference 2024 (GamiFIN 2024) April 2-
5, 2024, Ruka, Finland
jolinefrens@gmail.com (J. C. Frens); G.Bekebrede@tudelft.nl (G.
Bekebrede); J.N.Quist@tudelft.nl (J. Quist)
0009-0007-1985-8217 (J. C. Frens); 0000-0001-7884-8835 G.
Bekebrede); 0000-0002-6365-4082 (J. Quist)
© 2024 Copyright for this paper by its authors. The use permitted under
Creative Commons License Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
CEUR Workshop Proceedings (CEUR-WS.org)
CEUR
ceur-ws.org
Workshop ISSN 1613-0073
Proceedings
142
iterative stages. These are (1) strategic problem goal refers to social engagement, defined as social
orientation, (2) develop future vision, (3) backcasting connections and interactions to develop and maintain
analysis, (4) elaborate future alternatives and define the participants' social network [1].
follow-up agenda, and (5) embed results and agenda to
stimulate follow-up and implementation. Backcasting
is a normative approach in futures studies focusing on 3. Methodology
desirable and sustainable futures. It is different from
forecasting focussing on likely futures, and To research the effects of games on (social)
exploratory scenario approaches that focus on engagement and vision design, we extensively
possible futures [3,14,15,16]. evaluated two interventions. The first intervention
Participatory backcasting is most useful when was a workshop with master students during their
applied to complex societal problems, when there is a Industrial Ecology project course on sustainable and
need for major change, when dominant trends circular Industrial Parks, while the second
contribute to the problem, when the problem cannot intervention was conducted at the business park De
be solved by market-based solutions, and when there Wildeman, Zaltbommel. The interventions consisted of
is a sufficiently long-time horizon to realise the a workshop including the game and two
desirable future [16]. All these points apply to the topic questionnaires. The effects of the game were measured
of circular business and industry parks. using observations, questionnaires, and a vision
In this research, the CE framework of Metabolic is evaluation.
used, called ‘The Seven Pillars of the Circular Economy’
[17]. This is a vision-based framework that defines a
circular economy as “a new economic model for
3.1 Game: CircularPark
addressing human needs and fairly distributing
resources without undermining the functioning of the The game CircularPark (see Figure 1) is a multiplayer
biosphere or crossing any planetary boundaries” [17]. game consisting of two phases in which groups of three
This framework is holistic, containing seven pillars to six people make a vision for a circular business park.
and three surrounding properties. The pillars are The first phase consists of several rounds in which the
materials, energy, water, biodiversity, society & participants are asked to competitively generate ideas
culture, health & wellbeing, and value. The properties based on a semi-random brainstorming prompt. A new
are equity, transparency, and resilience [17]. On brainstorming prompt is created for every round,
business and industry parks, circularity based on the consisting of three parts: (1) an element card with
framework can take various shapes and something that could be present at a business park
configurations. Options include, but are not limited to, (e.g., a roof), (2) a theme card relating to the circular
exchange of (waste) materials, energy and/or water economy (e.g., litter), and (3) a die-throw indicating
between companies (also known as industrial whether the idea should be part of a linear or circular
symbiosis), shared products and/or services, and economy (see a,b,c in Figure 1). Both element and
giving more space to nature. theme cards are chosen by the participants from a
Participatory backcasting is supported by four small selection of the cards, giving them influence in
groups of tools. These groups are tools for (social) the topics discussed. The ideas are written on an
engagement, design, analytical, and management, answer sheet (see d in Figure 1), read out loud and
coordination, and communication. A tool that can be voted on by the participants. In the second phase, the
used for social engagement in participatory participants are asked to collaboratively integrate the
backcasting is gaming. Serious games can be used as ideas generated in the first phase onto a map of the
safe innovation space for alternative futures [18]. This business park under study (see e in Figure 1), followed
gives an indication that games could be used as a by adapting and refining the ideas and vision proposal
design tool for future visions (step 2 develop future using the questions on the reflection cards (e.g., What
visions). However, the literature on games for vision does the average day look like at the business park of
development in participatory backcasting processes is the vision proposal?; marked as f in Figure 1) [21].
limited, though a few examples could be identified [7]. The gaming workshop consists of three steps: (1)
There is some research combining backcasting and briefing, (2) gameplay, and (3) debriefing. During the
serious games, mainly using the game as tool during briefing step, the workshop facilitator gives a short
the backcasting analysis [6, 8, 12, 19] or separate from theoretical background on circularity and explains the
the backcasting process [7, 10 ,11,13]. Besides creating goal and rules of the game, which is followed by the
a safe innovation space, games can increase gameplay. Finally, in the debriefing step, the facilitator
interaction between participants and researchers [20] asks probing questions for the participants to reflect
and can therefore be used for (social) engagement. on the experience. For the evaluation the participants
This is especially important during the vision creation are asked to answer questionnaires before the briefing
step as it is generally when engagement and and after the debriefing step.
workshops for participatory vision generation start.
As a (social) engagement tool, the aim of the game
is (1) to involve stakeholders, and (2) to guide and
generate interaction between the stakeholders [15,
16]. The first goal refers to engagement, defined as "the
willingness to have emotions, affect, and thoughts
directed toward and aroused by the mediated activity
to achieve a specific objective" [1, p. 496]. The second
143
manager of one of the companies on De Wildeman, and
an office manager at De Wildeman. By conducting this
workshop, the perspective of stakeholders of a
business park without extensive sustainability
knowledge is added to the research. The workshop
took place at one of the companies at the business
park.
3.3 Data collection
The workshops are evaluated on two different criteria:
(1) content of the vision design and (2) the (social)
Figure 1: CircularPark game materials: (a) theme engagement, as these are the two main reasons to
cards, (b) element cards, (c) circularity die, (d) apply serious games.
answer sheet, (e) map business park, and (f)
reflection cards 3.3.1 Vision design
3.2 Participants The outcome of the game is a vision for a circular
business or industry park. It is important that the
The game was played two times, with different target vision is of good quality and that the participants are
groups. satisfied with the outcome. To evaluate the quality of
the vision two criteria of Van der Voorn et al. are used
[28]: (1) the presence of transformative elements, (2)
3.2.1 Industrial ecology and presence of goals and guiding targets.
project: industrial systems The developed visions were written down in a
meeting report and sent to the participants for
verification. Next, the transformative elements, and
The first workshop was played with master students
goals and guiding targets were identified in the
of the Industrial Ecology program, which is a combined
developed vision. Next, transformative elements were
MSc program of Leiden University and Delft University
assessed on their circularity using the Seven Pillars of
of Technology, as part of the 10 ects course Industrial
the Circular Economy. The participants' satisfaction
Ecology Project on industrial symbiosis and making
design was measured using self-reporting in the post-
industry parks circular and sustainable.
questionnaire. The results were used to interpret how
During the course, groups of students analyzed and
participants felt about the vision. If a desire to change
re-designed an existing industrial park based on three
the vision was expressed, suggestions were evaluated
categories (water, energy, and material flows). The
by the researcher whether they were an incremental
two-hour workshop was held in the second part of the
or radical change to the developed vision.
course with 15 students working on the Botlek
Industrial Park in Rotterdam, Industrial Park Höchst in
Germany, or Kwinana Industrial Area in Western 3.3.2 (Social) engagement
Australia. The students had already analyzed the
current state and relevant stakeholders and were The effects of the game on (social) engagement were
working on a redesign of the selected park. Therefore, tested on three dimensions: (1) game experience, (2)
the students could be considered as experts on their perceived level of influence, and (3) learning. These
industrial park and qualified to develop a circular dimensions relate to different parts of the definition
future vision for their parks. for engagement and include willingness to have
emotions, affect, and thoughts directed toward and
3.2.3 Business park De aroused by the mediated activity to achieve a specific
objective, respectively.
Wildeman, Zaltbommel The construct game experience is used as defined
by Poels et al. [29]. So, the game experience is split into
The second workshop was conducted at the business three dimensions, each containing several concepts.
park De Wildeman, which is a business park under The dimensions are: (i) core experience during the
development in the municipality of Zaltbommel in the game (competence, sensory & imaginative immersion,
middle of the Netherlands [22-24]. The park’s flow, tension/annoyance, challenge, negative affect,
development is based on three core values: positive affect), (ii) social presence experience
sustainability, safety, and accessibility. To ensure (psychological involvement – empathy, psychological
adherence to these core values, all companies on De involvement – negative feelings, behavior
Wildeman are required to join the park management. involvement), and (iii) post-game experience (positive
In 2017, the business park has written a sustainability experience, negative experience, tiredness, returning
masterplan with the aim to make all business parks in to reality). Dimensions 1 and 3 relate to the goal of
Zaltbommel energy-positive before 2025 [25,27]. engagement while dimension 2 relates to the goal of
The three-hour workshop on De Wildeman was social engagement. The dimensions can be measured
conducted with three stakeholders: an account using the Game Experience Questionnaire (GEQ) [30].
manager from the municipality Zaltbommel, a general For every participant, the score for each concept is
144
calculated individually following the guidelines of the Local resource generation.
GEQ. The overall results of the questionnaire are Pillar: Materials
evaluated per component on what the implications are More space for nature.
on the (social) engagement. Pillar: Biodiversity
The perceived level of influence on the design is Space for not-work needs.
determined using self-reporting. The results are used Pillars: Value, health & wellbeing,
to interpret how the overall participant felt about their and society & culture
level of influence. Collaboration between companies
The construct learning is split into two categories. on the park grounds.
The first category is general learning, which covers all Pillar: Society & culture
relevant learning that has happened in the workshop.
Shared facilities. NA
The second category is learning from other
Stakeholder (De Wildeman)
participants, which covers the social interactions Pillars: Materials and society &
about the desired subjects. Using the results of the culture
postquestionnaire, not only the number of people Local energy and resource
having learned could be evaluated, but also how this production/ collection.
learning was induced (through the game or through Pillars: Energy, materials, and water
other participants). Furthermore, changes in Space for not-work needs.
conceptualization of circularity before and after the Pillars: Value, health & wellbeing,
workshop, self-reported insights, and the discussion and society & culture
during debriefing, were used to uncover aspects of More room for nature.
what had been learned . Pillar: Biodiversity
4. Results 4.1 Vision design
The results of the two workshops are described and During the game, the participants made a visual
compared below. Due to a technical error, a few representation of their proposed vision (see Figure 2
questions were only answered by 5 of the 15 students, for an example). The vision analysis showed that all the
regarding participant satisfaction (see Table 2) and visions contain transformative elements. Per vision,
perceived degree of influence (see Table 3). transformative elements were identified and grouped
Furthermore, participants could leave questions open. using circular economy principles and the related
The number of participants is reported per variable. pillar(s) of the Circular Economy framework [17]. All
vision proposals do contain clear principles relating to
Table 1 the circular economy that could be used to formulate
Vision analysis goals or guiding targets in a follow-up workshop. All
Transformative elements Principle & Goals CE pillars were addressed at least once. The pillar
CE pillar(s) and materials was addressed most often (8x), followed by
guiding society & culture (6x), value (5x), biodiversity (4x),
targets health & wellbeing (3x), energy (2x), and finally, water
Restructure management to NA (1x). However, none of the visions contain any explicit
repurchase for the environment goals or guiding targets. The results of the vision
or society. analyses can be found in Table 1. The detailed visions
Student 1 (Botlek)
Pillar: Value can be found in Frens [21].
Local resource collection/
generation.
Pillars: Materials and energy
Recycling of waste materials.
Pillar: Materials
Repairing existing products.
Pillar: Materials
Local resource collection. NA
Student 2 (Kwinana)
Pillar: Materials
Recycling post-consumer waste.
Pillar: Materials
Figure 2: Example output game
More space for nature.
Pillar: Biodiversity The results from the post survey show that five
Space for not-work needs. participants were (very) satisfied with the vision
Pillars: Value, health & wellbeing, design. Three students were somewhat neutral by
and society & culture being neither satisfied nor unsatisfied. On the question
if the participants would like to change the developed
Repurchase for the environment or NA
visions, only one out of eight respondents said they
(Höchst)
Student
society.
would like to adapt the plan. The results can be found
3
Pillars: Value, biodiversity, and
in Table 2.
society & culture
145
The answers to the questions about the insights of
circularity in general and on the business park,
students reported social and organizational insights,
while seven students especially mentioned that new
management methods are needed. This was also
present in the design of group 1. Four students
explicitly mentioned redistribution of health and three
students said that the wellbeing of people should also
be included. This is also in line with the designs of the
students, where many elements of broader social
values were added to the design.
Table 2
Frequency table Participant satisfaction
Students Stakeholders
(n=5) (n=3)
Very unsatisfied
Somewhat unsatisfied
Neither satisfied nor 3
unsatisfied
Somewhat satisfied 1 2
Very satisfied 1 1
Wants to change the 1
developed vision
4.2 (Social) engagement
4.2.1 Game experience
The results of the game experience questionnaire
(GEQ) can be found in Figure 3. The results of the
student workshop are plotted on one boxplot per
component. Based on the interquartile range method,
six outliers were detected. Since these are natural
outliers, the data has not been removed from the
results. However, they are plotted separately from the
boxplot to give a more accurate presentation of
division of the data. On top of the student boxplots, the
results of the three stakeholders are plotted.
For all components of the GEQ, the results of the
stakeholder workshop fall within the total range of the
results of student workshop. For 6 of the 14
components (43%) all stakeholder results fall within Figure 3: Results GEQ
the middle 50% of the student results. For the other 8
components, at least one of the results is located For the GEQ post-game module, the student and
within this 50% middle range. In total, 11 of the 42 stakeholder workshop results are also rather similar.
(26%) stakeholder results are outside the 50% middle However, the stakeholder results suggest a more
range of the student results. positive experience compared to the student results.
The results of the GEQ core module of the student Components that indicate low (social) engagement
and stakeholder workshop are similar and discussed (negative experience and tiredness) score low. The
together. Results of two components that indicate high component that indicates high (social) engagement
(social) engagement (sensory & imaginative (positive experience) shows a broader range of results
immersion and positive affect on mood) scored for the student workshop. For the stakeholder
relatively high, with most results scoring above the workshop, the scoring is neutral to high.
center value. Results for the component flow, which Finally, the results of the social presence module of
would also indicate high (social) engagement, have a the GEQ of the student and stakeholder workshop are
broad spread in results. The results of two components also similar. The component indicating low (social)
that would have a negative effect on (social) engagement (negative feelings) scores low. The
engagement (tensions/annoyance and negative affect components indicated high (social) engagement
on mood) scored relatively low with all participants (empathy and behavioural involvement) score high
scoring below the center value. and spread results, respectively.
146
Table 3 Table 4
Frequency table perceived degree of influence Self-reported insights (learning)
Students Stakeholders Results Results
(N=5) (N=3) students stakeholders
No influence 0 0 Any insights 13 (N=15) 3 (N=3)
Low degree of 1 0 Insights concept of
influence circularity from
Some degree of 1 0 - other participants 12 (N=15) 3 (N=3)
influence and/or the game
High degree of 3 3 - other participants 10 (N=15) 3 (N=3)
influence - the game 7 (N=15) 2 (N=3)
Very high degree 0 0 Insights circularity 10 (N=15) 3 (N=3)
of influence business park
Part of vision proposal 3 (N=5) 2 (N=3)
not thought about
4.2.2 Perceived influence before workshop
Apart from the engagement in the post survey, we
asked the participants to what degree they felt that
they personally had influence on the vision proposal
using a 5-point Likert-scale. The results can be found
5. Discussion
in Table 3. Six out of 8 participants said they perceived
The vision evaluation shows that all visions included
a high degree of influence; one person experienced a
transformative elements, while none had guiding goals
low degree of influence and another person some
or targets. The presence of transformative elements
degree of influence. The student participant
can be explained by using semi-random brainstorming
experiencing low influence explained that the vision
prompts that are not related to the current state of the
was not targeted toward the main areas of interest for
business park. By allowing the participants to think
the proposal. The student participants stating high
freely and creatively in the first phase, they can
influence said they were “considerably very involved
propose ideas for a circular future beyond the
throughout the game and felt like [their] voice and
presence. The absence of goals and guiding targets
opinion matter” (Translated from Dutch by the
could be due to the game design. However, the vision
researcher). One of the stakeholders experienced high
design process usually consists of more than one
influence but the participants were with a small group
workshop. In case of a follow up workshop, guiding
with similar world views, which may led to similar
goals and targets can be added. So, if there is a need to
ideas.
generate or define the goals and guiding targets earlier
in the process, the game can easily be adapted for this.
4.2.3 Learning In the survey, participants indicated that they
learned about circularity, which is in line with the
In the postquestionnaire, participants were asked to observations in the first round, when players were
self-report whether they obtained any new insights challenged to give their own ideas of the linear and
about the concept of circularity due to the game or circular economy and discuss these. So the game gives
other participants and if they had obtained any an explorative space to experiment with different
insights for circularity at their business park. types of circularities and to become creative in the
Furthermore, they were asked whether any part of the vision design. This was further supported by the
vision proposal had not been thought about before the observation that most participants proposed an idea in
workshop. The results are shown in Table 4. most rounds and could influence the vision proposal.
In the debriefing, participants were asked to share The final vision proposals not only included ideas from
their insights and how they could use their learning at the first phase, but also adjustments and new ideas
the workshop for vision-making in the future. The implemented in later phases. Examples of such
students indicated that they would be able to use a creativity include the social, organizational, and
vision-based approach to circular thinking rather than managerial changes in the park to become more
a strategy-based approach. The main response of the circular. Although such input was part of the CE
stakeholders was that they were reminded of the value framework applied in the game design, it also
of coming to a brainstorm with an open mind, rather facilitated the discussion. In this way the game has
than a goal that needs to be achieved. In both value in the vision design stage of participatory
workshops, the participants were able to have a backcasting. Additionally, the creativity and discussion
valuable and insightful discussion about how they showed that the participants were willing to have
could use learning and insights of the workshop in thoughts directed towards the development of the
future settings. vision using the game, which would indicate a positive
effect on the (social) engagement.
The results of the GEQ show that the participants
experienced emotions toward the mediated activity.
The results of the social presence module indicate that
these emotions were also directed toward other
147
participants, and suggest a positive effect on (social) Taking advantage of our results, they can consider the
engagement. benefits and drawbacks of the tool and decide whether
Finally, the participants were asked whether they it would be beneficial for their case. Future research
believed to have influenced the developed vision. about the use of gaming could include research on the
Overall, most participants felt involved in the design of effects on follow-up activities. It is also suggested to
the vision, in line with the goals of (social) engagement organize and study more workshops using different
for the game. types of games to compare their effects. Furthermore,
This research contributes to the benefits and the effects should also be tested in a real future
drawbacks of using games as tool for participatory planning context. In addition, other designers could
backcasting, which is complementary to prior research develop and test the effect of different tools. The
on games in backcasting focusing on the output of methods used in this research can be used as initial
workshops [6, 8-13]. This explorative study could also framework to test the effects to make the tools and
encourage others to develop tools and methods that their effects more comparable.
could be used within the participatory backcasting
process and evaluate their effects. By developing and
evaluating tools for participatory backcasting on their References
effects and conditions for achieving these effects,
practitioners can make more informed decisions on [1] P. Bouvier, E. Lavoué, and K. Sehaba, “Defining
what methods to use and with what purpose, and Engagement and Characterizing Engaged-
under what conditions and settings. Behaviors in Digital Gaming,” Simul Gaming, vol.
45, no. 4–5, pp. 491–507, Aug. 2014, doi:
10.1177/1046878114553571.
6. Conclusion and [2] Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Waterstaat,
recommendations [3]
“Nederland circulair in 2050,” Sep. 2016.
J. Quist, W. Thissen, and P. J. Vergragt, “The
impact and spin-off of participatory backcasting:
The aim of this paper was to explore effect of a serious
From vision to niche,” Technol Forecast Soc
game on vision design and (social) engagement in
Change, vol. 78, no. 5, pp. 883–897, Jun. 2011,
participatory backcasting. From the results of playing
doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2011.01.011.
the games with four teams in two different settings we
[4] D. Loorbach, N. Frantzeskaki, and F. Avelino,
can conclude that the game was useful and supportive
“Sustainability Transitions Research:
to create visions that the participants were on average
Transforming Science and Practice for Societal
(very) satisfied with. The game proved to be useful for
Change,” Annu Rev Environ Resour, vol. 42, no. 1,
generating transformative ideas but did not lead to
pp. 599–626, Oct. 2017, doi: 10.1146/annurev-
clear goals and targets. This could be overcome by
environ-102014-021340.
adding a follow-up session for target setting.
[5] D. Iwaniec and A. Wiek, “Advancing
The aim of (social) engagement tools is to (1)
Sustainability Visioning Practice in Planning—
involve stakeholders and (2) guide and generate
The General Plan Update in Phoenix, Arizona,”
interaction between stakeholders. The results of the
Planning Practice & Research, vol. 29, no. 5, pp.
GEQ score and post-game modules indicate a positive
543–568, Oct. 2014, doi:
effect of participants being involved (engagement) and
10.1080/02697459.2014.977004.
the social presence module indicates a positive effect
[6] E. Bruley, B. Locatelli, M. J. Colloff, N. Salliou, T.
on interaction and social engagement during the game.
Métris, and S. Lavorel, “Actions and leverage
Finally, the participants on average perceived that they
points for ecosystem-based adaptation pathways
were able to influence the design of the vision (through
in the Alps,” Environ Sci Policy, vol. 124, pp. 567–
their engagement). In conclusion, our research
579, Oct. 2021, doi:
suggests that the use of a serious game can have a
10.1016/j.envsci.2021.07.023.
positive effect on (social) engagement.
[7] G. Guillen Mandujano, J. Quist, and J. Hamari,
While our research provides first insights into the
“Gamification of backcasting for sustainability:
effects of a serious game as (social) engagement and
The development of the gameful backcasting
design tool for vision making during the participatory
framework (GAMEBACK),” J Clean Prod, vol. 302,
backcasting process, it is not without limitations. For
p. 126609, Jun. 2021, doi:
instance, the research is conducted in a short time
10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126609.
period, so it was not possible to incorporate the full
[8] J. P. Kahan, “Bouncecasting: a seminar gaming
participatory backcasting process or any later effects
approach to foresight,” foresight, vol. 23, no. 6,
in the results. Furthermore, the data gathered have
pp. 613–627, Oct. 2021, doi: 10.1108/FS-02-
limitations due to a small number of participants and
2021-0060.
all research was conducted using one game. It should
[9] F. Andreotti, E. N. Speelman, K. Van den
also be mentioned that the participants were aware of
Meersche, and C. Allinne, “Combining
the workshop being organized for study purposes, and
participatory games and backcasting to support
that the developed visions would not have direct
collective scenario evaluation: an action research
consequences on their actual future planning.
approach for sustainable agroforestry landscape
Finally, several recommendations can be given.
management,” Sustain Sci, vol. 15, no. 5, pp.
First, participatory backcasting practitioners are
1383–1399, Sep. 2020, doi: 10.1007/s11625-
recommended to make use of serious games as a tool
020-00829-3.
in their toolbox to support the backcasting process.
148
[10] F. Ithnin, M. J. M. Nor, Mohd. R. Y. Yusoff, and S. T. Wildeman III,” GEMEENTEBLAD, Zaltbommel,
Inayatullah, “Futures Scenarios for Universiti Jan. 25, 2023.
Teknikal Malaysia Melaka (UTeM),” The Social [23] Gemeente Zaltbommel, “Bestemmingsplan
Sciences, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 664–670, 2018. Zaltbommel, De Wildeman,” Zaltbommel, Dec.
[11] S. Tahir Inayatullah, S. Ahmed, P. Alam, S. Davis, 2014.
and S. Hashemi, “Alternative scenarios for BRAC [24] Gemeente Zaltbommel, “Bestemmingsplan
University,” On the Horizon, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. Zaltbommel, De Wildeman II,” Zaltbommel, Sep.
275–285, Sep. 2013, doi: 10.1108/OTH-01- 2017.
2013-0006. [25] “Over De Wildeman.” Accessed: Jul. 05, 2023.
[12] R. Hickman, O. Ashiru, and D. Banister, [Online]. Available: https://www.de-
“Achieving Carbon-Efficient Transportation,” wildeman.nl/de-wildeman
Transportation Research Record: Journal of the [26] “Parkmanagement De Wildeman.” Accessed: Sep.
Transportation Research Board, vol. 2139, no. 1, 13, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.de-
pp. 172–182, Jan. 2009, doi: 10.3141/2139-20. wildeman.nl/parkmanagement
[13] A. C. Mangnus et al., “New pathways for [27] “Bestuur en adviseur.” Accessed: Sep. 13, 2023.
governing food system transformations: a [Online]. Available: https://www.de-
pluralistic practice-based futures approach using wildeman.nl/bestuur-en-adviseur
visioning, back-casting, and serious gaming,” [28] T. van der Voorn, J. Quist, C. Pahl-Wostl, and M.
Ecology and Society, vol. 24, no. 4, p. art2, 2019, Haasnoot, “Envisioning robust climate change
doi: 10.5751/ES-11014-240402. adaptation futures for coastal regions: a
[14] P. J. Vergragt and J. Quist, “Backcasting for comparative evaluation of cases in three
sustainability: Introduction to the special issue,” continents,” Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang, vol.
Technol Forecast Soc Change, vol. 78, no. 5, pp. 22, no. 3, pp. 519–546, Mar. 2017, doi:
747–755, Jun. 2011, doi: 10.1007/s11027-015-9686-4.
10.1016/j.techfore.2011.03.010. [29] K. Poels, Y. A. W. de Kort, and W. A. IJsselsteijn,
[15] J. Quist, Backcasting for a Sustainable Future. “D3.3 : Game Experience Questionnaire:
Delft: TU Delft, 2007. development of a self-report measure to assess
[16] J. Quist, “Backcasting and Scenarios for the psychological impact of digital games,”
Sustainable Technology Development,” in Eindhoven, 2007.
Handbook of Sustainable Engineering, J. [30] W. A. IJsselsteijn, Y. A. de Kort, and K. Poels, “The
Kauffman and K.-M. Lee, Eds., Dordrecht: Game Experience Questionnaire.” Technische
Springer Netherlands, 2013, pp. 749–772. doi: Universiteit Eindhoven., 2013.
10.1007/978-1-4020-8939-8.
[17] Metabolic, “The Seven Pillars of the Circular
Economy,” metabolic.nl. Accessed: Feb. 21, 2023.
[Online]. Available:
https://www.metabolic.nl/news/the-seven-
pillars-of-the-circular-economy/
[18] S. Flood, N. A. Cradock-Henry, P. Blackett, and P.
Edwards, “Adaptive and interactive climate
futures: systematic review of ‘serious games’ for
engagement and decision-making,”
Environmental Research Letters, vol. 13, no. 6, p.
063005, Jun. 2018, doi: 10.1088/1748-
9326/aac1c6.
[19] L. W. Keeler, M. J. Bernstein, J. P. Nelson, and B. R.
Kay, “AudaCITY: A Capacity-Building Research
Method for Urban Sustainability
Transformation,” Frontiers in Sustainable Cities,
vol. 4, Jul. 2022, doi: 10.3389/frsc.2022.837578.
[20] R.-J. den Haan and M. van der Voort, “On
Evaluating Social Learning Outcomes of Serious
Games to Collaboratively Address Sustainability
Problems: A Literature Review,” Sustainability,
vol. 10, no. 12, p. 4529, Dec. 2018, doi:
10.3390/su10124529.
[21] J. C. Frens, “Using Serious Games for Vision
Development in the Participatory Backcasting
Process,” Delft, Sep. 2023. Accessed: Nov. 19,
2023. [Online]. Available:
https://repository.tudelft.nl/islandora/object/u
uid%3A4d145a78-1610-4159-8cea-
63812cc17149?collection=education
[22] “Burgemeester en wethouders van Zaltbommel –
ontwerp beeldkwaliteitplan Zaltbommel, De
149