Strategy games to improve environmental policymaking

Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law; Nature and Landscape Conservation; Urban Studies; Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment; Ecology; Geography, Planning and Development; Food Science; Global and Planetary Change

Abstract :

[en] While the scientific community documents environmental degradation and develops scenarios to identify the operational margins of system Earth, less attention is given to how decisions are made that steer the system in one direction or the other. We propose to use strategy games for this purpose, increasing the representation of human agency in scenario development and creating spaces for deliberation between different worldviews. Played by the right people, strategy games could help break free from established norms and support more transparent democratic dialogues, responding to the human and social limitations of current decision-making. The question is, who gets to play?

Disciplines :

Environmental sciences & ecology
Social & behavioral sciences, psychology: Multidisciplinary, general & others

Author, co-author :

Garcia, Claude A.

Savilaakso, Sini

Verburg, René W.

Stoudmann, Natasha

Fernbach, Philip

Sloman, Steven A.

Peterson, Garry D.

Araújo, Miguel B.

Bastin, Jean-François ; Université de Liège - ULiège > TERRA Research Centre > Biodiversité et Paysage

Blaser, Jürgen

More authors (23 more)

Language :

English

Title :

Strategy games to improve environmental policymaking

Publication date :

09 May 2022

Journal title :

Nature Sustainability

eISSN :

2398-9629

Publisher :

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Peer reviewed :

Peer Reviewed verified by ORBi

Additional URL :

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-022-00881-0.pdf

Available on ORBi :

since 16 May 2022

Statistics

Number of views

105 (5 by ULiège)

Number of downloads

2 (1 by ULiège)

More statistics

Scopus citations^®

Scopus citations^®
without self-citations

OpenCitations

OpenAlex citations

Bibliography

Díaz, S. et al. Pervasive human-driven decline of life on Earth points to the need for transformative change. Science 366, eaax3100 (2019). DOI: 10.1126/science.aax3100
Díaz, S. et al. Summary for Policymakers of the Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES Secretariat, 2019).
Global Biodiversity Outlook 5 (Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, 2020).
Leclère, D. et al. Bending the curve of terrestrial biodiversity needs an integrated strategy. Nature 585, 551–556 (2020). DOI: 10.1038/s41586-020-2705-y
Waeber, P. O. et al. Choices we make in times of crisis. Sustainability 13, 3578 (2021). DOI: 10.3390/su13063578
Nyborg, K. et al. Social norms as solutions. Science 354, 42–43 (2016). DOI: 10.1126/science.aaf8317
Xu, H. et al. Ensuring effective implementation of the post-2020 global biodiversity targets. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 10.1038/s41559-020-01375-y (2021).
Díaz, S. et al. Set ambitious goals for biodiversity and sustainability. Science 370, 411–413 (2020). DOI: 10.1126/science.abe1530
van Soest, H. L. et al. Analysing interactions among sustainable development goals with integrated assessment models. Glob. Transit. 1, 210–225 (2019). DOI: 10.1016/j.glt.2019.10.004
McLaren, D. & Markusson, N. The co-evolution of technological promises, modelling, policies and climate change targets. Nat. Clim. Change 10, 392–397 (2020). DOI: 10.1038/s41558-020-0740-1
Araújo, M. B. et al. Standards for distribution models in biodiversity assessments. Sci. Adv. 5, eaat4858 (2019). DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aat4858
Pereira, L. M. et al. Developing multiscale and integrative nature–people scenarios using the Nature Futures Framework. People Nat. 2, 1172–1195 (2020). DOI: 10.1002/pan3.10146
Preston, B. L. et al. Scale and the representation of human agency in the modeling of agroecosystems. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 14, 239–249 (2015). DOI: 10.1016/j.cosust.2015.05.010
Otto, I. M. et al. Human agency in the Anthropocene. Ecol. Econ. 167, 106463 (2020). DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.106463
Saltelli, A. et al. Five ways to ensure that models serve society: a manifesto. Nature 582, 482–484 (2020). DOI: 10.1038/d41586-020-01812-9
Redpath, S. M. et al. Games as tools to address conservation conflicts. Trends Ecol. Evol. 33, 415–426 (2018). DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2018.03.005
Speelman, E. N. et al. Serious gaming as a tool to facilitate inclusive business; a review of untapped potential. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 41, 31–37 (2019). DOI: 10.1016/j.cosust.2019.09.010
Rooney-Varga, J. N. et al. Combining role-play with interactive simulation to motivate informed climate action: evidence from the World Climate simulation. PLoS ONE 13, e0202877 (2018). DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0202877
Garcia, C. A. et al. The global forest transition as a human affair. One Earth 2, 417–428 (2020). DOI: 10.1016/j.oneear.2020.05.002
Roese, N. J. & Epstude, K. in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology Vol. 56 (ed. Olson, J. M.) 1–79 (Academic Press, 2017).
Fernbach, P. M. et al. Political extremism is supported by an illusion of understanding. Psychol. Sci. 24, 939–946 (2013). DOI: 10.1177/0956797612464058
Reddie, A. W. et al. Next-generation wargames. Science 362, 1362–1364 (2018). DOI: 10.1126/science.aav2135
Lofgren, E. T. & Fefferman, N. H. The untapped potential of virtual game worlds to shed light on real world epidemics. Lancet Infect. Dis. 7, 625–629 (2007). DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(07)70212-8
Kleinschroth, F., Garcia, C. & Ghazoul, J. Reconciling certification and intact forest landscape conservation. Ambio 48, 153–159 (2019). DOI: 10.1007/s13280-018-1063-6
Kamto, M. et al. Using role-play to explore strategies for improving palm oil production and sustainability in Cameroon. ETFRN NEWS 139 (accessed 25 September 2021).
Grantham, H. S. et al. Anthropogenic modification of forests means only 40% of remaining forests have high ecosystem integrity. Nat. Commun. 11, 5978 (2020). DOI: 10.1038/s41467-020-19493-3
Vennix, J. A. M. Group model-building: tackling messy problems. Syst. Dyn. Rev. 15, 379–401 (1999). DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1727(199924)15:4<379::AID-SDR179>3.0.CO;2-E
Biggs, D. et al. The implementation crisis in conservation planning: could ‘mental models’ help? Conserv. Lett. 4, 169–183 (2011). DOI: 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2011.00170.x
Kelly, G. A. The Psychology of Personal Constructs: Clinical Diagnosis and Psychotherapy (Routledge, 2003).
Marengo, L. & Zeppini, P. The arrival of the new. J. Evol. Econ. 26, 171–194 (2016). DOI: 10.1007/s00191-015-0438-0
Kremer, M. & Debo, L. Inferring quality from wait time. Manage. Sci. 62, 3023–3038 (2016). DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2015.2264
Chong, D. et al. When self‐interest matters. Polit. Psychol. 22, 541–570 (2001). DOI: 10.1111/0162-895X.00253
Garcia, C. A. et al. Coffee, farmers, and trees—shifting rights accelerates changing landscapes. Forests 11, 480 (2020). DOI: 10.3390/f11040480
Wittgenstein, L. Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus English edn first published in 1922 (Routledge, 2019).
Fauvelle, E. & Garcia, C. AgriForEst: un jeu pour élaborer des scénarios sur un terroir villageois d’Afrique Centrale. VertigO https://doi.org/10.4000/vertigo.23245 (2018).
Festinger, L. A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance Vol. 2 (Stanford Univ. Press, 1962).
Schmierbach, M. et al. No one likes to lose. J. Media Psychol. 26, 105–110 (2014). DOI: 10.1027/1864-1105/a000120
Wood, S. L. & Lynch, J. G. Jr Prior knowledge and complacency in new product learning. J. Consum. Res. 29, 416–426 (2002). DOI: 10.1086/344425
Ottati, V. et al. When self-perceptions of expertise increase closed-minded cognition: the earned dogmatism effect. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 61, 131–138 (2015). DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2015.08.003
Mermet, L. Strategic Environmental Management Analysis: Addressing the Blind Spots of Collaborative Approaches. Collection Idées pour le débat 5 (IDDRI, 2011).
Barnaud, C. et al. in Companion Modelling (ed. Étienne, M.) 127–153 (Springer, 2014).
Ferris, F. D., von Gunten, C. F. & Emanuel, L. L. Knowledge: insufficient for change. J. Palliat. Med. 4, 145–147 (2001). DOI: 10.1089/109662101750290164
Chen, W. J. & Krajbich, I. Computational modeling of epiphany learning. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 4637–4642 (2017). DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1618161114
Castelfranchi, C. Mind as an anticipatory device: for a theory of expectations. In International Symposium on Brain, Vision, and Artificial Intelligence (eds De Gregorio, M. et al.) 258–276 (Springer, 2005).
Garcia, C., Dray, A. & Waeber, P. Learning begins when the game is over: using games to embrace complexity in natural resources management. GAIA Ecol. Perspect. Sci. Soc. 25, 289–291 (2016).
Arnstein, S. R. A ladder of citizen participation. J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 35, 216–224 (1969).
Nielsen, K. S. et al. The role of high-socioeconomic-status people in locking in or rapidly reducing energy-driven greenhouse gas emissions. Nat. Energy 10.1038/s41560-021-00900-y (2021).
Bandura, A. Toward a psychology of human agency. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 1, 164–180 (2006). DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00011.x
Le Page, C. et al. Exploring how knowledge and communication influence natural resources management with ReHab. Simul. Gaming 47, 257–284 (2016). DOI: 10.1177/1046878116632900
Geist, H. J. & Lambin, E. F. Proximate causes and underlying driving forces of tropical deforestation; tropical forests are disappearing as the result of many pressures, both local and regional, acting in various combinations in different geographical locations. BioScience 52, 143–150 (2002). DOI: 10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0143:PCAUDF]2.0.CO;2
Meyfroidt, P. et al. Middle-range theories of land system change. Glob. Environ. Change 53, 52–67 (2018). DOI: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2018.08.006
Bastin, J. F. et al. The global tree restoration potential. Science 365, 76–79 (2019). DOI: 10.1126/science.aax0848
Kleinschroth, F. & Healey, J. R. Impacts of logging roads on tropical forests. Biotropica 49, 620–635 (2017). DOI: 10.1111/btp.12462
Pea, R.D. in Distributed Cognitions: Psychological and Educational Considerations (ed. Salomon, G.) 47–87 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1993).
Dudman, K. & de Wit, S. An IPCC that listens: introducing reciprocity to climate change communication. Clim. Change 168, 2 (2021). DOI: 10.1007/s10584-021-03186-x
Garcia, C., Cornioley, T., Chamagne, J. & Dillmann, C. Defining Indicators for Intact Forest Landscapes in the Congo Basin by Using a Role-Playing Game (FSC, 2017); https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.29544.16645