IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i18p13364-d1234235.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Engaging Citizens in the Bioeconomy: Insights from the Co-Creation and Co-Design in the Development of the Serious Bioeconomy Game “Mission BioHero”

Author

Listed:
  • Merit Tatar

    (Institute of Baltic Studies, Research Think-Tank, Lai 30, 51005 Tartu, Estonia)

  • Mariia Khrapunenko

    (Institute of Baltic Studies, Research Think-Tank, Lai 30, 51005 Tartu, Estonia)

  • Richard Karl Henahan

    (Institute of Baltic Studies, Research Think-Tank, Lai 30, 51005 Tartu, Estonia)

  • Andra Asser

    (Institute of Baltic Studies, Research Think-Tank, Lai 30, 51005 Tartu, Estonia)

Abstract

In serious game design, there is a growing trend towards involving players more substantially in the development process. However, several scholars and practitioners agree that still more research and empirical data are needed to guide such participatory prototyping processes. So far, less focus has been put on the influence of co-creation and co-design on participants in the process. This article explores the co-creation and co-design process in creating a serious game called “Mission BioHero”, with a focus on sustainability and the bioeconomy. The game aims to engage citizens in the bioeconomy, help them learn in a fun and interactive way, and aggregate their ideas to shape bioeconomy policies. This serious game was fully co-created and co-designed with citizens and stakeholders from eight regions in five European countries. This research investigates the nature and impact of co-creation and co-design on game development and its driving success factors, explores educational capacities of this participatory process on participants, and evaluates its impact on the co-designed serious game. The findings draw upon empirical data gathered from the co-creation and co-design phases, participants’ feedback, and external game players’ input. The study confirms the value of the participatory design process in serious games design and offers methodologies, tools and lessons learned for similar future processes.

Suggested Citation

  • Merit Tatar & Mariia Khrapunenko & Richard Karl Henahan & Andra Asser, 2023. "Engaging Citizens in the Bioeconomy: Insights from the Co-Creation and Co-Design in the Development of the Serious Bioeconomy Game “Mission BioHero”," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-45, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:18:p:13364-:d:1234235
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/18/13364/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/18/13364/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Xianfeng Wu & Shuli Liu & Ashish Shukla, 2020. "Serious Games as an Engaging Medium on Building Energy Consumption: A Review of Trends, Categories and Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-16, October.
    2. Katharine Vincent & Andrew J. Dougill & Jami L. Dixon & Lindsay C. Stringer & Tracy Cull, 2017. "Identifying climate services needs for national planning: insights from Malawi," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(2), pages 189-202, February.
    3. Robert-Jan Den Haan & Mascha C. Van der Voort, 2018. "On Evaluating Social Learning Outcomes of Serious Games to Collaboratively Address Sustainability Problems: A Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-26, December.
    4. Mihai Dinu & Simona Roxana Pătărlăgeanu & Radu Petrariu & Marius Constantin & Ana-Mădălina Potcovaru, 2020. "Empowering Sustainable Consumer Behavior in the EU by Consolidating the Roles of Waste Recycling and Energy Productivity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-24, November.
    5. Zhang, Xiang & Chen, Rongqiu, 2008. "Examining the mechanism of the value co-creation with customers," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(2), pages 242-250, December.
    6. Coenen , Lars & Hansen , Teis & Rekers , Josephine V., 2015. "Innovation Policy for Grand Challenges. An Economic Geography Perspective," Papers in Innovation Studies 2015/13, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Parry, Glenn & Bustinza, Oscar F. & Vendrell-Herrero, Ferran, 2012. "Servitisation and value co-production in the UK music industry: An empirical study of Consumer Attitudes," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(1), pages 320-332.
    2. Janssen, Matthijs J. & Abbasiharofteh, Milad, 2022. "Boundary spanning R&D collaboration: Key enabling technologies and missions as alleviators of proximity effects?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    3. Elena Bakhanova & Jaime A. Garcia & William L. Raffe & Alexey Voinov, 2023. "Gamification Framework for Participatory Modeling: A Proposal," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 32(5), pages 1167-1182, October.
    4. Jonas Heiberg & Christian Binz & Bernhard Truffer, 2020. "The Geography of Technology Legitimation. How multi-scalar legitimation processes matter for path creation in emerging industries," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2034, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Aug 2020.
    5. L. G. Pee, 2016. "Customer co-creation in B2C e-commerce: does it lead to better new products?," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 217-243, June.
    6. Gian Luca Casali & Mirko Perano & Andrea Moretta Tartaglione & Roxanne Zolin, 2018. "How Business Idea Fit Affects Sustainability and Creates Opportunities for Value Co-Creation in Nascent Firms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-15, January.
    7. Iris Wanzenböck & Koen Frenken, 2018. "The subsidiarity principle: Turning challenge-oriented innovation policy on its head," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1806, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Jan 2018.
    8. Mirella Schrijvers & Niels Bosma & Erik Stam, 2022. "Entrepreneurial Ecosystems and Structural Change in European Regions," Working Papers 2202, Utrecht School of Economics.
    9. Tan, Kim Hua & Ji, Guojun & Chung, Leanne & Wang, Ching-Hsin & Chiu, Anthony & Tseng, M.L., 2019. "Riding the wave of belt and road initiative in servitization: Lessons from China," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 15-21.
    10. Theresa Tribaldos & Flurina Schneider, 2021. "Enabling Players to Develop Theories of Change for Sustainable Development: A Serious Game," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 52(5), pages 664-678, October.
    11. Iuliana Raluca Gheorghe & Victor Lorin Purcarea & Consuela Madalina Gheorghe, 2018. "Consumer eWOM Communication: The Missing Link between Relational Capital and Sustainable Bioeconomy Ii Health Care Services," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 20(49), pages 684-684, August.
    12. Behl, Abhishek & Jayawardena, Nirma & Pereira, Vijay & Islam, Nazrul & Giudice, Manlio Del & Choudrie, Jyoti, 2022. "Gamification and e-learning for young learners: A systematic literature review, bibliometric analysis, and future research agenda," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    13. Andrew J. Dougill & Thirze D. G. Hermans & Samuel Eze & Philip Antwi-Agyei & Susannah M. Sallu, 2021. "Evaluating Climate-Smart Agriculture as Route to Building Climate Resilience in African Food Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-8, September.
    14. Raven, Rob & Walrave, Bob, 2020. "Overcoming transformational failures through policy mixes in the dynamics of technological innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    15. Janssen, Matthijs J. & Abbasiharofteh, Milad, 2022. "Boundary spanning R&D collaboration: Key enabling technologies and missions as alleviators of proximity effects?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 180.
    16. Naser Valizadeh & Latif Haji & Masoud Bijani & Negin Fallah Haghighi & Mahsa Fatemi & Ants-Hannes Viira & Yenny Katherine Parra-Acosta & Alishir Kurban & Hossein Azadi, 2021. "Development of a Scale to Remove Farmers’ Sustainability Barriers to Meteorological Information in Iran," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-18, November.
    17. Uyarra, Elvira & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, Jon Mikel & Flanagan, Kieron & Magro, Edurne, 2020. "Public procurement, innovation and industrial policy: Rationales, roles, capabilities and implementation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    18. Ágnes Bárkányi & Attila Egedy & Attila Sarkady & Róbert Kurdi & János Abonyi, 2022. "Expert-Based Modular Simulator for Municipal Waste Processing Technology Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-14, December.
    19. van Winden, Willem & Carvalho, Luís, 2019. "Intermediation in public procurement of innovation: How Amsterdam’s startup-in-residence programme connects startups to urban challenges," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    20. Grillitsch, Markus & Hansen, Teis & Madsen, Stine, 2020. "How novel is Transformative Innovation Policy?," Papers in Innovation Studies 2020/8, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:18:p:13364-:d:1234235. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.