IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirb/v49y2022i3p1074-1090.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A game co-design method to elicit knowledge for the contextualization of spatial models

Author

Listed:
  • Carissa J Champlin

    (Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands)

  • Johannes Flacke
  • Geert PMR Dewulf

Abstract

A frequent criticism of knowledge-based planning tools is the apparent mismatch between information frameworks used in their spatial models and the information needs of planning actors. Increasingly, these actors are contributing their context-specific knowledge during the development of such tools. Transferring this knowledge from actors to the model remains a challenge. This study establishes a set of design requirements for knowledge elicitation in small group settings and introduces game co-design as a method allowing planning actors and planning support experts to meet halfway between the technology and user domains in the so-called third space. We present an initial case where in three nominal group sessions, actors encountered and critiqued parameterized assumptions of their planning issues in a tangible game environment. Findings indicate that the method can elicit different types of knowledge (divergence) about a spatial system in operationalized terms (formalization). We discuss the potential of tangible game co-design as a modeling as learning exercise and its complementarity to dedicated digital technologies for more holistic planning support.

Suggested Citation

  • Carissa J Champlin & Johannes Flacke & Geert PMR Dewulf, 2022. "A game co-design method to elicit knowledge for the contextualization of spatial models," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 49(3), pages 1074-1090, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirb:v:49:y:2022:i:3:p:1074-1090
    DOI: 10.1177/23998083211041372
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/23998083211041372
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/23998083211041372?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aija Staffans & Maarit Kahila-Tani & Stan Geertman & Pihla Sillanpää & Liisa Horelli, 2020. "Communication-Oriented and Process-Sensitive Planning Support," International Journal of E-Planning Research (IJEPR), IGI Global, vol. 9(2), pages 1-20, April.
    2. Heide K. Lukosch & Geertje Bekebrede & Shalini Kurapati & Stephan G. Lukosch, 2018. "A Scientific Foundation of Simulation Games for the Analysis and Design of Complex Systems," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 49(3), pages 279-314, June.
    3. Lane, David C., 1992. "Modelling as learning: A consultancy methodology for enhancing learning in management teams," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 64-84, May.
    4. Ikujiro Nonaka, 1994. "A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 14-37, February.
    5. Krystyna A. Stave, 2002. "Using system dynamics to improve public participation in environmental decisions," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 18(2), pages 139-167, June.
    6. Henrik Gudmundsson, 2011. "Analysing Models as a Knowledge Technology in Transport Planning," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(2), pages 145-159.
    7. Helen Couclelis, 2005. "“Where has the Future Gone?†Rethinking the Role of Integrated Land-Use Models in Spatial Planning," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 37(8), pages 1353-1371, August.
    8. Etiënne A. J. A. Rouwette & Jac A. M. Vennix & Albert J. A. Felling, 2009. "On Evaluating the Performance of Problem Structuring Methods: An Attempt at Formulating a Conceptual Model," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 18(6), pages 567-587, November.
    9. Alexander Wilson & Mark Tewdwr-Jones, 2020. "Let’s draw and talk about urban change: Deploying digital technology to encourage citizen participation in urban planning," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 47(9), pages 1588-1604, November.
    10. Cristina Ampatzidou & Katharina Gugerell & Teodora Constantinescu & Oswald Devisch & Martina Jauschneg & Martin Berger, 2018. "All Work and No Play? Facilitating Serious Games and Gamified Applications in Participatory Urban Planning and Governance," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 3(1), pages 34-46.
    11. te Brömmelstroet, Marco & Bertolini, Luca, 2008. "Developing land use and transport PSS: Meaningful information through a dialogue between modelers and planners," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 251-259, July.
    12. Vennix, Jac A. M. & Andersen, David F. & Richardson, George P. & Rohrbaugh, John, 1992. "Model-building for group decision support: Issues and alternatives in knowledge elicitation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 28-41, May.
    13. D F Andersen & J A M Vennix & G P Richardson & E A J A Rouwette, 2007. "Group model building: problem structuring, policy simulation and decision support," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(5), pages 691-694, May.
    14. Sterman, John., 1994. "Learning in and about complex systems," Working papers 3660-94., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    15. Pelzer, Peter, 2017. "Usefulness of planning support systems: A conceptual framework and an empirical illustration," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 84-95.
    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. Lane, David C. & Rouwette, Etiënne A.J.A., 2023. "Towards a behavioural system dynamics: Exploring its scope and delineating its promise," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 306(2), pages 777-794.
    2. Federico Cosenz & Guido Noto, 2016. "Applying System Dynamics Modelling to Strategic Management: A Literature Review," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(6), pages 703-741, November.
    3. Nuno Videira & Rita Lopes & Paula Antunes & Rui Santos & José Luís Casanova, 2012. "Mapping Maritime Sustainability Issues with Stakeholder Groups," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 596-619, November.
    4. Scott, Rodney J & Cavana, Robert Y & Cameron, Donald, 2016. "Recent evidence on the effectiveness of group model building," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 908-918.
    5. Marleen H. F. McCardle‐Keurentjes & Etiënne A. J. A. Rouwette & Jac A. M. Vennix & Eric Jacobs, 2018. "Potential benefits of model use in group model building: insights from an experimental investigation," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 34(1-2), pages 354-384, January.
    6. Kelly, Kristine L., 1998. "A systems approach to identifying decisive information for sustainable development," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 452-464, September.
    7. Ines Winz & Gary Brierley & Sam Trowsdale, 2009. "The Use of System Dynamics Simulation in Water Resources Management," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 23(7), pages 1301-1323, May.
    8. Etiënne A. J. A. Rouwette & Jac A. M. Vennix & Albert J. A. Felling, 2009. "On Evaluating the Performance of Problem Structuring Methods: An Attempt at Formulating a Conceptual Model," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 18(6), pages 567-587, November.
    9. Lu, Jinfeng & Dimov, Dimo, 2023. "A system dynamics modelling of entrepreneurship and growth within firms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 38(3).
    10. Laura Schmitt Olabisi & Amadou Sidibé, 2023. "Observations from a system dynamics modeling field school in Mali," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 39(1), pages 80-94, January.
    11. te Brömmelstroet, Marco, 2017. "Towards a pragmatic research agenda for the PSS domain," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 77-83.
    12. Rodney J. Scott & Robert Y. Cavana & Donald Cameron, 2016. "Client Perceptions of Reported Outcomes of Group Model Building in the New Zealand Public Sector," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 77-101, January.
    13. Marco Te Brömmelstroet & Luca Bertolini, 2010. "Integrating land use and transport knowledge in strategy-making," Transportation, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 85-104, January.
    14. Sarah Gerritsen & Sophia Harré & David Rees & Ana Renker-Darby & Ann E. Bartos & Wilma E. Waterlander & Boyd Swinburn, 2020. "Community Group Model Building as a Method for Engaging Participants and Mobilising Action in Public Health," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(10), pages 1-12, May.
    15. Lane, David & Husemann, Elke & Holland, Darren & Khaled, Abdul, 2019. "Understanding foodborne transmission mechanisms for Norovirus: A study for the UK's Food Standards Agency," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(2), pages 721-736.
    16. Ya-Tsune Sie & Pierre-Alexandre Château & Yang-Chi Chang & Shiau-Yun Lu, 2018. "Stakeholders Opinions on Multi-Use Deep Water Offshore Platform in Hsiao-Liu-Chiu, Taiwan," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-13, February.
    17. Ricciardi, Francesca & De Bernardi, Paola & Cantino, Valter, 2020. "System dynamics modeling as a circular process: The smart commons approach to impact management," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    18. David C. Lane & Birgit Kopainsky & David C. Lane, 2017. "‘Behavioural System Dynamics’: A Very Tentative and Slightly Sceptical Map of the Territory," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(4), pages 414-423, July.
    19. Ram Gopalan & Tingnan Lin, 2022. "Tackling gun violence: is systems thinking necessary?," OPSEARCH, Springer;Operational Research Society of India, vol. 59(3), pages 908-929, September.
    20. Gogi, Anastasia & Tako, Antuela A. & Robinson, Stewart, 2016. "An experimental investigation into the role of simulation models in generating insights," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 931-944.

    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:sae:envirb:v:49:y:2022:i:3:p:1074-1090. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.