Perspective | Published:

Climate change games as tools for education and engagement

Nature Climate Change volume 5, pages 413418 (2015) | Download Citation

Abstract

Scientists, educators and policymakers continue to face challenges when it comes to finding effective strategies to engage the public on climate change. We argue that games on the subject of climate change are well-suited to address these challenges because they can serve as effective tools for education and engagement. Recently, there has been a dramatic increase in the development of such games, many featuring innovative designs that blur traditional boundaries (for example, those that involve social media, alternative reality games, or those that involve direct action upon the real world). Here, we present an overview of the types of climate change game currently available, the benefits and trade-offs of their use, and reasons why they hold such promise for education and engagement regarding climate change.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    , & Trends in public attitudes toward climate change: The influence of the economy and Climategate on risk, information, and public policy. Risk Haz. Crisis Public Policy 5, 22–37 (2014).

  2. 2.

    Education, politics and opinions about climate change evidence for interaction effects. Climatic Change 104, 231–242 (2011).

  3. 3.

    & The politicization of climate change and polarization in the American public's views of global warming, 2001–2010. Sociol. Quart. 52, 155–194 (2011).

  4. 4.

    in Encyclopedia of Corporate Social Responsibility 2606–2610 (Springer, 2013).

  5. 5.

    , & PISA 2006: An assessment of scientific literacy. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 46, 865–883 (2009).

  6. 6.

    , , , & Opportunities and challenges in next generation standards. Science 340, 276–277 (2013).

  7. 7.

    & Science Education in Europe: Critical Reflections Vol. 13 (The Nuffield Foundation, 2008).

  8. 8.

    , , & (eds) Education and Sustainability: Responding to the Global Challenge (IUCN Commission on Education and Communication, 2002).

  9. 9.

    & Climate change gaming on board and screen: A review. Simulat. Gaming 44, 253–271 (2013).

  10. 10.

    From content to context: Videogames as designed experience. Educ. Res. 35, 19–29 (2006).

  11. 11.

    , & (eds) Games for a New Climate: Experiencing the Complexity of Future Risks (Boston Univ., The Frederick S. Pardee Center for the Study of the Longer-Range Future, 2012).

  12. 12.

    Epistemic frames for epistemic games. Comput. Educ. 46, 223–234 (2006).

  13. 13.

    Good Video Games and Good Learning (Peter Lang, 2007).

  14. 14.

    & Quality criteria for visions and visioning in sustainability science. Sustain. Sci. 9, 497–512 (2014).

  15. 15.

    Video games in education. Int. J. Intell. Games & Simulation 2, 49–62 (2003).

  16. 16.

    & Rules of Play: Game Design Fundamentals (MIT Press, 2004).

  17. 17.

    Reality is Broken: Why Games Make Us Better and How They Can Change the World (Penguin, 2011).

  18. 18.

    & Integrating climate change mechanics into a common pool resource game. Simulat. Gaming 44, 427–451 (2013).

  19. 19.

    Thinking in Systems: A Primer (Chelsea Green, 2008).

  20. 20.

    Education for ecology: Science, aesthetics, spirit, and ceremony. Manage. Learn. 38, 27–44 (2007).

  21. 21.

    & Three views of systems theories and their implications for sustainability education. J. Manage. Educ. 33, 323–347 (2009).

  22. 22.

    Deep learning and education for sustainability. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. 4, 44–56 (2003).

  23. 23.

    et al. World Climate: A role-play simulation of climate negotiations. Simulat. Gaming (2014).

  24. 24.

    et al. Climate interactive: The C-ROADS climate policy model. Syst. Dynam. Rev. 28, 295–305 (2012).

  25. 25.

    et al. Management flight simulators to support climate negotiations. Environ. Modell. Softw. 44, 122–135 (2013).

  26. 26.

    Serious Games. (University Press of America, 1987).

  27. 27.

    Serious games, debriefing, and simulation/gaming as discipline. Simulat. Gaming 41, 898–920 (2010).

  28. 28.

    From edutainment to serious games: A change in the use of game characteristics. Games and Culture 5, 177–198 (2010).

  29. 29.

    Engaging by design: How engagement strategies in popular computer and video games can inform instructional design. Educ. Tech. Res. 53, 67–83 (2005).

  30. 30.

    , , , & The Hopkins games program: Conclusions from seven years of research. Educ. Res. 2, 3–7 (1973).

  31. 31.

    et al. Computer gaming and interactive simulations for learning: A meta-analysis. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 34, 229–243 (2006).

  32. 32.

    , , , & Assessment in and of serious games: An overview. Adv. Hum. Comput. Inter. 2013, 136864 (2013).

  33. 33.

    , , , & A systematic literature review of empirical evidence on computer games and serious games. Comput. Educ. 59, 661–686 (2012).

  34. 34.

    et al. Relationships between game attributes and learning outcomes: Review and research proposals. Simulat. Gaming 40, 217–266 (2008).

  35. 35.

    & A review of scholarship on assessing experiential learning effectiveness. Simulat. Gaming 35, 270–293 (2004).

  36. 36.

    & The Use of Computer and Video Games for Learning: A Review of the Literature (Learning and Skills Development Agency, 2004).

  37. 37.

    , & Assessment in simulation and gaming: A review of the last 40 years. Simulat. Gaming 40, 553–568 (2009).

  38. 38.

    What Video Games have to Teach us about Learning and Literacy: Revised and Updated Edition (Macmillan, 2007).

  39. 39.

    , & The motivational pull of video games: A self-determination theory approach. Motiv. Emotion 30, 344–360 (2006).

  40. 40.

    2014 Essential Facts about the Computer and Video Game Industry (Entertainment Software Association, 2014).

  41. 41.

    State & County Quickfacts (United States Census Bureau, 2014);

  42. 42.

    Video games: A route to large-scale STEM education? Science 323, 79–82 (2009).

  43. 43.

    & A game framework for scenario generation for the CO2 issue. Simulat. Gaming 14, 317–344 (1983).

  44. 44.

    in Proceedings of the 28th Annual International Conference of the International Simulation and Gaming Association (eds Geurts, J., Joldersma, C. & Roelofs, E.) 301–311 (Tilburg Univ. Press, 1997).

  45. 45.

    A climate change board game for interdisciplinary communication and education. Simulat. Gaming 44, 328–348 (2013).

  46. 46.

    Clim'way (Cap-Sciences, 2008);

  47. 47.

    Pervasive learning games: Explorations of hybrid educational gamescapes. Simulat. Gaming 37, 41–55 (2006).

  48. 48.

    , , & Pervasive games: Bringing computer entertainment back to the real world. Comput. Entertain. 3, 4 (2005).

  49. 49.

    Pervasive in CHI'11 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (eds Begole, B. & Kellogg, W.) 1085–1088 (Association for Computing Machinery, 2011).

  50. 50.

    et al. in Proceedings of the International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games (eds El-Nasr, M. S., Consalvo, M. & Feiner, S.) 49–56 (Association for Computing Machinery, 2012).

  51. 51.

    & Direct Action Games: Games Meet the Real World [speech presented at the Games for Change Festival] (New York, 2010).

  52. 52.

    , & Evaluation of a pervasive game for domestic energy engagement among teenagers. Comput. Entertain. 7, 54 (2009).

  53. 53.

    Habitat (Elevator Entertainment, 2013);

  54. 54.

    , , & Greenify: A real-world action game for climate change education. Simulat. Gaming 44, 349–365 (2013).

  55. 55.

    et al. in CHI'13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (eds Mackay, W. E., Brewster, S. & Bødker, S.) 1497–1502 (Association for Computing Machinery, 2013).

  56. 56.

    SMARTIC (PoLAR Projects, 2013);

  57. 57.

    & EcoChains: Arctic Crisis (PoLAR Projects, 2014);

  58. 58.

    Fate of the World (Red Redemption, 2011).

  59. 59.

    Video game: Playing with the planet. Nature Clim. Change 1, 17–18 (2011).

  60. 60.

    Climate Mission 3D - A World Saving Game (Nokia, 2011);

  61. 61.

    FutureCoast (PoLAR Projects, 2014);

  62. 62.

    Debriefing: Toward a systematic assessment of theory and practice. Simulat. Gaming 23, 145–160 (1992).

  63. 63.

    , & Three levels of learning in simulations: Participating, debriefing, and journal writing. Simulat. Gaming 23, 174–185 (1992).

  64. 64.

    , & in Proceedings of the International Conference on Advances in Computer Entertainment Technology (eds Kato, H., Haller, M. & Vasilako, A. V.) 182–189 (Association for Computing Machinery, 2009).

  65. 65.

    , & Why we engage: How theories of human behavior contribute to our understanding of civic engagement in a digital era. Berkman Center Research Publication 21, 1–29 (2013).

  66. 66.

    , , & Information and expression in a digital age: Modeling Internet effects on civic participation. Commun. Res. 32, 531–565 (2005).

  67. 67.

    Technology, media, and political participation. Natl Civic Rev. 100, 41–44 (2011).

  68. 68.

    The Civic Potential of Video Games (MIT Press, 2008).

  69. 69.

    & Playful civic learning: Enabling reflection and lateral trust in game-based public participation. Int. J. Commun. 8, 759–786 (2014).

  70. 70.

    & in Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Communities and Technologies (eds Foth, M., Kjeldskov, J. & Paay, J.) 179–185 (Association for Computing Machinery, 2011).

  71. 71.

    Climate Diplomat (The Energy + Environment Foundation, 2009).

  72. 72.

    & Artic Saga (PoLAR Projects, 2014).

  73. 73.

    Anno 2070 (Ubisoft Entertainment, 2011).

  74. 74.

    Climate Challenge (Red Redemption, 2006);

  75. 75.

    WB Climate (Amsgames, 2013);

  76. 76.

    Love Letters to the Future (Amythos Media, 2009);

Download references

Acknowledgements

J.S.W. and J.J.L. acknowledge the National Science Foundation for supporting this work under grant 1239783. We thank S. L. Pfirman for guidance on this manuscript.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Mathematics, Science, and Technology, Teachers College, Columbia University, 525 W 120th St, New York 10027, USA

    • Jason S. Wu
    •  & Joey J. Lee

Authors

  1. Search for Jason S. Wu in:

  2. Search for Joey J. Lee in:

Contributions

J.S.W. and J.J.L. jointly conceived this article. J.S.W. wrote the first draft. J.J.L. assisted with significant feedback, revision and editing of the final version.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joey J. Lee.

About this article

Publication history

Received

Accepted

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2566

Further reading