Play ul Ci izen Discussion Space o Help S ee Socie y Towa ds
Wa e Secu i y
Paul Wa son1, Paul Hollins1, Rebecca Ha is1, Simon Egen eld -Nielsen2, Ka ha ina Kolle 3,
Claudia Fabian3 and Ba ba a Kieslinge 3
1Uni e si y o G ea e Manches e , Bol on, UK
2Se ious Games In e ac i e, Copenhagen, Denma k
3Cen e o Social Inno a ion, Vienna, Aus ia
p.a.hollins@bol on.ac.uk
.ha i[email p o ec ed]
simon@se iousgames.ne
kkolle @zsi.a
[email protected]
kieslinge @zsi.a
Abs ac : In his pape , we explo e he use o a play ul dilemma ac i i y, a su ey and public da a analysis o spa k ci izen
awa eness and e lec ion on wa e use wi hin he UK. Wa e secu i y ensu es access o esh wa e o su i al and socie y’s
needs. The e is signi ican ci izen agency in wa e secu i y ha impac s he eshwa e ese es. Howe e , in many coun ies,
wa e secu i y is unde -discussed. Encou aging spaces o indi iduals o assess hei wa e use, iden i y was e, and adop
sus ainable p ac ices is key o sus aining eshwa e esou ces o he u u e. We p esen a case s udy conduc ed as pa o
he GREAT p ojec o s imula e ci izen discussion on wa e use and i s subsequen impac on he b oade wa e sys em.
Th ough a se ies o ac i i ies, ci izens can e lec on hei wa e use, conside he u u e o ecas o wa e secu i y wi hin he
UK, and expe ience a play ul dilemma o sa e a ci y om he e ec s o d ough . In his dilemma, playe s a e pa o an
o ganisa ion ackling a ci y’s wa e c isis. Faced wi h limi ed wa e esou ces, playe s analyse da a on he popula ion's usage
and sugges beha iou changes o educe consump ion. The challenge lies in balancing he need o wa e conse a ion wi h
he isk o p oposing changes ha a e esis ed by he popula ion. The playe s mus con ince he acili a o o bo h he
p ac icali y and accep abili y o hei plans. Success es o es wa e secu i y, bu ailu e e eals he consequences o inac ion.
Wi hin his play ul discussion space, we c ea e an exchange o ci izens o elici a i udes and p e e ences on cu en wa e
use and explo e how indi iduals migh be “nudged” in o less was e ul beha iou . In his pape , we desc ibe he co-design o
his quali a i e app oach, sha e indings on a i udes and p e e ences elici ed (n = 19), and e lec on his me hod as a ool
o os e ing awa eness and meaning ul ci izen discussions.
Keywo ds: Dilemma game, Play ul educa ion, Clima e con e sa ion, Wa e sus ainabili y
1. Backg ound
Wa e secu i y e e s o socie y's access o esh wa e o su i al and sus ainable con inua ion. Sus aining
wa e sys ems amid clima e change and popula ion g ow h is complex, equi ing in as uc u e, indus ies, and
ag icul u e o conside usage (He e al., 2021). Collec i ely, popula ion habi s signi ican ly a ec na ional
ese es. Fo ins ance, daily domes ic use pe pe son is 379 li es in he US e sus 147 in F ance (BSI, 2024, pp.
31–32). Despi e ci izen impac , wa e use emains unde discussed (BSI, 2024), c ea ing a disconnec be ween
wa e secu i y needs and public unde s anding o sus ainable engagemen .
To educa e he public on clima e issues, he adi ional knowledge de ici model assumes lack o unde s anding
is a ba ie o ac ion (Simis e al., 2016). While in o ma ion is c ucial, his model p esumes people will adjus
beha iou once in o med. Ye , e en when con en is hea d, pe sonal belie s, alues, and ci cums ances shape
clima e engagemen . Two-way discussion allows ci izens o in e p e and in eg a e new knowledge h ough
hese subjec i e lenses (E inge & Pain e , 2023). Dialogue os e s sha ed unde s anding, opens di e se
pe spec i es, and suppo s decision-making (P öppe , e al., 2024). In sho , sa e spaces o clima e discussion
can aid in e p e a ion and help o e come beha iou al ba ie s.
Educa ional games suppo lea ning ou comes, hough a ension o en exis s be ween subjec dep h and
engaging gameplay. Play ul lea ning occupies a middle g ound be ween game-based lea ning and gami ica ion
(Plass e al., 2020). Game-based lea ning p esen s subjec s as sys ems o ules, choices, and consequences,
in i ing expe ien ial in e ac ion (Pe o a e al., 2013). Gameplay becomes he lea ning p ocess. Fo example,
nu sing s uden s de eloped p ocedu al knowledge o in a enous injec ions h ough a digi al game equi ing
app op ia e equipmen selec ion, u ning decision-making in o lea ning (Hwang & Chang, 2023). Gami ica ion
applies speci ic game ea u es, like poin s o achie emen s, o non-en e ainmen ac i i ies, enhancing
mo i a ion (De e ding e al., 2011). Howe e , he lea ning con en emains la gely unchanged. A play ul
864
The P oceedings o he 19 h Eu opean Con e ence on Games Based Lea ning
Paul Wa son e al.
app oach sub ly in eg a es game design p inciples in o lea ning ac i i ies. These ac i i ies align meaning ully
wi h game elemen s, mo ing beyond simple gami ica ion. Howe e , hey a e no ull games (Plass e al., 2020,
p. 5). Fo example, sc ip ed na a i es suppo ho el oom design decisions (Hamalainen, 2008) o wa e
managemen case wo k (Hummel e al., 2011). In hese examples, in e ac ion wi hin he game wo ld is limi ed
o isualising in o ma ion. The game wo ld and na a i e s uc u e suppo he in ended lea ning ac i i ies and
ou comes.
Social dilemmas occu when sho - e m sel -in e es con lic s wi h long- e m collec i e wellbeing (Van Lange e
al., 2013). In sus ainabili y con ex s, his e lec s how esou ce o e use oday may comp omise u u e socie al
needs. Social dilemma games o en adop a mac o pe spec i e o simula e how decisions bene i ing one g oup
can unde mine b oade sys ems (D uen & Zawadzki, 2021). Quick game ounds allow playe s o obse e impac s,
os e ing empa hy and showing how sus ainable coope a ion bene i s all (Ce u i, 2017). These games in oduce
co e concep s, p omp ing choice-making and expe ien ial lea ning. When amed a ound local issues, dilemmas
may engage communi ies in secu ing sus ainable esou ces (Meinzen-Dick e al., 2018). Re lec ion on pe sonal
esou ce use is p esen bu may no occu du ing gameplay due o he game’s mac o lens. Ins ead, i su aces
be ween ounds o a e wa d, when pa icipan s’ ene gy may be oo low o meaning ul sensemaking (Ce u i,
2017; Liao e al., 2023).
Social dilemmas o e a help ul amewo k o pa icipa o y ac i i ies p omo ing discussion on esou ce no ms
and ai ness. The dilemma becomes a ocal poin whe e di e se pe spec i es con e ge, and discussion os e s
idea ion (Janssen e al., 2023). Recen wo k has shown discussion can be a co e mechanic shaping playe choice.
Fo example, Me y e al. (2025) p esen ed a dilemma game on a “g een oo s” ini ia i e. I enabled ole-play
among housing s akeholde s o explo e policy comp omises. Th ough dialogue, playe s engaged wi h he
dilemma and di e se pe spec i es, ad oca ing ai e policy de ails.
To con ibu e o wa e sus ainabili y educa ion, we employ a co-design me hodology o de elop a dilemma
discussion as a concise, play ul ac i i y. Building on p e ious dilemma games, we u ilise his play ul app oach
no o unde s and he socio-economic dynamics o a b oade wa e sys em, bu a he o e lec on and engage
wi h sensemaking on sus ainable ci izen wa e use, some hing ha ci izens ha e he powe o adjus in hei
daily li es. D awing on p inciples o collabo a i e game design (Wang & Huang, 2021), we u ilise a sha ed space,
na a i e, coope a i e goals, and social dilemma aming o incen i ise sus ainabili y discussions and sense-
making ha elici s e lec ion and a i udes owa ds indi idual wa e use. Th ough play ul engagemen , we look
o d aw ou wha easonable ci izen wa e use looks like and explo e he impac o his app oach on indi idual
wa e beha iou .
2. Play ul Dilemma Design
This s udy p esen s ini ial wo k designing and implemen ing he "Sa e he Ci y" play ul dilemma. A collabo a ion
wi h Wa e wise (Wa e wise 2025), a UK non-p o i o ganisa ion ha p omo e he “wise” use o wa e . We
u ilised he GREAT (Games Realising E ec i e and A ec i e T ans o ma ions) (Hollins e al., 2023) co-design
me hodology o explo e how game-based app oaches can os e public discussion on easonable ci izen wa e
use.
The GREAT me hodology is an eigh -s ep p ocess o co-designing game-based ac i i ies ha acili a e
communica ion be ween ci izens and policymake s. This app oach acili a es a "dialogue h ough games"
be ween hese s akeholde s, elici ing a i udes and p e e ences on clima e issues. S eps one o h ee ou line he
policymake 's goals and explo e how game-based ac i i ies can acili a e hese goals. These s eps culmina e in
he de elopmen o in e ac ions and suppo ing a e ac s. S ep ou ocuses on engaging he a ge g oup wi h
he designed app oach. S eps i e o eigh in ol e e alua ing he collec ed da a wi h s akeholde s, dissemina ing
indings o a b oade audience, and e lec ing on wha has been achie ed and wha can be imp o ed. This pape
co e s he wo k comple ed in s eps one o ou .
In s ep one wo kshops wi h Wa e wise, wo goals summa ised wha his case s udy should achie e:
• Imp o e public conside a ion owa ds wa e use
• Discuss wi h he public how hey would be willing o achie e wa e sus ainabili y in he UK
In he second s ep wo kshops, policymake s idea ed game concep s aimed a achie ing he goals es ablished in
he i s s ep. The ideas ha esona ed wi h he wo kshop g oup included:
865
The P oceedings o he 19 h Eu opean Con e ence on Games Based Lea ning
Paul Wa son e al.
• Na a i e o wa e use wi hin he b oade wa e sys em
• Ac i i ies ha allowed playe s o calcula e wa e consump ion pe day
• Scena ios in ol ing pe sonal wa e use and con lic s wi h he b oade wa e sys em
In s ep h ee, indus y pa ne Se ious Games In e ac i e (SGI) engaged wi h he lea ning goals and how hese
could be ep esen ed on hei Dilemma Based Lea ning (DiBL) pla o m (DiBL, 2025). On his pla o m, acili a o s
p esen discussion con en on sc een, while “playe s” join ia PC o mobile o o m eams, discuss, o e, and
commen . The pla o m enables di e en media o be deli e ed o indi idual de ices han wha ’s shown on he
acili a o ’s sc een, suppo ing a ied pe spec i es. The esul is a se o in e ac i e ac i i ies and dilemma
scena ios, wi h o es and choices eco ded h ough he pla o m.
Figu e 1: Facili a o and playe sc een using he DiBL pla o m. Playe s can see bo h he acili a o sc een
and hei own sc een. Playe sc een can be used o ex en y, o ing, and in o ma ion deli e y
Th ough a se ies o mee ings wi h Wa e wise, he ollowing ac i i ies we e chosen:
Ac i i y 1: Wa e Use Su ey: Playe s a e su eyed on hei cu en pe cep ion o wa e supply wi hin he UK
and asked ques ions abou daily wa e use (Wa son, 2025 S1). The esul is an es ima e o how much wa e each
playe uses each day. The esul s a e p i a e, a pe sonal poin o e lec ion and p ime o examining wa e use
in o ma ion in he play ul dilemma (Ac i i y 3).
Ac i i y 2: Da a Explo a ion o Fu u e Wa e Supply: Using wo g aphs (Wa son, 2025 S2), playe s mus iew and
discuss he da a o c ea e a i le and ag line o a newspape a icle on he ou look o wa e supply in he UK.
This ac i i y aims o g ound playe s' iews on wa e supply h ough da a and he impo ance o conside ing
wa e use.
Ac i i y 3: Sa e he Ci y Play ul Dilemma: (See igu e 2 o high-le el low) Playe s a e in o med ha hey a e
pa o HYDRO, a g oup in cha ge o main aining he wa e supply in he ic i ious ci y, Bel on. Bel on is acing a
wa e c isis, and HYDRO mus conside he wa e beha iou s ha he popula ion can easonably change o hal e
ba h oom wa e use. Pa icipan s collabo a i ely analyse ci izen ba h oom wa e use da a (Wa son, 2025 S4) o
p opose easible beha iou -changes and suppo ing s a egies. The sha ed pla o m and na a i e p o ide a
common space and con ex o discussions. The na a i e is kep local o UK pa icipan s by using d ough as he
cause, and ba h oom wa e use in o ma ion simila o UK habi s. The mission a icula es he o e a ching goal,
while he na a i e s uc u e in oduces a dilemma ega ding wha wa e use should change and posi ions he
g oup wi h a sha ed esponsibili y o esol ing i . The playe s' ac ions a e o delibe a e and p esen plans o
hal e wa e use. These ac ions do no in e ac wi h he game wo ld un il a plan is o med. Like game-based
lea ning, he ac ions o discussion and sensemaking a e he equi ed ou comes o his play ul ac i i y. Once plans
ha e been submi ed, playe s hen o e on hei p e e ed cou se o ac ion. The acili a o e alua es he plan's
impac : subs an ial sa ings esul in he ci y's sal a ion, mode a e success yields pa ial p og ess, and insu icien
e o s lead o con inued c isis. The esul ing na a i e is deli e ed o pa icipan s h ough he playe and
acili a o sc eens.
866
The P oceedings o he 19 h Eu opean Con e ence on Games Based Lea ning
Paul Wa son e al.
Figu e 2: Sa e he Ci y play ul ac i i y co e p og ession loop
3. Pilo
A pilo was conduc ed using a con enience sample (n = 6) o es imings and echnology. A Game Expe ience
Ques ionnai e (GEQ) (IJssels eijn e al., 2013) was adminis e ed o explo e pa icipan s' pe cep ions o he
play ul dilemma expe ience. GEQ uses a se ies o 33, 5-poin Like scale ques ions (0 = no a all, 1 = sligh ly, 2
= mode a ely, 3 = ai ly, 4 = ex emely). A bug in he sys em in e up ed he play ul dilemma du ing his pilo ,
causing a pe iod o inac ion. F om he GEQ (see Table 1), pa icipan s epo ed limi ed nega i e expe iences
du ing and a e play. The posi i e expe ience was sligh du ing play (M = 1.13, SD = 1.02), bu he equi alen
s anda d de ia ion sugges s some a iabili y in his. Posi i e expe ience a e play was mode a e. The game
es ablished a sligh o mode a e sense o low and mode a e imme sion. Playe s ound ha he play ul dilemma
and suppo ing ac i i ies encou aged discussion on wa e use and enjoyed using da a wi hin he play ul dilemma.
Timings o all ac i i ies and wo ded con en we e adjus ed based on eedback om his pilo .
Table 1: GEQ co e module desc ip i e s a is ics. 0 = "no a all", 1 = "sligh ly", 2 = "mode a ely", 3 = " ai ly",
and 4 = "ex emely"
GEQ Ca ego y
Mean
SD
SE
Compe ence
1.63
0.98
0.40
Imme sion
2.30
0.50
0.20
Flow
1.84
0.88
0.36
Tension/Annoyance:
0.33
0.52
0.21
Challenge
1.73
0.94
0.39
Posi i e a ec
2.53
0.75
0.30
Nega i e a ec
0.25
0.32
0.13
Posi i e Expe ience
1.13
1.02
0.42
Nega i e expe ience
0.47
0.25
0.10
Ti edness
0.33
0.52
0.21
Re u ning o Reali y
0.28
0.33
0.13
4. Me hods
In o al, 19 pa icipan s ( emale = 10, mean age = 46, min age = 22, max age = 71) we e ec ui ed o he main
ial. A pa icipan call was placed h ough he communica ion channels (e.g., LinkedIn, Facebook) o Wa e wise.
The call explained ha we a e explo ing play ul app oaches o discussing wa e use. Th ough he sign-up p ocess,
pa icipan s we e sc eened o make su e hey we e o e 18 and li ing in he UK. No incen i es we e o e ed o
pa icipan s in his s udy.
4.1 Expe imen al Se up
Sessions ook place be ween Ma ch and Ap il 2025. Each session had 3-6 pa icipan s. All session discussions
ook place online h ough Zoom calls. This pla o m was chosen as i has he po en ial o a b oad each. The
DiBL pla o m equi es an open webpage o load he playe sc een. The acili a o deli e s hei sc een h ough
an online ideo o ma . Playe s will hen ha e o engage wi h he acili a o sc een and hei own sc een. The
playe sc een can be accessed on a phone, able , o web b owse . (See igu e 4).
867
The P oceedings o he 19 h Eu opean Con e ence on Games Based Lea ning
Paul Wa son e al.
Figu e 4: Pa icipan s needed o na iga e be ween he zoom discussion and hei own webpage o ake pa
in he sessions
4.2 P ocedu e
Pa icipan s would a i e online o he alloca ed Zoom session. The in o ma ion shee was discussed, and
consen o ake pa was ga he ed (10 mins). Then ollowed acili a ed ac i i ies. Ac i i y one (10 mins), ac i i y
wo (15 mins), and ac i i y h ee (15 mins). A e lec i e su ey was hen gi en o he pa icipan s h ough he
DiBL pla o m which asked abou hei expe ience (Wa son, 2025 S4). Du ing his e lec i e sec ion, he ex
en y o wha pa icipan s enjoyed he mos and leas appea ed on sc een o engage some inal hough s on his
e lec ion (10 mins). One week la e , a ollow-up su ey was sen o he pa icipan s, which asked he same
ques ions om ac i i y one, along wi h addi ional ques ions inqui ing abou any changes in beha iou (Wa son,
2025 S6).
4.3 Da a cap u e
Video sessions and ansc ip ions we e eco ded h ough Zoom ea u es. T ansc ip ions we e checked and
anonymised a e sessions we e comple ed. T ansc ip s we e used o hema ic analysis o discussions (Cla ke
& B aun, 2017). The hemes explo ed we e Wa e Reduc ion Concep s, he gene al a eas whe e pa icipan s el
wa e sa ings could be made, Wa e Reduc ion Ideas, speci ic ac ions o educe wa e use, and Reasons Agains ,
which included easons o disag eemen wi h sugges ed ideas. Tex en y and o ing beha iou we e eco ded
on he DiBL pla o m and ecei ed by he esea che a e he sessions we e conduc ed. Mic oso Fo ms we e
used o a ollow-up su ey and a sign-up su ey. Th ough he sign-up su ey, basic demog aphic da a on age
and gende we e ga he ed.
5. Resul s
Th ough he ollow-up su ey, pa icipan s we e asked i hey had made any changes o hei wa e use habi s.
Ou o 19 pa icipan s, 16 esponded. Eigh s a ed no changes in wa e use. Fou s a ed pu pose ul e o in
u ning o unning aps, wo s a ed aking sho e showe s, one s a ed ying o gene ally be mo e wa e
e icien , and wo s a ed ha hey had made changes, bu did no gi e de ails on wha changes.
Pa icipan s we e su eyed as pa o ac i i y one in he Zoom sessions, and one week la e on hei epo ed
hei wa e use. Al hough o e all mean wa e use was educed (756.59 L – 725.68 L), his was no signi ican
( (15) 0.61, p = 0.531) ac oss he g oup.
Table 2: The wa e educ ions hemes and ideas gene a ed om he Sa e he Ci y play ul ac i i y
Wa e Reduc ion
Concep s
Wa e Reduc ion Ideas No. P’s
ag ee
Reasons Agains
Reduc ions in showe
ime
Showe no mo e han 4- 5 pe week 8 Voca ion, amily needs, skin
condi ions
Reduce showe ime o 4-6 mins
7
Change in showe
habi s
Wash hai less 3
Reduce Toile
lushing
I i is yellow, le i mellow (some o he
ime)
10 Conside ed unsani a y
Tu n o aps
B ushing ee h
8
868
The P oceedings o he 19 h Eu opean Con e ence on Games Based Lea ning
Paul Wa son e al.
Wa e Reduc ion
Concep s
Wa e Reduc ion Ideas No. P’s
ag ee
Reasons Agains
Ba h oom ha dwa e
Ins all e icien de ices
3
Expensi e, should be go e nmen
suppo ed
Main enance and leakage
2
Subsidies o ba h oom ha dwa e
4
SMART me e ing
Pe sonal moni o ing
5
No one should be penalised as wa e
use is dynamic be ween households.
Po en ial o s a e con ol e ec s
Compa ing o collec i e 7
Wa e awa eness P omo e bene i s o less wa e use on sel
+ collec i e + en i onmen
5
Volume used + Wa e a ge s
8
Dynamic P icing I use mo e wa e , you pay mo e 3
No penalise ce ain amily
demog aphics and app ecia e
dynamic be ween households.
Wa e ecycling
Rain ca che s
6
G ey wa e use
1
The ollow-up su ey included a 5-poin Like scale ques ion (1 = s ongly disag ee, 5 = s ongly ag ee) on
whe he hey ound hemsel es conside ing wa e use mo e, and i hey had discussed wa e use mo e. The
popula ion sample was no no mally dis ibu ed, so a one-sample Wilcoxon T- es was conduc ed on he median
esponse agains he mid-poin o 3.00. A signi ican de ia ion below 3.00 would sugges a median disag eemen
wi h he s a emen , while a de ia ion abo e 3.00 would indica e ag eemen . The e was a signi ican posi i e
ag eemen ha pa icipan s had been conside ing hei wa e use mo e (V=105.50, p=0.006) wi h a la ge e ec
size (0.76). Discussions o wa e use we e no signi ican (V=51.00, p=0.685) wi h a small e ec size (0.13). This
sugges s a median neu al esponse.
Table 2 summa ises he hema ic analysis o he Sa e he Ci y play ul discussions. Pa icipan s commonly
suppo ed educing showe ime, oile lushing, and u ning o aps while b ushing ee h. While i was
conside ed ha many could adop hese habi s, ba ie s exis ed (e.g. amily size, oca ions, skin condi ions). One
pa icipan opposed lushing educ ion, ci ing hygiene conce ns. Tu ning o aps was seen as easy and
su p isingly impac ul when hey ealised how much wa e uns h ough he ap each minu e. Upg ading o
wa e -e icien de ices was well ega ded, i subsidised. O he wise, i was conside ed cos -p ohibi i e, despi e
i s po en ial e ec i eness.
When discussing suppo i e in as uc u e o wa e use educ ion, SMART me e ing was posi i ely ecei ed o
aising awa eness o pe sonal wa e use and leakages. Howe e , conce ns eme ged a ound po en ial
su eillance and mic omanagemen h ough he da a gene a ed. Pa icipan s saw alue in compa ing usage da a
wi h o he s, bu only i anonymised. Iden i iable da a was iewed as a p i acy iola ion. Th ough da a,
compa isons wi h anonymised collec i es we e iewed as mo i a ing and help ul o unde s anding easonable
wa e use and a po en ial a enue o gami ica ion and goal se ing.
Pa icipan s welcomed in o ma ion campaigns, no ing he need o clea e guidance o suppo beha iou al
change. Ideas included heal h bene i s o educed washing, local wa e a ge s, and en i onmen al impac s.
Dynamic p icing was a ou ably ecei ed in one session, p o ided i didn' un ai ly a ec amilies o hose wi h
ba ie s o wa e e iciency. Sugges ions o wa e ecycling and g eywa e use eme ged, al hough wi hou
conc e e p oposals. While pa icipan s belie ed UK ain all could suppo non-d inking wa e euse, p ac ical
implemen a ion emained unclea .
Pa icipan s we e asked o w i e one sen ence on wha hey enjoyed he mos and leas . When epo ing on
wha hey enjoyed he mos , eigh pa icipan s men ioned g oup discussions and hea ing o he s' poin s o iew.
Fou speci ically men ioned he Sa e he Ci y exe cise, one men ioned lea ning abou hei wa e use, one
men ioned he compu e game-s yle o he play ul dilemma, and ano he men ioned ha he ac i i ies used
da a. When epo ing on wha hey enjoyed he leas , wo men ioned he a icle ac i i y as i equi ed c ea i e
hough , wo men ioned seeing how much wa e hey used, and one men ioned echnical issues o logging in.
When su eyed "How was you expe ience o he session (1= e y nega i e and 5= e y posi i e", he a e age
esponse was 4.32 (SD=0.58). A Wilcoxon one-sample - es agains he middle alue o 3 sugges s a signi ican
posi i e subjec i e a ec in he sessions (p= p < .001, = 171) wi h a la ge e ec size (1.00).
869
The P oceedings o he 19 h Eu opean Con e ence on Games Based Lea ning
Paul Wa son e al.
6. Discussion
We explo ed he use o a play ul dilemma and suppo ing ac i i ies o c ea e a discussion space whe e ci izens
could e lec on and ad ise a pa h o wa d o easonable wa e use a home.
Despi e he sho ime gi en o hese sessions, he play ul dilemma p omp ed discussion on easonable wa e
educ ions. P io games emphasised s akeholde dynamics a a socie al le el, and as such, p edominan ly
gene a e knowledge and conce n wi hin ha aming (Ce u i, 2017; Cheng e al., 2019; Liao e al., 2023). Gi en
he igh e ocus on ci izen wa e use, his play ul dilemma was able o highligh sus ainable and ai use o daily
wa e habi s. Sel -washing ou ines became a dominan s a egy due o he dilemma’s ocus on ba h oom wa e
use and equi alen eal-wo ld impac . Discussion shi ed owa d communica ing hese habi s o Bel on
esiden s, wi h sugges ions on p omo ing change h ough policy and in as uc u e (e.g. SMART me e ing,
dynamic p icing, in o ma ional ools). Two hemes in luenced he accep ance o such measu es. Fi s ,
pa icipan s alued insigh in o pe sonal and collec i e wa e use o in o m wa e beha iou . Second, he e was
conce n abou ensu ing no demog aphic is un ai ly penalised by igid ideals o e icien wa e use.
Dilemma game s udies ha e ocused e alua ions on how concep ual knowledge o a dilemma is de eloped
h ough play and he ideas o awa eness and conce n ha a ise a e playing he game (Cheng e al., 2019; Nese
e al., 2020). Some assessmen on how his expe ience may shape sus ainable beha iou a e play (Albe a elli
e al., 2018). Ou play ul dilemma and suppo ing ac i i ies may aid gene al awa eness and conce n abou wa e
use, simila o ull dilemma games. Pa icipan s epo ed hey conside ed hei wa e usage mo e. Howe e ,
hey we e no ound o discuss wa e beha iou mo e han no mal, which migh be expec ed i indi iduals we e
g appling wi h o mo e in e es ed in he wa e habi s. No signi ican educ ion in o e all epo ed wa e use was
obse ed in he ollow-up su ey, bu 8/16 pa icipan s who ook pa in he ollow-up su ey epo ed
pu pose ul changes in hei wa e use (sho e showe s and u ning o aps). This sugges s ha his app oach
may help nudge easily adjus able beha iou s ha ha e limi ed impac elsewhe e in a ci izen’s beha iou .
GEQ sco es om he pilo indica e a gene ally posi i e expe ience. Howe e , low and imme sion we e only
mode a e, sugges ing ha he ac i i y unc ioned well as a discussion bu less so as a game expe ience. Designed
o p omp discou se and e lec ion on ci izen wa e use, he na a i e s uc u e and sha ed goal e ec i ely
s imula ed b oad inqui y in o esponsible wa e p ac ices. While he absence o game-wo ld in e ac ions
acili a ed immedia e discussion, inco po a ing addi ional game elemen s, such as ole-speci ic sub-goals aligned
wi h a collec i e objec i e, could enhance engagemen and os e deepe dialogue (Oksanen & Hämäläinen,
2014; Wang & Huang, 2021). Ye , in oducing complex, non-discu si e mechanics may shi ocus owa d
gameplay na iga ion, po en ially de ac ing om he in ended sensemaking p ocess (Liao e al., 2023).
The play ul dilemma and he discussion i os e ed we e highligh ed se e al imes as he mos enjoyable pa o
he session. This sugges s ha he o ma has he po en ial o engage a a ie y o pe spec i es in a wa e
con e sa ion. Sligh delays in he ne wo k can os e awkwa d discussion momen s whe e indi iduals alk o e
each o he , and a gap in he discussion can seem mo e poignan han a eal-wo ld con e sa ion. Howe e , his
did no hal discussion o e he opics p esen ed. Those who engaged wi h a mobile de ice needed o be
echnologically sa y o use bo h he Zoom applica ion and DiBL playe sc een. Howe e , wi h acili a ion, he
pla o m deli e ed da a, su eys, game exposi ion, and consequences o dilemmas.
Limi a ions on he discussions should be no ed. While he discussions d ew on di e se pe spec i es, he g oup
o ma may ha e sub ly in luenced he con ibu ions. Social desi abili y bias, whe e esponses align wi h
pe cei ed g oup no ms, can dis o sus ainabili y discou se (Be gen & Labon é, 2020). We sough o mi iga e
his by acili a ing discussions ha encou aged di e gen iews and os e ed appo . None heless, when
in e p e ing consensus, i is essen ial o conside he in luence o dominan na a i es. Fu u e esea ch could
s eng hen indings by inco po a ing oppo uni ies o anonymous e lec ion and indi idual inpu beyond g oup
se ings.
Limi a ions on how we measu ed beha iou change h ough sel - epo ed wa e use a e also suscep ible o
social desi abili y bias. I was imp ac ical o ga he ac ual wa e usage du ing he s udy. Imp o emen s o his
me hod could be made by inding independen wa e use obse a ions o iangula e wi h sel - epo ing.
The pa icipan pool mus be conside ed. The call may ha e a ac ed ci izens who a e al eady in e es ed in
wa e sus ainabili y, which could impac discussion and epo ed beha iou . Rep oducing he app oach ac oss
di e en demog aphics would help iden i y he ype and mix o ci izens his app oach may o may no impac .
870
The P oceedings o he 19 h Eu opean Con e ence on Games Based Lea ning
Paul Wa son e al.
7. Conclusions
This s udy demons a es he po en ial o play ul dilemmas o os e meaning ul e lec ion on sus ainable wa e
use a he household le el. While pa icipan s epo ed inc eased awa eness and some beha iou al shi s,
b oade engagemen wi h wa e habi s emained limi ed. The ac i i y unc ioned e ec i ely as a discu si e ool,
wi h i s na a i e s uc u e and sha ed goal p omp ing c i ical dialogue, al hough he game-like imme sion was
mode a e. Social dynamics shaped he discou se, unde sco ing he need o u u e designs o suppo bo h
indi idual exp ession and g oup exchange. Wi h ca e ul acili a ion and a ge ed enhancemen s, such
in e en ions could play a aluable ole in changing low-ba ie , sus ainable beha iou s.
Acknowledgemen s
Funded by he Eu opean Union. Views and opinions exp essed a e howe e hose o he au ho (s) only and do
no necessa ily e lec hose o he Eu opean Union. Nei he he Eu opean Union no he g an ing au ho i y can
be held esponsible o hem.
E hics Decla a ion: This s udy ecei ed e hical app o al om he Uni e si y o Manches e E hics Commi ee.
AI Decla a ion: AI ools we e used o check g amma and help ph ase some con en .
Re e ences
Albe a elli, S., F a e nali, P., He e a, S., Melenho s , M., No ak, J., Pasini, C., Rizzoli, A.E. and Ro ondi, C. (2018) A su ey
on he design o gami ied sys ems o ene gy and wa e sus ainabili y. Games, 9(3), p.38.
Be gen, N. and Labon é, R. (2020) “E e y hing is pe ec , and we ha e no p oblems”: de ec ing and limi ing social
desi abili y bias in quali a i e esea ch. Quali a i e heal h esea ch, 30(5), pp.783-792.
BSI (2024) Thi s o Change: Accele a ing P og ess o a Wa e Secu e Wo ld 2024. ep. BSI G oup. A ailable a :
h ps://www.bsig oup.com/si easse s/pd /en/insigh s-and-media/campaigns/bsi_ hi s _ o _change_2024_ inal.pd
(Accessed: 02 Feb ua y 2025).
Ce u i, N. (2017) Social dilemmas in en i onmen al economics and policy conside a ions: A e iew. E hics in P og ess, 8(1),
pp.156-173.
Cheng, P.H., Yeh, T.K., Tsai, J.C., Lin, C.R. and Chang, C.Y. (2019) De elopmen o an issue-si ua ion-based boa d game: A
sys emic lea ning en i onmen o wa e esou ce adap a ion educa ion. Sus ainabili y, 11(5), p.1341.
Cla ke, V. and B aun, V. (2017). Thema ic analysis. The jou nal o posi i e psychology, 12(3), pp.297-298.
D uen, P.B. and Zawadzki, S.J. (2021) Escaping he Clima e T ap: Pa icipa ion in a Clima e-Speci ic Social Dilemma
Simula ion Boos s Clima e-P o ec i e Mo i a ion and Ac ions. Sus ainabili y, 13(16), p.9438.
DIBL (2025) philosophy. A ailable a : h ps://dibl.eu/philosophy/ (Accessed: 05 Ma ch 2025).
E inge , J. and Pain e , J. (2023) The science o clima e con e sa ions. Social Media+ Socie y, 9(2), p.20563051231177930.
Hamalainen, R. (2008) Designing and e alua ing collabo a ion in a i ual game en i onmen o oca ional
lea ning. Compu e s & Educa ion, 50(1), pp.98-109.
He, C., Liu, Z., Wu, J., Pan, X., Fang, Z., Li, J. and B yan, B.A. (2021) Fu u e global u ban wa e sca ci y and po en ial
solu ions. Na u e communica ions, 12(1), p.4667.
Hummel, H.G., Van Houcke, J., Nadolski, R.J., Van de Hiele, T., Ku e s, H. and Löh , A. (2011) Sc ip ed collabo a ion in
se ious gaming o complex lea ning: E ec s o mul iple pe spec i es when acqui ing wa e managemen
skills. B i ish Jou nal o Educa ional Technology, 42(6), pp.1029-1041.
Hollins, P., Ashby, L., Iwendi, C., McGhee, P., Owe , J., D achsle , H., Bu gos, D., G i i hs, D., Kieslinge , B., Egen eld , S. and
Zacha iou, A. (2023) Oc obe . The Applica ion o Games o Engage Ci izens in Clima e Change Policy De elopmen .
In Eu opean Con e ence on Games Based Lea ning (pp. 887-XVIII). Academic Con e ences In e na ional Limi ed.
h ps://zenodo.o g/ eco ds/7802446
Janssen, M.A., Falk, T., Meinzen-Dick, R. and Vollan, B. (2023) Using games o social lea ning o p omo e sel -
go e nance. Cu en Opinion in En i onmen al Sus ainabili y, 62, p.101289.
Liao, K.H., Chiang, Y.S. and Chan, J.K.H. (2023) The le ee dilemma game: A game expe imen on lood managemen
decision-making. In e na ional jou nal o disas e isk educ ion, 90, p.103662.
Meinzen-Dick, R., Janssen, M.A., Kandikuppa, S., Cha u edi, R., Rao, K. and Theis, S. (2018) Playing games o sa e wa e :
Collec i e ac ion games o g oundwa e managemen in Andh a P adesh, India. Wo ld De elopmen , 107, pp.40-53.
Me y, A., Zacha iou, A. and Yau, J. (2025) Explo ing dilemma games in sus ainable u ban planning: A Cyp io case s udy on
u ban oo op u iliza ion o clima e change. In E3S Web o Con e ences (Vol. 608, p. 05010). EDP Sciences.
871
The P oceedings o he 19 h Eu opean Con e ence on Games Based Lea ning
Paul Wa son e al.
Nese , T.S., Ande sson, L., Uh q is , O. and Na a a, C. (2020) Se ious gaming o clima e adap a ion—assessing he
po en ial and challenges o a digi al se ious game o u ban clima e adap a ion. Sus ainabili y, 12(5), p.1789.
Oksanen, K. and Hämäläinen, R. (2014) Game mechanics in he design o a collabo a i e 3D se ious game. Simula ion &
Gaming, 45(2), pp.255-278.
P öppe , H.Y., an Eck, C.W. and Bakke , B.N. (2024) Clima e Change Con e sa ions Amongs Young Adul s: On
Con e sa ional Sa e y and he Sea ch o Consensus in Pola izing In e ac ions. En i onmen al Communica ion, pp.1-
16.
Simis, M.J., Madden, H., Caccia o e, M.A. and Yeo, S.K. (2016) The lu e o a ionali y: Why does he de ici model pe sis in
science communica ion?. Public unde s anding o science, 25(4), pp.400-414.
Wa son, P. (2025) “Supplemen a y Ma e ials o 'Play ul Ci izen Discussion Space o Help S ee Socie y Towa ds Wa e
Secu i y' pape ”. Zenodo. doi:10.5281/zenodo.16926830.
IJssels eijn, W.A., De Ko , Y.A. and Poels, K. (2013) The game expe ience ques ionnai e.
Wa e wise (2025) Abou Us. A ailable a : h ps://wa e wise.o g.uk/abou -us/ (Accessed: 05 Ma ch 2025).
Van Lange, P.A., Joi eman, J., Pa ks, C.D. and Van Dijk, E. (2013) The psychology o social dilemmas: A
e iew. O ganiza ional Beha io and Human Decision P ocesses, 120(2), pp.125-141.
Wang, C. and Huang, L. (2021) A Sys ema ic Re iew o Se ious Games o Collabo a i e Lea ning: Theo e ical F amewo k,
Game Mechanic and E iciency Assessmen . In e na ional Jou nal o Eme ging Technologies in Lea ning, 16(6).
872
The P oceedings o he 19 h Eu opean Con e ence on Games Based Lea ning
