This article concentrates on ways in which novel playful technologies can engage youth in co-creation of living environments. The presented study focuses on five selected prototypes of serious digital geogames and gamified storytelling that were developed specifically for younger generations of users. The analysis concentrates on reviewing their goals, game story, outcomes, and the results of testing serious digital geogames prototypes with youth. It leads to a set of identified urban planning engagement forms that can be well supported with the help of serious digital geogames. They include exploring landscapes, learning about places, learning about specific topics, reconstructing the past, envisioning the future, connecting with action projects, and communicating. The article concludes with the discussion of the main findings and perspectives for further research.
AhlqvistOLoffingTRamanathanJ, et al. (2012) Geospatial human-environment simulation through integration of massive multiplayer online games and geographic information systems. Transactions in GIS16(3): 331–350. Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
2.
AhlqvistOSchliederC (2018) Geogames and geoplay. game-based approaches to the analysis of geo-information. Part of the Advances in Geographic Information Science book series (AGIS). Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing Switzerland.
3.
ArnsteinSR (1969) A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners35: 216–224.
4.
CherryL (2011) Young voices on climate change: The Paul F-Brandwein 2010 NSTA Lecture. Journal of Science Education & Technology20: 208–213.
5.
CrowleyA (2015) Is anyone listening? The impact of children’s participation on public policy. International Journal of Children’s Rights23: 602–621.
6.
CunninghamH (1995) Children and Childhood in Western Society since 1500. (Studies in Modern History). New York, NY: Longman.
de AndradeBA (2020) Climate geogames: a new paradigm to games as civic engagement tools for urban heritage sustainability. International Journal of Environmental Resilience Research and Science - IJERRS2(1). DOI: 10.48075/ijerrs.v2i1.26003.
de SenaÍSMouraACM (2022) Mission-oriented in geodesign experience: teaching about cultural landscape values. In: International Conference on Computational Science and Its Applications. Cham: Springer.
11.
de SenaÍSPoplinAde AndradeB (2021) GeoMinasCraft: a serious geogame for geographical visualization and exploration. In: GeertmanSCMPettitCGoodspeedRet al. (eds) Urban Informatics and Future Cities. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 613–632. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-76059-5_30.
12.
de SenaÍSFonsecaBMde AndradeBA, et al. (2018) Minecraft como ferramenta de visualização e interpretação da paisagem de interesse para a geodiversidade de Minas Gerais - MG. Revista de Geografia35(4): 120. DOI: 10.51359/2238-6211.2018.238210.
13.
DevischO (2008) Should planners start playing computer games? Arguments from simcity and second life. Planning Theory & Practice9: 209–226.
14.
DevischOPoplinASofronieS (2016) The gamification of civic participation. Two experiments in improving the skills of citizens to reflect collectively on spatial issues. Journal of Urban Technology23(2): 81–102.
15.
FassbinderH (1995) City forums and planning strategies: the example of the Berlin city forum. In: International Urban Design Congress ‘Managing Urban Change'. Helsinki, Finnland: University of Art and Industrial Design.
16.
GelernterD (1991) Mirror Worlds: The Universe in a Box?Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
17.
GordonEManosevitchE (2010) Augmented deliberation: merging physical and virtual interaction to engage communities in urban planning. New Media and Society13: 75–95.
18.
GordonESchirraS (2012) Playing with Empathy: Digital Role-Playing Games. Brisbane: Public Meetings.
19.
HartR (1992) Children's Participation. From Tokenism to Citizenship. Florence: U. I. essays.
20.
HorelliL (1997) A methodological approach to children's participation in urban planning. Scandinavian Housing & Planning Research14: 105–115.
21.
HorelliL (2018) Children as urban planners. Arch. &Comport. I Arch. & Behav10: 371–377.
22.
KeeffeMAndrewsD (2015) Towards an adolescent friendly methodology: accessing the authentic through collective reflection. International Journal of Research & Method in Education38: 357–370.
23.
KhanlouN (2008) Psychosocial integration of second and third generation racialized youth in Canada. Canadian diversity/Diversité Canadienne6: 54–57.
24.
KrekA (2008) Games in urban planning: the power of playful public participation. In: Mobility Nodes as Innovation Hubs. Proceedings of 13th International Conference on Urban Planning, Regional Development and Information Society, EditorsSchenkManfredVasilyPopovichV.EngelkeDirkPietro Elisei. ISBN 978-39502139-5-9. S. 683–669, REAL CORP 008,Vienna, Austria.
25.
MichaelDChenS (2005) Serious Games: Games That Educate, Train and Inform. USA divisions: Course Technology PTR.
26.
MooreR (1978) Meanings and measures of children/environment quality: Some findings from Washington environmental yard. In: RogersWElttelsonWH (eds) New Directions in Environmental Design Research. Arizona: EDRA, 287–306.
27.
PoplinAde AndradeBAde SenaÍS (2021) Geogames for change: co-designing the future of cities with games. In: OwensLarke (eds). Games and Play in the Creative, Smart and Ecological City. London and New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, 64–94.
28.
PoplinA (2020) Big data and occupants behavior in a built environment: introducing a game-based data collection method. Journal of Urban Planning and Development (JUPD), Special Issue on Data Science & the Built Environment146(2). American Society of Civil Engineers, Published online on March 19, 2020. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000552.
PoplinA (2018) GeoGames: games for change – designing for future communities. Geografía y Sistemas de Información Geográfica (GEOSIG), special issue on geodesign, Section I, 150–166. Translated to Portuguese,.
31.
PoplinAVemuriK (2018) Spatial game for negotiations and consensus building in urban planning: YouPlaceIt. In: AhlqvistSchlieder (eds). Geogames and Geoplay. Game-based Approaches to the Analysis of Geo-Information, p. 63 – 90, Advances in Geographic Information Science. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing Switzerland.
32.
PoplinAKerkhoveTReasonerM, et al. (2018) Serious GeoGames for civic engagement in urban planning: discussion based on four game prototypes. In: YamuCPoplinADevischO, et al. (eds) The Virtual And The Real: Perspectives, Practices and Applications For The Built Environment. London and New York: RoutledgeTaylor & Francis Group, 189–213.
33.
PoplinAShenkLKrejciC, et al (2017) Transforming Pervasive into Collaborative: Engaging Youth as Leaders with GIS through a Framework that Integrates Technologies, Storytelling, and Action. Journal of Interaction Design & Architecture, Special Issue on Pervasive Participation – New Horizons for Citizen Involvement and User Experience35: 182–204.
34.
PoplinA (2017) Online serious games for urban planning, in play the City – Stadt & Spiel. Journal PlanerInn (Planer)3. Published by the Vereinigung fuer Stadt-, Regional- und Landesplanung, Germany.
35.
PoplinA (2014) Digital serious game for urban planning: B3 – Design your Marketplace. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design41(3): 493–511.
36.
PoplinA (2012) Playful public participation in urban planning: a case study for online serious games. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems (CEUS), Elsevier36(3): 195–206.
37.
PrenskyM (2012) From Digital Natives to Digital Wisdom: Hopeful Essays for 21st Century Learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
38.
RitterfeldUCodyMVordererP (2009) Serious Games: Mechanisms and Effects. New York and London: Routledge.
39.
SchliederCKieferPMatyasS (2005) Geogames: a conceptual framework and tool for the design of location-based games from classic board games. In: Proc. of the First International Conference on Intelligent Technologies for Interactive Entertainment (INTETAIN)M. e. a. Maybury, 164-173 Madonna di Campiglio. ItalyBerlin Heidelberg: Springer.
40.
SchliederCKieferPMatyasS (2006) Geogames: designing location-based games from classic board games. Intelligent Systems. Danvers, MA: IEEE, 40–46.
41.
ScholtenH (2017) Geocraft as a means to support the development of smart cities, getting the people of the place involved-youth included. Qual. Innov. Prosper21: 119–150.
42.
SchwartzDITomaszewskiB (2021) When Virtual and Real Worlds Collide: Civil Engineering and Location-based Games. In: VillanovaPA (ed). Proceedings of the Middle Atlantic American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) Conference. Fayetteville, AR: Web.
43.
SgrittaGB (1993) Provision: limits and possibilities. In: HelioPLLauronenEBardyM (eds) Politics of Childhood and Children at Risk. Provision, Protection and Participation. International expert meeting. FinnlandVienna: European Centre for Social Welfare Policy and Research, 35–47.
44.
TomaszewskiBKonovitz-DaverASchwartzD, et al. (2018) GIS and serious games. In: CovaTJTsouM-H (eds). Comprehensive Geographic Information Systems. Berkeley, CA: Elsevier, 369–383.
45.
TomaszewskiBWalkerAGawlikE, et al. (2020) Supporting disaster resilience spatial thinking with serious geogames: project lily pad. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information96: 405.
46.
von HelandFWesterbergPNybergM (2015) Using Minecraft as a citizen participation tool in urban design and decision makingFuture Places. Stockholm.
47.
WardC (1977) The Child in the City. London: The Architectural Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
