Current Research Trends in Games for Public Participation in Planning

Prilenska, Viktorija

doi:10.2478/aup-2019-0016

Abstract

The research, outlined in the paper, explores games as methods for better public participation in planning. Drawing on the thematic analysis of scientific publications, prominent authors and research centres, as well as key research themes, are identified. The themes include motivational aspects of gamified participation, online and pervasive games for massive civic engagement, deliberative and educational games for collective problem-solving, game co-design for questioning and reframing planning concepts. The paper concludes with the benefits of gamification for participatory planning practice.

References

1. Lerner, J. Playing with power: Participatory planning games in Rosario’s villas. Latin American Perspectives, 2013, Vol. 20, Issue 189, pp. 185–201. https://doi.org/10.1177/0094582X1246776010.1177/0094582X12467760
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
2. Shipley, R., Shipley, S. UTZ. Making it Count: A Review of the Value and Techniques for Public Consultation. Journal of Planning Literature, 2012, Vol. 27, Issue 1, pp. 22–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/088541221141313310.1177/0885412211413133
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
3. Horelli, L. A Methodology of Participatory Planning. In Robert B. Bechtel, Robert & Arza Churchman, ed., Handbook of Environmental Psychology. S.l.: John Wiley & Sons, 2002, pp. 607–628. ISBN 0-471-40594-9.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
4. Aravena, A. My architectural philosophy? Bring the community into the process. TEDGlobal 2014 [online]. TED Ideas worth spreading [cited 13.01.2020]. https://www.ted.com/talks/alejandro_aravena_my_architectural_philosophy_bring_the_community_into_the_process/discussion?referrer=playlist-11_must_see_ted_talks
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
5. BLOCK BY BLOCK. Our work. Project selection [online]. Block by Block [cited 13.01.2020]. https://www.blockbyblock.org/our-work
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
6. Connelly, S. Looking inside public involvement: How is it made so ineffective and can we change this? Community Development Journal. 2006, Vol. 41, Issue 1, pp. 13–24. https://doi.org/10.1093/cdj/bsi04610.1093/cdj/bsi046
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
7. Nienhuis, I., Van Dijk, T., De Roo, G. Let’s Collaborate! But Who’s Really Collaborating? Individual Interests as a Leitmotiv for Urban Renewal and Regeneration Strategies. Planning Theory & Practice, 2011, Vol. 12, Issue 1, pp. 95–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2011.54667110.1080/14649357.2011.546671
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
8. Donders, M., Hartmann, T., Kokx, A. E-Participation in Urban Planning: Getting and Keeping Citizens Involved. International Journal of E-Planning Research, 2014, Vol. 3, Issue 2, pp. 54–69. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijepr.201404010410.4018/ijepr.2014040104
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
9. Rowe, G., Frewer, L.J. Public participation methods: A framework for evaluation. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 2000, Vol. 25, Issue 1, pp. 2–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/01622439000250010110.1177/016224390002500101
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
10. Johnson, I.G., Macdonald, A., Briggs, J., Manuel, J., Salt, K., Flynn, E., Vines, J. Community Conversational. In: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI ’17. S.l.: Association for Computing Machinery, 2017, pp. 2320–2333. ISBN 978-1-4503-4655-9. https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.302555910.1145/3025453.3025559
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
11. Wilson, A., Tewdwr-Jones, M., Comber, R. Urban planning, public participation and digital technology: App development as a method of generating citizen involvement in local planning process. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 2019, Vol. 46, Issue 2, pp. 286–302. https://doi.org/10.1177/239980831771251510.1177/2399808317712515
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
12. Schneider, S.H., Busse, S. Participatory Budgeting in Germany–A Review of Empirical Findings. International Journal of Public Administration, 2019, Vol. 43, Issue 3, pp. 259–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2018.142660110.1080/01900692.2018.1426601
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
13. Kleinhans, R., Van Ham, M., Evans-Cowley, J. Using Social Media and Mobile Technologies to Foster Engagement and Self-Organization in Participatory Urban Planning and Neighbourhood Governance. Planning Practice & Research, 2015, Vol. 30, Issue 3, pp. 237–247. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2015.105132010.1080/02697459.2015.1051320
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
14. Klamert, K., Münster, S. Child’s play - A literature-based survey on gamified tools and methods for fostering public participation in urban planning. In: Electronic Participation, 9th IFIP WG 8.5 International Conference, ePart 2017, St. Petersburg, Russia, September 4-7, 2017, Proceedings, S.l.: Springer International Publishing, 2017, pp. 24–33. ISBN 978-3-319-64321-2. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64322-9_310.1007/978-3-319-64322-9_3
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
15. Ampatzidou, C., Gugerell, K., Constantinescu, T., Devisch, O., Jauschneg, M., Berger, M. All Work and No Play? Facilitating Serious Games and Gamified Applications in Participatory Urban Planning and Governance. Urban Planning, 2018, Vol. 3, Issue 1, pp. 34–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.17645/up.v3i1.126110.17645/up.v3i1.1261
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
16. Minnery, J., Searle, G. Toying with the City? Using the Computer Game SimCityTM4 in Planning Education. Planning Practice and Research, 2013, Vol. 29, Issue 1, pp. 41–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2013.82933510.1080/02697459.2013.829335
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
17. Potts, R., Jacka, L., Yee, L.H. Can we ‘Catch ‘em All’? An exploration of the nexus between augmented reality games, urban planning and urban design. Journal of Urban Design, 2017, Vol. 22, Issue 6, pp. 866–880. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2017.136987310.1080/13574809.2017.1369873
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
18. Gordon, E., Baldwin-Philippi, J. Playful civic learning: Enabling reflection and lateral trust in game-based public participation. International Journal of Communication, 2014, Vol. 8, Issue 1, pp. 759–786.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
19. Tan, E. Negotiation and Design for the Self-Organizing City. Gaming as a method for Urban Design. S.l.: TU Delft, 2014. A+BE | Architecture and the Built Environment. ISBN 978-94-6186-356-0. https://doi.org/10.7480/abe.2014.11
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
20. Thiel, S.K., Ertiö, T.P., Baldauf, M. Why so serious? The Role of Gamification on Motivation and Engagement in e-Participation. Interaction Design and Architectures, 2017, Vol. 35, pp. 158–181.10.55612/s-5002-035-008
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
21. Winn, B. M. The Design, Play, and Experience Framework. In: Handbook of Research on Effective Electronic Gaming in Education. Hershey, PA, USA: Information Science Reference (an imprint of IGI Global), 2009, pp. 1010–1024. ISBN 978-1-59904-808-6. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-59904-808-6.ch05810.4018/978-1-59904-808-6.ch058
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
22. Duke, R. D. Origin and Evolution of Policy Simulation: A Personal Journey. Simulation & Gaming, 2011, Vol. 42, Issue 3, pp. 342–358. https://doi.org/10.1177/104687811036757010.1177/1046878110367570
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
23. Feldt, A.G. Experience with Simulation / Gaming: 1960–2010. Simulation & Gaming, 2014, Vol. 45, Issue 3, pp. 283–305. https://doi.org/10.1177/104687811454398310.1177/1046878114543983
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
24. Sanoff, H. Community participation methods in design and planning. New York, NY, USA: John Wiley & Sons, 2000. 320 p. ISBN 0-471-35545-3.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
25. Sanoff, H. Democratic Design: Participation Case Studies in Urban and Small Town Environments. S.l.: VDM Verlag Dr. Müller, 2010. 168 p. ISBN 978-3-639-28830-8.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
26. Devisch, O., Poplin, A., Sofronie, S. The Gamification of Civic Participation: Two Experiments in Improving the Skills of Citizens to Reflect Collectively on Spatial Issues. Journal of Urban Technology, 2016, Vol. 23, Issue 2, pp. 81–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/10630732.2015.110241910.1080/10630732.2015.1102419
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
27. Thiel, S.-K., Lehner, U., Sturmer, T., Gospodarek, J. Insights from a m-participation prototype in the wild. In: 2015 IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communication Workshops (PerCom Workshops 2015). S.l.: IEEE, 2015, pp. 166–171. ISBN 978-1-4799-8425-1. https://doi.org/10.1109/PERCOMW.2015.713401310.1109/PERCOMW.2015.7134013
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
28. Thiel, S.-K., Frohlich, P. Gamification as Motivation to Engage in Location-Based Public Participation. In: Georg GARTNER and Haosheng HUANG, ed., Progress in Location-Based Services 2016. S.l.: Springer International Publishing AG, 2017, Lecture notes in Geoinformation and cartography, pp. 399–421. ISBN 978-3-319-47289-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47289-8_2010.1007/978-3-319-47289-8_20
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
29. Gordon, E., Haas, J., Michelson, B. Civic creativity: Role-playing games in deliberative process. International Journal of Communication, 2017, Vol. 11, pp. 3789–3807.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
30. Devisch, O. Should Planners Start Playing Computer Games? Arguments from SimCity and Second Life. Planning Theory & Practice, 2008, Vol. 9, Issue 2, pp. 209–226. https://doi.org/10.1080/1464935080204223110.1080/14649350802042231
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
31. Devisch, O., Gugerell, K., Diephuis, J., Constantinescu, T., Ampatzidou, C., Jauschneg, M. Mini is beautiful. Playing serious mini-games to facilitate collective learning on complex urban processes. Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal, 2017, Vol. 35, pp. 141–157.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
32. Poplin, A. Games and serious games in urban planning: study cases. In: Computational Science and Its Applications - ICCSA 2011. S.l.: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011, pp. 1–14. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. ISBN 978-3-642-21887-3. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21887-3_110.1007/978-3-642-21887-3_1
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
33. Poplin, A. Playful public participation in urban planning: A case study for online serious games. Computers Environment and Urban Systems, 2012, Vol. 36, Issue 3, pp. 195–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2011.10.00310.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2011.10.003
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
34. Poplin, A. Digital serious game for urban planning: „B3-Design your Marketplace!” Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 2014, Vol. 41, pp. 493–511. https://doi.org/10.1068/b3903210.1068/b39032
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
35. Poplin, A., Shenk, L., Passe, U. Transforming Pervasive into Collaborative: Engaging Youth as Leaders with GIS through a Framework that Integrates Technologies, Storytelling, and Action. Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal, 2017, Vol. 35, pp. 182–204.10.55612/s-5002-035-009
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
36. The A-Z of social research: a dictionary of key social science research concepts (Eds.: R. L. Miller, J.D. Brewer). London; Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE, 2003. 362 p. ISBN 978-0-7619-7132-0.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
37. Taylor, D. The Literature Review: A Few Tips on Conducting It. University of Toronto. Writing Advice [online, cited 13.01.2020]. https://advice.writing.utoronto.ca/types-of-writing/literature-review/
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
38. Creswell, J. W. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Method Approaches. 3rd edition. Thousand Oaks, California, USA: SAGE Publications, 2009. 296 p. ISBN 978-1-4129-6557-6.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
39. Saunders, M. N. K., Lewis, P., Thornhill, A. Research methods for business students. 7th edition. Edinburgh Gate, Harlow, Essex, England: Pearson Education Ltd., 2016. 768 p. ISBN 978-1-292-01662-7.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
40. Cord, A. F., Roessiger, F., Schwarz, N. Geocaching data as an indicator for recreational ecosystem services in urban areas: Exploring spatial gradients, preferences and motivations. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2015, Vol. 144, pp. 151–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.08.01510.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.08.015
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
41. Eklund, A. Gaming the Real World [online]. Plethora-project [cited 13.01.2020]. https://www.plethora-project.com/gaming-the-real-world
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
42. Stark, E. Playful places: Uncovering hidden heritage with Ingress. In: Social, Casual and Mobile Games: The changing gaming landscape. New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2016. ISBN 978-1-5013-1060-7.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
43. Charmaz, K. Constructing grounded theory. London, UK: Sage Publications, 2006. 416 p. ISBN 978-0-7619-7352-2.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
44. IAP2 International Association for Public Participation. Core Values, Ethics, Spectrum – The 3 Pillars of Public Participation. IAP2 International Association for Public Participation. Resources, 2018 [online]. IAP2 [cited 14.01.2020]. https://www.iap2.org/page/pillars
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
45. Rowe, G., Frewer, L. J. A typology of public engagement mechanisms. Science Technology and Human Values, 2005, Vol. 30, Issue 2, pp. 251–290. https://doi.org/10.1177/016224390427172410.1177/0162243904271724
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
46. Hamdi, N., Goethert, R. Action planning for cities: a guide to community practice. Chichester; New York: John Wiley, 1997. 264 p. ISBN 978-0-471-96928-0.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
47. Wates, N. The community planning handbook: how people can shape their cities, towns and villages in any part of the world. London: Earthscan, 2000. 240 p. ISBN 978-1-85383-654-1.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
48. ENGAGEMENT LAB. What’s @stake? [online]. atstakegame [cited 14.01.2020]. https://atstakegame.org
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
49. Hummel, K. @Stake: A Role-Playing Card Game. 18. September 2015 [online]. NCDD. Resource Center [cited 14.01.2020]. http://ncdd.org/rc/item/10150/
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
50. Cameron, K. Using a B.U.G. to Promote Urban Design. 1. March 2004 [online]. Metropolis [cited 14.01.2020]. http://www.metropolismag.com/cities/using-a-b-u-g-to-promote-urban-design/
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
51. Ferri, G., Coppock, P. Serious Urban Games. From play in the city to play for the city. In: Media and the City: Urbanism, Technology and Communication [Eds.: Simone Tosoni, Matteo Tarantino and Chiara Giaccardi]. S.l.: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2013, pp. 120–134. ISBN 978-1-4438-4943-2.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
52. Salen, K. Big Urban Game [online]. Katie Salen. Selekted Work [cited 14.01.2020]. https://www.katiesalen.me/projects#/big-urban-game/
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
53. STEVENMN01. B.U.G. Blue Day 1, 3. June 2011 [online]. YouTube Video [cited 14.01.2020]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2opyxELpaHM
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
54. Constantinescu, T. I., Devisch, O., Kostov, G. City Makers: Insights on the Development of a Serious Game to Support Collective Reflection and Knowledge Transfer in Participatory Processes. International Journal of E-Planning Research, 2017, Vol. 6, Issue 4. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJEPR.201710010310.4018/IJEPR.2017100103
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
55. INSHENGXIA. What is „Community PlanIt”, 9 February 2013 [online]. YouTube Video [cited 14.01.2020]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcJ09qtkOpw
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
56. Gugerell, K., Zuidema, C. Gaming for the energy transition. Experimenting and learning in co-designing a serious game prototype. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2017, Vol. 169, pp. 105–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.04.14210.1016/j.jclepro.2017.04.142
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
57. Prilenska, V. Serious game for modelling neighbourhood energy supply scenarios. In: SBE19 Thessaloniki − Sustainability in the built environment for climate change mitigation. 23−25 October 2019, Conference Proceedings. S.l.: IOP Science.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
58. PLAY!UC. Floating City [online]. Play!UC Playing with Urban Complexity [cited 14.01.2020]. http://play-uc.net/?page_id=529
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
59. Prandi, C., Roccetti, M., Salomoni, P. Valentina NISI and Nuno Jardim NUNES. Fighting exclusion: a multimedia mobile app with zombies and maps as a medium for civic engagement and design. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 2017, Vol. 76, pp. 4951–4979. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-016-3780-910.1007/s11042-016-3780-9
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
60. Prilenska, V. Participation Game. Reflections on the iterative design process. PlaNext. In print.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
61. Valdez Young, A. Play Before Plan: Games for the Public and Planners to Value the Street. Journal of Urban Technology, 2015, Vol. 22, Issue 3, pp. 97–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/10630732.2015.104029910.1080/10630732.2015.1040299
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
62. Valdez Young, A. Shopomama. 25 August 2012 [online]. ISSUU [cited 23.08.2019]. https://issuu.com/betterthanliving/docs/shopomama
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
63. Valdez Young, A. Arrivalocity. 25 August 2012 [online]. ISSUU [cited 23.08.2019]. https://issuu.com/betterthanliving/docs/arrivalocity
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
64. Valdez Young, A. Pech City, 25 August 2012 [online]. ISSUU [cited 23.08.2019]. https://issuu.com/betterthanliving/docs/pechcity
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
65. KULTÚRAKTÍV. Games: Pop-up Pest [online]. KULTÚRAKTÍV [cited 23.08.2019]. https://kulturaktiv.hu/en/projects/pop-up-pest/
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
66. Toth, E., Poplin, A. Pop-up Pest: An Educational Game for Active Participation of Children and Youth in Urban Planning. In: REAL CORP 2013. Planning Times You better keep planning or you get in deep water, for the cities they are a-changin’. Proceedings of 18th International Conference on Urban Planning, Regional Development and Information Society. Schwechat-Rannersdorf, Austria: CORP – Competence Center of Urban and Regional Planning, 2013, pp. 731–741. ISBN 978-3-9503110-4-4.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
67. Toth, E., Poplin, A. ParticiPécs − a cooperative game fostering learning about the built environment and urban planning. In: 17th AGILE Conference on Geographic Information Science (AGILE 2014), Workshop Geogames and Geoplay, June 03–06, 2014, Castellón, Spain. 2014.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
68. Olszewski, R., Turek, A., Laczynski, M. Urban Gamification as a Source of Information for Spatial Data Analysis and Predictive Participatory Modelling of a City’s Development. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Data Management Technologies and Applications - Vol. 1: DATA. 2016, pp. 176–181. https://doi.org/10.5220/000600520176018110.5220/0006005201760181
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
69. LOGIVILLE. Urbax 21. Simulation pédagogique de l’aménagement urbain [online]. Urbax 21. [cited 23.08.2019]. https://www.urbax.eu/en/presentation-2/10.3917/cdsu.069.0021
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
70. Gomes, S. L., Hermans, L. M., Islam, K. F., Huda, S. N., Hossain, Z., Thissen, W.A.H. Capacity Building for Water Management in Peri-Urban Communities, Bangladesh: A Simulation-Gaming Approach. Water, 2018, Vol. 10, pp. 1704–1723. https://doi.org/10.3390/w1011170410.3390/w10111704
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
71. ILAB.O. ZWERM [online]. Player Vimeo [cited 23.08.2019]. https://player.vimeo.com/video/65648085
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
72. Laureyssens, T., Coenen, T., Claeys, L., Mechant, P., Criel, J., Van De Moere, A. ZWERM: A modular component network approach for an urban participation game. In: CHI ’14: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2014, pp. 3259–3268. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556288.255705310.1145/2556288.2557053
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
73. Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., Nacke, L. From game design elements to gamefulness: Defining gamification. In: MindTrek ’11: Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments, 2011, pp. 9–15. https://doi.org/10.1145/2181037.218104010.1145/2181037.2181040
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
74. Leao, S., Izadpahani, P. Factors Motivating Citizen Engagement in Mobile Sensing: Insights from a Survey of Non-Participants. Journal of Urban Technology, 2016, Vol. 23, Issue 4, pp. 85–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/10630732.2016.117582410.1080/10630732.2016.1175824
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
75. Bowser, A. E., Hansen, D. L., Raphael, J., Reid, M., Gamett, R. J., He, Y. R., Rotman, D., Preece, J. J. Prototyping in PLACE: A Scalable Approach to Developing Location-Based Apps and Games. In: CHI ’13: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2013, pp. 1519–1528. https://doi.org/10.1145/2470654.246620210.1145/2470654.2466202
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
76. Bowser, A., Hansen, D., Preece, J., He, Y., Boston, C., Hammock, J. Gamifying citizen science: A study of two user groups. In: CSCW Companion ’14: Proceedings of the companion publication of the 17th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work & social computing, 2014, pp. 137–140. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556420.255650210.1145/2556420.2556502
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
77. Raczkowsky, F. Making Points the Point - Towards a History of Ideas of Gamification. In: Mathias Fuchs, Sonia Fizek, Paolo Ruffino and Niklas Schape, ed., Rethinking Gamification. Lüneburg, Germany: Meson Press, Hybrid Publishing Lab, Leuphana University of Lüneburg, n.d., pp.141–160. ISBN 978-3-95796-000-9.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
78. Bogost, I. Persuasive Games: Exploitationware, 3 May 2011 [online]. Gamasutra [cited 14.01.2020]. https://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/134735/persuasive_games_exploitationware.php
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
79. Yannakakis, G. N., Paiva, A. Emotion in Games. In: The Oxford Handbook of Affective Computing [Eds.: Rafael Calvo, Sidney D’Mello, Jonathan Gratch and Arvid Kappas]. S.l.: Oxford University Press, 2014. ISBN 978-0-19-994223-7.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
80. Geher, G. Video Games and Emotional States. why your kid is addicted to Fortnite, 3 September 2018 [online]. Psychology Today [cited 14.01.2020]. https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/darwins-subterranean-world/201809/video-games-and-emotional-states
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
81. Nicholson, S. A User-Centered Theoretical Framework for Meaningful Gamification. In: Games+Learning+Society 8.0. June 13–15, 2012, 2013, 658 p.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
82. Brown, G., Kyttä, M. Key issues and research priorities for public participation GIS (PPGIS): A synthesis based on empirical research. Applied Geography, 2014, Vol. 46, pp. 122–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2013.11.00410.1016/j.apgeog.2013.11.004
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
83. Wiggins, A. Free as in puppies. In: Proc. CSCW 2013, 2013, pp. 1469–1480. https://doi.org/10.1145/2441776.244194210.1145/2441776.2441942
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
84. Ertiö, T.-P. Participatory Apps for Urban Planning—Space for Improvement. Planning Practice & Research, 2015, Vol. 30, Issue 3, pp. 303–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2015.105294210.1080/02697459.2015.1052942
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
85. Kahila-Tani, M., Broberg, A., Kyttä, M., Tyger, T. Let the Citizens Map—Public Participation GIS as a Planning Support System in the Helsinki Master Plan Process. Planning Practice and Research, 2016, Vol. 31 Issue 2, pp. 195–214. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2015.110420310.1080/02697459.2015.1104203
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
86. Eräranta, S., Kahila-Tani, M., Nummi-Sund, P. Web-based Public Participation in Urban Planning Competitions: International Journal of E-Planning Research, 2015, Vol. 4, Issue 1, pp. 1–18. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijepr.201501010110.4018/ijepr.2015010101
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
87. EESTI ARHITEKTUURIKESKUS. Main Street: giving public spaces back to people [online]. Peatänav [cited 14.01.2020]. http://www.peatanav.ee/en
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
88. Oser, J., Hooghe, M., Marien, S. Is Online Participation Distinct from Offline Participation? A Latent Class Analysis of Participation Types and Their Stratification. Political Research Quarterly, 2013, Vol. 66, Issue 1, pp. 91–101. https://doi.org/10.1177/106591291243669510.1177/1065912912436695
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
89. Krek, A. Rational Ignorance of the Citizens in Public Participatory Planning Alenka Krek. In: Manfred SCHRENK, ed., CORP 2005 GEO MULTIMEDIAProceedings 10th International Conference on Information & Communication Technologies (ICT) in Urban Planning and Spatial Development and Impacts of ICT on Physical Space. S.l.: Department of computer aided planning and architecture, Vienna University of Technology, 2005, pp. 165–169. ISBN 3-901673-12-1.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
90. Graells-Garrido, E., Ferres, L., Caro, D., Bravo, L. The effect of Pokémon Go on the pulse of the city: a natural experiment. EPJ Data Science, 2017, Vol. 6, Issue 1, p. 23. https://doi.org/10.1140/epjds/s13688-017-0119-310.1140/epjds/s13688-017-0119-3
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
91. Thakuriah, P., Tilahun, N. Y., Zellner, M. Big Data and Urban Informatics: Innovations and Challenges to Urban Planning and Knowledge Discovery. In: Seeing Cities Through Big Data [Eds.: Piyushimita Thakuriah, Nebiyou Tilahun and Moira Zellner]. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2017, pp. 11–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-40902-3_210.1007/978-3-319-40902-3_2
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
92. Goodspeed, R. Digital knowledge technologies in planning practice: from black boxes to media for collaborative inquiry. Planning Theory & Practice, 2016, Vol. 17, Issue 4, pp. 577–600. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2016.121299610.1080/14649357.2016.1212996
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
93. Rodriguez, H. The playful and the serious: An approximation to Huizinga’s Homo Ludens, 2006 [online]. Game Studies [cited 14.01.2020]. http://gamestudies.org/0601/articles/rodriges
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
94. Van Dijk, T., Ubels, H. How Dutch professionals conduct interactive design sessions to foster ‘shared understanding’. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 2015, Vol. 43, Issue 3, pp. 464–479. https://doi.org/10.1177/026581351561765810.1177/0265813515617658
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
95. Innes, J. E., Booher, D.E. Consensus Building as Role Playing and Bricolage. Journal of the American Planning Association, 1999, Vol. 65, Issue 1, pp. 9–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/0194436990897603110.1080/01944369908976031
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
96. Sotamaa, O., Ermi, L., Laukkanen, T., Mäyrä, F., Nummela, J. The Role of Players in Game Design: A Methodological Perspective. In: Proceedings of Digital Experience: Design, Aesthetics, Practice. DAC 2005. 2005, pp. 35–42.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
97. Isbister, K., Flanagan, M., Hash, C. Designing games for learning: insights from conversations with designers. In: the 28th international conference: Proceedings of the 28th international conference on Human factors in computing systems - CHI ’10. Atlanta, Georgia, USA: ACM Press, 2010, p. 204. https://doi.org/10.1145/1753326.175363710.1145/1753326.1753637
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
98. Khaled, R., Vasalou, A. Bridging serious games and participatory design. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 2014, Vol. 2, Issue 2, pp. 93–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2014.03.00110.1016/j.ijcci.2014.03.001
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
99. Adams, E. Fundamentals of game design. Third edition. Berkeley, CA: New Riders, 2014. 576 p. ISBN 978-0-321-92967-9.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
100. Luck, R. What is it that makes participation in design participatory design? Design Studies, 2018, Vol. 59, pp. 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2018.10.00210.1016/j.destud.2018.10.002
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
101. Gee, J. P. Good Video Games and Good Learning: Collected Essays on Video Games, Learning and Literacy. 2nd edition. S.l.: Peter Lang Inc., International Academic Publishers, 2013. 194 p. ISBN 978-1-4331-2393-1.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article

Current Research Trends in Games for Public Participation in Planning

Abstract

Paradigm

My account