A multi-player computer game to explore sustainable bioenergy crop production

Background/Question/Methods

Scientists in the DOE-funded Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (GLBRC) are constructing complex economic and ecological models to design sustainable bioenergy cropping systems. In the process, researchers must grapple with the economic and environmental tradeoffs associated with designing cropping systems that can meet future energy needs, support ecosystem services and be economically viable. How can educators engage students in exploring and unraveling these relevant sustainability challenges and real economic tradeoffs? We created a multiplayer, web-based video game for secondary, undergraduate and informal learning environments. Players take on the role farmers working to sustainably grow energy crops, earn income and improve ecosystem services. The game was developed in collaboration with GLBRC scientists and includes realistic, dynamic, agent-based ecological and economic models. As a result, land management and economic decisions by players have local and global effects on their “farm” and the rest of the “world.” For instance, crop prices are based upon a supply-demand function and local biodiversity is affected by regional landscape patterns. The game can serve as a flexible tool for students to learn about aspects of sustainability, basic dynamics of ecological and economic systems, and cooperative problem solving.

Results/Conclusions

We demonstrated a beta-version of the game for two undergraduate classes and several informal audiences. For the undergraduate classes, a combination of clinical interviews, open discussion and written assessments were used to uncover student reasoning and learning outcomes. For informal audiences, we used feedback forms and open discussions to learn about player strategies and gather suggestions for improvements. Preliminary analyses of player responses and feedback suggest that the game is effective at helping students understand the relevance of economic-environmental tradeoffs in achieving sustainable outcomes. For instance, players who pursued a strategy to maximize economic returns often changed to a more balanced approach after observing declining soil fertility and crop yields over time. Similarly, players who make decisions solely to maximize ecosystem services at the expense of income would come away with an appreciation of the economic dimensions of sustainability. The game was less effective however in helping players understand the mechanisms by which individual decisions and strategies produced specific ecological and economic responses. We expect that improvements to the user interface will address this issue.