Child’s Play - A Literature-Based Survey on Gamified Tools and Methods for Fostering Public Participation in Urban Planning

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10429)


As urban planning processes are often complex and protracted, fostering public participation in this sector has to be seen as a major challenge. Nevertheless, previous research on that topic offers various solutions that aim to tackle that problem, either by focusing on playful formats or on gamification and serious gaming. Often examined separately, these approaches deliver promising strengths to improve public participation in the urban sphere. Hence, a synopsis of those strategies seems to be worthwhile and is therefore further investigated in this paper. In order to analyze current works on that issue systematically, the paper is structured via a literature-based classification of different stages of public participation that distinguish whether citizens are being informed, consulted or collaborated with during the planning process. By giving an insight on innovative participation tools and methods in this field, the pursued outcome of this article are impulses for designing an advanced participatory platform which is part of the research project U_CODE (Urban Collective Design Environment).


Public participation Urban planning Mobile participation Gamification Playfulness Serious gaming Augmented reality 



The research upon which this paper is based was part of the project U_CODE (Urban Collective Design Environment) which has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under grant agreement No 688873.


  1. 1.
    Münster, S., Georgi, C., Heijne, K., Klamert, K., Nönnig, J.R., Pump, M., Stelzle, B.: How to involve inhabitants in urban design planning? An overview on a state of the art, key challenges and promising approaches. In: KES 2017 (accepted paper)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brabham, D.C.: Crowdsourcing the public participation process for planning projects. Plan. Theory 8, 242–262 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nabatchi, T.: A Manager’s Guide to fostering Transparency and Democracy. IBM Center for The Business of Government (2012)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Deyle, R., Schively Slotterback, C.: Group learning in participatory planning processes. J. Plan. Educ. Res. 29, 23–38 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Giering, S.: Public Participation Strategies for Transit. Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Höffken, S.: Mobile Partizipation: Wie Bürger mit dem Smartphone Stadtplanung mitgestalten. Rohn, Lemgo (2015)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ertiö, T.-P.: M-participation: the emergence of participatory planning applications: Research Briefings 6b (2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kim, B.: Understanding Gamification. Library Technology Reports, vol. 51, no. 2. American Library Association, Chicago (2015)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Seaborn, K., Fels, D.I.: Gamification in theory and action: a survey. Int. J. Hum Comput Stud. 74, 14–31 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., Nacke, L.: From game design elements to gamefulness: defining “gamification”. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference Envisioning Future Media Environments, pp. 9–15. ACM, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zichermann, G., Cunningham, C.: Gamification by Design: Implementing Game Mechanics in Web and Mobile Apps. O’Reilly, Sebastopol (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Deterding, S., Björk, S., Nacke, L., Dixon, D., Lawley, E.: Designing gamification: creating gameful and playful experiences. In: Mackay, W.E. (ed.) CHI’13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 3263–3266. ACM, New York (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., Sarsa, H.: Does gamification work? A literature review of empirical studies on gamification. In: 47th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 3025–3034. IEEE, Piscataway (2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Morschheuser, B., Hamari, J., Koivisto, J.: Gamification in crowdsourcing: a review. In: Bui, T.X., Sprague, R.H. (eds.) Proceedings of the 49th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 4375–4384. IEEE, Piscataway (2016)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gordon, E., Schirra, S., Hollander, J.: Immersive planning: a conceptual model for designing public participation with new technologies. Environ. Plan. B Plan. Des. 38(3), 505–519 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gordon, E., Walter, S.: Meaningful inefficiencies: resisting the logic of technological efficiency in the design of civic systems. In: Gordon, E., Mihailidis, P. (eds.) Civic Media: Technology, Design, Practice, pp. 243–266. The MIT Press, Cambridge (2016)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Robinson, D., Reed, V.: The A-Z of Social Research Jargon. Ashgate Publishing Limited, London (1998)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
  19. 19.
    Bortz, J., Döring, N.: Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation für Human- und Sozialwissenschaftler. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bless, C., Higson-Smith, C.: Fundamentals of Social Research Methods: An African Perspective. Juta Education, Lusaka (2000)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Arnstein, S.R.: A ladder of citizen participation. J. Am. Inst. Plan. 35(4), 216–224 (1969)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    IAP2. IAP2 public participation spectrum. Louisville. IAP2 (2013).
  23. 23.
    OECD: Citizens as Partners: OECD Handbook on Information, Consultation and Public Participation in Policy-Making. OECD Publishing, Paris (2001)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tufte, T., Mefalopulos, P.: Participatory Communication. The World Bank (2009)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Broschart, D., Zeile, P.: Augmented reality in Architektur und Stadtplanung – Techniken und Einsatzfelder. In: Strobl, J., Blaschke, T., Griesebner, G., Zagel, B. (eds.) Angewandte Geoinformatik 2014. Beiträge zum 26. AGIT-Symposium Salzburg, pp. 638–647. Wichmann, Berlin (2014)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gnat, M., Leszek, K., Olszewski, R.: The use of geoinformation technology, augmented reality and gamification in the urban modeling process. In: Gervasi, O., et al. (eds.) ICCSA 2016. LNCS, vol. 9787, pp. 484–496. Springer, Cham (2016). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-42108-7_37 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Broschart, D., Zeile, P.: Architecture: augmented reality in architecture and urban planning. In: Buhmann, E. (ed.) Peer Reviewed Proceedings of Digital Landscape Architecture 2015 at Anhalt University of Applied Sciences, pp. 111–118, Wichmann, Berlin (2015)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ertiö, T.-P.: Participatory apps for urban planning - space for improvement. Plan. Pract. Res. 30(3), 303–321 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Evans-Cowley, J.: The best planning apps for 2016 (2016).
  30. 30.
    Mallan, K., Foth, M., Greenaway, R., Young, G.T.: Serious playground: using second life to engage high school students in urban planning. Learn. Media Technol. 35(2), 203–225 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Thiel, S.-K., Lehner, U.: Exploring the effects of game elements in m-participation. In: Lawson, S., Dickinson, P. (eds.) Proceedings of the 2015 British HCI Conference, pp. 65–73. ACM, New York (2015)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Jones, P., Layarad, A., Speed, C., Lorne, C.: Maplocal: use of smartphones for crowdsourced planning. Plan. Pract. Res. 30(3), 322–336 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Evans-Cowley, J.: The best planning apps for 2014 (2014).
  34. 34.
    Martí, I.G., Rodríguez, L.E., Benedito, M., Trilles, S., Beltrán, A., Díaz, L., Huerta, J.: Mobile application for noise pollution monitoring through gamification techniques. In: Herrlich, M., Malaka, R., Masuch, M. (eds.) ICEC 2012. LNCS, vol. 7522, pp. 562–571. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-33542-6_74 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Thiel, S.-K., Lehner, U., Stürmer, T., Gospodarek, J.: Insights from a m-participation prototype in the wild. In: IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communication Workshops, pp. 166–171. IEEE, Piscataway (2015)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Thiel, S.-K., Fröhlich, P., Sackl, A.: Experiences from a living lab trialling a mobile participation platform. In: Schrenk, M., Popovich, V.V., Zeile, P., Elisei, P., Beyer, C. (eds.) REAL CORP 2016, Proceedings of 21st International Conference on Urban Planning, Regional Development and Information, pp. 263–272. CORP - Competence Center of Urban and Regional Planning, Wien (2016)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Stembert, N., Mulder, I.J.: Love your city! An interactive platform empowering citizens to turn the public domain into a participatory domain. In: International Conference Using ICT, Social Media and Mobile Technologies to Foster Self-Organisation in Urban and Neighbourhood Governance (2013)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Thiel, S.-K.: A review of introducing game elements to e-participation. In: Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government (CeDEM), pp. 3–9 (2016)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Gordon, E., Baldwin-Philippi, J.: Playful civic learning: enabling reflection and lateral trust in game-based public participation. Int. J. Commun. 8, 759–786 (2014)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Fung, A.: Varieties of participation in complex governance. Publ. Admin. Rev. 66, 66–75 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Renn, O., Webler, T., Rakel, H., Dienel, P., Johnson, B.: Public participation in decision making: a three-step procedure. Pol. Sci. 26, 189–214 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Media CenterTechnische Universität DresdenDresdenGermany

Personalised recommendations