The Mediterranean and climate change: An online participatory simulation – Results from the front lines

<p>Modern, educational simulation/games (s/g) have a rich legacy, stretching back to the 1960s.  They are used today for communicating science in educational, environmental or governmental organizations.  Other uses are to help groups and organizations conduct research, solve complex problems or make collective decisions.</p><p>Over the last two decades, a particularly powerful, but underused, form of s/g has developed, called participatory simulation (PS).  It contains (elements of) game, simulation, role-play, experience, human interaction, decision-making, negotiation, engagement, stakeholder, etc.  It is often large scale, open ended, goal and results oriented, free form and data driven.  Of course, debriefing is a crucial component.</p><p>Last summer (2020), the International Oceans-Climate School (IOCS), of the Ocean Open University (OOP), France, planned to organize an in-person summer school with a PS as its capstone event.  We then postponed and made it an autumn school.  It then became clear that this also was impossible, and so, after some hesitation, we scrambled to turn it into an online PS (OPS).</p><p>The theme was “<em>The Mediterranean and climate change: Impacts, people, action</em>”.  Our overarching goal was to help participants understand the <strong>oceans-climate nexus</strong> and to become better <strong>ocean-climate-literate stakeholders</strong>.  The IOCS is an official event of the <strong>Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission</strong> (IOC) of UNESCO, as part of the <strong>UN Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development</strong>.</p><p>The school ran over three days, with the OPS over two days.  We searched for a platform that would accommodate the flexibility needed for the OPS; we chose Discord.  We had participants originating from Brazil, France, India, Italy, Iran, Spain, Tunisia and the UK; ages ranged from 19 to 60 years.  It was a great success.  A detailed, online feedback form two weeks after the event collected participants’ opinions, including:</p><ul><li><em>“It was a wonderful experience.”, :I felt very good with all the participants.”, “When I describe the experience to friends I always say that it was something really useful for my personal and professional growth.”, “It was a very enriching experience for me to meet all these people with different training and knowledge, coming from different countries.”, “Enriching moments, so much more to discover.”, “What a great experience! I felt happy, engaged and surrounded by beautiful minds.”</em></li> </ul><p>We will run the event again in the Spring and the late summer or autumn, with different geoscience themes.  The success of the October 2020 event raises several research questions, including:</p><ul><li>How do the online and the in-person versions compare?</li> <li>What are the advantages and drawbacks of each?</li> <li>Which is more effective for what objectives and what results?</li> <li>How do the two versions stack up in regard to conducting research on such events?</li> <li>What are the implications of OPS for geoliteracy?</li> </ul><p>Our presentation will describe the event in more detail, offer tentative answers to the above questions, and help you decide if you wish to participate in the next event.  Co-authors include both organizers and participants.</p>

Transfer of ergonomics knowledge from participatory simulation events into hospital design projects

BACKGROUND: Participatory simulation (PS) is a method that can be used to integrate ergonomics and safety into workplace design projects. Previous studies have mainly focused on tools and methods for the simulation activities. The subsequent process of transferring and integrating the simulation outcomes into the design of workplaces is poorly understood. OBJECTIVES: This study sets out to study the role of actors and objects in the transfer of ergonomics knowledge generated in PS events and in the integration of this knowledge into a design project. The study identifies factors that influence what part of the simulation outcomes are integrated. METHODS: The empirical context of the study was six PS events that were part of a hospital design project. The events were investigated based on knowledge transfer theory, observations, interviews and document studies. RESULTS: Actors and objects with abilities of transferring ergonomics knowledge from the PS events to the hospital design project were identified. The study indicated that persons producing the objects functioned as a filter, meaning that not all ergonomics knowledge was transferred from the PS events. The main influencing factors on the integration were: predetermined building dimensions and room interdependency. CONCLUSIONS: Four recommendations were proposed for ergonomists and safety professionals when planning PS events.

Companion modelling and participatory simulation: A glimpse

<p>Title:  <strong>Companion modelling and participatory simulation: A glimpse</strong></p><p>David Crookall (1) and Nicolas Becu (2)</p><p>(1) Université Côte d’Azur, Nice, France; (2) LIttoral ENvironnement et Sociétés (LIENSs), La Rochelle, France.</p><p>Simulation/games are ‘usually’ used to communicate science, such as in educational, environment or government organizations.  Another developing use is to help organizations to solve problems or make decisions.  Two successful and related simulation/gaming approaches, called companion modelling (ComMod) and participatory simulation (PS), have been developed over the last two decades, and constitute fairly elaborate decision-making aides and problem-solving tools.</p><p>Both approaches involve the full collaboration of stakeholders in the evolving development of a model and a simulation, in participating and in debriefing.  The underlying aim is usually to explore the relations among stakeholders (society) and between them and their environment.  For example, they have been used to help two communities in conflict over natural resources, to give authorities and inhabitants the opportunity to discuss and decide about coastal erosion and habitats or to help local authorities explore alternative coastal flood prevention measures.</p><p>They have also been used to bring together a wide range of stakeholders from the same territory to discuss and analyse their varied visions, objectives and interactions.  Indeed, some forms of these tools can be used to help organizations, such local authorities and professional groups, to discuss ideas on possible futures, to explore scenarios for marine policy or for flood planning, to generate ideas for a new constitution or ministerial policy.</p><p>ComMod generally entails building a model of socio-ecological interactions (maybe computerized), which underlies participation in a large-scale role-play with stakeholders who have contributed to the design.  Often the design process takes several meetings (each of two to three days or more) over a period of several weeks or even months: this is both a strength and a weakness.  The model is usually developed with agent-based modelling (ABM) tools.  One such computer tool is ‘Common Pool Resources and Multi-Agent Systems’ (CORMAS), designed specifically as a support tool for ComMod; another is NetLogo.</p><p>PS overlaps to a large degree with, and is sometimes seen as an offshoot of, ComMod.  One main difference is that does not necessarily use ComMod (i.e., a model built with stakeholders and/or an ABM).  A PS in this sense tends to be easier to develop and implement because its design does not require as much toing and froing between stakeholders and facilitators.  A PS tends to capture emerging phenomena and trace developing relations in regard to social, industrial and territorial resources and demands on those resources; it can manifest a fairly powerful forecasting or future projection element.</p><p>Our session will provide a small glimpse of the rationale behind the two strands and illustrate several ways in which they have been used effectively.  We will also provide a resource list of references, associations and training opportunities.</p>

ICEWISE: A game to test the effects of sea ice forecast reliability on voyage planners’ confidence

<p>A group of scientists in a multi-national consortium have worked together to improve climate services for maritime actors in Arctic waters. The consortium under the project Enhancing the Saliency of climate services for marine mobility Sectors in European Arctic Seas (SALIENSEAS) running 2017-2020, has aimed to coproduce improved (sub)seasonal sea ice forecast and iceberg detection services. The project involved metservice experts and end users to collaboratively explore ways in which forecast services can reduce uncertainties for stakeholders.</p><p>However, direct questioning about perceived risks and uncertainties during operations do not always lend themselves well to traditional inquiries such as self-report surveys. Stakeholders can and do experience difficulty accurately recalling and rating past perceptions and connecting them to varying environmental conditions. As an alternative, experiential approaches such as participatory simulation are able to furnish a reliable environment that facilitates replication, experimenting and learning.</p><p>We present a novel approach with which to explore effects from the reliability of sub-seasonal sea ice forecasts on the user’s perception of uncertainties. Our methods combine anticipatory methods through the use of scenarios with participatory simulation in a computerized simulation/game called ICEWISE. In our paper we will:</p><ul><li>introduce the game and the newly developed seasonal sea ice forecast</li> <li>present results from a gaming workshop conducted with experts in Arctic marine operations</li> <li>discuss the role of full and structured debriefing in maximizing the learning that takes place during gaming sessions</li> </ul><p>To conclude, we reflect on the upcoming stages of data collection, which will culminate in an exploratory model. The model will serve to inform sea ice service providers about the potential mediating effects deriving from the reliability of sea ice forecasts on the user’s own perceived confidence in successful voyage planning.   </p>