Journal of Cleaner Production 208 (2019) 924e936

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Review

Facilitating sustainability transition through serious games: A

systematic literature review
Marios Stanitsas a, *, Konstantinos Kirytopoulos b, Elise Vareilles c
a
School of Mechanical Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, Greece
b
School of Natural & Built Environments, University of South Australia, Australia
c
Industrial Engineering Center, IMT Mines Albi, France

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t :

Article history: Exploring aspects of how innovative methods can truly attain a sustainable society is necessary for the
Received 22 June 2018 future of our planet. This study focuses on serious games, and how users can increase their under-
Received in revised form standing of sustainability issues and their familiarity with sustainable development strategies. “Users” of
11 October 2018
serious games consist of all possible target groups that are interested in attaining knowledge of sus-
Accepted 14 October 2018
Available online 18 October 2018
tainability through the use of games that are designed for a purpose beyond entertainment, in this case
for sustainability education. This paper follows the systematic literature review method to deliver a study
of serious games featuring sustainable development practices and policies. In order to provide a thor-
Keywords:
Sustainability
ough analysis of their dynamic features, 77 games were explored in this study. The findings show the
Sustainable development growing number of serious games that seek to educate in sustainability and the categorization of these
Serious games games according to the triple-bottom line of sustainability, giving clarification hints to users wishing to
Game-based learning select the relevant tool that offers an understanding of specific sustainability issues. The purpose of such
Education research is to reveal the contribution of serious games as effective tools in facilitating sustainability
education and to group them according to their nature and direction in relation to sustainability. Lim-
itations in their effectiveness are also identified and a research agenda for new, relevant serious games is
proposed that will enhance holistic knowledge and make it easier to clarify their pedagogical basis. The
recipients of the findings will be all those future users and trainers who are interested in accessing
sustainability education patterns through the use of serious games. This study will enable them to select
the serious game that best serves their needs.
© 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction & background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 925

2. Research method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 926
2.1. Tracing the documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 927
2.2. Filtering the documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 927
2.3. Evaluating the documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 927
2.4. Synthesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 929
3. Results and discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 929
3.1. Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 929
3.2. Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 932
4. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935
Supplementary data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (M. Stanitsas), konstantinos.
[email protected] (K. Kirytopoulos), [email protected]
(E. Vareilles).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.157
0959-6526/© 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 M. Stanitsas et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 208 (2019) 924e936 925

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935

1. Introduction & background study lists the attainment of learning outcomes as tangible and
readily definable information in line with sustainable development
An undisputed feature of modern societies is the rapid change requirements, or best practices as defined by professional bodies. It
they are undergoing. Major social changes affect or characterize promotes Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) as voca-
every aspect of society, and influence our ways of life, causing tionally vital (meeting sustainability requirements), making it
increasing confusion in people's daily lives (Van Opstal and Huge
, worth of investigation. Serious games are a means to encourage
2013; Ferguson, 2016). Scientific techniques need to be called sustainability concepts in societies. Education is a crucial element
upon in order to provide viable solutions for perpetual sustain- but it does not ensure a change of philosophy towards SD patterns
ability concepts (Nawaz and Koç, 2018; Mihelcic et al., 2003; Kivila€ (Brundiers and Wiek, 2013). Analysis of general SD competences in
et al., 2017; Gonza
lez et al., 2011). The target scenario needs to several HEIs has shown that engineering students do not possess
include environmental issues such as climate change, social issues the proper skills of systemic thinking and holistic knowledge upon
such as poverty and happiness, and economical aspects such as graduating (Fumiyo, 2007; Major et al., 2017). It is crucial to achieve
profitable investments (Lee, 2012; Komurlu et al., 2015a). Plenty of this element if a change of mentality is desired. (Karel et al., 2012;
definitions of the vast field of sustainability exist. However, it is Fazey et al., 2018).
commonly accepted that all definitions should include biophysical, During the last decades, HEIs have been conducting research on
human and economic aspects. As Dick et al. (2018) and Ramcilovic- how to integrate sustainability into their educational methods
Suominen and Pülzl (2018) indicated in their work, sustainability (Ragazzi and Ghidini, 2017; Tejedor et al., 2018; Holdsworth and
can be understood as the interaction of humans with the envi- Thomas, 2016). A growing number of HEIs have created educa-
ronment and with other human beings in order to achieve envi- tional tools for SD, research on sustainability integration, social
ronmental, social and economic advantages. The World outreach, procedures, assessment and statements, university
Commission on Environment and Development, also known as the partnerships, institutional schemes, conventional educative pro-
Brundtland Report, shaped a definition that has been widely grams for educators and green campus projects (Annan-Diab and
accepted by the scientific community (Renoldner, 2013; Schubert Molinari, 2017). Universities, and especially engineering-related
and La
ng, 2005; Vasconcellos Oliveira, 2018). According to this HEIs, are taking fundamental and essential steps to follow the
report: “Sustainable development is a development that meets the modern-era trend of SD reformulating their educational strategies
needs of the present without jeopardizing the ability of future (Beynaghi et al., 2016; Luederitz et al., 2017). This long and difficult
generations to meet their own needs” (WCED, 1987). Supplemen- path involves the crucial step of incorporating Sustainability
tary to this philosophy are the Sustainable Development Goals Assessment Tools (SATs). SATs play an important role in HEIs, fa-
(SDG) that the United Nations (UN) have set, the basis of which are voring the genesis of SD policies and the development of SD
the essentials of energy utilization, water and nourishment (United practices. They are implementers of innovation (Dlouha
et al.,
Nations, 2015). As literature suggests, sustainable technologies 2018). Nevertheless, as Berzosa et al. (2017) indicate, researchers
have come a long way, driven by environmental awareness and the have shied away from using such tools. Even though the value of
rising costs of fossil fuels (Marousek, 2013; Mardoyan and Braun, sustainability is commonly recognized by academics, SD projects
2015; Bieber et al., 2018; Fazey et al., 2018). The most promising tend to be perceived as trivial tasks, mainly due to the difficulty of
achievements concern renewable energy, sustainable living, specifying clear objectives (the topic of sustainability is too broad)
organic agriculture, environmental economics and environmental (De Lange, 2017; Ludwig, 1993, Silvius, 2017, Sierra et al., 2018). This
technologies. Within these general categories, technologies like lack of engagement gives potency to the demand for innovative
CO2 capture, water cleaning, soil improvement, sustainable design educational approaches that facilitate authentic educational con-
(construction) and cogeneration all add to the repository of sus- tent and thinking in the field of SD (Blanco-Portela et al., 2017;
tainability achievements (Marousek, 2014a; Koytsoumpa et al., Ceulemans et al., 2015; Kevin, 2003). In other words, integration of
2018; Marousek, 2014b; Pe
rez-lombard et al., 2008; Gurgun et al., SD requires demanding perception of the key factors, purviews,
2015; Robichaud Lauren and Anantatmula Vittal, 2011). The focus limitations and independence of different SD projects in order to
seems to be on long-term issues that have environmental, social, obtain a beneficial outcome (Cairns and Martinet, 2014). Such
and economic implications (Komurlu et al., 2015b). Prevention of awareness can be established within a united, interdisciplinary
physical waste, increase in energy efficiency and improvement of framework that requires the learner to dig into compositional
resource productivity, all help to expand profitability and enhance thinking in various stages. Such a framework constitutes deep and
competitiveness in the long run. In fact, due to years of neglect, meaningful learning (Major et al., 2017; Kalsoom and Khanam,
these are often high-return investment fields (Van Opstal and 2017).
Huge
, 2013; Ha

k et al., 2018; Kakoty, 2018). Fig. 1 provides an overview of the matters that need to be
Nonetheless, as the need for sustainability can no longer be considered from the educator's perspective when seeking to instill
overlooked, there is general agreement that the educational tools SD practices through educational methods. It is based on the
used to transmit knowledge of Sustainable Development (SD) and UNESCO report combined with the sustainable development goals
promote new methods to teach it need to be renovated (Dagiliu  te_ that the UN set in 2015.
et al., 2018; Jaca et al., 2018; Thürer et al., 2018; Saunila et al., Goni et al. (2017), developing the proposal made by Stephens
2018; Beumer et al., 2018; Anand and Sen, 2000). Various at- et al. (2008), outlined four points that need to be addressed for
tempts have been made to move in this direction. A growing HEIs to reach the goal of a sustainable-oriented culture, through the
number of Higher Educational Institutes (HEI) are adopting and implementation of adequate holistic educational SD tools. These
integrating SD policies and sustainable-oriented communication points are listed as follows:
patterns in their educational research (Tejedor et al., 2018). This
926 M. Stanitsas et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 208 (2019) 924e936

Fig. 1. Engagement with SD practices and policies based on UNESCO and UN reports for sustainable development (United Nations, 2015; UNESCO, 2005).

i. HEIs can become the means to integrate sustainability analyzed the way these games help to develop the sustainable
thinking in modern societies. This comes as a continuation of philosophy. These reviews are those of Katsaliaki and Mustafee
the philosophy that each one of us should practice sustain- (2015) and two years later, Madani et al. (2017). Despite the fact
ability actions individually to achieve sustainable philosophy that these two studies were published recently, their data stop at
thinking. 2013. Since then, an enormous expansion of SGs on SD has been
ii. HEIs teach students the basic principles of design, project observed. Some of these newer games can be found in this study.
management and problem solving for them to be able to Taking the research one step further, their categorization according
confront the need for sustainability. to the most widely-accepted diagram of sustainability (triple-bot-
iii. HEIs can apply project-based learning methods, which will tom line scenario of economic, social and environmental attributes)
properly guide students through the SD path. has not been attempted before and appears for the first time in this
iv. HEIs can be involved in SD practices to create curiosity study. Adding to the same concept, the mapping of the engagement
amongst individuals and collaborate with other institutions with SD practices and policies based on UNESCO and UN reports for
or sustainability related centers. SD has also been achieved. This study is based on the scientific
hypothesis which claims that any SG on SD fully contributes to all
Jickling and Wals (2008) pointed out that by implementing educational attributes of sustainability's triple-bottom line (economic,
education for SD in HEIs, a whole range of other activities are social and environmental dimension). The aim of this research is to
involved, such as carrying out literature review analysis, tutoring provide an overview and classification of SGs on SD and to explore
and numerous projects that concern the structure of society. their potential as educational tools. The implications of the research
Melkonyan et al. (2017) acknowledged that the implementation of are two-fold. The practical implication is that practitioners and
sustainability is a complicated philosophical pattern that leads to educators gain an in depth understanding of the existing serious
long processes, various challenges and risks. games in relation to sustainability. Furthermore, the grouping of
It is generally accepted that Serious Games (SGs) offer great serious games according to the triple bottom line of sustainability
potential in the education sector, mainly due to the positive effects and their in-depth analysis provides academics with a basis for
they have on learning outcomes (Rossano et al., 2018). Focusing on further analysis and research into new serious games related to
sustainability concepts, the use of SGs can deliver a major increase sustainability.
of interest in training, project understanding and evaluation The paper unfolds as follows: A method review of SGs on SD is
amongst users. The advantages of SGs come from the fact that they reported in section 2, analyzing their underlying characteristics (77
receive gameplay characteristics from common entertainment SGs are included). In section 3, the results of the study are pre-
games and focus on learning or training, with concepts of applying sented, along with an extended discussion. Finally, section 4 in-
theoretical instructions in real-life environments cludes the conclusions and the promising prospects for future
(Wattanasoontorn et al., 2013; Lamb et al., 2018a; Botella et al., research.
2011). SD games are the main focus of this study. SGs tap into the
effects of Game - Based Learning (GBL), especially those that pro-
2. Research method
vide directional lines towards multi-meaning concepts like sus-
tainability. Some reviews of SGs on SD have been conducted which
To meet the aim of the paper, a systematic literature review
 M. Stanitsas et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 208 (2019) 924e936 927

Fig. 2. Research method (SLR) presented in steps.

(SLR) was conducted. The SLR method is considered particularly 5092 results in total, using different keywords and combinations
useful when publishing the crucial conclusions of a large and each time (refer to Table 1), 81 journal articles, 10 conference pa-
complex body of research literature (Sengers et al., 2016). It remains pers, 5 books, 4 reports from international organizations and 1
a method which is widely used by researchers who wish to produce online database1 (plus the ones in the Appendix section) were
eye-catching conclusions in their review papers (Vela
squez et al., finally included in this study. This determined the first stage of the
2018; Fischer et al., 2017; Guitart et al., 2012; Rodrigues and selection method.
Mendes, 2018). Other studies in SGs have shown the path to- The study of online databases (referring to the one included in
wards the application of this method, making it easier to select the the total documentation and the rest in the Appendix section)
proper SGs that fit the main purpose of this paper (Katsaliaki and involved reading the description of each SG as a first step, and then
Mustafee, 2015; Goni et al., 2017; Chappin et al., 2017; Dlouh
a actually playing the game. Following this process, the opportunity
et al., 2018; Madani et al., 2017). The cases studied in this review to determine the classification, the relevance and the context of the
concern the use of SGs in SD as a means to incorporate holistic games was provided. Thus, the categorization was achieved rela-
knowledge about sustainability issues in HEIs. In line with the tively easily.
suggestions of Thürer et al. (2018) and Boyle et al. (2016), a sys- The search relations also resulted from the first review and
tematic formula for retrieving and selecting the academic publi- addressed the diversity of games (video games, sandbox games,
cations was used. The schema followed is presented in steps in etc.) that were played as well as standings for the possible out-
Fig. 2. Paragraphs 2.1 to 2.3 shape the research design followed for comes of playing (assessment effects, learning, educational tools,
tracing, filtering, and evaluating the documents, in that order. skills, motivation).

2.1. Tracing the documents 2.2. Filtering the documents

Tracing the documents (documentation) of the related SGs on The initial sample of 5092 documents was further reduced to
SD that could be used as educational tools was conducted in the 444 by reading the title and abstract. This was further reduced to
form of a literature review (conference papers, journal articles, 101 documents (plus the online databases provided in the
book chapters, reports from international organizations, online Appendix section) by excluding unrelated documents after reading
databases) that provides online links to accessible SGs. In this the full text. The vast number of unrelated documents is acceptable,
research, the subject to be analyzed is SGs on SD and their use as as restrictions were made on the subject area (computer science,
effective educational tools. These are thus the three main keywords engineering, social sciences, environmental science, energy, deci-
of the research (refer to Table 1). sion sciences). This tactic was chosen mainly due to its objectivity
Relevant documents were identified from six online databases: and flexibility in the field of sustainability and educational tools like
Scopus, Science Direct, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Springerlink SGs.
and Emeraldinsight. The selection of these specific online databases To safeguard against relevant documents being lost, all the
was made due to their large coverage of documents. As Table 2 references were validated twice. Following this process, 4 supple-
suggests, so as to keep the number of documents manageable mentary documents were discovered and added to the total
and to ensure the significance of the sources, the search was further documentation sample. The final sample was 101 documents from
limited to certain criteria (time period, subject area, etc.). Among which 31 were reviews on sustainability issues and the rest
referred to SGs (on SD and as educational tools). The systematic
literature investigation (filtering), including the documents' source
Table 1
is diagrammed in Fig. 3.
Keywords of research.
The progression of documents retrieved in scientific databases
Serious Games (SGs) Sustainable Development Educational Tools mentioned in paragraph 3.1. is shown in Fig. 4. As expected, Scopus
(SD)
and Science Direct were the electronic platforms that provided the
Gamification Sustainability Educational most primary documents to our SLR. The platform with the highest
technology
contribution in searches was Scopus, with 2354 documents and the
Game based learning Triple bottom line (TBL) Holistic
(GBL) understanding
one that engendered the lowest contribution was Emeraldinsight,
Green games Education for sustainability Effective learning with 86 documents.
SD games Sustainable management Motivation
Environmental games SD issues Educational process
2.3. Evaluating the documents

This phase involved removing and documenting information

1
from each of the 101 final documents (plus the online databases
The 1 online database was included in the final documentation sample because
of the website's layout which resembles an analytical review of SGs. Other online
provided in the Appendix section). To ensure objectivity, two-time
databases (Appendix) are more like online platforms where users can play the analysis and extra discussion among researchers were conducted in
game and read a brief description. order to determine any possible illogicality in review results. The
928 M. Stanitsas et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 208 (2019) 924e936

Table 2
Selection criteria of the SLR.

Criterion Inclusion Criteria Exclusion Criteria

Time period 1990eFebruary 2018 Older studies

Subject Area  Computer Science All other subject areas
 Engineering
 Social Sciences
 Environmental Science
 Energy
 Decision Sciences
Research Discipline  Engineering All other research disciplines
 Sustainable Development
 Energy
 Ecology
 Technology
 Business Management/Accounting
Document Type  Conference paper All other document types
 Journal article
 Book chapter
 Reports from international organisms
 Online databases
Scientific Content  Documents that present a model, technique or literature review to explore  Documents whose main aim is not an assessment of SGs
and describe SGs on SD  Documents that do not describe any specs of a SG (just names)
 Documents that describe the assessment of a SG  Documents that do not analyze the educational outcomes of a SG
 Documents that show cases of study of SD practices and policies  Documents that do not discuss evaluation models of the SGs prism
 Documents that analyze the educational contribution of SGs
 Documents that review existing SGs on SD
Language English All other languages
Availability Available in online academic search databases Not available online

Fig. 3. Diagramming the systematic literature investigation. Adapted from Caiado et al. (2017).

Fig. 4. Progression of documents retrieved in scientific databases.

 M. Stanitsas et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 208 (2019) 924e936 929

suggested path was inspired by Boyle et al. (2016) and Thürer et al. the SGs and the sustainability issues described, and the researchers
(2018), who developed literature reviews on sustainability and SG involved in these practices.
practices accordingly.
The difficulty of evaluating the final selection of documents lies 3. Results and discussion
in deciding which SGs may foster education in SD issues and how
they can be related to educational approaches. The integration of This section presents a research of serious games related to SD
sustainability and SD philosophy in SGs can be understood as the and their added value in the educational sector. The SGs were
outcome of specific concepts in which numerous characteristics are identified through web sources; the main one was CRS (2017),
united. The important part of the evaluation process lies in the while others are presented in the Appendix and related paper re-
concept of how practices are hypothesized by the writers and how views (Katsaliaki and Mustafee, 2015; Madani et al., 2017). All 101
they are applied in the curricula in education. Taking these prin- final documents contributed in showing the “path” towards this
ciples into consideration, the final type of document was deter- identification. Besides the name of the SG, the year it first became
mined (Fig. 5). The SGs identified in this study, present an available, the type, the audience it addresses, the teaching exclu-
educational character in sustainability topics in line with TBL phi- sivity the study of each game initially identified and the sustainable
losophy. Most reviews were found in journal articles, conference technology/SD strategy are described. The findings indicate that the
papers and online databases, dependent mainly on the nature of increasing number of SGs featuring SD reveals a preference of the
the paper (SGs, SD). academic community for their use as educational tools to incor-
porate SD ideals.
2.4. Synthesis
3.1. Results
Each paper individually was a source of general data on the
scientific content of the paper, as presented above in Table 2. Serious Games (SGs) with SD themes have developed steadily in
Furthermore, additional specific data required to meet the aim of the academic world over approximately the last fifteen years
the paper was collected (SGs, SD, etc.). To reach the desired (Fig. 6) and gamification has become progressively widespread
outcome, an extensive review was performed (Fig. 5), to ensure that since it first appeared (Dias et al., 2018). The most in-depth analysis
the obtained data were appropriate. This also permitted the of SGs on SD was conducted by Katsaliaki and Mustafee (2015) and
straightforward comparison and analysis of the extracted data Madani et al. (2017), where the authors noted the need for further
during the evaluation process. research. However, while the effectiveness and the educational
The scientific database of documents was scrutinized to distin- value of the games analyzed is not in doubt, the empirical evidence
guish patterns in the literature. Three main characteristics were regarding their holistic contribution to sustainability values is still
recognized in the results: the nature of the research and the writer, emerging. After reviewing a large number of SGs on SD (as well as

Fig. 5. Final document types.

Fig. 6. SGs on SD over time (until February 2018).

930 M. Stanitsas et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 208 (2019) 924e936

actually playing them to define the possible educational outcomes), column 2, the type in column 3, the participants in column 4,
it was found that SGs are one of the best means to engage in whether the SG described was created specifically for teaching
learning on sustainability. Although this is the case, findings indi- purposes (HEIs and other institutions) in column 5, while column 6
cate that education of this kind (theoretical background through shows whether the SG was first documented by Katsaliaki and
SGs) is not enough to engage students in a holistic approach to the Mustafee (2015) (with the indication 1) or Madani et al. (2017)
philosophy of sustainability. A tangible, practical solution has to be (with the indication 2). Finally column 7 describes the sustainable
applied towards this kind of educational method as well. This is the technology/SD strategy according to each game's educational
missing part and the “Achilles' heel” of modern education systems content. The reference for each SG is provided in the Appendix
with regard to SD. section.
The studies of Katsaliaki and Mustafee (2015) and Madani et al. Among the 77 games analyzed, the seven categories of SG
(2017) constitute one of the main sources of this paper for the orientation (TBL) included sandbox video games, hybrid simulation
identification of SGs on SD. Table 3 presents the list of these SGs, games, online games, computer quiz games, computer simulation
along with other useful characteristics. Column 1 states the year games, computer assisted games, card games, dice games, mobile
that the SG became available. The name of the SG is presented in apps, board games, RPGs, online sandbox games, online alternative

Table 3
List of SGs on SD identified in this study.

Year Names of SGs on SD Type of SG Participants Teaching Initially identified Sustainable technology - SD strategy
exclusivity by

1990 1. Simearth Sandbox video game General public Yes 1 Air cleaning
1994 2. Irrigation Management Game Hybrid simulation game Students, SD prof. Yes 2 Management of landfill
1998 3. Geology Explorer Online game Students Yes 2 Earth resources exploitation
1999 4. Build a Prairie Computer quiz game Students Yes 1 Soil improving
2000 5. Learning SD (LSD) Card game Students Yes 1 Env. Conservation & urban
development
6. The Great Green Web Computer quiz game Students, Yes 1 Sustainable consumer behavior
stakeholders
7. Samba Role Play Board game Stakeholders No 2 Natural resource management
2003 8. Industrial Chlorine Transport Card game Students, SD prof. Yes 2 Social technology as a SD public policy
Metagame
9. Slyvopast Hybrid simulation game Students Yes 2 Effective strategy for SD
2004 10. Balance of the Planet Online game SD prof. No 1 CO2 capture through managerial
choices
11. Keep Cool Board game General public No 1 Sustainable process negotiation
12. River Basin Game Board game Students, SD prof. Yes 2 Water cleaning
13. Industrial Waste Game Card game Students Yes 2 Industrial waste management
2005 14. Atollgame Role-playing videogame Stakeholders No 1 Groundwater cleaning
(RPG)
15. MHP RPG Stakeholders No 1 Strategies for SD technologies
16. Better Business Dilemmas Computer quiz game Students, SD prof. Yes 1 Decision making for SD technologies
2006 17. Shrub Battle Board game Students Yes 1 Sustainable landscape design
18. 3rd World Farmer Online sandbox game General public No 1 Sustainability of agricultural land use
19. Climate Challenge Online sandbox game General public No 1 Renewable energy sources & politics
2007 20. Stop Disasters! Online sandbox game Students Yes 1 Natural disasters prevention
21. Energyville Online sandbox game General public No 1 Sustainable energy supply
22. Encon City Online sandbox game Stakeholders Yes 1 Energy conservation
23. Butorstar Hybrid simulation game Students Yes 2 Biodiversity & agricultural conservation
24. Food Import Folly Online sandbox game Students Yes e Sustainable resource use
2008 25. World Without Oil Online alternate reality Stakeholders No 1 Renewable energy sources (RES)
game
26. Environment Game Computer quiz game Stakeholders Yes 1 Sustainable building design
27. Building Game Computer quiz game Students Yes 1 Sustainable building design
28. Electrocity Online sandbox game Students Yes 1 Environmental management
29. Catchment Detox Online sandbox game General public No 1 Sustainable development (TBL)
2009 30. The Sims Adapted Sandbox video game General public No 1 Energy conservation
31. Shortfall Online game General public No 1 Sustainable engineering
32. Green City Computer simulation Students Yes 1 Green urban development
game
33. MIT CleanStart Online sandbox game General public Yes e Sustainable decision-making
34. Tragedy of the Tuna Computer simulation General public, Yes 1 Water resources management
game students
2010 35. Enercities Online sandbox game Students, SD prof. Yes 1 RES & urban development
36. Fate of the World Online sandbox game General public, Yes 1 Global warming solutions
students
37. Cityone Online sandbox game Students, SD prof. Yes 1 Sustainable city development
38. Oceanopolis Online sandbox game Stakeholders No 1 Water management
39. The UVA Bay Game Computer simulation Stakeholders Yes 1 Sustainable products & services
game
40. Sustainable Delta Game Hybrid simulation game General public No 2 Water cleaning
2011 41. SOS 21 Online sandbox game Stakeholders No 1 Sustainable living
42. River Basin Game Computer assisted game Students Yes 2 Reclaimed water management
43. Fate of the World: Tipping Point Video game General public No 2 Global warming solutions
 M. Stanitsas et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 208 (2019) 924e936 931

Table 3 (continued )

Year Names of SGs on SD Type of SG Participants Teaching Initially identified Sustainable technology - SD strategy
exclusivity by

44. Spent Online sandbox game General public No e Sustainable economics

2012 45. Irrigania Online game Students Yes 2 Sustainable agriculture
46. Aqua Republica Online game Students Yes 2 Water resources management
47. Citizen Science Online game Students Yes 2 Water cleaning
48. Earthopoly Board game Students, Yes e Resources management
stakeholders
2013 49. World Climate Computer simulation General public No 1 Global warming decision-making
game
50. Climate Change Survivor Board game General public No 2 Eco-innovation
51. Papers please Video game General public Yes e Sustainable immigration & cultural
integration
2014 52. Paying for Predictions Dice game Stakeholders No e Climate-based disaster risk reduction
53. About That Forest Video game General public No e Sustainable forest management
2015 54. Earth: A Primer Mobile app General public No e Geoengineering & environmental SD
55. Polar Eclipse Board game General public Yes e Earth resources management
56. EcoChains Card game General public No e Sustainable food chains
57. Cities: Skylines Video game General public No e Sustainable urban design
58. Evacuation Challenge Game RPG Stakeholders Yes e Natural disaster & emergency planning
59. PeaceMaker Video game General public No e Government's role in social
sustainability
60. The Arcade Wire: Oil God RPG General public No e Food sustainability & geopolitics
61. Extreme Event: Coastal City RPG Stakeholders No e Sustainability of natural hazard risk
2016 62. Laudato Si Board game General public Yes e Biodiversity & economic inequalities
63. UrbanClimateArchitect Online game General public Yes e Sustainable urbanism
64. Flood Resilience Game Board game General public Yes e Flood resilience
65. Never Alone Video game General public No e Resilience & sustainability
66. Lie, Cheat & Steal Board game General public No e Politics of sustainability
2017 67. The Catan: Oil Springs Scenario Board game General public No e Resource management
68. Energy Safari Board game Students Yes e Energy conservation
69. New Shores: A Game for Computer simulation General public Yes e Green project management
Democracy game
70. The world's future Board game Students, Yes e Resource management
stakeholders
71. Nexus Board game Stakeholders Yes e Water management for SD
72. Gifts of Culture Board game General public No e Cultural sustainability
73. Lords of the Valley: board game Board game Students, Yes e Biodiversity & water management
stakeholders
74. Flood Control Game Board game General public Yes e Flood disaster management
75. Energy Transition Game RPG Stakeholders Yes e Energy saving
76. Lords of the Valley Video game Stakeholders Yes e Sustainable leadership
2018 77. ECO Video game Students Yes e Sustainable civilization

reality games and video games. Table 3 displays the thematic majority of SGs are designed to educate users in SD, their field of
breakdown of each SG, while Fig. 9 shows the type of SGs released gravity is sometimes centered on only a part of the dimensional TBL
over the period examined. An additional feature of these SGs is that diagram. Fig. 7 provides an overview of each game according to its
many of them, even the single-player games, could be modified for orientation on the TBL. The numbers in the figure indicate that the
use by teams of players instead of individuals. The majority of the SGs described in Table 3 follow the same numeration pattern. The
games have been designed to educate students, SD professionals majority of the games (total of 25, or 32% according to Fig. 8) have
(SD prof.) and stakeholders. Some of them can be used by the achieved the goal of educating players in SD principles by involving
general public in order to increase awareness of sustainability is- all three dimensions of sustainability. The second largest percent-
sues. Stakeholders are typically motivation groups of entities that age, of 18% with a total of 14 games, belongs to the environmental
need to be clearly aware of sustainability topics for their own rea- aspect. Environmental management games tend to be highly pop-
sons. The general public, on the other hand, are players who have ular nowadays, especially due to ecological destruction and the
no direct interest in engaging with the SD world, including all other huge increase in the use of the Earth's natural resources (Damania
subcategories as well. The reasons for playing and educating et al., 2018). The Socio-Economic, Socio-Environmental and Eco-
themselves in this direction are totally different. The virtual envi- Efficiency dimensions are almost equally developed, with 12%,
ronment of the majority of the SGs is two dimensional. 13% and 8% respectively, which corresponds to 9, 10 and 6 games in
The 77 SGs that were identified in Table 3 reveal that, although each dimension. Adding these percentages (33%), with a total
the first game featuring sustainable criteria was created in 1990, the amount of 25 SGs, it is obvious that following two dimensions of
majority of the games were developed between 2010 and 2018. the TBL achieves superior results in the educational road towards
However, the research concerned SGs developed before February SD. Covering at least two of the selected dimensions makes it easier
2018, and the next five years are expected to see the release of more for educators to somehow facilitate the third one and attain holistic
SGs on SD. Fig. 6 summarizes the above-mentioned information, SD knowledge. The economic dimension is the least popular
displaying the release of all the SGs (a total of 77) over time. amongst these kinds of SGs with only 1 game (1%). On the other
The findings on game characterization, which is specified ac- hand, the social dimension is gaining in popularity, with 12 games
cording to the TBL of sustainability, show that although the vast (16%).
932 M. Stanitsas et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 208 (2019) 924e936

Fig. 7. Orientation of SGs on SD according to TBL (following the numeration of Table 3).

Fig. 8. Percentage of SGs on SD according to their orientation policy (TBL).

3.2. Discussion teaching exclusivity, the audience involved and the learning di-
rections of sustainability issues.
Having analyzed a large number of papers in the field of SGs on One limitation identified in this study has to do with the fact
SD, it is clear that GBL in general, and the development of SGs that that not all available SGs on SD could be found in academia or
address sustainability issues in particular, are growing fields, and through internet sources. SGs tend to be less popular than enter-
very promising for the future of sustainability education. In this tainment games and thus their discovery presents obstacles.
paper, an analysis of a sample of recent SGs was conducted ac- Following the research method of the paper, a systematic liter-
cording to significant parameters like game objective and gaming ature review was conducted. Through the SLR, critical conclusions
type. The problems identified during this research concerns the concerning the “nature” of the SGs on SD were drawn, defining
lack of references to new SGs in the sustainability field, their their concepts and intentions towards sustainability. The analysis of
categorization according to the TBL scenario and their numeration the 77 SGs on SD principles involved SGs released from 1990 until
so that they can become easily accessible to users who desire to be February 2018. Throughout the years a progressive rise in the
educated towards certain aspects of sustainability values. number of SGs has been observed (Fig. 6). While there are plenty of
In order to fill the gap that has existed so far in literature reviews types of SGs on the market (board, card, online sandbox, etc.), those
of SGs addressing SD issues, wide-ranging research with all- that have ultimately been the most popular during recent years are
embracing contributions from various scientific fields needs to be board games and computer games (Fig. 9). Other types, like dice
considered, in order to meticulously comprehend all the vital fea- games or sandbox games present a lower rate of recurrence. The
tures that SGs on SD have to offer. Features that should be thematic field of these SGs covers a variety of topics (economical
addressed include educational outcomes, ethics, aims, strategies, aspects, social policies, environmental management) and thus their
 M. Stanitsas et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 208 (2019) 924e936 933

Fig. 9. Type of SGs released from 1990eFebruary 2018.

categorization according to the TBL scenario of sustainability was learning values like motivation, socialization and understanding, as
possible (Fig. 7). To fully examine the thematic breakdown of these well as learning positionings, like behaviorism and humanism.
games, a quick play was performed in order to access the basic There is a lack of harmony between the vital examination features
features of each game. of each study. Most assessments of SGs lack scientific accuracy.
When seeking to teach specific sustainability attributes, edu- Based on the current analysis, it can be concluded that scientific
cators are confronted with difficulties in deciding which SG is the accuracy calls for improvement in the value of SGs for educating in
most appropriate to their needs. Through this paper, guidance to- SD principles, in order to attain effective outcomes.
wards the desired path becomes easier than ever. Users can easily The purpose of this study was to determine the educational
gain access to the SG of their choice by knowing beforehand if it is contribution of SGs on SD, based on the TBL of sustainability and
appropriate for their intentions (including internet links in the identify their impact scenario in sustainability teaching. Based on
Appendix section). Observations through this literature review the findings (SGs characteristics) which is consistent to the existing
search revealed that not all SGs on SD are exclusively reserved for literature, there appears to be a lack of information in the field of
teaching. Among the 77 SGs presented in this study, those that GBL on the topic of SGs for sustainability education (Annetta, 2010;
seem to contribute exclusivity to teaching appear in Table 3. Michael and Chen, 2005; Rugelj and Zapusek, 2013;
The high rise in the number of SGs that address SD issues (Fig. 6) Wattanasoontorn et al., 2013; Young et al., 2012; Cahier et al., 2011;
is an indicator that additional instruction and knowledge methods Charsky, 2010; Corti, 2006; Crookall, 2010; Westera et al., 2008;
are expected to be developed in the future. SGs have the potential Madani et al., 2017; Argasin
ski and We˛grzyn, 2018; Lamb et al.,
to be used as a tool for effective educational involvement. In this 2018b; Moloney et al., 2017; Giessen, 2015; Allal-Che
rif and
review, the state of SGs that give guidance in SD principles was Makhlouf, 2016). Thus, five basic inferences can be drawn: (1) the
analyzed, to provide awareness of their practicality as educational effectiveness (teaching exclusivity) of SGs in meeting sustain-
tools. ability's educational requirements does not apply to all the games,
These SGs (their characteristics) have been briefly described and but depends on the philosophy, the design and the type of each
analyzed. The main objective of carrying out the SLR was to extract game; (2) a large number of studies of SGs (on SD or not) do not
beneficial information about SGs that incorporate SD principles. properly define their research method and lack quantitative results.
The findings show that a growing number of SGs that seek to Consequently, the clarity of the findings is hard to evaluate; (3)
educate SD issues are being developed, especially during the last considering that the fields of SGs and sustainability are relatively
decade. The majority of these games contain major characteristics new, there is a clear need to inspect the educational outcomes over
like the fact that they are available for free, making the task easier time and to clarify the influence and the effectiveness of SGs, if any,
for educators and stakeholders. Another important factor is that on the users; (4) interviews are a significant part of GBL, permitting
most of them can be found on the web and are therefore easily users to describe their understanding and comprehend the
accessible to anyone interested. Furthermore, they offer a single educational link that connects “pure” gaming itself and didactic
player option, which removes the need for team playing. objectives; and (5) education through SGs (GBL) raises users'
Apart from assessing the educational outcome of these games, incentive and engagement, resulting in advantageous outcomes
the formation of multiple key factors is examined, including through fast learning.
incentive, user experience and user-friendliness. Conclusions As already mentioned in the introduction sector, the scientific
drawn from this analysis concern, the effectiveness (through their hypothesis of this study claims that any SG on SD fully contributes to
design and the audience they refer to) of the SGs mentioned in all educational attributes of sustainability's triple-bottom line (eco-
providing a holistic understanding of SD, the lack of quantitative nomic, social and environmental dimension). The Systematic Litera-
results in some cases, and finally the increase in motivation and ture Review (SLR) process is a formal, repeatable, recognized
engagement that SGs can provide (which has valuable effects on process, which in our case, was used for tracing, filtering and
knowledge outcomes). The reviewed SGs address a variety of evaluating the literature relevant to SGs, sustainability and SD. By
934 M. Stanitsas et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 208 (2019) 924e936

revealing the rate of recurrence of different documents in serious implementation of educational tools (SGs) that reinforce inter-
gaming and sustainability concepts, SLR has become a very satis- disciplinary influences. The key factor for the establishment of
factory method to examine the original hypothesis (prove or deny) such methods is to acquire holistic knowledge through educa-
and to thoroughly gather, explore and describe the results. As tional methods (Mayorova et al., 2018).
Imtiaz et al. (2013) mention in their study, after identifying 174 9. Along with these lines of development, there is a need for
published SLRs between 2005 and 2011, SLR is a valuable tool for people (users) to engage in sustainability topics and thus future-
researchers seeking wide-ranging knowledge. The fact that SLR proof themselves, so as to prevent long-term economic, social
offers helpful information concerning the need for further research and environmental damage (Rowley et al., 2012).
in older studies, further demonstrates that it is a very promising
clarification method (Hassler et al., 2016). Fig. 10 examines the 4. Conclusions
research factors and their interconnections allowing deeper ex-
amination of the SLR findings. This study offers an understanding of the concept of 77 SGs and
their contribution in sustainability matters. The analysis performed
1. Digital reality is transforming our society in fundamental ways, in this study shortens the gap between SD practices, policies and
becoming increasingly pervasive across all sectors and being education (SGs), creating an extensive mapping (Fig. 1). A catego-
integrated in several aspects of our lives. Education, and SGs in rization of 77 SGs was achieved according to the TBL (Fig. 7), giving
particular, are part of this transformation (Yu, 2017). Thinking clarification hints to users wishing to select the relevant tool that
ahead, new digital technologies are expected to create massive offers an understanding of specific sustainability issues (TBL). After
integration, both in the professions and in educational sectors numerating the reviewed SGs on SD, they are positioned in a three-
previously considered unaffected (Frey and Osborne, 2017). dimensional diagram of sustainability, to provide easy access to
2. SGs, which are the main subject of this review, are an example of users. The trend of new SGs on SD appearing over time, and the
a different type of game. They are designed to develop a specific sharp increase in their development over recent years (Fig. 6), in-
aspect of knowledge or training (sustainability issues in our dicates that sustainability is becoming more and more essential for
case) and to be used in education (Dias et al., 2018). modern societies, and education in SD issues is seen as crucial for
3. Users of digital reality are currently generating data at an un- its proper implementation.
precedented pace with information coming in many forms and Considering all the above-mentioned aspects and the findings of
directions. However, there remains a fragmented relation be- the study, it can be concluded that the original scientific hypothesis,
tween the data, the environment and the human interaction which claims that any SG on SD fully contributes to all educational
involved (sustainability and SD issues). attributes of sustainability's TBL, should be rejected. Findings
4. Increasing attention is being paid to integration of sustainability indicate that there are indeed some SGs that fully contribute to-
into development patterns within a SD framework. The pre- wards the apprehension of all of sustainability's triple-bottom line
dominant modeling approach under the SD framework is to (economic, social and environmental dimension) parameters
develop peoples' awareness of sustainability initiatives through (Fig. 7), nonetheless there are plenty that do not. A large number of
effective educational methods (SGs) (Halati and He, 2018). SGs on SD cover certain educational aspects of the TBL, such as the
5. The data generated nowadays usually entails a disparate and economic part, or in some cases, a combination of two (economic-
broad variety of sources, forms, locations, accuracy and velocity social). As previously mentioned, the implications of the research
of collection, which results in great complexity in terms of its are two-fold. The practical implication contributes towards the
management and use (Kwon et al., 2018). Thus, appropriate understanding of the existing SGs in relation to SD. This enables
collection and handling procedures are essential, as well as users to select the SG that complies with their educational needs.
particular trials for its management and application. Going one step further, the grouping of SGs according to the TBL of
6. The response to these pressures has resulted in an increased sustainability (Fig. 7) and their painstaking scrutiny offers prospect
interest in regulatory policies regarding procedures for the use for further research on SGs that address SD values.
and control of digital reality tools, like operational SGs (Lemstra, Despite the considerable interest in SGs as educational tools, it is
2018). important to understand that developing SGs for educational pur-
7. Holistic understanding of sustainability values is the most poses can be very complex, and expensive and entail significant
important educational outcome of a SG that addresses SD challenges. A possible direction for future research could be the
principles. Some games are getting closer to this goal, others not development of experimental studies that systematically uncover
so much. key features that are useful in promoting holistic learning. Another
8. Training shows that in order for users to better acquire knowl- conceivable track towards improving the layout of these SGs is to
edge of sustainability issues, there is a need for the integrate realistic 3D graphics that bring users closer to reality.

Fig. 10. Research factors and interconnections.

 M. Stanitsas et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 208 (2019) 924e936 935

These graphics are impressive and thus help to raise players' 156, 556e568.
Charsky, D., 2010. From edutainment to serious games: a change in the use of game
motivation (Sweetser and Wyeth, 2005). Additionally, SGs should
characteristics. Game. Cult. 5, 177e198.
develop more intense social interaction (providing gains in the Corti, K., 2006. Games-based Learning; a Serious Business Application.
social dimension of TBL). Future research might also include a Crookall, D., 2010. Serious games, debriefing, and simulation/gaming as a discipline.
survey of the data on profiles of users and instructors, or a survey of Simulat. Gaming 41, 898e920.
CRS, 2017. Games 4 Sustainability [Online]. Centre for system solutions, Poland.
stakeholder aspirations, including HEIs, industry and society. Available: https://games4sustainability.org/.
Dagiliu  te,
_ R., Liobikiene, _ G., Minelgaite,_ A., 2018. Sustainability at universities:
students’ perceptions from green and non-green universities. J. Clean. Prod. 181,
Acknowledgements 473e482.
Damania, R., Russ, J., Wheeler, D., Barra, A.F., 2018. The road to growth: measuring
The authors have contributed to this paper equally and declare the tradeoffs between economic growth and ecological destruction. World Dev.
101, 351e376.
that there's no financial/personal interest or belief that could affect
De Lange, D.E., 2017. Start-up sustainability: an insurmountable cost or a life-giving
their objectivity in this study. Furthermore, the authors express investment? J. Clean. Prod. 156, 838e854.
their gratitude to the reviewers who contributed to the improve- Dias, L.P.S., Barbosa, J.L.V., Vianna, H.D., 2018. Gamification and serious games in
ment of this study. They are also grateful to the reviewers for their depression care: a systematic mapping study. Telematics Inf. 35, 213e224.
Dick, J., Orenstein, D.E., Holzer, J.M., Wohner, C., Achard, A.-L., Andrews, C., Avriel-
thorough and constructive comments on earlier versions of this Avni, N., Beja, P., Blond, N., Cabello, J., Chen, C., Díaz-Delgado, R., Giannakis, G.V.,
article which greatly helped the authors to make this study as Gingrich, S., Izakovicova, Z., Krauze, K., Lamouroux, N., Leca, S., Melecis, V.,
Miklo
s, K., Mimikou, M., Niedrist, G., Piscart, C., Postolache, C., Psomas, A.,
explicit and useful as possible.
Santos-Reis, M., Tappeiner, U., Vanderbilt, K., Van Ryckegem, G., 2018. What is
socio-ecological research delivering? A literature survey across 25 international
Appendix A. Supplementary data LTSER platforms. Sci. Total Environ. 622e623, 1225e1240.
Dlouha
, J., Henderson, L., Kapitul cinov
a, D., Mader, C., 2018. Sustainability-oriented
higher education networks: characteristics and achievements in the context of
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at the UN DESD. J. Clean. Prod. 172, 4263e4276.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.157. Fazey, I., Sch€ €we, F.,
apke, N., Caniglia, G., Patterson, J., Hultman, J., Van Mierlo, B., Sa
Wiek, A., Wittmayer, J., Aldunce, P., Al Waer, H., Battacharya, N., Bradbury, H.,
Carmen, E., Colvin, J., Cvitanovic, C., D'Souza, M., Gopel, M., Goldstein, B.,
References Ha€m€ al€ainen, T., Harper, G., Henfry, T., Hodgson, A., Howden, M.S., Kerr, A.,
Klaes, M., Lyon, C., Midgley, G., Moser, S., Mukherjee, N., Müller, K., O'Brien, K.,
Allal-Che
rif, O., Makhlouf, M., 2016. Using serious games to manage knowledge: the O'Connell, D.A., Olsson, P., Page, G., Reed, M.S., Searle, B., Silvestri, G., Spaiser, V.,
SECI model perspective. J. Bus. Res. 69, 1539e1543. Strasser, T., Tschakert, P., Uribe-Calvo, N., Waddell, S., Rao-Williams, J., Wise, R.,
Anand, S., Sen, A., 2000. Human development and economic sustainability. World Wolstenholme, R., Woods, M., Wyborn, C., 2018. Ten essentials for action-
Dev. 28, 2029e2049. oriented and second order energy transitions, transformations and climate
Annan-Diab, F., Molinari, C., 2017. Interdisciplinarity: practical approach to change research. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 40, 54e70.
advancing education for sustainability and for the sustainable development Ferguson, P., 2016. Productivity growth as a barrier to a sustainability transition.
goals. Int. J. Manag. Educ. 15, 73e83. Environ. Innovat. Soc. Transit. 20, 86e88.
Annetta, L.A., 2010. The “I's” have it: a framework for serious educational game Fischer, D., Stanszus, L., Geiger, S., Grossman, P., Schrader, U., 2017. Mindfulness and
design. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 14, 105e112. sustainable consumption: a systematic literature review of research approaches
Argasin
ski, J.K., We˛grzyn, P., 2018. Affective patterns in serious games. Future and findings. J. Clean. Prod. 162, 544e558.
Generat. Comput. Syst. (in press). Frey, C.B., Osborne, M.A., 2017. The future of employment: how susceptible are jobs
Berzosa, A., Bernaldo, M.O., Ferna
ndez-Sanchez, G., 2017. Sustainability assessment to computerisation? Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 114, 254e280.
tools for higher education: an empirical comparative analysis. J. Clean. Prod. Fumiyo, K., 2007. Dissonance in students' perceptions of sustainable development
161, 812e820. and sustainability: implications for curriculum change. Int. J. Sustain. High
Beumer, C., Figge, L., Elliott, J., 2018. The sustainability of globalisation: including the Educ. 8, 317e338.
‘social robustness criterion. J. Clean. Prod. 179, 704e715. Giessen, H.W., 2015. Serious games effects: an overview. Proc. Soc. Behav. Sci. 174,
Beynaghi, A., Trencher, G., Moztarzadeh, F., Mozafari, M., Maknoon, R., Leal Filho, W., 2240e2244.
2016. Future sustainability scenarios for universities: moving beyond the Goni, F.A., Chofreh, A.G., Mukhtar, M., Sahran, S., Shukor, S.A., Klemes, J.J., 2017.
United Nations decade of education for sustainable development. J. Clean. Prod. Strategic alignment between sustainability and information systems: a case
112, 3464e3478. analysis in Malaysian public Higher Education Institutions. J. Clean. Prod. 168,
Bieber, N., Ker, J.H., Wang, X., Triantafyllidis, C., Van Dam, K.H., Koppelaar, R.H.E.M., 263e270.
Shah, N., 2018. Sustainable planning of the energy-water-food nexus using Gonza
lez, A.B.R., Díaz, J.J.V., Caaman ~ o, A.J., Wilby, M.R., 2011. Towards a universal
decision making tools. Energy Pol. 113, 584e607. energy efficiency index for buildings. Energy Build. 43, 980e987.
Blanco-Portela, N., Benayas, J., Pertierra, L.R., Lozano, R., 2017. Towards the inte- Guitart, D., Pickering, C., Byrne, J., 2012. Past results and future directions in urban
gration of sustainability in Higher Eeducation Institutions: a review of drivers of community gardens research. Urban For. Urban Green. 11, 364e373.
and barriers to organisational change and their comparison against those found Gurgun, A.P., Komurlu, R., Arditi, D., 2015. Review of the LEED category in materials
of companies. J. Clean. Prod. 166, 563e578. and resources for developing countries. Proc. Eng. 118, 1145e1152.
Botella, C., Breton-Lo
pez, J., Quero, S., Ban ~ os, R.M., García-Palacios, A., Zaragoza, I., Ha
k, T., Janouskova
, S., Moldan, B., Dahl, A.L., 2018. Closing the sustainability gap: 30
Alcaniz, M., 2011. Treating cockroach phobia using a serious game on a mobile years after “Our Common Future”, society lacks meaningful stories and relevant
phone and augmented reality exposure: a single case study. Comput. Hum. indicators to make the right decisions and build public support. Ecol. Indicat. 87,
Behav. 27, 217e227. 193e195.
Boyle, E.A., Hainey, T., Connolly, T.M., Gray, G., Earp, J., Ott, M., Lim, T., Ninaus, M., Halati, A., He, Y., 2018. Intersection of economic and environmental goals of sus-
Ribeiro, C., Pereira, J., 2016. An update to the systematic literature review of tainable development initiatives. J. Clean. Prod. 189, 813e829.
empirical evidence of the impacts and outcomes of computer games and Hassler, E., Carver, J.C., Hale, D., Al-Zubidy, A., 2016. Identification of SLR tool needs
serious games. Comput. Educ. 94, 178e192. e results of a community workshop. Inf. Software Technol. 70, 122e129.
Brundiers, K., Wiek, A., 2013. Do we teach what we preach? An international Holdsworth, S., Thomas, I., 2016. A sustainability education academic development
comparison of problem- and project-based learning courses in sustainability. framework (SEAD). Environ. Educ. Res. 22, 1073e1097.
Sustainability 5. Imtiaz, S., Bano, M., Ikram, N., Niazi, M., 2013. A tertiary study: experiences of
Cahier, J., Mawas, N.E., Zhou, C., Be
nel, A., 2011. Web 2.0, serious game: structuring conducting systematic literature reviews in software engineering. In: ACM In-
knowledge for participative and educative representations of the city. In: IET ternational Conference Proceeding Series, pp. 177e182.
International Conference on Smart and Sustainable City (ICSSC 2011), 6e8 July Jaca, C., Prieto-Sandoval, V., Psomas, E.L., Ormazabal, M., 2018. What should con-
2011, pp. 1e6. sumer organizations do to drive environmental sustainability? J. Clean. Prod.
Caiado, R.G.G., De Freitas Dias, R., Mattos, L.V., Quelhas, O.L.G., Leal Filho, W., 2017. 181, 201e208.
Towards sustainable development through the perspective of eco-efficiency - a Jickling, B., Wals, A.E.J., 2008. Globalization and environmental education: looking
systematic literature review. J. Clean. Prod. 165, 890e904. beyond sustainable development. J. Curric. Stud. 40, 1e21.
Cairns, R.D., Martinet, V., 2014. An environmental-economic measure of sustainable Kakoty, S., 2018. Ecology, sustainability and traditional wisdom. J. Clean. Prod. 172,
development. Eur. Econ. Rev. 69, 4e17. 3215e3224.
Ceulemans, K., Lozano, R., Alonso-Almeida, M., 2015. Sustainability reporting in Kalsoom, Q., Khanam, A., 2017. Inquiry into sustainability issues by preservice
higher education: interconnecting the reporting process and organisational teachers: a pedagogy to enhance sustainability consciousness. J. Clean. Prod.
change management for sustainability. Sustainability 7, 8881. 164, 1301e1311.
Chappin, E.J.L., Bijvoet, X., Oei, A., 2017. Teaching sustainability to a broad audience Karel, F.M., Jordi, S., Didac, F.B., 2012. How to educate engineers for/in sustainable
through an entertainment game e the effect of Catan: oil Springs. J. Clean. Prod. development: ten years of discussion, remaining challenges. Int. J. Sustain. High
936 M. Stanitsas et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 208 (2019) 924e936

Educ. 13, 211e218.
rez-lombard, L., Ortiz, J., Pout, C., 2008. A review on buildings energy con-
Pe
Katsaliaki, K., Mustafee, N., 2015. Edutainment for sustainable development:A sumption information. Energy Build. 40, 394e398.
survey of games in the field. Simulat. Gaming 46, 647e672. Ragazzi, M., Ghidini, F., 2017. Environmental sustainability of universities: critical
Kevin, W., 2003. Deep learning and education for sustainability. Int. J. Sustain. High analysis of a green ranking. Energy Proc. 119, 111e120.
Educ. 4, 44e56. Ramcilovic-Suominen, S., Pülzl, H., 2018. Sustainable development e a ‘selling
Kivil€
a, J., Martinsuo, M., Vuorinen, L., 2017. Sustainable project management point’ of the emerging EU bioeconomy policy framework? J. Clean. Prod. 172,
through project control in infrastructure projects. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 35, 4170e4180.
1167e1183. Renoldner, K., 2013. Rethinking ‘our common future’: a physician's remarks 25 years
Komurlu, R., Arditi, D., Gurgun, A.P., 2015a. Energy and atmosphere standards for after the release of ‘Brundtland report’. Med. Conflict Surviv. 29, 278e288.
sustainable design and construction in different countries. Energy Build. 90, Robichaud Lauren, B., Anantatmula Vittal, S., 2011. Greening project management
156e165. practices for sustainable construction. J. Manag. Eng. 27, 48e57.
Komurlu, R., Gurgun, A.P., Arditi, D., 2015b. Evaluation of LEED requirements for site Rodrigues, M., Mendes, L., 2018. Mapping of the literature on social responsibility in
properties in developing country-specific certification. Proc. Eng. 118, the mining industry: a systematic literature review. J. Clean. Prod. 181, 88e101.
1169e1176. Rossano, V., Roselli, T., Calvano, G., 2018. A serious game to promote environmental
Koytsoumpa, E.I., Bergins, C., Kakaras, E., 2018. The CO2 economy: review of CO2 attitude. In: Uskov, V.L., Howlett, R.J., Jain, L.C. (Eds.), Smart Education and e-
capture and reuse technologies. J. Supercrit. Fluids 132, 3e16. Learning 2017. Springer International Publishing, Cham.
Kwon, H., Park, Y., Geum, Y., 2018. Toward Data-driven Idea Generation: Application Rowley, C., Mukherjee Saha, J., ANG, D., 2012. 5 - towards a business sustainability
of Wikipedia to Morphological Analysis. Technological Forecasting and Social future. In: Rowley, C., Mukherjee Saha, J., ANG, D. (Eds.), Succeed or Sink.
Change. Chandos Publishing.
Lamb, R., Antonenko, P., Etopio, E., Seccia, A., 2018a. Comparison of virtual reality Rugelj, J., Zapusek, M., 2013. Learning Programming with Serious Games.
and hands on activities in science education via functional near infrared Saunila, M., Ukko, J., Rantala, T., 2018. Sustainability as a driver of green innovation
spectroscopy. Comput. Educ. 124, 14e26. investment and exploitation. J. Clean. Prod. 179, 631e641.
Lamb, R.L., Annetta, L., Firestone, J., Etopio, E., 2018b. A meta-analysis with exam- Schubert, A., L
ang, I., 2005. The Literature Aftermath of the Brundtland Report ‘Our
ination of moderators of student cognition, affect, and learning outcomes while Common Future’ (A Scientometric Study Based On Citations In Science And
using serious educational games, serious games, and simulations. Comput. Social Science Journals).
Hum. Behav. 80, 158e167. Sengers, F., Wieczorek, A.J., Raven, R., 2016. Experimenting for sustainability tran-
Lee, W.L., 2012. Benchmarking energy use of building environmental assessment sitions: a systematic literature review. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change (in press).
schemes. Energy Build. 45, 326e334. Sierra, L.A., Yepes, V., García-Segura, T., Pellicer, E., 2018. Bayesian network method
Lemstra, W., 2018. Leadership with 5G in Europe: two contrasting images of the for decision-making about the social sustainability of infrastructure projects.
future, with policy and regulatory implications. Telecommun. Pol. 42, 587e611. J. Clean. Prod. 176, 521e534.
Ludwig, D., 1993. Environmental sustainability: magic, science, and religion in Silvius, G., 2017. Sustainability as a new school of thought in project management.
natural resource management. Ecol. Appl. 3, 555e558. J. Clean. Prod. 166, 1479e1493.
Luederitz, C., Scha €pke, N., Wiek, A., Lang, D.J., Bergmann, M., Bos, J.J., Burch, S., Stephens, J.C., Hernandez, M.E., Roma
n, M., Graham, A.C., Scholz, R.W., 2008. Higher
Davies, A., Evans, J., Ko €nig, A., Farrelly, M.A., Forrest, N., Frantzeskaki, N., education as a change agent for sustainability in different cultures and contexts.
Gibson, R.B., Kay, B., Loorbach, D., Mccormick, K., Parodi, O., Rauschmayer, F., Int. J. Sustain. High Educ. 9, 317e338.
Schneidewind, U., Stauffacher, M., Stelzer, F., Trencher, G., VENJAKOB, J., Sweetser, P., Wyeth, P., 2005. GameFlow: a Model for Evaluating Player Enjoyment
Vergragt, P.J., Von wehrden, H., Westley, F.R., 2017. Learning through evaluation in Games.
e a tentative evaluative scheme for sustainability transition experiments. Tejedor, G., Segal as, J., Rosas-Casals, M., 2018. Transdisciplinarity in higher educa-
J. Clean. Prod. 169, 61e76. tion for sustainability: how discourses are approached in engineering educa-
Madani, K., Pierce, T.W., MIRCHI, A., 2017. Serious games on environmental man- tion. J. Clean. Prod. 175, 29e37.
agement. Sustain. Cities Soc. 29, 1e11. Thürer, M., Tomasevi
c, I., Stevenson, M., Qu, T., Huisingh, D., 2018. A systematic
 Hor

Major, L., Namestovski, Z., ak, R., Baga
Kreki


ny, A., c, V.P., 2017. Teach it to sustain review of the literature on integrating sustainability into engineering curricula.
it! Environmental attitudes of Hungarian teacher training students in Serbia. J. Clean. Prod. 181, 608e617.
J. Clean. Prod. 154, 255e268. UNESCO, 2005. In: UNESCO (Ed.), United Nations Decade of Education for Sus-
Mardoyan, A., Braun, P., 2015. Analysis of Czech subsidies for solid biofuels. Int. J. tainable Development (2005e2014): International Implementation Scheme.
Green Energy 12, 405e408. UNESCO, Paris, 2005e2014 ed. UNESCO.
Marousek, J., 2013. Use of continuous pressure shockwaves apparatus in rapeseed United Nations, U.G.A., 2015. In: Assembly, U.G. (Ed.), Transforming Our World: the
oil processing. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 15, 721e725. 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
Marousek, J., 2014a. Biotechnological partition of the grass silage to streamline its Van Opstal, M., Huge
, J., 2013. Knowledge for sustainable development: a world-
complex energy utilization. Int. J. Green Energy 11, 962e968. views perspective. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 15, 687e709.
Marousek, J., 2014b. Significant breakthrough in biochar cost reduction. Clean Vasconcellos Oliveira, R., 2018. Back to the future: the potential of intergenerational
Technol. Environ. Policy 16, 1821e1825. justice for the achievement of the sustainable development goals. Sustainability
Mayorova, V., Grishko, D., Leonov, V., 2018. New educational tools to encourage 10, 427.
high-school students' activity in stem. Adv. Space Res. 61, 457e465. Vela
squez, I., Caro, A., Rodríguez, A., 2018. Authentication schemes and methods: a
Melkonyan, A., Gottschalk, D., Vasanth Kamath, V.P., 2017. Sustainability assess- systematic literature review. Inf. Software Technol. 94, 30e37.
ments and their implementation possibilities within the business models of Wattanasoontorn, V., Boada, I., García, R., Sbert, M., 2013. Serious games for health.
companies. Sustain. Prod. Consump. 12, 1e15. Entertain. Comput. 4, 231e247.
Michael, D.R., Chen, S.L., 2005. Serious Games: Games that Educate, Train, and WCED W.C.O.E.A.D., 1987. Our Common Future: the Bruntland Report. Oxford
Inform. Muska & Lipman/Premier-Trade. University Press, Oxford (online).
Mihelcic, J.R., Crittenden, J.C., Small, M.J., Shonnard, D.R., Hokanson, D.R., Zhang, Q., Westera, W., Nadolski, R., Hummel, H., Wopereis, I., 2008. Serious Games for Higher
Chen, H., Sorby, S.A., James, V.U., Sutherland, J.W., Schnoor, J.L., 2003. Sustain- Education: a Framework for Reducing Design Complexity.
ability science and Engineering: the emergence of a new metadiscipline. En- Young, M.F., Slota, S., Cutter, A.B., Jalette, G., Mullin, G., Lai, B., Simeoni, Z., Tran, M.,
viron. Sci. Technol. 37, 5314e5324. Yukhymenko, M., 2012. Our princess is in another castle: a review of trends in
Moloney, J., Globa, A., Wang, R., Roetzel, A., 2017. Serious games for integral sus- serious gaming for education. Rev. Educ. Res. 82, 61e89.
tainable design: level 1. Proc. Eng. 180, 1744e1753. Yu, G., 2017. Chapter 2 - understanding the self through the use of digitally con-
Nawaz, W., Koç, M., 2018. Development of a systematic framework for sustainability structed realities. In: Gackenbach, J., BOWN, J. (Eds.), Boundaries of Self and
management of organizations. J. Clean. Prod. 171, 1255e1274. Reality Online. Academic Press, San Diego.