the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Thirsty Earth: A Game-Based Approach to Interdisciplinary Water Resources Education
Abstract. The sustainable management of water resources requires cooperative institutions, whose development is rarely included in often overloaded engineering education curricula. To address this gap, we developed Thirsty Earth, an open-access online multi-player game designed to introduce key concepts in water governance through experiential learning. The game can be integrated into standard water management and hydrology classes as part of interactive teaching modules. In Thirsty Earth, students assume the roles of farmers in rural communities, making annual decisions about crop selection and irrigation methods to maximize agricultural profits under uncertain climate conditions. Through gameplay, they encounter critical trade-offs associated with environmental uncertainty, cooperation over shared infrastructure, and the depletion of common-pool water resources, which are central to contemporary water management. Students can address these issues by purchasing and sharing reliable information on resource use and crafting institutional rules to regulate behavior. The game’s dual versions, which include a simplified spreadsheet-based implementation and an advanced web-based interface, offer flexibility to promote active learning in diverse educational contexts.
- Preprint
(6375 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(337 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 07 Apr 2025)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-330', Wim Douven, 06 Mar 2025
reply
I enjoyed reading the paper. It is a very interesting contribution to the literature on serious games and the role they can play in strengthening (students') skills for tackling social and environmental challenges, in particular water resources management. It provides an in-depth overview of serious games research to date, and contributes to the knowledge with the concepts and application of the interdisciplinary game Thirsty Earth, with more focus on designing solutions, which, as shown, can be used in different learning environments.
I have three comments, questions.
- The game is presented as an interdisciplinary game and indeed uses knowledge and insights in the field of technology, natural sciences and social sciences in a very interesting way. I wondered to what extent the design and implementation of the game was also an interdisciplinary effort, involving e.g. social science or public administration researchers. Looking at the authors' connections, they appear to have mainly scientific, technological and engineering backgrounds. Is that indeed the case? Have also teachers or researchers from social or public administration been involved? And what are your experiences working on a game like this in a more or less disciplinary or interdisciplinary team? What would be recommendations for others wanting to use the game in education?
- In the concluding section you talk about learning from the different game runs over the years (7 years) and the effectiveness of the game in achieving learning objectives. You do mention that no formal evaluation has taken place (line 386), so I understand that a quantitative substantiation is not possible. But would it be possible to add some qualitative data, e.g. in the form of quotes based on the reflection sessions (step 7 of the game), which would provide more insight into the effectiveness of the game according to the students, and support your conclusions
- One final note. The game has been developed for STEM (science, technology, engineering, math) students, actually it would also be interesting if mixed disciplinary groups of students played the game (as they are also expected to work together in real life), also to see if that would lead to different outcomes and discussions. I do realize that this may be more difficult to organize.Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-330-RC1 -
AC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-330', Marc F. Muller, 13 Mar 2025
reply
We are grateful to Dr. Douven for reading our paper and for his positive feedback. We hope our responses and proposed modifications satisfactorily address his comments.
Regarding your first comment on interdisciplinary aspects of Thirsty Earth: Although social scientists and public policy scholars were not explicitly involved in the game’s original design, I (Muller) consider myself an interdisciplinary water scientist, with research focusing on the coupled interactions between humans and water systems. My work on common-pool resource dilemmas in shared groundwater —shaped by collaboration with water scholars across various disciplines—influenced many of the game’s core concepts. That being said, Thirsty Earth was indeed initially developed for an engineering course to introduce students to water-resource policy. It builds on technical topics familiar to STEM students (e.g., groundwater flow, weather uncertainty, and water balance) and integrates socio-economic and institutional elements over time. However, the game has also been implemented in an interdisciplinary minor on sustainability that was open to non-engineering students (primarily from political science and business/management), who found the game both accessible and beneficial. In fact, having a heterogeneous mix of participants led to more robust debates, particularly concerning institutional design, and enhanced the educational experience. For educators interested in using Thirsty Earth, our recommendation is to implement it in an interdisciplinary context whenever possible, allowing students from diverse backgrounds to share and learn from one another’s expertise. Another possibly valuable application is within social science curricula, where the game can illustrate how environmental processes and constraints shape governance challenges and institutional design. We will expand Section 5 of the updated manuscript to discuss these points.
Regarding your second comment on student feedback: We agree that including qualitative data would enhance our discussion of the game’s effectiveness. We will add representative quotes from the student reflections conducted during the debriefing sessions (step 7 of the game) in the Supplementary Materials of the revised paper. We will also reference these reflections in Section 6, where we discuss educational outcomes.
Regarding your third comment, we fully agree that an interdisciplinary educational setting is ideal. As noted in our response to your first comment, we have already observed that a mix of STEM and non-STEM students significantly enhances the educational quality of Thirsty Earth. Participants with diverse backgrounds and areas of expertise bring a variety of perspectives to the table, resulting in more nuanced discussions and more effective engagement in institutional design. Although organizing an interdisciplinary group may pose additional logistical challenges, our experience suggests that the educational benefits are well worth the effort. We will expand Section 5 in our revised paper to discuss these observations.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-330-AC1 -
RC2: 'Reply on AC1', Wim Douven, 17 Mar 2025
reply
Thanks Marc for your extensive feed-back. I understand not all comments can be addressed in the paper, and much look forward to read your updated version. Best, Wim
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-330-RC2
-
RC2: 'Reply on AC1', Wim Douven, 17 Mar 2025
reply
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
177 | 30 | 6 | 213 | 24 | 4 | 5 |
- HTML: 177
- PDF: 30
- XML: 6
- Total: 213
- Supplement: 24
- BibTeX: 4
- EndNote: 5
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|---|---|---|
United States of America | 1 | 83 | 38 |
China | 2 | 17 | 7 |
Netherlands | 3 | 14 | 6 |
Switzerland | 4 | 10 | 4 |
France | 5 | 10 | 4 |
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1
- 83