Journal of Cleaner Production 14 (2006) 837e847

www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Games by which to learn and teach about sustainable

development: exploring the relevance of games and
experiential learning for sustainability
Hans Dieleman a,*, Don Huisingh b,1
a
Center for Sustainability and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Room M7-19, 3000 Dr Rotterdam, The Netherlands
b
The Center for Clean Products and Clean Technologies, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, 311 Conference Center Building, Knoxville, TN, USA
Received 1 August 2005; accepted 1 November 2005
Available online 27 March 2006

Abstract

This paper discusses the roles of games in experiential learning for sustainability. It includes applied emphases upon four topics: (1) The
challenges of sustainable development education with the need for interdisciplinarity, knowledge, skills and attitudinal training and with a special
focus upon the urgent needs for paradigm, context and practice changes to help ensure that we make progress toward sustainable societies. We
emphasize that these characteristics challenge existing teaching and educational philosophies and methods. (2) The theory of experiential learn-
ing, as developed by David Kolb in the nineteen eighties. We underscore that experiential learning is a good model for education for sustain-
ability. (3) The usefulness of games as tools in learning processes. Various aspects of games are discussed such as the ‘functions of games’ and
‘the different categories of games,’ and ‘the role of games in learning and particular in experiential learning.’ These three aspects form the the-
oretical part of the paper. (4) Brief reviews of some illustrative games. The authors provide practical advice on how to play games in the context
of learning for SD. They underscore facets such as the contextualization of games, technical aspects of playing games and the debriefing after the
games have been played. The authors conclude the paper with conclusions that games are potentially relevant in all of the four learning phases of
experiential learning. Games are especially relevant in phase four. In this phase games can contribute to helping learners to effect shifts in their
personal paradigms, context and practice that are needed for sustainable development. The final conclusion is that many games exist and have
been proven to be helpful. Educators are invited to change their curricula to facilitate usage of games as integral components of their educational
philosophy tools and practice.
! 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Games and simulations in education; Learning through simulations; Simulations for teaching sustainability

1. Introduction: how do we learn? doing.’ By contrast at school, in the classroom, most of us

‘How do we learn?’ As a child we learn by exploring, by
touching things, moving things and taking things apart. Along
this process we break things, twist and bend them and discover
that we sometimes can and sometimes cannot repair them.
This is really an ‘experiential’ way of learning: ‘learning by
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ31 10 408 2050.
E-mail addresses: dieleman@fsw.eur.nl (H. Dieleman), dhuising@utk.edu
(D. Huisingh).
1
Tel.: þ1 865 974 3379.
had to sit down quietly, without moving, talking or playing.
When the teacher was speaking we had to have our arms
crossed in front of us and be constantly alert to the words of
wisdom coming from her/him!! Learning (and teaching) was
seen as a purely cognitive process. We had to think, to analyze,
to COMPREHEND, to learn by heart and to store the content
of books in our memories. However, already about a hundred
years ago, this traditional view on learning began to be chal-
lenged by many educators. Various scholars in education and
pedagogy such as Peter Petersen, Rudolf Steiner or Maria
Montessori started to question the purely cognitive and

0959-6526/$ - see front matter ! 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2005.11.031
838 H. Dieleman, D. Huisingh / Journal of Cleaner Production 14 (2006) 837e847
analytical approaches to learning. They developed alternative
approaches and founded new schools such as the Jenaplan
School (Petersen), the Free School (Steiner) and the Montes-
sori School (Montessori). The school reformers looked at the
characteristics, learning capacities and needs of young chil-
dren and developed fundamentally new approaches to facilitat-
ing their learning. Currently, most of our children (fortunately
also those outside Jenaplan, Steiner or Montessori schools)
have more freedom at school to discover and learn by doing.
For a long time, such ‘alternative’ approaches were only
used in the context of primary education and were focused
upon the learning characteristics of children. Only much later,
some educators started to see that the traditional learning ap-
proach is also limited and restrictive for adult learners. One
of the approaches that is highly critical towards traditional
learning and teaching methods, especially for adults, is the
experiential learning theory developed by David Kolb. His
theory provides a comprehensive view on different forms of
learning and places them in an integrative framework. It is
this theory on experiential learning that we utilize as our start-
ing point for the discussion of the usage of games in learning
for sustainability [1].
2. Kolb’s experiential learning theory
According to Kolb, learning is a process of a combination
of grasping experience and transforming it. The essence of ex-
periential learning is that it involves not only understanding
phenomena, and not only observing the phenomena being
studied (grasping or prehension), but it also focuses upon do-
ing something with them, such as testing them or applying
them with the intention of achieving a desired result (transfor-
mation). Along the line of ‘grasping’ and ‘transforming,’ Kolb
makes a number of distinctions (Fig. 1).
In terms of grasping, he distinguishes between apprehen-
sion and comprehension. Experience grasped through compre-
hension relies on conceptual interpretation and symbolic
representation. That is the kind of teaching that we usually re-
ceive in schools and almost always in universities. It is ratio-
nal, usually analytical and uses the right side of the brain. In
contrast experience grasped through apprehension relies on
the tangible and felt qualities of the immediate experiences.
That refers to the kind of learning processes one goes through
while exploring things, looking at them and touching, feeling,
(understanding) (experiencing)
comprehension apprehension
prehension
LEARNING
transformation
intention extension
(internalization) (externalization)
Fig. 1. Different forms of learning, according to Kolb [1].
smelling, tasting and hearing them. It relies upon intuition,
feeling, emotion and insight that are lateral processes of
thought, typically processed through the left side of the brain.
For Kolb, there is more to learning than the distinction be-
tween comprehension and apprehension. Learning is the result
of grasping or prehension (comprehension and apprehension)
as well as transforming. In terms of transforming, he distin-
guishes between intention and extension. The learning process
of transforming through intention relies on internal reflection.
It touches upon our emotions and recreates and transforms the
image we have of ourselves, vis-à-vis the phenomena being
studied. Transformation that relies on extension is based on
active manipulation of the external world. It recreates and
transforms phenomena or an object and therefore, the external
world around us.
According to Kolb, different forms of learning result in
different types of knowledge. He makes a distinction between
assimilative, accommodative, divergent and convergent
knowledge. Assimilative knowledge helps the learner to un-
derstand and adapt to existing contexts and situations. Accom-
modative knowledge helps the learner to understand and adapt
to new contexts and situations Divergent knowledge helps the
learner to accomplish changes within given situations and con-
texts. Finally, convergent knowledge helps the learner to
change situations and contexts. The distinction has a similarity
with the two types of learning that have been identified by
Argyris: single loop learning and double loop learning. Single
loop learning aims at learning to perform known activities
better, within a given context. Double loop learning aims at
changing the context in which activities take place; a type of
learning how to learn how to make increasingly effective
changes.
Different learning processes lead to different types of
knowledge and contribute to different change processes
(Table 1). According to Kolb, experience grasped through
apprehension and transformed through intention results in
assimilative knowledge. Experience grasped through compre-
hension and transformed through intention results in accom-
modative knowledge. When experience is grasped through
comprehension and transformed through extension, the result
is convergent knowledge. When experience is grasped by
apprehension and transformed by extension, divergent knowl-
edge is the result.
2.1. The four-stage cycle of learning
The process of experiential learning can be described as
a four-stage cycle, involving four different learning modes.
Table 1
Relationships among learning processes, types of knowledge and change
processes
Learning process Type of knowledge Change process
Apprehension/intention Assimilative Adapt to existing contexts
Comprehension/intention Accommodative Adapt to different contexts
Comprehension/extension Convergent Change within contexts
Apprehension/extension Divergent Changes contexts
 H. Dieleman, D. Huisingh / Journal of Cleaner Production 14 (2006) 837e847
Kolb describes learning as a system, or as a complete package
with exercises and theory, allowing students to go through all
phases of the experiential learning process. In this process or
system, he distinguishes among four phases. Firstly, the phase
of concrete experiences, secondly, the phase of reflective ob-
servation, thirdly, the phase of abstract conceptualization and
fourthly, the phase of active experimentation.
2.1.1. Concrete experiences
The learning phase of concrete experiences focuses on the
grasping of experience through apprehension. According to
Kolb, this is the most common starting point in learning in
human development. Children first start to apprehend
experiences and learn to know reality ‘‘as it is.’’ In higher
education this phase refers to the importance of understanding;
‘‘experiencing’’ the richness and complexity of reality, a com-
plexity that is beyond our capacity to grasp it in terms of
models and theories. (Fig. 2)
2.1.2. Reflective observation
The next phase focuses on accommodative knowledge. The
key to reflective observation is that it stimulates the learning
process of how we have to act with respect to specific ques-
tions, what the working of specific solutions is, what opera-
tional knowledge is needed to perform tasks in different
roles. This phase can be compared with single loop learning,
learning knowledge and skills that enables one to become bet-
ter in performing known tasks within more or less given con-
texts. It deals with practices, tools and techniques currently
used.
2.1.3. Abstract conceptualization
The third learning phase focuses on comprehension through
conceptual interpretation, analyses and symbolic representa-
tions. In many training programs, this type of education has
been the primary focus over the past several centuries. It em-
phasizes the importance of gaining understanding from infor-
mation, it disregards specific contexts, because it seeks to
unravel and understand universal principles and universally
applicable knowledge, such as theories and philosophies.
This phase enables development of skills for converting infor-
mation into knowledge, since it focuses upon going beyond the
Concrete
experiences
Divergent
Changes contexts
Grasping via
apprehension
Transformation
Active Transformation
experimentation Via extension Via extension
Grasping via
Convergent / comprehension
Change within a context
Abstract
conceptualization
Fig. 2. The experiential learning cycle of Kolb [1].
839
present and beyond applied solutions and problem definitions;
however, it is still within given contexts.
2.1.4. Active experimentation
The active experimentation phase aims at putting the
knowledge that has been acquired, into practice. This phase
is the ultimate phase of transformation, as it aims at manipu-
lating the outside world through the implementation of
change. In a learning cycle, this phase typically merges into
the next cycle, when active experimentation has the character-
istics of new experiences. A student changes, in this period,
from being ‘‘a student,’’ a relative outsider that still has to
be fully socialized, into being ‘‘a participant,’’ a member of
a specific actor group.
The different stages of the experimental learning cycle as
well as the relationships that Kolb sees between ways of learn-
ing and types of knowledge are very relevant for education in
sustainable development. In Section 3, we explore that
relevance.
3. Experiential learning and sustainable development
education
Kolb’s theory is very relevant for sustainable development
(SD) and for SD education in several ways.
First of all his focus upon ‘apprehension and comprehen-
sion’ is very relevant. One of the fundamental challenges of
SD education is its goal to integrate science, social sciences
and managerial science into one, overarchingdsystems
thinkingdframework. This is basically a cognitive challenge
that is fundamental. We all are children of the ‘Enlightenment,’
with an intellectual heritage of analysis. That means we have
learned to take things apart, to deconstruct them and to ana-
lyze them. As a result of a few hundred years of the scientific
heritage, we are poorly equipped to reconstruct the whole after
the analysis and deconstruction. We focus more on the parts
than on the whole. What SD requires of us is to understand
the effects of one dimension on the other dimensions and on
the whole (and back and forth). However, since we are so
poorly equipped to think in systems terms and to comprehend
systems behavior, we are tempted to deconstruct systems and
to analyze the parts.
We lack the cognitive tools to comprehend systems and
therefore, we keep ‘flipping-back to an analytical mode,’
even though we know we should not do so. One of the key
Assimilative
challenges of SD education is to develop a ‘systems thinking
Adapt to existing contexts language.’ But as long as we are not there, we can make
use of other -non-cognitive- approaches to ‘‘record’’ reality
Reflective and to begin to ‘understand’ sustainability. On an emotional
observation
and intuitive level, we are capable of apprehending and ‘expe-
riencing’ complex systems. We can experience the interaction
Accommodative
Adapt to new contexts
of a warm wind, a raising sun, the sound of the sea and the
waves, the arm of a beloved one and the taste of a cool beer
and experience them as great experiences. We can describe
them as ‘heaven on earth’ or as ‘one of the best moments of
my life.’
840 H. Dieleman, D. Huisingh / Journal of Cleaner Production 14 (2006) 837e847
We immediately know that the surplus or added value of
such moments is not in one of the different elements (the
wind, the sun, the sea, the arm, the beer) but in the combina-
tion and especially the ‘interactions’ among all of these facets.
In the same way, SD cannot and should not be reduced to three
dimensions but is to be realized in the interaction of all of
those dimensions as well as the crucial integration of the
fourth dimension, TIME!! The time dimension is crucial in
any kind of SD context, but it is so often overlooked!
Therefore, we need other tools to ‘understand and to work
with’ reality. In the next section, we present the point that
games, and especially games that deal with ‘systems behavior,’
are tools that we can use to apprehend and experience systems
behavior that will provide us experiential insights into the dy-
namic factors of what we need to do to transform unsustain-
able into sustainable societies.
Additionally, there must be the element of emotional
attachment to the subject of study. The challenge of SD (and
education for SD) goes much further than merely a quest for
multidisciplinarity. It IS multidisciplinary but, at the same
time it is oriented towards effecting change, based on certain
values and visions of a desired future state based upon those
values. The word ‘empathy’ is a word that comes to mind
when envisioning the consequences of this challenge. When
we not only seek to analyze but also wish to change, and
when this change is based on certain values, the consequences
are that certain levels of emotion and emotional attachment are
essential. This means that we need to develop a certain emo-
tional relationship with the subject we learn and teach;
in this we are seeking to integrate apprehension with
comprehension.
SD education requires multidisciplinary collaboration. It re-
quires teachers and students to become co-learners who are
able to make the connections between the diverse domains
of knowledge generation and knowledge application, in real
life situations. This means they have to be able to bridge dif-
ferent professional cultures, traditions, gender differences and
ages.
The experiences within environmental sciences during the
past 20 to 30 years show that such connections and bridges
can be made, but it is a very difficult challenge for persons in-
volved in transdisciplinary projects to mutually understand
each other. In such efforts, we discover that we all have im-
plicit images of reality and ‘taken-for-granted,’ working
methods in our minds. Since these images and methods are
not the same for people coming from various backgrounds
and ages, they must not be ‘implicit’ but must be made explicit
and must be openly discussed and acted upon.
Finally, there is the action element that is essential for ef-
fecting changes. Kolb points at the relationship between
ways of learning, knowledge and change. Certain types of ed-
ucation result in certain types of knowledge and contribute to
certain types of change and action. We should be very much
aware of the fact that education for SD must focus upon and
contribute to dramatic changes in paradigms, context and be-
havior. As a consequence education for SD should focus on
education that relies on apprehension and extension since
the combination of those two processes leads towards divert-
ing knowledge that facilitates understanding and motivates
people to contribute to changing the systems from unsustain-
able to sustainable. But since education for SD requires, at
the same time that the student develops a certain emotional re-
lationship with the subject of study, education should also rely
on apprehension and intention. Finally, the two remaining
stages of the cycle are equally important. The usage of the ap-
propriate tools and a sound multidisciplinary understanding of
the subject of study are equally indispensable to help the stu-
dent develop an emotional attachment and the capacity to tran-
scend existing contexts and paradigms. This means that
education for SD should be based on a well balanced mix of
the four types of learning. Therefore, we need to develop ed-
ucation that is based on apprehension as well as comprehen-
sion, and that is based on intention as well as on extension.
When one looks at the standard format of education for SD,
one sees that several of the required parts are present but that
teaching in apprehension and especially in apprehension and
extension are rare or are totally absent. That is understandable
because these kinds of teaching rely less on formal education
and rely much more on emotional processes and on ‘learning
by doing.’ Even though it may be understandable, it does not
mean that it is desirable and in fact it is not as effective as it
would be if all four approaches were always utilized.
A standard format of education for SD, very often starts
with a presentation of a case study. We find that the usage
of case studies is the most common approach to observing re-
ality. This makes sense since case studies help us to grasp the
richness of reality and to go beyond the merely analytical ap-
proach. It is also an attempt to understand processes within
certain contexts. Case studies ‘‘par excellence’’ provide the
context to understand the particular behavior of people within
these contexts and to understand (comprehend) the linkages
between certain problems, the behavior and technologies
within these contexts and the problems that result. It leads to
contextual thinking’ and provides solutions that are context-
specific. It helps us to ‘apprehend’ reality and prepares for
the development of changes within certain contexts. Case stud-
ies can be helpful but we must be aware of the fact that they do
not necessarily lead to changing paradigms, contexts or behav-
ior. They may even be counterproductive in this respect since
students may become tempted to look for solutions within the
boundaries of the prescribed case studies. That is why addi-
tional teaching techniques and learning modes are needed.
Such additional modes do exist. In many curricula, field-
work or internships are included. Potentially, these should
cover the aspects of apprehension and extension. Very often
however, they do not facilitate the development of contextual
changes. Students leave the school or university and become
internalized into a company or organization where they do
their fieldwork or internship. This means that students auto-
matically accept the contexts of the organization where they
perform their fieldwork. There are several psychological ex-
planations for this. Students feel that they lack the knowledge
and experience of the personnel that work in the organization
and that they should learn from them instead of giving
 H. Dieleman, D. Huisingh / Journal of Cleaner Production 14 (2006) 837e847 841

critique. Since internships often are an avenue for obtaining
a job in that organization, students are reluctant to criticize
and tend to accept the organization as it is. The psychological
processes are perfectly understandable and in a way this is be
favored, after all, it is better to understand and apprehend first,
before one starts to criticize. The real danger is that this leads
to accepting existing contexts. The key is the fine line between
an attempt to change existing contexts and the practice of cri-
tique. Often an attempt to change contexts is perceived as cri-
tique. Students should be educated in this and should be
provided with more tools to master these kinds of challenges.
Playing games can help and can provide students with an un-
derstanding of the subtle differences between critique and at-
tempts to change contexts. For more details on these facets,
see Table 2.
Since the fieldwork or internship is very crucial in learning
to change contexts and not many pedagogical tools exist to fa-
cilitate this phase, we feel that the games we present in this
paper are potentially very useful, especially in this teaching/
learning phase. We feel, in fact, that this phase of the learning
cycle misses explicit educational program elements and we
believe that games can be perfect program elements for en-
riching and enhancing this phase.
Games can serve very important roles in all the program
elements however (See Fig. 3). In the phase of learning through
concrete experiences and within the context of presenting case
studies, games like role-plays can serve a very significant role.
In the phase of reflective observation and the exploration of
tools and techniques, games, especially games for self analysis,
collabortion and communication, should be an essential part of
all curricula. Also, in the phase of abstract conceptualization,
games should be a part of education for SD. In this phase,
students must learn to collaborate with colleagues from various
disciplines and once again, games can play a powerful role in
helping them to learn these kinds of skills.
4. Games in the context of experiential learning
and sustainable development
Playing games is an appropriate activity in the context of
learning for SD and especially in the context of experiential
learning. When one plays games, one simulates and creates
realities, with certain mutually accepted rules, roles, condi-
tions and assumptions. When one plays games, one can easily
‘take the role of others’ and develop an emotional understand-
ing (apprehension) of why others act as they do. The beauty of
playing games is that one ‘learns by doing’ and ‘learns by fail-
ing’ without negative consequences for the real world. One
can simulate certain realities, play, manipulate and experiment
and experience what the consequences are or what they might
be. In case the consequences are negative, one learns what
NOT to do and one can design alternative approaches or alter-
native goals. The added value of games compared to experi-
ments is the fact that within games, one can combine
aspects of comprehension and apprehension, as well as pro-
cesses of intention and extension. Playing games has the fol-
lowing functions:
" They provide learning experiences. One can ‘learn by do-
ing’ without creating real consequences for the outside
world.
" They provide the possibility to create shared experiences.
This is extremely important since this can provide the
foundation of shared problem definitions and shared views
of solutions that can help the learners make further prog-
ress toward SD, which is a key element for success. Be-
cause, first of all SD is a complex phenomenon that, by
its very nature, involves diverse stakeholders. Secondly
it involves actors of different cultural, academic and expe-
riential backgrounds societal positions; as such they have
very different attitudes, values and needs. In this context,
one of the key challenges is develop a shared view for peo-
ple with such heterogeneous contexts. Playing games can
help.
" Playing games with people with dramatically different
backgrounds, help to create, at least, one shared experi-
ence. This shared experience can be used as the point of
reference to facilitate mutual understanding and will
help the workshop facilitator(s) to engage and empower
her/his/their audience during the use of other games.
" Playing games contributes to team-building. Since playing
games creates shared experiences, it can help in the pro-
cess of team-building. Since not every shared experience
leads to better team-building; by careful selection, the

Table 2
Games in the context of learning processes and types of knowledge that is likely to be developed with their usage
Phase Teaching program element Learning process Type of knowledge
Apprehension:
Concrete experiences Case study approach games: role plays Apprehension intention Assimilative
Active experimentation Games: system games, games for self analysis Apprehension extension Divergent
and collabortion and communication
Comprehension:
Reflective observation Games for self analysis and collabortion and Comprehension extension Accommodative
communication to practice skills
Abstract conceptualization Analysis experiments Games for self analysis Comprehension extension Convergent
and collabortion and communication to
practice multidisciplinary collaboration
842 H. Dieleman, D. Huisingh / Journal of Cleaner Production 14 (2006) 837e847
Menu of games
Games for self-analysis
Everything but sleep
or
Nine dot game
or
Rest in my arms
Games for communication
and collaboration
Paper tear
or
Thumb wrestling
or
Harvest game
System games
Triangles
or
Avalange
or
Living loops
Fig. 3. Brief menu of some games useful for teaching sustainability-related
concepts.
games that are used can help to contribute to team-build-
ing. Playing games that facilitate communication and col-
laboration usually do result in better team performance
and provide a sense of belonging to a team. The advantage
of games is that they are ‘safe’ and ‘experimental’ as well
as the fact that they are ‘not for real.’ This can help to en-
gage people who normally prefer to not become team-
players.
" Playing games contributes to knowledge of oneself. By
playing games, participants gain insight into their atti-
tudes, values and thought processes. They can help the
gaming participants discover the implicit assumptions
that they have in life, but that may not necessarily be
shared by others. Playing systems games helps participants
understand and feel the limitations and possibilities to
change the system. This is essential for helping people en-
vision the changes that need to be made and to empower
them to make the changes in ‘real life’ that are essential
for SD.
" Playing games helps to test alternative solutions. As stated
earlier, one of the fine attributes of playing games is that
one ‘learns by doing’ without negative consequences for
the real world. One can simulate diverse realities, play
the games, manipulate reality and experience the resulting
consequences, within the safety of the simulation. At the
same time while one is testing alternative solutions one
also learns much about one’s self while creating shared ex-
periences for all participants. Especially for SD, it is
essential to have these kinds of shared experiences and
to benefit from the consequent insights because the system
characteristics of SD make it difficult to predict the out-
come of interventions, in the real world, but the simula-
tions may help the participants to be more open to
explore ways of moving forward.
" Playing games is fun and entertainment. Such ways of
‘learning,’ are very important because they generate posi-
tive mental energies and enthusiasm for participants to en-
gage in the complex challenge of SD. Games, properly
selected and used, may also contribute to changes in the
visions of what is essential for effecting SD. Many people
associate the issue with words such as ‘heavy,’ ‘serious,’
negative’ or ‘depressing.’ But in fact, even though there
is some truth that some of those qualifications, SD also
provides the opportunity for creativity, innovation and ad-
venture. Playing games may help to make people see this
part of SD.
Of course not all games have the same function. Some
games help one to discover parts of one’s self; others help
one to understand processes of and mechanisms in communi-
cation with others. Yet other games help one to experience the
working of complex systems and help to position oneself
within such systems. In the next section we distinguish among
the three types of types of games. Roughly speaking, three cat-
egories of games can be distinguished: games for ‘self-analy-
sis,’ games for communication and collaboration, and ‘system
games.’
4.1. Games for ‘self analysis’
Games for ‘self-analysis’ help participants become more
conscious of their thought processes, sensorial perceptions
and values. Games of this type help one to clarify one’s im-
plicit assumptions and the ways one approaches other people,
their organizations or their problems. An example of this type
of game is, ‘everything but sleep’ (see Section 5 of this article)
that helps the participants experience how they watch and lis-
ten to a teacher providing instructions for the steps of the
game. Most people that play the game are surprised by the out-
come and discover something about everyday life that is abso-
lutely new to them. Other games such as the ‘‘rest in my
arms,’’ focus on the experiential level of ‘trust’ and ‘confi-
dence’ that one has one in oneself and in others. When playing
this game, especially in a group, one discovers, experiences
and ‘sees’ that the level of trust someone has in others is di-
rectly related to the level of confidence one has in themselves.
In terms of the experiential learning cycle of Kolb, games
for ‘self analysis’ help, first of all, in the process of intention
that relies on internal reflection. It touches upon the image we
have of ourselves vis-à-vis the outside world. Additionally,
this type of games help the participants learn in the extension
stages to help them make transformative changes in the world.
The ‘nine dot’ game (see Section 5 of this article) for instance
tells us much about ourselves in how we seek solutions for
problems. In our attempts to change the world it is equally
 H. Dieleman, D. Huisingh / Journal of Cleaner Production 14 (2006) 837e847
important to be aware of our implicit functioning as well as the
image we have of ourselves vis-à-vis the outside world.
4.2. Games for ‘communication and collaboration’
Games for ‘communication and collaboration’ help one to
understand and experience invisible mechanisms that take
place when one communicates and collaborates. The game
‘paper tear’ shows, for instance that the way we look at reality
literally depends on our view of reality. When hearing this, so-
cial scientists may be tempted to think of Karl Marx and his
theory of materialism. According to Marx, we interpret the
world according to the societal position we have which deter-
mines our ‘consciousness’ and our vision of the world. ‘Paper
tear’ (see Section 5 of this article) shows that this process is
true in an even more literal sense. What we see as our left
or our right depends on where we are, for instance in a class-
room. This has quite a few consequences for communication.
By playing this game these consequences are immediately
seen and ‘felt’ or experienced. Other games, such as ‘harvest’
or thumb wrestling’ manifest some of the implicit culturally
rooted mechanisms that almost all of us bring into processes
of collaboration. The game ‘harvest’ (also known as ‘fishbanks
ltd’) is the best game to show and make participants feel the
reality of the ‘tragedy of the commons.’
In terms of the experiential learning cycle of Kolb, games
for ‘communication and collaboration’ are very useful in var-
ious stages. In stage 1 they can be useful in understanding the
concrete experiences and the realities we observe and experi-
ence. In Kolb’s stage 2, when dealing with tools and tech-
niques, they play a role in the selection and usage of
management tools and techniques. In part three, they can be
extremely useful when one works in multi-disciplinary teams,
One of the key challenges of working in multi-disciplinary
teams is to understand and respect each other, despite the
fact that you don’t always understand each other’s analyses.
4.3. System games
System games aim to show the players the functioning of
complex systems. These games are extremely interesting in
the context of SD since it is a system-based concept. System
games enable participants to see, feel and ‘experience’ various
aspects of system behavior. These experiences are useful in the
context of transformation of the world. While playing system
games one feels that they are part of a larger whole. One is
able to influence the system, but is usually not able to steer
the system in exactly the direction one would like. This means
that one has to try to understand how the system functions and
to find ways to make the necessary changes. System games
can help one to understand the functioning of leverage points.
Leverage points are crucial points in the system because by
working at these points one can change the entire system
more effectively and efficiently. The game ‘triangles’ (see Sec-
tion 5 of this article) helps participants experience what it is
like to be part of a system, to be able to change it, but not steer
it and to better understand what and where the import leverage
843
points are. The game ‘avalanche’ (see Section 5 of this article)
shows us the complex interactions between individual inten-
tions of participants of a system and the system behavior. Av-
alanche is one of the ultimate games to show the complexity of
stabilizing and decreasing parameters such as economic
growth and consumption.
In terms of the experiential learning cycle of Kolb, systems
can be useful in various stages, but are especially valuable in
stage four. The games help us to really feel and experience the
behavior of large and complex systems and help us to experi-
ence the effects of certain interventions in such systems. As
such they are potentially enormously useful in the transforma-
tion stage, especially when we are dealing with systemic is-
sues such as SD.
Games can play a role in all of the four stages of Kolb’s
learning cycle. In order to clarify that we look at the four
stages again and review what educational program elements
belong within each of the four stages (Fig. 3):
(a) In phase one, we often work with case studies. The essen-
tial objective of this phase is to begin to understand the
role of actors, their problem definitions and their ways
to find and implement solutions.
(b) In phase two, we use tools and techniques in the process of
seeking to understand them in a comprehensive and appre-
hensive way Games are especially helpful to apprehend
social and management aspects, tools and techniques.
(c) In phase three, we seek to better understand the processes
of scientific analysis and understanding theoretical in-
sights. System games certainly can play a role in the clar-
ification of the theoretical aspects of systems behavior.
When scientists work in multi-disciplinary groups, as is al-
most always required in research in SD, games for com-
munication and collaboration can help to enhance the
communication processes among researchers from differ-
ent disciplinary backgrounds.
(d) In phase four, we engage in games that provide opportuni-
ties for active experimentation. This provides the partici-
pants the opportunity to apply their knowledge and
understanding to specific and concrete situations and cir-
cumstances. (For further clarification, see the contents of
Table 3.)
5. Games that were played during the Workshop in
Monterrey, Mexico in June 2004
During the workshop at the conference in Monterrey we
played a selection of games derived from the different cate-
gories of games. This enabled the participants to experience
games from each category discussed above. Most of these
games are described in the ‘Systems Thinking Playbook’
that was written by Linda Booth-Sweeney and Dennis
Meadows [3]. This book has been the input of a project per-
formed in the Netherlands in 2004 and early 2005 for the gov-
ernmental program, ‘‘Learning for Sustainability.’’ The object
of that program was to empower trainers and teachers in sus-
tainability and to provide them with the tools needed. Within
844 H. Dieleman, D. Huisingh / Journal of Cleaner Production 14 (2006) 837e847

Table 3 game’ and ‘rest in my arms.’ The three games illustrate vari-
Educational program elements and types of games that may be useful in the ous aspects of the human brain. They provide sufficient input
different learning phases
to discuss the role of self-analysis in SD.
Phases Educational program Games
elements
" ‘‘Everything but sleep’’ is a nice game to show participants
Concrete Actors are involved. Games for how they and others in the workshop read a text that was
experiences Actor’s perspectives are communication,
clarified. collaboration and
provided to them. The game is based on the participant’s
Problems are involved and system games are capacity and intuitive usage of the mental process of ‘as-
the definitions of problems useful for this phase. sociation.’ The game shows how rapidly we assume that
are clarified. certain words are said or written while this is absolutely
Reflective Current practices in terms Games for not true. The game shows how easy it is to manipulate peo-
observation of solutions are clarified. communication, ple and to place words in their minds without saying or
The use and understanding collaboration and writing them. The game makes participants aware of their
of tools is highlighted. for self-analysis are
own mental processes and shows them the risks/dangers
The use and understanding useful for this phase.
of techniques is experienced. of being manipulated with words.
" The ‘‘nine dot game’’ is an excellent game to start a brain-
Abstract Understanding theoretical Games for
conceptualization insights is an essential communication,
storm session. The game confronts the participants with an
part of this phase. collaboration and assignment that cannot be solved using ‘traditional’
Understanding limitations system games are thought processes and self-evident solutions. The problem
of the practices and useful for this phase. solver needs to be creative. The problem is very easily
techniques is essential. solved once the problem solver steps out of the traditional
Learning new approaches
and new contexts is essential.
boxes and dares to experiment with unorthodox solutions.
Working in The game is very simple and very illustrative for what one
(multi-disciplinary) teams needs to realize SD; with traditional solution approaches
is valuable. the problems cannot be solved. Using unorthodox solu-
Active Applying knowledge and Games for self tions however, changes the framework and solutions are
experimentation understanding in concrete analysis, easy to find and to implement.
and specific circumstances communication " ‘‘Rest in my arms’’ shows the participant the relationship
is especially important in collaboration and
between self-confidence and trust in others. The game is
this phase. system games are
valuable for easy to play andvery illustrative. This game is one of
this phase. a whole range of games that can be played to ease and
‘let things go.’ This game is also helpful for self-analysis;
consequently it is useful in helping to catalyse communi-
the framework of that project, Hans Dieleman, together with cation and collaboration.
12 trainers and teachers from various Dutch organizations (cit-
ies, schools, and consultants) organized a number of work-
shops with Dennis Meadows in the format of Master-classes. 5.2. Games for communication and collaboration
The experiences gained during these workshops with
Meadows are encapsulated within the Dutch manual: ‘‘Playing Within the category ‘‘games for communication and collab-
towards sustainability’’ [2]. oration’’ we listed three games on the menu: ‘paper tear,’
The lessons and insights obtained were with the partici- ‘thumb wrestling’ and ‘the harvest game.’
pants at the Monterrey workshop. The workshop’s second
source of information and experience was the experience " ‘‘Paper tear’’ is a good game to illustrate multiple aspects
that Donald Huisingh gained in many workshops and formal of communication. Paper tear illustrates the importance of
courses on Simulation and Gaming he has conducted during telling people not only, WHAT to do but to tell them as
the last 20 years in more than 40 countries. Games not in- well WHY they perform that task. This game can be
cluded in the book by Sweeney and Meadows were drawn very useful for managers. At the same time Paper tear il-
from the facilitator’s own games or from those developed by lustrates, in a very good way, the importance of accurate
participants in previous workshops they have facilitated. and clear explanations in communication. Finally, it shows
The following list of ‘briefly described,’ games was used as that we really look at reality in different ways when we are
a menu from which games were selected for the workshop. in a different position vis-à-vis each other.
" ‘‘Thumb wrestling’’ is a traditional game. Two people
‘wrestle’ with their thumbs. The objective is for each
5.1. Games for ‘self analysis’ participant to score as many points as possible. The
game illustrates, in a fabulous way, how almost all of us
Within the category ‘‘games for ‘self-analysis’’’ we placed start to fight against each other and try to make each
three games on the menu: ‘everything but sleep,’ the ‘nine dot others life hard. As a result neither player makes many
 H. Dieleman, D. Huisingh / Journal of Cleaner Production 14 (2006) 837e847
points. When, by contrast, the game is played in a collab-
orative way, both players score heavily. The game shows
much about one’s implicit rules and values by which
one approaches the reality of ‘‘scoring as many points as
possible.’’
" ‘‘Harvest game’’ is a game developed by Dennis Meadows
and is very well known as ‘‘Fishbanks Ltd’’ Fishbanks is
a computer game and ‘harvest’ is a simplified, non-com-
puter version of it. Both illustrate, in an excellent way,
the ‘tragedy of the commons.’ In ‘harvest’ the participants
form small groups of fishermen who go out on the ocean to
fish. The objective for each team is to maximize their
profit, in the long term. The game shows, in a marvelous
way, how and why the ‘tragedy of the commons’ occurs
and what mechanisms account for it. The game provides
much valuable input for extensive debriefing on what
needs to be changed in our way of collaboration in order
to achieve SD.
5.3. System games
Within the category, ‘system games,’ the menu also offers
three games: ‘triangles,’ ‘avalanche’ and ‘living loops.’ These
games take more time to play than the games of the first
category.
" ‘‘Triangles’’ is a game that can be played with a large
group of people. In fact, a minimal of ten to fifteen partic-
ipants is required. The participants form a system and are
interdependent elements of that system. Each participant
has two others as his or her reference (which make the tri-
angles) and the essence of the game is that when one per-
son moves, the reference persons have to move as well.
But as these reference persons have their own reference
persons, those persons will start to move as well. This
setup allows the participants the opportunity to clarify var-
ious aspects of system behavior such as ‘leverage points’
and ‘systems change and stability.’
" ‘‘Avalanche’’ is a perfect metaphor for SD, or to be more
accurate: for unSD. The game is played with a hoop or
a stick and requires 6 to 10 participants. The participants
have the shared task of bringing down the hoop or the stick
to the floor. Individually they have to be careful to not lose
contact with the stick or the hoop. What usually happens is
illustrative for unSD. The individuals are so focused on
their private tasks that the collective task of ‘bringing
down’ is not achieved. In fact, what usually happens is
that the hoop or the stick goes up instead of down. This
is a perfect metaphor for SD. The game offers many op-
portunities to discuss why it is so difficult to bring down
economic parameters like consumption, and illustrates
that systems have their own ‘behavior.’
" ‘‘Living loops’’ is a game to illustrate cause and effect, as
well as the functioning of open and closed systems. Partic-
ipants are elements in a chain, with either a negative or a pos-
itive sign. Impulses are given to one person in the chain and
845
the impulses go from one person to the other. Dependent on
the sign of the person (negative or positive) the impulse is
amplified or starts to go into the opposite direction. With
this basic format, various aspects of systems can be illus-
trated. Five to ten persons are required to play this game.
6. The technique of playing games
Playing games are serious ways to learn. Games can help to
deepen the participant’s understanding and help them to appre-
hend diverse facets of reality in new and more comprehensive
ways. There is however, one condition to this and that con-
cerns the way games are performed. Only when games are
well prepared, well executed and well evaluated, will the in-
tended effects and impacts of the games be realized. Each
game has its own rules and requirements that must to be re-
spected. In addition to game-specific rules, the following are
a few generic rules that need to be applied when playing
any kind of game: (1) the contextualization and preparation
for the game, (2) the execution including explanation to the
participants of how to play the game and (3) the debriefing
at the end of the game. We briefly discuss these generic rules
in the following paragraphs:
6.1. The contextualization and preparation for playing
the game
The purpose of playing games in teaching is to be able to
play, to manipulate and experience and ultimately to appre-
hend certain aspects of reality. This means that games should,
in some way or other, represent the reality (realities) of the
participants. That is why the types of game and the types of
participants are key variables that must be carefully addressed
in selecting and playing the games.
6.1.1. Type of game
In principle there are three ways in which games can repre-
sent the real world around us. A first group of games represent
realities that we can find anywhere and are not specific; the
universal game. Games like ‘thumb wrestling’ or ‘everything
but sleep’ belong to this type. They can be played with any
group because they refer to universal aspects of reality.
A second type of games are the situation-specific or isomor-
phic types of games. They represent concrete settings such as
a classroom, a hospital, a prison, a fight, a couple in love, etc.
The third type, the fantastic type, does not represent any
specific or any universal reality. The world in this type of
game is purely fictional. The game ‘triangles’ is a game that
belongs to this group.
6.1.2. Type of (target) group
The next question concerns the group of people that are en-
gaged in playing the games. Is this a group of students, neigh-
borhood citizens, politicians, elderly, mixed group in terms of
gender, age and race, etc. When playing games, it is important
to ask the question what do we want to accomplish with the
games and with what types of groups we will play the games?
846 H. Dieleman, D. Huisingh / Journal of Cleaner Production 14 (2006) 837e847
Dependent on the answers to these questions (purpose and tar-
get group) one can select appropriate games. Games derived
from the universal or fantastic type can, in principle, be played
in any setting. Isomorphic games can be very powerful but
must be tailored to the specific target groups.
6.1.3. Group dynamics
The group dynamics is largely dependent on the culture of
the participants of the group and to questions such as whether
the group members know each other well or not at all. In case
one plays with groups that know each other well (for instance
employees of a company that collaborate on a daily basis) one
must realize that some fixed group dynamics exist. One will
always find some informal leaders, some jokers, some mem-
bers of the group that are prone to question and criticize,
some stereotypes will also become evident and some tensions
among members may come to the surface. It is important for
the game facilitators to be fully aware of this so they properly
anticipate and even use these aspects in the games to make the
learning opportunities richer and more complete.
Depending upon the cultural setting, some games may re-
quire modifications or adjustments. When one plays games
in cultures where it is not appropriate for men and women
to hold each others hands, for example, the facilitators can
provide the participants with a piece of rope or any other de-
vice to overcome such practical barriers for playing games
where that is an element. Alternately, in such cases, one could
have separate circles for males and females. In other words,
the game coordinator should adapt and adjust the games to
fit the context and to realize that all are flexible and dynamic
ways of helping the participants learn in new/old ways.
6.2. The actual play, including the introduction and
instructions to the participants
The Actual Play part involves the aspects of Introduction
and Instructions. It also involves the details of the activities
of the game.
6.2.1. Introduction and instructions
An important part of the success and impact of games can
be explained by the proper introduction to and instructions for
each game. It is very important to use exactly the right words
and to leave out some of the key words in the explanation. In
games such as ‘everything but sleep’ the effect of the game
largely depends on the word ‘sleep’ and the way this is used
in the introduction.
It is equally important to explain, in a ‘step-by-step’ man-
ner, precisely what the participants are to do, what is expected
of them and what they should not do. It is also essential to ask,
several times, if all participants have understood the purpose
and actions of the game. It is highly recommended that the fa-
cilitator(s) act out some of the movements that the participants
have to make, in case this is part of the game, to ensure that all
understand what is to be done.
6.2.2. In education: the sequence of games and explanations
In educational settings one should make a conscious choice
between the sequence of playing the game and explaining cer-
tain elements of reality. Games can be used to make students
explore certain aspects of reality. In this case games should be
played without too much introduction and should be followed
by an extensive debrief. Games can also be used to make stu-
dents experience or apprehend certain aspects of reality that
are explained to them before they play the game(s), in
a more theoretical manner.
6.2.3. Technical aspects of playing the games
Playing games involves three different technical aspects.
First of all, some games must be played with certain tools
and toys. It is important to prepare these aspects thoroughly.
Some games, like avalanche, depend entirely on the right
equipment used. When a too heavy hoop is used, the game
will probably not work at all and is a waste of time and energy.
A second aspect is related to the space within which the games
are played. If the room is not adequate in terms of size or
equipment it is advised not to play certain games at all. It is
better not to play games instead of playing them in a poorly
executed way. The last aspect concerns effectiveness as well
as safety of the participants. Be aware of hard objects such
as balls and protect and warn participants that are vulnerable
because of clothing (fragile or light colored that may become
soiled in the process of playing the game(s) or of certain med-
ical devices or conditions that potential participants my have
that may put them at risk if they participate in some games.
6.3. The debriefing at the end of the gaming session
The debriefing session at the end of the gaming session is
an extremely important aspect of playing games. One trainer
and game developer once underlined the importance of de-
briefing in the following way; ‘playing a game without debrief-
ing is like playing a soccer game without scoring goals.’ The
participants will always have an array of experiences but
they will need a context and some help to facilitate their clar-
ification and expression of the emotive ‘learnings’ they expe-
rienced. Also, of course, as they express their ‘learnings’ and
listen to the ‘learnings’ of others, they will realize that people
learn very different things from performing the same activities.
Reflections on the differences in perceptions and emotions that
are elicited via the games are extremely valuable. Such de-
briefing sessions are essential to also help the participants to
reflect on how they may use the lessons they learned in their
personal and professional lives as well as how they may use
these and numerous other games and simulations in their
teaching and training activities.
Some questions that can be relevant in the debriefing after
a game or games include but are not limited to:
" What did I learn about myself, my behavior, my values,
my thoughts, my fears, and my eagerness to win, while
participating in this game or games?
 H. Dieleman, D. Huisingh / Journal of Cleaner Production 14 (2006) 837e847
" What did I learn about the others, their behavior and
attitudes?
" What did I learn about different forms of communication?
" What was new to me?
" What did I know but do not do?
" What did I learn concerning the topic of my study or work
(SD) and how can I use this in the future?
7. Conclusions
In this paper, the authors explored the relevance of the the-
ory of experiential learning and the roles of games for educa-
tion for SD. They emphasized that the theory of experiential
learning provides numerous opportunities for teachers and
learners to obtain valuable insights in learning processes.
The theory is helpful in identifying the relationships between
education and learning for paradigm and context change. The
authors conclude that this phase is very important in education
for SD but that currently many curricula do not include the ex-
plicit program elements necessary to facilitate learning via the
usage of games.
Games are excellent tools, precisely to practice with con-
textual and paradigm changes. As such, games could and
should be added to curricula in SD education. In terms of
the four phases of the experiential learning cycle, games
play important roles in all four phases but especially in phase
847
four. They can help students understand and apprehend the dif-
ferences between criticism and making suggestions for context
changes in concrete organizational settings. This is a very
important skill that students should learn before they start to
work, as interns or as paid professionals.
Many games are already available and new ones are being
developed all the time. This paper makes a reference to nine
different games in three game categories: games for self-anal-
ysis, games for communication and collaboration and system
games. The nine games are samples of the thousands of others
that are available. We feel that it is up to educators and
teachers to implement the many games that exist and to
change their curricula to facilitate usage of games within
them. Thereby, we anticipate that all of us will become
increasingly effective in helping ourselves and our students
to become effective ‘Change Agents’ toward Sustainable
Societies.
References
[1] Kolb D. Experiential learning, experiences as the source of learning and
development. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall; 1984.
[2] Dieleman H. Playing for sustainability. Rotterdam: Erasmus University;
2004 (Leren voor duurzaamheid, Dutch publication).
[3] Booth Sweeney L, Meadows D. Systems thinking playbook; exercises
to stretch and build learning and systems thinking capabilities. 1995.
ISBN 0-9666127-7-9.