Sustainability of water resources is perhaps the most emotive topic in water-scarce regions. Within river catchment, people tend to have conflicting interests and perceptions that influence how they interact with their physical environment to reap maximum benefits from it (Wallace et al., 2003; Peters et al., 2023). Along the upland–lowland landscape gradient of a river catchment, variations in rainfall and atmospheric energy and land-use distinctions influence water resources availability within the catchment (Näschen et al., 2019; Martins et al., 2021). Within the same gradient, stakeholders can differ in a variety of ways including culture, livelihoods, perspectives, and attitudes on human-water interactions. Water availability dynamics is one key factor that influences human behavior as people (who largely depend on it) adapt to changing hydrological conditions (Garrote, 2017; Pande et al., 2020). Competition for available water resources can lead to water-related tensions and even conflicts between downstream and upstream communities, and households (Wamucii et al., 2023). Conflicting stakeholders’ perspectives on water resources lead to complex human–water interactions as different stakeholders, depending on their unique water needs, have independent demands and interests for available water resources (Renner and Opiyo, 2021). As a result, competing water demands among households and between humans and the environment exist. Resolving conflicts of interest among individual viewpoints toward collective perspectives is paramount to achieving sustainable management of water resources in a water-scarce environment (Molnar et al., 2017; Bernauer and Böhmelt, 2020). Therefore, it is relevant to study the approaches and methodologies that have the potential to promote collective understanding among diverse stakeholders.

Differences in culture, individual values, and preferences are key to the way societies perceive, interact, use, and manage water resources (Grafton and Hussey, 2011; Cosgrove and Loucks, 2015; Loucks and van Beek, 2017; Dadson et al., 2019). Sustainable management of water resources requires an integrated approach to managing and allocating water resources, by accounting for stakeholders’ divergent socio-hydrological perspectives and values (Di Baldassarre et al., 2019). Cumming et al. (2006) highlighted that many challenges in natural resource management arise from a mismatch between the scale at which management occurs and the scales of the underlying processes. This misalignment is evident in water resource management, where the increasing demand for water has significantly outpaced population growth. For instance, Cosgrove and Loucks (2015) reported that, in recent decades, the global rate of water use has increased at more than twice the rate of population growth, leading to widespread water stress. With the uncertain future effects of changing climate, demographics, technological dynamics (Moss et al., 2010), there is a pressing need to purposively explore alternative approaches to managing human–water processes. Such approaches should have the ability to simulate the outcomes of conflicting human viewpoints of various stakeholders in a safe environment. This is needed to explore possible outcomes in ways that can develop valuable lessons for diverse stakeholders, hence the inclination towards collective understanding.

Achieving shared perspectives in ways people view and interact with their environment is complex due to differences in the humans’ mental models (i.e., perspectives) that proliferate “wicked” problems. This research adapts the definition of mental models as the cognitive representations of the social-environmental system that frames how humans interact with their environment (Mathevet et al., 2011). Q-method has gained popularity as a key approach for evaluating stakeholders’ perspectives (Bavin et al., 2020; Dieteren et al., 2023). Scientific research is vital for addressing complex problems, but its interpretation is often limited to professionals, excluding key stakeholders like small-scale farmers, who rely more on reflective learning and personal experiences (Kuil et al., 2018). Thus, a need for alternative approaches that can enhance learning from experience. Alternative participatory approaches such as serious games offer the opportunity for reflective and experiential learning (Pannese et al., 2013; Ponticorvo et al., 2022). Serious gaming refers to the use of games for purposes beyond pure entertainment, such as education, training, awareness creation, or social change (Dahya, 2009; Smith and Bowers, 2014; Savic et al., 2016). These games are designed to engage users while delivering meaningful content or helping them develop specific skills in a fun and interactive way (Dillon, 2013; Noemí and Máximo, 2014). Serious gaming encourages team-based problem-solving and addresses typical conflicts of interest (Kikkawa et al., 2022). Interacting with virtual systems such as board games presents a suitable learning platform for both professionals and non-professionals. Potential collective agreements and actions can be explored through interaction in collaborative and participatory settings (Pahl-Wostl et al., 2007; den Haan and Van der Voort, 2018; Kikkawa et al., 2022).

Recent studies report serious gaming as an alternative participatory approach that facilitates discussion and promotes experiential learning among diverse stakeholders, hence supporting collective future planning (Speelman et al., 2014; Meinzen-Dick et al., 2018; Andreotti et al., 2020; Best et al., 2021; Mochizuki et al., 2021). Experiential learning occurs when stakeholders generate new knowledge or a change in understanding or perspectives through a process of experience, experimentation, and reflection which will lead to adjusted or new perspectives (Speelman et al., 2017; Janssen et al., 2023). The effect of serious gaming on stakeholders’ perspectives can be evaluated by conducting pre–post-game tests (Goodspeed et al., 2020; Salliou et al., 2021; McConville et al., 2023). The gaming workshops supports exploring the impacts of local decisions, hence exploring potential and different human–environmental systems scenarios. We hypothesize that the gaming process, particularly through the use of board games, provides a structured and interactive platform for experiential learning, allowing stakeholders to engage in simulated decision-making processes that foster deeper insights into complex socio-environmental interactions.

Despite the growing interest in the use of serious games as an alternative participatory approach among researchers and practitioners (Wesselow and Stoll-Kleemann, 2018; Rodela et al., 2019; Rodela and Speelman, 2023; Speelman et al., 2023), there remains limited information on the impact of this gaming approach in increasing knowledge and understanding among the targeted stakeholders (Rodela and Speelman, 2023). Prior studies have not extensively examined how serious gaming influences stakeholders’ knowledge, attitudes, and discourse on water resource challenges over time. By employing the Q-method to analyze shifts in stakeholder perspectives pre- and post-game, this study provides empirical insights into the effectiveness of serious gaming in fostering experiential learning and collaborative decision-making. The Q-method has been employed to explore discourse changes, including comparing multiple Q outcomes (Davies and Hodge, 2012; Speelman et al., 2018) and evaluating stakeholders’ views across different locations (Zhou and Mayer, 2017). The initial explorations utilizing the Q-method approach to assess the potential impact of serious gaming, based on pre- and post-game session perspectives, indicated promising results (Speelman et al., 2018).

This study aimed to explore the impact of serious gaming on human–water perspectives. The upper Ewaso Ng’iro River catchment in Kenya was selected as the case study due to its complex socio-ecological system. We conducted five game sessions using the ENGAGE game—Exploring New Gaming Approach to Guide and Enlighten (Wamucii et al., 2024). To understand the impact of the gaming session on the perspectives of the game participants, the pre-game, post-game, and post-post-game assessments were conducted using the Q-method approach (Watts and Stenner, 2005; Watts and Stenner, 2012; Amaruzaman et al., 2017). The key question to be answered in this study is: How do stakeholders’ perspectives on human–water interactions evolve over time as a result of participating in the ENGAGE serious game, and to what extent do these changes persist post-game?

This study aimed to assess the impact of actively participating in a serious gaming session on the human–water perspectives of game participants. We used the Q-method to assess and compare the perspectives of the game participants at three moments in time, namely pre-game, post-game, and post-post-game. The overall results show different opinions emerging in the pre-game, post-game, and in the post-post-game Q-sort sessions. In the pre-game sessions four opinion types that were more oriented to agreeing with hydrological issues such as climate change and rainwater harvesting and disagreeing with the negative impact of “profit-making” emerged. In the post-game sessions, four opinion types that were more oriented to disagreeing with catchment economics but agreeing on the negative impacts of illegal river water abstractions emerged. In the post-post-game Q-sort sessions, four opinion types that indicated a change in pre-game perspectives on the negative impacts of catchment economics on water resource availability variations emerged. The differences in opinion types in three different moments in time suggest potential learning of the stakeholders to change standpoints. We argue this could have been influenced by experiential learning during gameplay which concurs with other similar opinions (López-Faican and Jaen, 2021; Parakh et al., 2022; Pacheco-Velazquez et al., 2023). Assuming perspectives observed in the pre-game sessions can represent the pre-game discourses or conventional perspectives, then, the observed changes in the post-game sessions can be linked to experiential learning from the ENGAGE game.

During gameplay, players are triggered to make individual decisions relative to the interests of others and of the collective. The game experience stimulates experiential learning while by sharing knowledge, opinions and ideas among the group of participants also collaborative learning is fostered. Key aspects of the gameplay can be connected to the factors that make learning experiences and outcomes more accessible, memorable, emotionally engaging, and shareable as opined in Sereenonchai and Arunrat (2024). For instance, the immediate and simultaneous observation of outcomes ensured that learning was accessible, as participants shared real-time decision-making experiences that were transparent and easily understood, creating a common ground for reflection and discussion. The realistic scenarios simulated during gameplay, such as resource scarcity, competition, and negotiation, along with the visible and tangible consequences of decisions, made the learning process memorable and the lessons more likely to be retained. Emotional engagement was heightened through conflicts, particularly between downstream and upstream game participants over reduced water resources, as participants had to navigate the tension between individual interests and group needs. This combination of conflict and cooperation drove deeper learning and engagement. The collaborative nature of the game further enhanced shareability, as participants exchanged knowledge and collectively synthesized their experiences during the reflection round, creating narratives that could extend beyond the gameplay itself. As reported in Wamucii et al. (2024), the ENGAGE game significantly enhanced narratives through active participation. Additionally, the iterative rounds provided opportunities for game participants to adapt their strategies based on observed outcomes, promoting behavioral insights relevant to real-world challenges, such as sustainable resource management. These insights, when effectively communicated, align with principles of accessibility, memorability, emotional appeal, and shareability, which are critical for engaging broader audiences through educational tools or social media platforms (Borchert et al., 2010; Baek et al., 2014).

Understanding complex system dynamics such as the impact of individual irrigation activities can only be made visible by bringing stakeholders together in a participatory setting that allows holistic discussions and explorations as demonstrated in different studies (Garrod et al., 2013; Nikkels et al., 2019a; Nikkels et al., 2019b; Mussehl et al., 2023). Studies have also reported that pre–post-game analyses help highlight the changes from the baseline positions (conventional perspectives) such as improved understanding, learning, collaboration, etc. (Peña et al., 2018; McConville et al., 2023). The results in this study reveal that the “pro-harvesting opinion type” only appeared after the ENGAGE game sessions, while most of the other opinion types were labeled with the “blamers” label. However, this opinion type disappeared after several months. This may indicate that this type of opinion emerged due to game experiences which influenced game participants’ conventional perceptions. There is a higher chance that the experiences during gameplay where participants were subjected to increasing demand for water to support livelihood activities, household needs, etc., versus the reducing downstream flows, and emerging downstream–upstream tension and conflicts, provoked the need for water harvesting opinion type after playing the game. These observations were further reported in the post-game interviews and debriefs. For instance, the key cross-cutting lessons included: (i) importance of water storage, (ii) the value of stakeholder engagements, (ii) effective water resources management, and (iv) fair sharing of water resources. This indicates that the ENGAGE game triggered a deep reflection of human–water issues among the participants.

Comparing pre-game and post-game sessions, the results indicate that the ENGAGE game seemed to have built a consensus on the awareness of the link between catchment location and water scarcity in the study catchment, the impact of market opportunities (e.g., export companies), on water resources availability, and recognition of illegal river water abstractions as a major contributor to water shortages. Interestingly, despite building consensus, an increase in disagreement after playing the game was also observed in other aspects such as uncertainty about climate change as a major effect on water resources availability and whether pastoralist communities increase their livestock numbers in order to boost their wealth, hence the greatest suffering in the downstream zone during dry seasons. This increase in disagreement indicates that different game participants shifted their perspectives hence an increase in the Z score variance.

Since there, was no playing the game during the post-post-sessions, it appears that stakeholders returned to the “blamers” type of opinions a view observed before playing the games. The increase in disagreement could also be attributed to other factors beyond ENGAGE game influence, such as demographics, geographical location, and gender of participants. For instance, analyzing the characteristics of participants in the different opinion types (Table A3), it appears that the “older” and the “wealthier” participants were observed to load into the “urban blamers” opinion type. The pro-rainwater harvesting opinion type was male-dominated and was characterized by younger participants from the upper slopes. Although this study did not primarily focus on this aspect and was limited to a sample size of five game sessions, preliminary observations suggest variations in perspectives influenced by factors such as individual capacity, age, gender, and geographical location. This is especially relevant given that most researchers do not conduct post-post-game Q-sort sessions, which can assess the stability of changing human–water perspectives. We opine that game participants demographics need to be accounted for and their implications further investigated in serious gaming research studies.

Given that profit-making is one of the primary priorities of many stakeholders in the study catchment (Wamucii et al., 2023), a disagreement with catchment economic statements seems to have deepened after playing the ENGAGE game. However, after several months (i.e., post-post-game), the participants perspectives changed, and an agreement was observed on market opportunities in the catchment (e.g., export companies) encouraging more farmers to increase crop production, which increases river water abstractions. This shows the importance of post-post-game follow-ups to confirm whether the stakeholders’ perspectives and changes observed during gaming sessions are sustained beyond the game environment (Iacovides and Cox, 2015; Poels et al., 2015). For instance, after playing the game, most participants agreed that water governance and management issues are a concern, especially with uncontrolled illegal water abstractions as major contributors to water shortages in the catchment. However, after several months, participants did not seem to have a strong opinion on the inability of river basin organizations to effectively govern and manage water resources in the catchment.

The Q-sort results also helped to reveal unexpected perspectives. For instance, rainwater harvesting has been reported as not a widespread practice in the study catchment (ADF, 2005; Wamucii et al., 2023). However, in the pre-game sessions, it was ranked as an important activity in three out of four opinion types. This could indicate stakeholders are aware of the importance of rainwater harvesting, the lack of practice could be as a result of other factors, e.g., financial incapability but not a lack of awareness as had previously been assumed. These types of observations can be overly critical when drawing up catchment management plans, especially with a clear understanding of the “stakeholders” opinions.

This study reveals the Q-method’s importance in differentiating issues that are volatile (i.e., those likely to change due to game sessions) and those that are stable (i.e., where stakeholders have a common perception, where no major changes were observed after game sessions). For instance, the lack of prominence of land-use issues and population issues in the Q-sort results does not mean they are less important for the game participants. The fact that land-use and human population issues appeared to have lower values of Z scores and variance indicate a common perception among game participants. In other words, the probability of these two issues plotting high in a normal distribution curve (e.g., from a household survey) is very high. This concurs with the research stating that land-use changes and human population dynamics are major drivers of the changes observed in catchment water resource variations (Dwarakish and Ganasri, 2015; Berihun et al., 2019; Sridhar et al., 2019; Swain et al., 2021; Lei et al., 2022). This suggests that the Q-method can be used to highlight the stakeholders’ perspectives on various human–water issues. Additionally, this type of revelation can be instrumental in refining serious games such as modifying the ENGAGE board to different versions based on the encountered area of interest or aim. The Q-method approach has been applied to modify serious games or validation as reported by Kornevs et al. (2019) and Van Gaalen et al. (2022).

Importantly however, this study shows that the potential impact of the ENGAGE game on stakeholders’ perspectives beyond the game environment can be illustrated with maintained consensus on three issues; (1) recognizing that the location of the catchment is on the drier side of the water tower, hence a water-scarce environment, (2) the increasing market opportunities in the catchment encourage more river water abstractions, and (3) illegal river water abstractions are major contributors to water shortages in the catchment. These three issues had a higher disagreement in the pre-game sessions, but this was reduced immediately after playing the ENGAGE game and these changes were maintained and observed several months later.

The comparison of pre-game, post-game, and post-post-game sessions reveals significant shifts in stakeholders’ human–water perspectives following participation in the ENGAGE game. Participants demonstrated a greater recognition of key catchment issues, including the water-scarce nature of the region, the impact of increased market opportunities on river water abstractions, and the role of illegal abstractions in water shortages. The game reduced disagreements on these issues, with perspectives persisting months later. The study highlights the value of the gaming approach in enhancing understanding of stakeholder interactions with hydrological systems, influencing human–water perspectives, and identifying areas of consensus and diversity over time. Practical game experiences, such as visualizing declining water resources and livestock migration during dry seasons, appeared to influence participant perspectives, suggesting the efficacy of experiential learning through serious gaming. The study underscores the potential of Q-methodology to identify volatile and common perceptions, providing insights for policymaking and catchment management. While the results are promising for socio-hydrological scientists, water managers, and organizations, further research is needed to explore the games’ effects on individual behavioral changes. This includes conducting more post-game follow-ups, Q-sorts, and on-farm surveys, as well as examining how factors like wealth, profession, gender, and location shape stakeholder perspectives in serious gaming contexts.