Codesigning More-than-Human Ecosystems with Social and Environmental Systems: The Gamification of NetWall and BioDiveIn

Abstract

This study explores the integration of gamification into social and environmental systems to enhance urban biodiversity and foster the co-creation of ecosystems. It focuses on two key contributions: the development of tangible ecosystemic interventions, such as habitat extensions and edible landscapes, and the gamification of these interventions to engage communities. The interventions were codesigned using systems-oriented design methods, including gigamapping and prototyping, to produce scalable DIY solutions that empower communities to replicate these practices on their own. Additionally, urban games were created to incentivize participation by rewarding individuals for their contributions to biodiversity restoration.

1. Introduction

In 1978, Gregory Bateson posed a thought-provoking question: “What pattern connects the crab to the lobster and the orchid to the primrose and all of them to me? And me to you?” [1]. Inspired by this idea of interconnectedness, this research explores how urban environments can support biodiversity by creating collaborative, multi-species ecosystems. Through practical design interventions and gamified community engagement, this study aims to foster urban biodiversity and enhance ecological resilience. Specifically, this study aims to answer the question: “How can gamified community-driven interventions enhance ecosystem resilience in urban environments through the codesign of more-than-human ecosystems?” This question emerges from the urgent need to address biodiversity loss and fragmented urban ecosystems. Through the literature review of ecosystem resilience and community engagement, we identify gamification as a tool to foster participation and implement practical interventions. This research contributes by co-developing NetWall and BioDiveIn, which are tangible, scalable solutions that aim to reconnect fragmented ecosystems through participatory design. It further examines the role of gamification in incentivizing community action and fostering long-term ecological stewardship.

This project introduces two key ecosystemic interventions—NetWall (see Figure 1) and BioDiveIn (see Figure 2)—designed to provide habitats and edible landscapes for various species. These interventions consist of modular wooden structures installed on the facades of existing buildings, transforming urban surfaces into biodiverse ecosystems.

This research stands out due to its focus on strengthening urban connectivity through community-driven DIY engagement. Unlike other DIY initiatives that may emphasize individual participation or isolated ecological benefits, this project integrates systemic design, gamification, and real-life codesign laboratories to create a scalable framework for biodiversity restoration. The modules are tailored to accommodate various species, such as birds, insects, and plants, promoting symbiotic relationships within the urban environment. The interventions leverage simple, scalable DIY methods that individuals and communities can replicate on urban walls, balconies, and other spaces. To encourage widespread adoption, gamification strategies, such as reward systems and interactive urban games, were integrated into the design. These approaches aim to motivate public participation and build ecological awareness, creating a “pattern that connects” humans and other species in urban ecosystems.

The tangible interventions are marked with QR codes, leading to the immersive experience of gamified DIY engagement. The interventions are designed to offer multiple species habitats and edible and habitable landscapes, with the intention of contributing to a resilient urban ecosystem through symbiotic design [2].

Cities are critical to multiple species’ survival. Some of them adapt to life in the cities because they do not find edible and habitable landscapes in agricultural land due to its overtechnicization and increase in pesticides; for some, cities are on their migration paths as they are placed on the rivers [3]. Therefore, our research focuses on urban environments.

Urban biodiversity relies heavily on connectivity between fragmented ecosystems within and beyond city boundaries. These regions include urban centers, peri-urban areas, and adjacent non-urban landscapes that collectively form biodiversity networks. For example, many species require connected corridors to migrate, reproduce, and access food sources, especially as urban areas often intersect with key ecological routes such as river valleys or green belts [4]. Therefore, this project aims to help urban connectivity through the gamification of a DIY network by the local communities as well as the makers’ communities.

To generate urban connectivity in the neighborhoods, the top-down way would be too difficult due to the urban density and private property ownership. Therefore, we are motivating the public through series of events and gaming experiences to reproduce our tangible design interventions with edible and habitable landscapes on their own walls and balconies. These, together with the game, serve as the pattern that connects.

This research adopts system interventions as a method for addressing complex ecological challenges, referred to as muddling through the “problematique” [5]. These interventions act as leverage points within broader systems, promoting scalable, ecological, and social change [6]. The currently discussed analogue interventions are the NetWall [7] and the BioDiveIn [8,9], which extend edible and habitable landscapes for multiple species. These interventions also serve as access points, or “touchpoints” [10] for the gamified tools developed in this research, including the urban games GoCOLife [11] and COLife 1 [12] as well as the external citizen science platform Spot-a-Bee [13].

By gamifying biodiversity engagement, these tools create value for ecosystem actors and reward participants for their contributions [14]. The gamified applications motivate human users to DIY recipes while appreciating the value of the ecosystem, while Spot-a-Bee incentivizes participants to document pollinator activity in real-world settings. Looking ahead, the project envisions integrating image recognition technology to quantify and assign value to pollination activities, emphasizing the critical role of bees in urban ecosystems [15].

2. Methodology

This study employs a participatory and iterative design methodology to address urban biodiversity challenges. This research spanned multiple phases between 2023 and early 2024, integrating system-oriented design tools, prototyping, and real-life testing. The timeline of this research aligns with three key design studios under the COLife program: BioDiveIn Intervention (Winter Semester COLife Studio 2023), GoCOLife Game Design (Summer Semester COLife Studio 2023), and NetWall Intervention (Winter Studio 2024). These studios served as collaborative platforms for engaging human and non-human stakeholders, using tools like gigamapping and participatory workshops. The methodology, detailed below, reflects the iterative feedback loop of real-world testing employed in each phase.

The process integrates system-oriented design tools, prototyping, and real-life testing to codesign and implement ecosystemic interventions. Before the more-than-human codesign through the interventions that took place, the interventions were codesigned with human stakeholders, some representing the more-than-human perspective, such as ecologists [16]. This work was developed through design studio teaching, at the Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism, at the University of Stuttgart-Germany.

2.1. Mapping

The codesign process began with collaborative sessions involving human stakeholders, such as ecologists, and systemic design students. The goal was to integrate both human and more-than-human perspectives into the design.

The students first developed minimaps [17], which represented their personal understanding of this project. These maps fostered empathy and collaboration by revealing individual perspectives [18]. The minimaps were then integrated into larger, more comprehensive gigamaps using the Miro platform [19], visualizing complex relationships between ecological, social, and spatial elements. Based on the minimap outcomes, students were assigned responsibilities aligned with their interests and expertise, fostering deeper collaboration and ownership.

For the stakeholders’ sessions, the students made the WIP gigamaps as orderly as possible and plotted them on the board. Gigamaps are comprehensive visual tools used in system-oriented design to represent complex relationships between various ecological, social, and spatial factors [20]. They help designers identify connections and dependencies within multi-faceted projects, facilitating collaborative proposals and suggestions.

In this process, the gigamaps were shared with stakeholders, allowing the students to engage with and incorporate feedback into their evolving designs. While Sevaldson, the pioneer of gigamapping, emphasizes the value of messiness in capturing complex systems [17], we suggest that maintaining orderliness during presentations enhances participation and comprehension.

This approach resulted in iterative feedback loops between the messy process maps and the orderly presentation maps. The analogue maps were updated in Miro, oscillating between these two states as part of the codesign process (see Figure 3 and Figure 4). After the interventions were implemented, the gigamaps were finalized. In the case of NetWall, a complex gigamap was also supplemented with a simplified synthesis map for exhibition purposes, facilitating clearer communication. Both interventions—NetWall and BioDiveIn—were accompanied by DIY recipes, which were later gamified in subsequent semesters for broader community engagement (see Figure 5, Figure 6, Figure 7 and Figure 8).

2.2. The Real Life CoDesign Laboratory

The “Real-Life Codesign Laboratory” represents a methodology of integrating codesign practices into real-world settings to test and refine ecosystemic interventions. This approach bridges the gap between conceptual design and practical application by allowing the interventions to interact with their intended environments, users, and ecosystems [21].

2.2.1. Tangible and Non-Tangible Interventions

The tangible interventions, such as NetWall and BioDiveIn, were implemented in urban settings to support local biodiversity. These prototypes were installed on building facades and integrated into real-world ecosystems, enabling interactions with local wildlife, plants, and broader ecological systems. This marked the beginning of the “Real-Life Codesign Laboratory”, where real-life codesign really happens.

In addition to these physical installations, the laboratory leveraged non-tangible elements to enhance public engagement and accessibility:

• QR Codes: Embedded on the interventions, the codes provided access to supplementary blogs with detailed information and DIY guides.
• Urban Games: Two gamified tools, GoCOLife and COLife 1, were designed to further engage the public in biodiversity practices [22,23]. These games introduced tasks such as watering plants and recreating DIY interventions, motivating users to actively participate in urban ecological efforts.
• Citizen Science Application (Spot-a-Bee): Developed by Cardiff University and the University of Glasgow [13], this platform encouraged public participation in ecological monitoring by allowing users to upload images of pollinators. These user-contributed images trained image recognition algorithms to identify and assign value to pollination activities, fostering a new ecology of shared living through technology [24].

2.2.2. Iterative Feedback and Community Engagement

The Real-Life Codesign Laboratory emphasized iterative feedback loops to refine both tangible and non-tangible interventions:

• Ecological Interactions: observations of how local ecosystems interacted with the prototypes, such as which species utilized the modules, informed adjustments to their design and placement.
• Public Engagement: Activities such as ecological checks and community gatherings provided insights into public perceptions and usability. These events also fostered a sense of ownership among participants.
• Technology Integration: tools like Spot-a-Bee and urban games generate data that could inform both ecological research and community engagement strategies.

3. Outcomes

3.1. The Tangible Interventions

The interventions were prototyped along with the gigamapping codesign process, and they are an important part of it throughout the codesign process. They are installed on walls of dense city environments as we need to adapt our cities for biodiversity [3] to offer edible and habitable landscapes. Whilst BioDiveIn intervention uses plywood to generate different modules for various species, user-specific NetWall plays with different sizes of ‘responsive solid wood’ [25] modules for the opportunistic use of biodiverse species. Design for opportunistic use was discussed by Sevaldson, the father of systems systems-oriented design, who explains that, if you create diversity through a complex design, you reach more opportunities for use, such as a difference between stone and chair—the object to sit on [26]. What showed up in the ecological check, however, is that the user-specific modules were also used by biodiverse species for opportunistic purposes. This is a very important finding, showing that we should not design for specific species as such and rather focus on different opportunities for biodiverse species.

3.1.1. BioDiveIn

The intervention (see Figure 2) is based on several modules, focusing on different bats, squirrels, birds, insects and plants. It is built from local ecological plywood and ecological glue with ecological plastic folia for the plants and pools. The intervention focused on several specific species, extending their edible and habitable landscape. However, whoever was in the neighborhood took the opportunity, which was even better. The intervention involves human participation, such as filling the feeders or water pools for birds and insects. This is achieved through community engagement. However, it generates dependency of the environment instead of being an autopoietic system if we do not include humans as its part, which we do. This intervention was a big success because of its gardening event, where the community planted plants in it for edible landscapes. However, community engagement in such events might also be difficult as engaging the community with no gardening skills led to replanting the pods the year after as the work was not completed professionally. However, the ecological check this spring showed that multiple species inhabited the intervention. Therefore, it was successful.

3.1.2. NetWall

The intervention (see Figure 1) is based on several sizes of the same module from responsive solid wood. It supports bats, birds, insects, and plants through the surrounding seed bombing of nectarous plants through opportunistic use options. The responsive solid wood works as such: the panels are cut in tangential sections. Therefore, there is a different density on the left and right sides of the panel. This means that, with interaction with relative humidity and temperature, the panels warp [25]. Thus, the single-design cell airs when the relative humidity is low, and there is a high temperature. Also, it closes the cell when it is cold and raining. However, the panels never fully close. Thanks to the fact that the wood from different positions of the tree trunk warps with different intensities, we are generating a climate-diverse environment [27]. This is because each chamber has different panels from different positions of the tree trunk. The better diversity of the climatic environment, the better biodiversity [28]. Generating the opportunities of use through the complexity of the design offers both more intriguing environments as well as multi-species edible and habitable landscapes.

3.2. Gamification of Prototypes

The final phase of this project focused on gamifying the prototypes to engage users in learning about biodiversity and participating in DIY ecological interventions. Two primary gamified experiences were developed: GoCOLife, an interactive game set in an old cemetery, and the CoLife web-based game, which provided educational content and DIY guides for constructing and maintaining bio-interventions. These games were designed to enhance user engagement and promote long-term sustainability of the interventions. The GoCOLife game involved players following clues related to local biodiversity, ultimately leading them to the BioDiveIn interventions where they could scan QR codes to access DIY instructions. The CoLife web-based game provided a more extensive interactive experience, offering multiple chapters and activities that guided users through understanding, constructing, and maintaining urban biodiversity projects (see Figure 9).

The two games were developed in quite different ways. While the first one suggests the payers move within certain locations, fulfilling different tasks until they reach the intervention, the second one is not so spatial and is filled with different quizzes and DIY videos. Both games utilize gamification, which is the application of game-design elements in non-game contexts to boost user engagement, motivation, and behavior change [29]. By integrating features like points, badges, leaderboards, and narrative structures, gamification taps into both intrinsic and extrinsic motivators, effectively enhancing user participation and learning outcomes [30]. In environmental contexts, gamification has been shown to effectively promote sustainable behaviors and increase environmental awareness [31]. Games create immersive and interactive experiences that simplify complex ecological concepts, making them more accessible and engaging for a wide audience [32]. By incorporating challenges, feedback mechanisms, and reward systems, these games encourage users to actively participate in environmental stewardship, fostering long-term behavioral changes [33]. Additionally, digital games offer an opportunity for experiential learning by allowing users to experiment with and observe the consequences of their actions within a simulated environment [34]. This experiential aspect is crucial in environmental education, where understanding the interconnectedness and impact of human actions on ecosystems is vital [35].

3.2.1. GoCOLife Game

GoCOLife is a location-based mobile game designed to engage users with their immediate urban ecosystems through exploration and hands-on activities. The game requires players to physically navigate urban locations, where they interact with ecological hotspots and biodiversity projects. Missions and quests might include identifying local plant and animal species, participating in habitat restoration, or constructing ecological interventions using DIY recipes. Augmented reality (AR) features further enhance the immersive experience by allowing users to visualize ecological information and potential interventions within their real-world surroundings.

Gamification elements in GoCOLife include a progression system where players earn experience points by completing levels of a questionnaire, unlocking new challenges and content as they advance. The game also features reward mechanisms, granting players access to DIY recipes, tools, and customization options upon the successful completion of activities. Social interaction is encouraged through collaborative play features, such as team missions, community events, and leaderboards, which foster both competition and cooperation among users.

3.2.2. CoLife Web-Based Game

CoLife, on the other hand, is a web-based game that combines gamification with educational content to engage users in enhancing urban biodiversity through interactive learning and DIY project implementation. The game offers a virtual platform where users explore various aspects of urban ecology through modules, quizzes, and instructional content (see Figure 10). The user-friendly interface guides players through step-by-step processes for creating and maintaining ecological interventions, regardless of their prior experience or resources. CoLife’s asynchronous engagement model allows users to participate at their own pace, making it accessible to a broad audience.

Gamification elements in CoLife include an achievement system where users earn badges and certifications by completing educational modules and DIY projects, highlighting their progress and expertise. The game also features resource management, requiring users to plan and manage materials effectively to complete projects, simulating real-world sustainability considerations. Interactive quizzes challenge users’ knowledge of ecological topics, rewarding correct answers with points and unlocking advanced content and DIY recipes. Community sharing is encouraged through in-game forums and social media integration, fostering a sense of community and collaborative learning.

Both GoCOLife and CoLife aim to enhance environmental engagement through their unique design and gamification strategies. GoCOLife immerses users in direct interaction with their local environments, reinforcing knowledge of biodiversity and ecological processes through practical applications. It guides users in implementing DIY interventions such as building pollinator habitats and creating water features to support local wildlife. CoLife promotes the concept of a more-than-human economy by illustrating how supporting local biodiversity can improve environmental quality and human wellbeing. It uses its reward system to symbolize reciprocal relationships between humans and non-human actors, demonstrating the mutual benefits of ecological interventions. Through these innovative approaches, both games effectively engage users in environmental education and stewardship, promoting sustainable behaviors and fostering a deeper understanding of our ecosystems.

3.3. Evaluation of Codesigned Interventions

The codesigning process integrated inputs from ecological experts and community stakeholders to ensure the interventions addressed the needs of urban biodiversity while engaging the public in meaningful ways. This participatory approach brought together diverse perspectives, leading to innovative ecosystemic designs, such as NetWall and BioDiveIn, tailored to urban biodiversity challenges.

The iterative nature of the codesign methodology, combined with real-life ecological checks, ensured that both social and environmental systems benefitted from these interventions. These findings highlight the tangible contributions of codesigning to fostering resilient, interconnected urban ecosystems.

3.4. Events

These projects are accompanied by community events, such as gardening and seed bombing (see Figure 11) as well as ecological checks. This serves community engagement as well as finalizes the projects with nectarous plants for the pollinators. These events help to propagate our DIY recipes and our games that are marked with QR codes on our prototypes. For more engagement, we started to cooperate with BUND—Children of the Earth Stuttgart, where we donate our prototypes to their auctions. This way, we are also interacting with a more focused rather than a random audience. Both of these are important. The focused audience can make more impact, and the random audience is from the local community that needs to raise interest.

For such community events, we raise the attention of local stakeholders. For example, the local hotel sponsors our receptions, and the local biologist donates information on the ecosystem. The hotel manager is watering our plants as part of his daily exercise for green impact.

4. Discussion and Conclusions

We support real life ’methodological pluralism’ in systems-oriented design [36]. This means that we mix several methods and media with a multicentered perspective. Here, the overarching gigamapping, synthesis mapping, DIY recipes, and prototyping are combined with the real life codesign laboratory that engages with the codesign interaction through DIY recipes, citizen science applications, multiple events, and gamification. In our view, it is important that the gigamap is finalized after the intervention to communicate such extensive feedback loops to both the authors and the audience at the University of Stuttgart, exhibited along with the synthesis map and the DIY recipe. It is critical for the understanding of this process codesign tool and the processes and outputs behind it. This navigates the visitors to the real life intervention accompanied with events. The permanent tangible installations serve as a touchpoint [10] for entering services such as QR codes with DIY recipes, gaming applications, and the citizen science application ’Spot-a-Bee’ [13]. Therefore, the ’prototypical urban interventions’ [37] are generative. They are generative in many senses. One is public engagement in biodiversity support with a more-than-human perspective through gamification. Another one is generating biocorridors across the city as the public DIYs the recipes on their walls and balconies. Larger urban connectivity is crucial for a healthy, biodiverse urban environment, and the same is important public engagement in it [4]. Furthermore, being placed online, these recipes are spreading to makers’ communities around the world to be adapted to local ecosystems.

One more important finding is that we should not design for specific species as such and rather focus on different opportunities for biodiverse species.

Theoretically, this case study advances the discourse on community-driven urban ecology by demonstrating how gamified DIY interventions can serve as a leverage point for broader systemic change. It showcases how participatory design can operationalize the concept of “more-than-human” ecosystems, contributing to the fields of systemic design and urban ecology.

Practically, this project offers a replicable model for integrating biodiversity restoration into urban environments. The accessible DIY approach, combined with gamification, empowers communities to build and sustain ecological networks, creating lasting environmental and social impacts. These findings underscore the potential for similar methods to address urban biodiversity challenges worldwide.