Effective communication, education, and training strategies are vital to foster understanding, empathy, and adaptive behavior to climate change impacts such as sea level rise (Philippenko and Le Cozannet 2023, Velautham et al 2019, Vergunst et al 2025). Adaptation, defined as an ‘adjustment in natural or human systems in response to actual or expected climate stimuli or their effects which moderates harm or exploits beneficial opportunities’ (McCarthy et al 2001, p 982), entails cognitive and behavioral changes (Gallopin 2006, Nelson et al 2007). Although adaptation aims to reduce vulnerability (Smith 1996), safeguard health, and, where possible, harness opportunities (Burton 1992), adaptation requiring economic investment or lifestyle disruption often faces social resistance (Birk and Rasmussen 2014, Eisenack et al 2014, Barnet et al 2015, Berrang-Ford et al 2021).

In this context, gamification, the method of engagement that this review focuses on, holds significant potential for developing 21st century competencies (Romero and Turpo 2012). Gamification is a concept that encompasses game-like systems, serious games, and the application of game-based methods to foster cognitive or behavioral changes (Hamari 2019) within contexts not inherently associated with gaming (Deterding et al 2011). In our case, we apply this term to strategies that harness the engagement generated by playful dynamics to enhance learning processes (Marín 2015). According to Zichermann and Cunningham (2011), since this process involves the player’s cognition and gaming techniques, such simulated scenarios can be structured for problem-solving purposes. Games in particular may be applied for instrumental purposes, either adapting artifacts created originally for entertainment (Gee 2011) or directly as ‘serious’ games. Serious games, often also referred to as e-learning, edutainment, or game-based learning (Castillo et al 2018), have been defined as products primarily designed not for entertainment but rather to convey a message, teach a subject, or provide an educational or professional experience (Michael and Chen 2006). Due to their long history (Wilkinson 2016), with the first book on the subject published in 1970 (Abt 1970), they are a primary form of gamification for climate adaptation (Flood et al 2018). Research has aimed to explore in depth the relationship between serious play and learning. According to Muriel and Crawford (2018), key individual and collective learning outcomes can be achieved through repetition, sensory stimulation, competition, and immediate feedback. As noted by Ochoa and Chalmeta (2020), contemporary serious games are often funded by governments and public or private institutions, which commission specialized software development companies to create games tailored to their specific objectives. This does not imply that serious games and other forms of gamification function solely as transmitters of knowledge; rather, they also hold the potential to foster attitudinal changes regarding specific issues, to cultivate critical thinking about social problems, and to influence individuals’ prospective actions. Among these applications, their capacity to positively influence civic engagement stands out, being applicable to situations based on emergency risk plans or revealing urban problems (Romano et al 2021); or helping citizens to decide how to act appropriately in the face of concrete speculative scenarios (Devish et al 2016).

Climate impacts in coastal areas represent an important phenomenon in need of effective communication. The rise in mean sea level within coastal urban environments constitutes a pressing global challenge (Dawahidi et al 2019, Falasca et al 2023, UN 2024). When coupled with land subsidence, it heightens vulnerability erosion and recurrent flooding. Driven by oceanic thermal expansion and ice mass depletion, sea level rise threatens some of the most fragile ecological and geomorphological systems on Earth (Ibarra Marinas et al 2015). Projected impacts include saltwater intrusion, accelerated erosion affecting nearly 70% of the world’s beaches (Tavares and Drenkhan, 2010), and the potential loss of habitable and arable land, with estimates suggesting up to two meters of rise by 2100 (IPCC 2021). These physical changes also reshape wave dynamics as both oceanic surface area and atmospheric conditions evolve under anthropogenic climate change, driven primarily by fossil fuel combustion, deforestation and intensive agriculture (IPCC 2014 2021). However, despite decades of scientific evidence and widespread public awareness campaigns, the effectiveness of information-based methods in fostering meaningful public engagement with climate change issues has been limited (Suldovsky 2017). This limitation is evidenced by the persistent gap between knowledge and action, as many individuals and organizations remain passive in the face of mounting environmental challenges. In response to this disconnect, contemporary approaches to climate change engagement emphasize the need to address three interrelated dimensions: cognitive (understanding facts), affective (connecting emotionally with issues, solutions, and the actors around them), and behavioral (acting pro-environmentally) (Lorenzoni et al 2007, Ouariachi et al 2020, Fernández Galeote et al 2021). Traditional communication and educational tools, while valuable for disseminating information, often fall short of impacting all three dimensions simultaneously because they typically lack the experimental and immersive qualities necessary to evoke complex emotional responses and to inspire and support behavioral change (Wibeck 2014, Monroe et al 2017). This shortfall has prompted researchers and practitioners to explore alternative strategies that go beyond conventional methods. Among these, gamification has gained attention as a promising avenue for enhancing climate communication.

In the context of environmental sustainability and climate, gamification has been applied in several forms and for diverse aims. In education, sustainability games tend to incorporate interdisciplinary collaboration and a systems perspective, which are fundamental components of environmental management (Rusca et al 2012). As Madani et al (2017) assert: ‘Games can be applied in educational settings to promote awareness about environmental and sustainability challenges among citizens who are increasingly exposed to products of the information age’ (p 2). Researchers have tended to focus on broader topics than coastal resilience, such as energy, natural resources management, and climate change (Hallinger et al 2020); as a result, the specific consequences of climate change that directly impact the lives of particular populations are often overlooked. The effectiveness of sustainability-focused interventions is not solely dependent on game design, but also on high levels of inter- and intra-group trust among researchers, practitioners, and community participants, robust evaluation practices, and the involvement of experienced and knowledgeable facilitators (Flood et al 2018). While most games adhere to the recommendations of environmental experts, design considerations such as credibility, visibility, meaning, and social interaction are rarely integrated (Fernández Galeote and Hamari 2021), and it is not always clear what design characteristics lead to behavior change (Douglas and Brauer 2021).

Given the significance of the progressive rise in mean sea level, this review seeks to bridge the gap related to this topic by analyzing the full spectrum of relevant research on the educational application of gamified experience for raising awareness about climate resilience in urban coastal environments:

(A)

Context and population, including the sample’s age, geographic location, global economic ranking, gender distribution, occupation, and educational background.

(B)

The materials utilized during the gamified experience, the roles assigned to players, the numbers of sessions, the format of the experience, the intervention model, and the dominant narrative, all examined with the objective of drawing structural-level conclusions.

(C)

Analysis of received engagement, which can be categorized into cognitive, affective, and behavioral dimensions in relation to the gamified experience; additionally, the psychological foundations of these responses will be examined in depth, contextualized with the collected data, and assessed through appropriate analytical methods.

(D)

Quality and validity on the analyzed proposals, referred to as ‘strength’ based on the criteria established in the subsequent analysis.

This review compiles empirical findings from gamified experiences focused on resilience and adaptation to sea level rise in urban environments. To achieve this objective, we consider a set of analyzable elements, organized into sections aligned with the research questions outlined in the methodology.

The results of this systematic literature review will offer valuable insight into the current state of the art and identify potential avenues for future research on gamification as a tool for raising awareness in urban coastal environments, while addressing questions regarding its present status. This paper will be organized as follows: section 2 will outline the methodology employed in the systematic literature review, detailing the databases consulted, the study’s planning process, and the guidelines followed for data extraction. Section 3 will present the findings derived from the 40 research studies ultimately included int the review, detailing their bibliographic information and the variables considered in the analytical framework. Section 4 will outline a set of research recommendations based on the findings. Section 5 will conclude the paper with a summary of the key conclusions.

This study uses a systematic literature review methodology. Referring to Fink’s (2005) definition: ‘a systematic, explicit, [comprehensive,] and reproducible method for identifying, evaluating and synthesizing the existing body of completed and recorded work produced by researchers, scholars, and practitioners’ (pp 3, 17). Furthermore, it must be reproducible to enable other researchers in the field to build upon the process (Okoli 2015). In this research, the focus is on retrieving the existing body of empirical research of the gamification of experiences designed to promote engagement with climate resilience in urban coastal environments. Through the anticipated findings, the study aims to synthesize potential design alternatives and provide guidelines for future research in this field of study.

Since our goal is to obtain data from studies describing experiential, cognitive or behavioral outcomes, literature reviews and system descriptions with no empirical findings were excluded from the analysis corpus. Although most of the research collected consist of quantitative results, we also included studies that employ more qualitative methodologies (such as semi-structured interviews with participants and focus groups) to establish a broad framework of findings, enabling the drawing of general conclusions. Following the steps outlined by Okoli (2015), we employed a method based on four sequential phases: planning, selection, extraction, and execution. The fourth phase will be elaborated upon in greater detail in the section dedicated to the results.

2.1. Planning

The first phase of the research involves organizing a study purpose that aligns with contemporary concerns and has the potential to contribute to a future research agenda. To achieve this, we have employed the following questions:

Q1)

In which populations have these interventions been implemented, and do they consist of at-risk communities or those directly affected by the consequences of sea level rise?

Q2)

What have been the outcomes of these interventions, and have they yielded positive, negative, or mixed results in terms of engagement with climate change and with the gamified experience?

Q3)

What types of games have been utilized based on their materials, and which gamified strategies have been implemented? How is their design classified?

Q4)

What is the study design strength across the sample?

Based on this planning and the defined research questions, a protocol was established outlining the steps to structure the database for the systematic literature review.

2.2. Selection

This section aimed to establish a clear selection logic during the literature search, ensuring that the studies aligned with a set of criteria deemed essential for drawing coherent conclusions. To incorporate recent technological innovations and increase the likelihood that the digital systems described in the literature are compatible with modern computers and representative of contemporary techniques, a temporal range was set between 2014 and 2024. When discussing technological innovations, we specifically refer to two key developments relevant to the advancement of serious games and gamification-oriented software: (1) the announcement in 2014, followed by the launch in 2015, of Windows 10, which created a software development environment tailored to this operating system, thereby minimizing compatibility issues when testing software with current hardware; and (2) the standardization of virtual reality following the distribution of Oculus Rift in 2016.

The criteria for content selection were as follows:

(a)

The study must clearly identify the target population (e.g. coastal communities, students, local policymakers).

(b)

The objectives should go beyond general sustainability awareness and focus on imparting concrete scientific knowledge or fostering adaptive practices directly linked to the adverse impacts of climate change on coastal areas. For example, the adoption of concrete and practical measures that citizens and stakeholders can implement to adapt to the evolving challenge posed by climate change. These measures might include, e.g. sustainable coastal management practices, community-based monitoring of environmental indicators, or behavioral changes that reduce local vulnerability.

(c)

The gamified system should be explicitly connected to these learning or adaptation goals, ensuring that participants can relate game dynamics to real-world environmental challenges. In this context, gamification is defined as the use of game design techniques, whether in the form of full-fledged games or not, whether designed for a purpose other than entertainment or not, to facilitate game experiences that support cognitive and/or behavioral changes (Hamari 2019).

(d)

The study must provide empirical findings supported by quantitative and/or qualitative evidence, irrespective of the data collection or analysis methods used. This empirical grounding ensures that the intervention is not only innovative, but its effects are measurable and replicable.

Regarding format aspects, the following criteria were established:

(a)

The study must be written in English or Spanish.

(b)

The document must have been published between 2014 and 2024.

(c)

The source must be in a peer-reviewed journal, conference proceedings, or book.

The search process involved developing an automated database using the Publish or Perish tool, followed by filtering based on specific criteria. Among the databases available through Publish or Perish, two were selected: Scopus and Web of Science. A third database offered by the service, Google Scholar, was excluded because preliminary searches generated a significant number of results unrelated to the search criteria, increasing noise in the dataset. The search yielded a total of 1582 publications. A more detailed breakdown is available in Álvarez et al (2025a).

The string of basic terms used was structured based on the knowledge developed in previous research, resulting in a lexicon that is effective for searching intervention focused on raising awareness of climate resilience in coastal environments through gamified approaches. The string evolved through a series of test searches, which helped identify the most effective terms in retrieving relevant results. Due to technical issues with the tool (such as the limitation of the number of queries it could process), the string below was split and adjusted to achieve the desired results:

(Marine OR Coastal OR ‘Environmental awareness’ OR ‘Education for sustainable development’ OR Resilience OR ‘Climate Change’ OR ‘Sea-level rise’ OR ‘Sea level rise’ OR ESD OR Mitigation OR Adaptation OR ‘Global warming’ OR Pro-environmental OR ‘Rising sea level’ OR ‘Greenhouse gas*’ OR Sea OR (Climate AND impact*) OR Coast* OR Erosion OR (Climate AND risk*) OR ‘Extreme Weather’ OR ‘Extreme Event*’ OR ‘Environmental acti*’ OR Wetland* OR Ocean OR Island OR Storm* OR Flood* OR Surge* OR Estuar* OR Delta* OR Mangrove* OR Swamp* OR Water) AND (Geo-game* OR ‘Video game*’ OR Gamif* OR ‘Serious Game*’ OR ‘Environmental Game*’ OR ‘Learning Experiment*’ OR City-making OR Citymaking OR ‘Simulation Game*’ OR Videogame* OR ‘Playful Cit*’ OR Game-based OR ‘Board Game’ OR ‘Card Game*’ OR ‘Game Studies’ OR ‘Digital Game’ OR ‘Mobile Game*’ OR ‘Online Game’ OR ‘Computer Game’ OR ‘Educational Game’ OR ‘Role-playing Game’ OR Playful OR Geogame* OR Gameful OR ‘Green Game’ OR ‘City build’ OR City-build).

A spreadsheet with the search results was generated, providing a general overview of climate change through a gamified lens. As a result, it was necessary to refine the search through a screening process, which will be described in detail next. After retrieving multiple results related to social science experiments unrelated to gamification or climate emergencies, the term ‘co-design’ was removed from the search. A similar issue arose with ‘sustainable development’, as its broad scope generated a significant number of irrelevant results. The construction of the database commenced in July 2024. After aggregating the retrieved results and removing duplicates, a screening process was initiated, divided into the following stages:

(a)

Texts whose titles and abstracts were not relevant to the focus of the research were excluded. Most of the articles eliminated during this process were related to game theory in mathematics and surgical procedures.

(b)

Articles, conference proceedings, or book chapters with restricted access or that could not be located were excluded.

(c)

Due to an error in Publish or Perish, a small number of results did not comply with the established time limit and were therefore removed from the sample.

(d)

The remaining articles were thoroughly reviewed, and those that did not meet the selection criteria were removed from the database.

After the first author applied these criteria, unclear studies were shared with a second researcher and a consensus decision was reached for them. An aspect discussed was the inclusion of research on responsible water consumption and management or marine pollution, as their effects directly impact marine flora and fauna in these areas. Although these topics shared certain similarities with the aspects ultimately analyzed, they were excluded since neither involves a geographic transformation of these affected communities. Details on the variations in the database and the breakdown of the screening sampling process are available in Álvarez et al (2025a). The screening process and data extraction were conducted in parallel, as the papers ultimately included in the analysis—along with those discussed with the second researcher—were reviewed. The screening and data extraction took place between September 2024 and December 2024, resulting in a total of 40 units of analysis.

2.3. Extraction

The data collection selection criteria were established based on the research questions. Although most of the elements to be extracted were predetermined, additional units emerged and were incorporated as the reading of the studies unfolded. The process involved two researchers: one responsible for data collection and analysis, and one tasked with evaluating the validity of both the process and the results and proposing improvements, which were then discussed. For the quality appraisal, which was considered especially sensitive, both researchers were fully involved in a consensus-based approach, mirroring Fernández Galeote et al (2021). The variables were categorized into four categories: the first category aimed to classify to unit of analysis based on its bibliographical reference and provide general description following the DESLOCIS methodology (Gertrudix et al 2021), while the remaining categories were designed to address the research questions. Information regarding this aspect can be found in Álvarez et al (2025b).

The units of analysis used in coding are based on previous research (Fernández Galeote et al 2021, Gertrudix et al 2024), alongside a series of contributions aimed at adapting to the specific needs of the research. Aspects examined that differed from these sources include the presence of post-experimental reinforcement aimed at consolidating the knowledge acquired during the gamified experience. This included measures such as discussion groups to review key aspects of the experience and theoretical sessions designed to clarify the meaning of its most important concepts. Another aspect incorporated into the analysis was whether players were exposed to the most relevant concepts of the experience prior to gameplay. This factor considers the possibility that the results may be influenced by the knowledge acquired during the initial stage of the session.

This section presents the results of the analysis of 40 empirical studies. The first aspect examined is the bibliographical data, followed by four sections addressing the research questions: (a) the geographical location of the study and characteristics of the population included in the experiment (Q1); (b) classification of the intervention based on the strategies employed during the gamified session (Q2); (c) assessment of participant engagement (Q3); and (d) evaluation of the quality and strength of these interventions based on their outcomes (Q4).

3.1. Identification and bibliographic data

Due to the time-related exclusion criterion established, the earliest papers retrieved date back to 2014. The number of publications remained relatively stable between 2015 and 2019, with one to four publications per year. This number increased in 2020, with the publication of seven articles, and the tendency stays stable until 2023. The data for 2024 is considered incomplete. For additional information, refer to figure 1.

Figure 1. Number of publications per year.

Download figure:

Standard image High-resolution image

Most studies (87.5%) have been published in scientific journals, followed by conference proceedings (10%) and, lastly, book chapters (2.5%). A total of 32 venues are listed, with four of them having published more than one paper. These publications are the International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction (5), sustainability (3), regional environmental change (2), and water (2).

The classification of the publications was based on the categories established in Scopus; it should be noted that these publications may have more than one category. Since Scopus only listed 80% of the publications, this classification does not capture the entire sample. The most frequently occurring publication categories were as follows: Social Sciences (12), environmental science (9), earth and planetary sciences (8), agricultural and biological sciences (5), geography, planning and development (4), mathematics (3), computer science (3), water science and technology (3), global and planetary change (3). The remaining journals presented unique categories that were not repeated elsewhere.

3.2. Population and context

Given the geographical nature of the research, it is essential to analyze the context of the units of analysis, considering their connection to areas at risk due to rising sea levels. As part of the application context, we have also examined the participants’ age, gender, occupation, and prior knowledge of the issue.

3.2.1. Location

The primary countries where the research was conducted are the United States (12.5%) and Finland, with 10%. The remaining interventions with more than one result are Indonesia, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and Thailand (7.5% each), and Chile, Germany, and Taiwan (5% each). Based on the author team’s affiliations, the results are similar, highlighting the presence of the United States, Finland, and the United Kingdom. If the paper did not specify the location of the physical intervention, it was inferred based on the institutional origin of the researchers involved. On the other hand, a few research papers indicated an online intervention (5%). For additional information, refer to figure 2.

Figure 2. Number of papers by country of intervention.

Download figure:

Standard image High-resolution image

Regarding their connection to the object of study, all the identified countries have coastal areas that could be impacted by sea level rise. More importantly, according to data from the World Bank Group’s Climate Change Knowledge Portal (2025), these countries have experienced significant sea level rise between 1993 and 2024, with concerning projections for 2100.

Of all the countries involved, 67.5% were advanced economies, whereas 27.50% were emerging and developing economies, according to data provided by the International Monetary Fund (2025). Among the emerging economies with multiple results where Thailand and Indonesia (7.5% each) and Chile (5%). In terms of continent distribution, most interventions took place in Europe (42.5%) and Asia (30%), followed by America (22.5%).

3.2.2. Age and gender

The interventions can be classified based on their participants’ ages between those including adults (62.5%) and those for minors (17.5%); additionally, 5% of the interventions involved both, and 25% of the cases did not provide specific age data. Similarly, 65% did not specify the participants’ gender. On the other hand, 30% of the interventions included balanced samples (40–60), while in the remaining 5%, women were more present.

3.2.3. Occupation

Most gamified experiences were directed towards students, particularly those in higher education. A total of 20% of the participants were K-12 students, encompassing both primary and secondary education, with an age range of 5–18 years; in contrast, tertiary education represents 35%. Academics, professionals, and stakeholders constituted 42.5% of the sample; meanwhile, research samples whose occupations were either unreported or belonged to other professional sectors accounted for 35%. Figure 3 shows more details about the professional background of the participants. The total number exceeds the 40 studies analyzed, as several of them encompassed more than one type of occupation.

Figure 3. Number of papers by occupation.

Download figure:

Standard image High-resolution image

3.2.4. Previous relationship with climate change, adaptation and related topics

Of the 40 studies analyzed, 47.5% reported the presence of participants with stated beliefs, concerns, and/or knowledge regarding the issue addressed during the gamified experience. A total of 17.5% possessed knowledge of the subject matter due to a professional or educational connection, while the rest acquired knowledge through prior workshops or theoretical sessions designed to contextualize gamification. Conversely, 2.5% demonstrated a lack of interest or awareness regarding the subject in question. Furthermore, 32.5% did not report data on prior participant interest or contact with climate resilience or adaptation.

3.3. Intervention content and design

This section addresses the second research question by examining the elements employed in the gamification design and determining their classification based on their characteristics. This taxonomy may be structured according to factors such as game format, number of sessions, and the presence of a facilitator responsible for guiding participants throughout the experience. Additionally, consideration was given to whether the specialist reinforced their knowledge of the game’s issue through a prior theoretical session. or subsequent reinforcement, such as the formation of a discussion group. The analysis also included data on the level of immersion sought during the experience, depending on the degree of player involvement and the influence of the game environment. Additionally, it examined the existence and type of achievements implemented by the designers, the social strategies embedded within the experience, the material used (both physical and digital), and the specific aspects of the climate crisis that the game aimed to address. It should be added that two games have been the focus of multiple studies: Climate connected: Outbreak (3) and Costa resiliente (2). None of the games analyzed were designed for commercial purposes; rather, they were developed exclusively for research.

3.3.1. Length, facilitation, and format

Most of the interventions were conducted in a single session (72.5%), while 22.5% took place over two or more sessions. The remaining percentage corresponds to studies in which the number of sessions was not specified. A total of 35% of the interventions were conducted and guided by specialists that helped the participants during the experience, while 65% were carried out autonomously. Regarding pre- and post-experimental reinforcement, 20% introduced theoretical concepts prior to the experiment, while 17.5% implemented reinforcement after the experiment. Additionally, three studies incorporated reinforcement at both stages of the research (van der Wal et al 2015, Tsai et al 2019, Teague et al 2020).

Regarding the gaming experience, the games were classified based on the physical condition of the medium: digital, analog, or hybrid. The hybrid category includes games that integrate analog elements into digital environments (e.g. physical cards with a translation in the virtualized space) or studies comparing analog and digital versions of the same game to determine which yields better results. Within the sample, 13 games followed an analog format (e.g. board games, role-playing games), 18 were digital, and 9 employed hybrid dynamics.

Table 1 provides a description of the game format based on the type of intervention conducted and the nature of the device used to structure the game.

Table 1. Game formats and delivery methods.

| | Digital | Hybrid | Analog | Total | | | —–– | —— | —— | —– | | Facilitated | 2 | 2 | 10 | 14 | | Independent | 16 | 7 | 3 | 26 | | Total | 18 | 9 | 13 | 40 |

Regarding table 2, this table explores the interconnections between process guidance and pre- and post-experimental information exposure.

Table 2. Theoretical reinforcement and delivery methods.

| | Pre-intervention knowledge | Post-intervention knowledge | Total | | | ––––––––––––– | ————————— | —– | | Facilitated | 2 | 4 | 6 | | Independent | 6 | 3 | 9 | | Total | 8 | 7 | 15 |

While table 1 identifies a connection between guided processes and analog formats—given that analog games from this sample, lacking the embedded tutorials typical of digital games, often require external facilitation, and certain role-playing games involve the presence of a game master. Table 2 does not identify any significant relationship between format and pedagogical reinforcement.

3.3.2. Application domain

The study classified the analyzed articles into three categories: first, it highlighted interventions aimed at informing participants about the climate crisis from a scientific perspective (45%); second, it identified research that promoted mitigation practices (32.5%), either building on the scientific knowledge provided or independently; and finally, it emphasized interventions encouraging adaptation practices (100%), thereby fostering a resilient mindset. As illustrated in figure 4, the majority of studies showed cross-domain approaches. Regarding the occupation of the participants in each sample and its connection to the domains addressed, the results consistently converge towards adaptation.

Figure 4. Number of articles by domain represented.

Download figure:

Standard image High-resolution image

For instance, interventions targeting K-12 students primarily focused on adaptation practices, while knowledge and mitigation have 62.5% and 50% respectively. Among tertiary students, there was too a greater emphasis on interventions related to adaptation to the new climate context, although theoretical climate science education also maintained a significant presence (50%), while mitigation still emerged as the least prominent aspect within these interventions (35.7%). Experiences designed for academic professionals once again demonstrate a predominance of adaptation-focused content and climate science education (66.7%), with mitigation practices being the least represented (33.3%). Finally, interventions targeting the general population, or those that did not specify the participants’ occupations, reported the following results: Climate Science (35.7%), Mitigation (21.4%) and Adaptation (100%).

The predominance of adaptation was to be expected given the focus of this systematic literature review. In terms of the interventions’ spatial distribution, human settlements (cities and towns) accounted for the highest number of cases, reflecting the research community’s focus on fostering climate resilience in coastal areas at the local level. Table 3 provides a more detailed analysis, including interventions that adopted mixed spatial approaches.

Table 3. Spatial scope.

Spatial scope	Climate science	Mitigation	Adaptation	Total
Countries and regions	2	2	6	10
Farms and fish farms	0	0	1	1
Global	7	1	3	11
Households or individual actions	0	0	2	2
Human settlements (cities, towns)	8	7	21	36
Other professional environments	1	0	0	1
Water environments (coasts, rivers, lakes)	3	2	9	14
Total	21	12	42	75

3.3.3. Game topics

For the coding of topics, we based our classification on Fernández Galeote et al (2021), who used a set of terms related to climate change, including specific concepts associated with climate change adaptation. These included both meteorological phenomena that can provoke flooding and events directly linked to global warming, which ultimately result in geographical transformations caused by the loss of coastal land. Among the 40 papers analyzed, 90.47% proposed adaptive measures to address flooding. Floods were also the most numerous topics in terms of scientific information provided (33.33%). Studies addressing economic production and consumption practices aimed at preventing coastal climate phenomena accounted for the same proportion. The results are further detailed in table 4.

Table 4. Climate science, mitigation, and adaptation topics by number of research outputs.

Topic	Climate science	Mitigation	Adaptation	Total
Droughts	1	0	5	6
Economic practices production/consumption	0	13	0	13
Ecosystem threats	2	0	1	3
Floods	13	0	36	49
Generic awareness or science	11	0	5	16
Heatwaves	1	0	1	2
Heavy precipitation	1	0	3	4
Ocean acidification	1	0	1	2
Pests	3	3	3	9
Policymaking regulation/negotiation can affect the economic side	0	1	0	1
Sea level rise	1	0	5	6
Storms	2	0	2	4
Nature conservation	1	0	1	2
Water quality	3	0	8	11
Weather variability	0	0	1	1
Total	40	17	72	129

3.3.4. Game elements

For the elements that constitute the playable experience, we employed the taxonomy proposed by Fernández Galeote et al (2021), which builds upon the classification by Koivisto and Hamari (2019) to develop a framework aimed at extracting and organizing the relevant resources. This method results in four categories: (1) elements within the game that provide players with a sense of progression or achievement and can also be used to quantify their performance during the experience; (2) elements that foster social interaction among players, whether through teamwork, conflicts of interest, or discussions groups; (3) elements that enhance immersion in the game experience; and (4) materials that reflect the game’s core concepts. These materials can be digital, physical, or human, with additional resources considered to support reinforce the topics addressed in the game. In terms of results, studies like Olivares-Rodriguez et al (2022) adopt a mixed approach by examining the comparative effects of digital and physical materials.

Of the 40 studies analyzed, 97.5% incorporated achievement systems or progression milestones; 52.5% included dynamics that emphasized social interactions; 77.5% relied on immersive elements, reflecting the predominant presence of digital experiences; and 67.5% utilized materials to structure the experience. Table 5 provides a detailed overview of the results, along with the definitions of the elements that constitute each category. The bold terms indicate the categories of game elements along with their total frequency, whereas the regular terms display the subdivisions within each category and their respective individual frequencies.

Table 5. Game elements’ classification and frequency.

Game elements	Frequency
Achievement/progression-oriented	107
Badges, achievements, medals, trophies	3
Challenges, quests, mission, tasks, goals	31
Increasing difficulty	3
Leaderboards	7
Levels (gameplay split into phases, missions…)	12
Levels skills player (improvements of the character’s characteristics)	1
Performance and progress stats and feedback	10
Points, score, experience	21
Quizzes	12
Timer speed	7
Social-oriented	29
Collective voting	3
Competition, possible tension between diverging or conflicting interests	10
Cooperation, teams, collaboration	15
Peer-rating, review work of others	1
Immersion-oriented	40
Avatar, player character, virtual identity	3
Game world with visual representation	19
In-game rewards for performance but not bought, not points or badges	3
Narrative, narration, storytelling, dialogue with fictional characters	5
Role-play beyond just a premise, interaction characterized as a fictional character, especially with other players	10
Representation, resources, materials	62
Connection to IoT devices	7
Debriefing by facilitators	4
Digital cards events and challenges	1
Digital objects as game resources	7
Digital random number generation	1
Facilitators with no debriefing	1
In-game economy (market)	4
Physical cards actions	3
Physical cards as resources	2
Physical dice	1
Physical cards events and challenges	8
Physical objects as game resources	7
Physical playboard	11
Unexpected events with odds unbeknownst to players	5

Regarding table 6, the presence of elements is analyzed based on the game format. Most social games belonged to the analog format, as card and board games inherently require the simultaneous participation of multiple players.

Table 6. Presence of element types by game format.

Format	Achievement	Social	Immersion	Representation, resources, materials	Total
Analog	12	13	6	10	41
Digital	18	0	17	9	44
Hybrid	9	8	8	7	32
Total	39	21	31	26	117

3.4. Engagement results

The third research question examines the outcomes of the interventions. After extracting the research results, we applied the classification system that categorizes climate change engagement into three dimensions: cognitive, affective and behavioral (Lorenzoni et al 2007, Ouariachi et al 2020, Fernández Galeote et al 2021). Additionally, a fourth category was established to capture psychological responses to the gamified experience, specifically focusing on variables that measure participation, motivation, or preference for these systems over others (Koivisto and Hamari 2019). Furthermore, we aimed to describe the research outcomes in terms of engagement levels achieved. These outcomes were classified as positive (successful engagement development), mixed (engagement has not been as expected, contrasting with the initial hypotheses, or there is a mix of positive and negative engagement outcomes); or negative (the indicators show that the intervention has not achieved or even decreased participant engagement.

As illustrated in table 7, most outputs focus on examining forms of cognitive engagement, followed by experiential and sensorial engagement related to the game experience. In most cases related to knowledge of climate concerns, the emphasis was placed on adaptation to rising sea levels or weather-related catastrophes resulting in flooding. Consequently, cognitive engagement often led participants to consider preparedness measures for emergencies or urban planning strategies to address potential coastal changes. This is evident in the behavioral dimension of engagement, where results reflect decision-making practices with real-world implications or in-game actions demonstrating the assimilation of resilient knowledge. Since the primary focus of this research was on climate knowledge and preparedness strategies, studies aiming to engage participants on an affective level were less prevalent. The few notable exceptions were those that employed a catastrophist approach to raise awareness of the issue (Bathke et al 2019, Fernández Galeote et al 2022, Koroleva and Novak 2020).

Table 7. Number of papers reporting engagement results (including all directions: positive, mixed and negative) by dimension and specific outcome.

Engagement dimensionNumber of papersSpecific outcomeFrequency Cognitive40Climate science knowledge14 Mitigation knowledge11 Adaptation knowledge33

Affective3Individual1 Increase in concern2

Behavioral16In-game dialogue and actions6 Personal mitigation behavior1 Outputs2 Community real-world decision-making8 Personal academic or informational behavior1

Game experience26Preference, ease of use and other benefits10 Enjoyment, fun, motivation16 Issues3 High or intense participation2

As shown in table 8, positive qualitative or descriptive findings, as well as positive statistical results, were the most reported in the systematic review, with no instances of negative outcomes. The absence of negative results in this systematic literature review does not imply that such outcomes have not occurred within this field of study; rather, it suggests that they were not captured during the sample selection process, are not accessible, or have not been published. Studies that reported mixed results were primarily associated with approaches centered on cognitive engagement and the gaming experience. A detailed description of these results is provided in the following sections.

Table 8. Direction of results by engagement dimension.

Engagement dimension	Number of papers	Qualitative or descriptive results	Statistical results	Positive	Mixed	Negative	Positive	Mixed	Non-significant
Cognitive	40	36	4	0	9	4	0
Affective	3	3	0	0	1	0	0
Behavioral	16	15	1	0	6	1	0
Game experience	26	24	2	0	6	1	0

There were no mentions of economic, professional, or academic incentives among the participants in the interventions. Similarly, no research has been identified that reports difficulties in collecting data from participants or in extracting data in an unbiased and rigorous manner.

3.4.1. Study design and data collection techniques

For the classification of methodological approaches, the DESLOCIS method (Gertrudix et al 2021) was applied. This tool enables a comprehensive description of the analyzed units and provides an overarching perspective on the practices employed. 93% of the papers in the sample employed mixed methodological techniques to achieve more precise conclusions. Studies that relied on a single technique utilized questionnaires (Fernández Galeote et al 2023), document analysis (Xu et al 2020), and experiments (Koenigstein et al 2020). Table 9 indicates the number and type of interventions conducted according to the primary collection technique (the predominant data gathering technique) and secondary collection technique (supplementary techniques for triangulation or validation). The most recurrent study design is the experimental approach—particularly experiments focused on subjects. Regarding the definition of ‘experiment’, this research adopts an inclusive interpretation of the term, referring to any intervention involving participants that seeks to obtain empirical results. This study design does not necessarily imply randomized sampling or the implementation of control and experimental group comparisons. As shown in the table, some studies employed methodological combinations for secondary data collection. Research such as Magnuszewski et al ([2018](#erlae15