Maximising the Impact of Games as Effective Participative Tools: The Rufopoly Resource Kit

Rufopoly是一款参与式学习棋盘游戏，玩家可以通过一个名为RUFshire的虚构的农村城市边缘地带进行一次旅行，回答问题，并就发展挑战和地点创建做出决定；这些答案然后告知每个玩家对RUFshire的愿景。所遇到的问题由掷骰子决定，并基于为RREU项目(2010-2012年)收集的关于管理农村城市边缘环境变化的原始数据。Rufopoly已被广泛用于项目和计划的早期阶段，如开创性的大伯明翰和索利赫尔地方企业伙伴关系空间计划，并已被政府、欧盟项目小组、地方当局、商业、社区团体、大学和学校使用。它让观众接触到与边缘规划和环境问题相关的交付和权衡问题，但关键是没有使用复杂的术语。我们相信，Rufopoly的全部潜力和影响尚未完全实现。这其中有几个原因：1.Rufopoly是在我们的Relu项目接近尾声时开发的，作为Relu在2011年举办的一次会议的计划外成果，该会议的主题是“谁应该管理乡村？”它的成功促使它被列为一项产出。2.没有足够的资金将其成功测试并与政策和实践界结合，以最大限度地发挥其作为学习工具的作用，因为这从来不是该项目的初衷。它目前被认为是一款适合所有棋盘游戏的虚拟场所。需要更多的时间来探索Rufopoly成为利益相关者的通用平台的潜力，这些利益相关者希望开发自己的工具版本以满足自己的需求，并填补参与式工具在改进决策制定方面的有效性方面的广泛公认的空白。这一知识交流项目通过汇集Rufopoly设计者和用户共享的知识和先前的经验来解决这些不足。这为在威尔士、英格兰和苏格兰举行的一系列互动研讨会提供了信息，以确定如何将这种游戏形式改进为更有效和多功能的工具。这将有助于以Rufopoly资源工具包的形式扩大和嵌入对一系列政策和实践合作伙伴的影响。通过与最终用户的协作，我们可以确定如何在不同的用户群体和组织中重新配置Rufopoly，以与他们的议程和需求保持一致。该项目分为四个阶段：WP1：回顾和吸取以往Rufopoly的经验教训。这涉及(1)对实际结果和以往比赛的发现进行评估，并对结果进行分析。(2)推动者和核心参与者对Rufopoly优势和劣势的批判性评估。我们将主要借鉴我们在英国的经验，但也能够从内布拉斯加州(2013年11月)和瑞典(2014年)对Rufopoly的国际改编中获得见解。WP2：与不同的政策和实践受众举办一系列互动研讨会。这些讲习班将在英格兰、苏格兰和威尔士举行，由研究小组成员和其他参与者参加。这些研讨会的目的是(1)分享WP1的成果；(2)评估如何重新配置该工具，以解决参与者面临的原则需求和挑战；以及(3)优先考虑Rufopoly资源包的可行方案。WP3：使用WP1和WP2的结果，我们将(在我们的团队中)设计和试验Rufopoly‘Mk2’资源包和相关材料/指导。WP4：在现场直播的全球研讨会活动中发布Rufopoly资源工具包和指南。这将揭示由团队共同设计的基本资源工具包，并使资源工具包的测试者能够分享他们的经验，最大限度地实现知识交流及其潜在应用的范围。

Rufopoly is a participatory learning board game enabling players to undertake a journey through a fictitious rural urban fringe called RUFshire, answering questions and making decisions on development challenges and place-making; those answers then inform each player's vision for RUFshire. The encountered questions are determined by the roll of a die and based on primary data collected for a Relu project (2010-2012) about Managing Environmental Change at the Rural Urban Fringe. Rufopoly has been used extensively in early stages of projects and plans such as the pioneering Greater Birmingham and Solihull Local Enterprise Partnership spatial plan and has been used by government, EU project groups, local authorities, business, community groups, universities and schools. It has exposed audiences to issues associated with the delivery and trade-offs associated with planning and environmental issues at the fringe but crucially without the use of complex jargon.We believe that the full potential and impact of Rufopoly has yet to be fully realised. There are several reasons for this: 1. Rufopoly was developed towards the end of our Relu project as an unplanned output for a conference run by Relu in 2011 on 'Who Should run the Countryside?'. Its success prompted its inclusion as an output. 2. There were insufficient funds for it to be successfully tested and integrated with policy and practice communities to maximise its utility as a learning tool as this was never the original intention of the project.3. It is currently presented as a one size fits all board game of a hypothetical place. More time is needed to explore the potential of Rufopoly to become a generic platform for stakeholders wishing to develop their own versions of the tool to meet their own needs and to fill a widely recognised gap in the effectiveness of participatory tools for improved decsion making. This knowledge exchange project addresses these deficiencies by drawing together the shared knowledge and previous experiences of designers and users of Rufopoly. This informs a series of interactive workshops in Wales, England and Scotland to identify how this kind of game-format can be enhanced into a more effective and multifunctional tool. This will help extend and embed the impact for a range of policy and practice partners in the form of a Rufopoly Resource Kit. By working collaboratively with end users we can identify how Rufopoly can be reconfigured across different user groups and organisations in tune with their agendas and needs. There are four stages to this project: WP1: Review and learn lessons from previous Rufopoly experiences. This involves (1) an assessment of the actual results and findings from past games that were written up and the results analysed. (2) critical assessments of the strengths and weaknesses of Rufopoly from facilitators and core participants. We will draw priamirly from our UK experiences but are also able to secure insights from the international adaptations of Rufopoly from Nebraska (November 2013) and Sweden (2014). WP2: Conduct a series of interactive workshops with different policy and practice audiences. These workshops will be held in England, Scotland and Wales using members of the research team and other participants. The purpose of these workshops is to (1) share results of WP1; (2) assess how the tool could be reconfigured to address the principla needs and challenges facing participants; and (3) prioritise feasible options for a Rufopoly Resource Kit.WP3: Using WP1 and WP2 outcomes, we will design and trial (across our team) the Rufopoly 'Mk2' resource kit and associated materials/guidance. WP4: Launch the Rufopoly Resource Kit and guidance in a live streamed global workshop event. This would; reveal the basic resource kit as co-designed by the team and enable testers of the resource kit to share their experiences maximising knowledge exchange and its range of potential applications.