Analyzing the Implications of Design Choices in Existing Simulation-Games for Critical Infrastructure Resilience

A literature study has identified the major impacts of important design choices in simulation models and simulation-games that model critical infrastructure resilience. The four major groups of design choices discussed in this article are: (1) the chosen learning goal (system understanding or collaboration training), (2) realism and time scale of the scenario, (3) design of player roles and communication rules, (4) number of action alternatives, replay-ability and richness of performance feedback while playing. Researchers and practitioners who build simulation-games for studying critical infrastructure resilience can use the accumulated insights on these four aspects to improve the quality of their game design and the quality of the simulation models the game participants interact with.

[1]  Geertje Bekebrede,et al.  Experiencing Complexity: A gaming approach for understanding infrastructure systems , 2010 .

[2]  Igor S. Mayer,et al.  The Gaming of Policy and the Politics of Gaming: A Review , 2009 .

[3]  Graham M. Turner,et al.  Modelling food system resilience: a scenario-based simulation modelling approach to explore future shocks and adaptations in the Australian food system , 2015, Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences.

[4]  E. Luiijf,et al.  THE STATE AND THE THREAT OF CASCADING FAILURE ACROSS CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURES: THE IMPLICATIONS OF EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE FROM MEDIA INCIDENT REPORTS , 2011 .

[5]  Erich Rome,et al.  The Use of What-If Analysis to Improve the Management of Crisis Situations , 2016 .

[6]  Sherali Zeadally,et al.  Critical infrastructure protection: Requirements and challenges for the 21st century , 2015, Int. J. Crit. Infrastructure Prot..

[7]  J. van Laere,et al.  Coordinating distributed work: Exploring situated coordination with gaming-simulation , 2003 .

[8]  Paul Thomas Grogan,et al.  Interoperable simulation gaming for strategic infrastructure systems design , 2014 .

[9]  Jose Mari Sarriegi,et al.  The Role of Critical Infrastructures' Interdependencies on the Impacts Caused by Natural Disasters , 2013, CRITIS.

[10]  Josune Hernantes,et al.  Critical infrastructure dependencies: A holistic, dynamic and quantitative approach , 2015, Int. J. Crit. Infrastructure Prot..

[11]  Arjen Boin,et al.  Managing Transboundary Crises: Identifying the Building Blocks of an Effective Response System , 2010 .

[12]  Olivier L. de Weck,et al.  Collaborative design in the sustainable infrastructure planning game , 2016, SpringSim.

[13]  Shalini Kurapati,et al.  Improving resilience in intermodal transport operations in seaports: a gaming approach , 2015 .

[14]  Johan Bergström,et al.  On the rationale of resilience in the domain of safety: A literature review , 2015, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[15]  Jonas Lundberg,et al.  Systemic resilience model , 2015, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[16]  Allan McConnell,et al.  Preparing for Critical Infrastructure Breakdowns: The Limits of Crisis Management and the Need for Resilience , 2007 .

[17]  Geertje Bekebrede,et al.  Understanding Complex Systems Through Mental Models and Shared Experiences , 2015 .