Next Article in Journal
Research on the Impact of Event Sustainability on Brand Equity in Event Activities: A Case Study of Hainan Expo
Next Article in Special Issue
Impact of Video Games, Gamification, and Game-Based Learning on Sustainability Education in Higher Education
Previous Article in Journal
Analysis of Factors Influencing the Severity of Vehicle-to-Vehicle Accidents Considering the Built Environment: An Interpretable Machine Learning Model
Previous Article in Special Issue
Development of a Comprehensive Process for Introducing Game-Based Learning in Higher Education for Lecturers
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Promoting the Sustainability of Artisanal Fishing through Environmental Education with Game-Based Learning

by
Antonio Torralba-Burrial
1,2,* and
Eduardo Dopico
1
1
Department of Education Sciences, University of Oviedo, 33003 Oviedo, Spain
2
Institute of Natural Resources and Territorial Planning (Indurot), University of Oviedo, 33600 Mieres, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2023, 15(17), 12905; https://doi.org/10.3390/su151712905
Submission received: 30 May 2023 / Revised: 21 August 2023 / Accepted: 24 August 2023 / Published: 25 August 2023

Abstract

:
Oceans provide a wide range of ecosystem services, including food and cultural ecosystem services derived from fisheries. The sustainability of fisheries is addressed by United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 14 on ocean conservation, and education strategies should include ways to achieve it. In this paper, we describe a game-based learning environmental education experience for the promotion of artisanal fishing developed in northwest Spain, in which more than a thousand primary education students (aged 6–12) participated. Following a qualitative methodology, we analyze our own generated games, their formative assessment, and the results of their implementation in schools and informal education events. Moreover, we compare the educational games generated with other game-based learning experiences on ocean literacy and the sustainability of fisheries. These educational experiences provide play-based learning opportunities in which students show great motivation and increase their knowledge about marine biodiversity, the socio-environmental effects of fisheries, and ocean conservation. Some differences were identifiable in the choice and design of the games, including their type and duration, the dimensions of sustainability analyzed, the specific learning objectives sought, the historical and cultural references used, cooperative peer learning, and the generation of shared knowledge. In this experience, the inclusion of education for responsible consumption (SDG 12) within the sustainability of fisheries represents a remarkable innovation, empowering students in their role as fish consumers.

1. Introduction

Oceans provide a wide range of ecosystem services such as provisioning (food, water, energy), regulating (climate regulation), supporting (nutrient cycling, habitat provision, soil formation), and cultural services (recreational, cultural identity, spiritual values) [1,2,3,4]. Although the use of these ecosystem services has increased enormously since the 1950s (since the Great Acceleration [5,6,7]), fishing has remained too far from a state of sustainability [8,9,10]. Different types of fishing have different environmental impacts [11,12,13], with small-scale fisheries (artisanal fisheries) and their sustainability representing a new emerging issue in global ocean governance [14]. In fact, Goal 14 of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals emphasizes the need to conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas, and marine resources for sustainable development, something that has always been a priority for artisanal fisheries. Nevertheless, it is necessary to note that the inadequate management of small-scale fisheries may also cause unsustainability [12,15]. Therefore, it is necessary to guide the management of fisheries towards sustainable development [16,17].
In this framework, ocean literacy, i.e., the public understanding of the mutual relationship between us and the ocean and the importance of sustainable ocean use [18,19], can contribute to improving the conservation of the sea. This type of literacy must provide knowledge related to environmental and ecosocial issues such as the pollution of the seas and the loss of biodiversity, the depletion of natural resources, and the derived socioeconomic consequences [19,20,21,22,23,24]. Formal education, which is carried out in educational centers, plays a key role in the ocean literacy process and in the urgent transition towards sustainability [25,26,27]. In these teaching–learning contexts, didactic materials and resources have been designed to increase ocean literacy based on ecosocial educational programs and approaches [21,26,28,29,30,31].
Among these methodologies, game-based learning has become an interesting didactic tool to promote science learning in recent years [32,33,34]. Educational games have defined rules for play. They pose a challenge for students. Structured in a flexible way, they allow feedback on the actions of the student/player, giving the opportunity to move forward or backward when their actions are correct or not (for example, in their answers to the questions asked). Although educational games are not intended to be won but to promote learning, they offer a result (establishing who wins the game or when the game is won). The goal is always to create a playful educational environment where students enjoy the experience while learning [35,36,37]. Game-based learning implies the (re)design of learning activities based on educational science and discipline-specific issues, using learning games that have applications both within the educational framework and beyond it [37]. The use of analogic games and digital simulations has increased the motivation and interest of students in learning about environmental issues [34,38,39,40,41]. Different educational experiences have been used with game-based learning on the sustainability of fisheries and ocean literacy [21,42]. It is common for these educational practices to be based on knowledge of marine biodiversity and environmental problems [19,29] or to introduce role play to analyse the perspective of those interested in the preservation of the oceans: fishermen, marketers, environmental managers, etc. [31,43,44,45,46].
Here, we show an educational game-based learning intervention from a different perspective: education for responsible consumption, considering both ocean literacy and the ecosocial promotion of sustainable artisanal fishing versus other types of fisheries. The intended purpose is to describe the games designed and to show how these games have been used to help primary school students think about the sustainability of fisheries, as well as to discuss their differences from other game-based learning experiences about fisheries.
The research questions that this work addresses are (1) What is the knowledge of primary school students about the marine natural resources fished/collected in their region? (2) What is the knowledge of primary school students about the sustainability of fisheries in their region? and (3) Can game-based learning facilitate the creation of shared knowledge about fisheries and marine natural resources among primary school students?

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Context: Small-Scale Fisheries in the North of Spain

In the north of Spain, four autonomous communities are bordered by the Atlantic Ocean along the Bay of Biscay (the Basque Country, Cantabria, Asturias, and Galicia). Artisanal fishing constitutes a factor of cultural and traditional identity and a source of employment and income for these coastal communities [47]. In Asturias, 250 boats, grouped into 18 fishermen’s associations, are housed in 19 base ports, which also have fish markets to auction off the catches. Most of the vessels are 12 m long (75–80% of the fleet) and are employed in coastal fishing for fish and shellfish (mostly mollusks and crustaceans) [48]. Inshore fishing takes place approximately 46 nautical miles from the coast (85.19 km), operating on 226 fishing grounds that occupy 984,938 hectares of water mass [49]. Our fishing fleet practices artisanal fishing using 13 minor fishing gears (some nets, hooks, traps, and others) [48].
Some interesting ecosocial characteristics that Asturian artisanal fishing shares with other artisanal fisheries are its high level of environmental sustainability, its decent hiring and remuneration conditions for fishermen, its adaptive flexibility in target gear and species, its specialization in products of high perceived value, and its positive social impact on coastal communities [47,50]. Therefore, the Asturian artisanal fisheries practice a type of fishing that fits within the framework of the three pillars of sustainability in fishing: economic, social, and environmental sustainability [3,16,17,51]. In this sense, Asturian artisanal fisheries have seen their sustainability practices recognized with a type of label or ecolabel on their catches. Since 2015, the fish (fish and shellfish) caught by the artisanal inshore fleet and marketed at first sale in the fish markets has borne the local label Pescado de Rula con Artes Sanos (market fish caught with healthy fishing gear, pun in Spanish between healthy gears—Artes Sanos—and artisans—Artesanos). The fishery of local octopus has been certified since 2016 with the global MSC (Marine Stewardship Council) ecolabel.
Fish ecolabels can be a system to promote the transition towards sustainable fishing. They act as a link between sustainability-led actions in the catching of the fish and the consumers, who can choose to buy a certified product. For this to happen, fish consumers need to value ecolabels positively so that they are willing to pay a little more for the product of sustainable fishing, as well as opt to buy local fish [52,53]. Training responsible citizens to be aware of environmental problems so that they address their consumption options towards the solution of these problems and not towards their aggravation is part of Education for Sustainable Consumption [54,55,56] and Goal 12 of the Sustainable Development Goals established by the United Nations in 2015. The Ecos(i)Food project (https://ecosifood.com) is framed in this context, and it aims to apply scientific, educational, and management tools to the sustainability of traditional fisheries in Asturias.

2.2. Design of Educational Resources Based on Games on Sustainable Fishing

The educational strategy developed to promote education for responsible consumption and to support sustainable artisanal fisheries versus unsustainable fisheries followed an approach based on the gamification of educational content/knowledge [36,37,57,58]. Thus, three specific games (face-to-face and online board games) were designed as versatile teaching resources so that teachers in the basic education stages could apply them both inside and outside educational centers. Based on cooperative learning, these games propose a reflection on the environmental and social impacts produced by the different types of fishing, while students acquire knowledge about natural marine resources.
The online interactive cooperative game Sustainable Fish Consumption (Consumo Pescado Sostenible) was designed with the Genially application, following the style of an interactive virtual escape room [59,60]. A description of this game, and its pilot test, can be found in Torralba-Burrial and Dopico [61]. This game shows the sustainable use of marine resources through artisanal fishing, providing students the necessary training so that they have the possibility of choosing to consume sustainable fish. The learning situations are divided into three learning missions/challenges. This allows teachers to present the teaching content by tracing a narrative sequence linked to the sustainability of the ocean, seas, and marine resources. The game offers an empathic ecosocial perspective, with references to the repercussions for local fishermen facing fishing in distant seas and what this represents for the balance between their professional and personal lives. The implementation of the game in the classroom facilitates shared thinking among students, guided in the missions/challenges through the feedback provided by Octopus, the logo of the Ecos(i)Food project, who acts as a virtual hidden teacher. All students can win the game by working more effectively in a cooperative environment. This game provides an ethical context from which students can see represented the consequences of consumer choices in preserving marine biodiversity.
In another didactic proposal of game-based learning, the Fishing Alphabet virtual game (Rosco Pesquero), students had to choose the correct word related to fishing and responsible consumption to advance through each letter of the alphabet [62]. The game’s word options were selected according to the curricular contents of the natural sciences in these educational stages. In this way, they were related to the gears and types of artisanal fishing, the marine species of importance in regional fishing, the fish markets, the environmental impacts, and the basic elements that an ecolabel should contain.
The third game, unlike the previous ones, has not yet been described. Entitled Juego de Memoria Recursos Pesqueros de Asturias (Fishing Resources of Asturias Memory Game), it was based on traditional card-pairing games (downloadable in the Supplementary Materials). For its educational design, the species were selected based on socioeconomic and cultural importance (1); economic importance (2); the natural history narrative (3); threatened species of economic and cultural importance (4); and octopus fisheries with the MSC ecolabel (5). They had of necessity to be species on which a narrative could be traced about their natural history, their fishing exploitation (allowing us to talk about the differences between artisanal fishing and industrial fishing, the types of gear, and fishing quotas), and the interaction of the species with the students’ own personal experience (Table 1).
Each one of the 36 cards (14.8 × 21 cm) shows a color drawing of the chosen species. The illustrations had to allow a correct identification of the species and be in the public domain. Therefore, they were selected from zoological monographs published at the end of the 19th or beginning of the 20th century by the Biodiversity Heritage Library, showing the reference on the card. The cards were titled with the scientific names of each species and their names in Spanish, Asturian, and English, considering the diversity of languages in the region. The back of the cards showed the logo of the Ecos(i)Food project.
The game flowchart is depicted in Figure 1. The game helps students to share their experiences with these fish and shellfish. They say if they know them, if they have consumed any of these species, and what they know about the situation of the fish or their life cycles. In those moments, students learn from their own peers, generating shared knowledge from their own experiences. The teacher has a role in the game, guiding learning (although not the development of the game) and building the narrative that she/he wants to transmit. Her/his comments revolve around the natural history of fish; the characteristics that identify them; the sustainability of fishing gear; and the socioeconomic, environmental, and cultural importance of marine species. This didactic communication is provided according to the age and knowledge of the students who are playing. The previous selection of the species present in the cards allows the students to address their learning towards fishing sustainability.

2.3. Implementation of Game-Based Learning in Educational Centers

The game-based learning experience was designed using the learning games specifically designed for the project described in Section 2.2, and therefore it includes the previously described criteria for pedagogy and the sustainability of fisheries. The learning instructional design of the implementation in the educational centers includes as keystones formative assessment, collaborative learning by the students during play, and the generation of shared knowledge among students within a playful environment and addressed by educators associated with the project (not by their regular teachers).
Due to the pandemic caused by COVID-19 from March 2020 to September 2021, face-to-face activities in schools were not possible for people outside the teaching teams of each educational center. In this context, the students could participate in the games designed through a synchronous online connection with us. Thus, the interactive escape room on Sustainable Fish Consumption was put into practice in five primary schools (with students from 6 to 12 years old) during the 2020/2021 academic year [61].
In the 2022/2023 academic year, once the restrictions and protection measures were lifted, it was possible to access the educational centers with the game-based learning proposals. The gamified educational activities [63] contained in the games Sustainable Fish Consumption, Fishing Alphabet virtual game and Fishing Resources of Asturias Memory Game could be carried out in face-to-face sessions in 20 primary education centers, with the participation of nearly 1200 students. In collaboration with the teachers of each center, mainly from coastal towns with fishing ports (Figure 2), learning situations related to Sustainable Development Goal 14 were programmed. Following the idea of “conserving and sustainably using the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development” (ODS 14), the learning games designed took on meaning and helped stimulate practical learning about fishing and fishery products and their sustainability. In addition, non-formal education activities were also carried out with primary school students during a summer festival in the coastal town of Salinas (near Avilés on the map), using the online escape room and the memory game about fishing resources.
At the outset, a pretest instrument was devised to standardize the assessment of primary students’ perceptions towards fish labels when they go to buy fish with their families. However, owing to the limited number of primary school students who accompanied their families to purchase fish, the use of this instrument was discarded in the first sessions. Consequently, it was determined that anonymous and non-traceable qualitative data would be collected in the implemented sessions. The answers of the students during the games and the comments they made about the fisheries and their sustainability, in a non-standardized way, are used in this study. This is a similar approach to that followed in the prior literature presenting environmental games and game-based environmental learning experiences on fisheries, where short-term experiences without quantitative data are described, focusing on a comprehensive portrayal of the pedagogical design underlying the game, including the processes and knowledge that are mobilized during its educational implementation [44,46].
Moreover, the game-based learning sessions included a formative assessment, understood as direct feedback on the information obtained through the dialogue with, and the observation of, the students and their comments in the game, which determined how part of the educational experience developed (i.e., an assessment for learning according to the recent review by Schildkamp et al. [64]). This type of formative assessment allows (1) a less structured and more informal manner of collecting data (observation, dialogues) and (2) a quick form of continual feedback to steer learning [64]. Both characteristics are especially useful in the case of educational experiences in a short time frame with groups in which the interventions are not repeated, and thus it was determined that this assessment for learning should be chosen for these activities. In this study, observation of the students’ comments while playing the games and the continual dialogues with the educator were used to provide immediate feedback, in accordance with the assessment for learning methodology [64]. This approach is consistent with the data provided in other articles presenting environmental games and game-based environmental learning experiences on fisheries [44,46].

3. Results

3.1. Knowledge of Primary Students on Marine Natural Resources Collected in Their Region

The formative assessment [64] on ocean literacy and fishery sustainability was carried out throughout the learning situation that each game fostered (Figure 3). During each activity, the students’ answers and doubts about fish consumption, the sustainability of fishing resources, and knowledge of ocean diversity were collected. In this way, it was possible to assess what prior knowledge the students had, and how they were learning the basic knowledge contained in the gamified activities. In this continuous monitoring process, it was found that the students were used to consuming a relatively small number of fish species, which were basically the most consumed species in the region: salmon, hake, gilthead bream, and albacore. Regarding shellfish, their responses included crustaceans such as shrimp, crabs, spider crabs, and barnacles. Among the mollusks, they said they knew clams, mussels, and squid. In some of the schools, students had the expected taxonomic difficulty classifying barnacles (crustaceans) and sea urchins (echinoderms), listing both as mollusks. When they were told that this last animal was also edible, most of the students said that they would not like to eat the sea urchin (oricio, in the Asturian vernacular) because of its appearance (without having eaten it). In this sense, it is important to consider that sea urchins not only play a critical role in marine ecosystems but are also part of the Asturian food culture. In fact, the ones consumed are imported from nearby regions. In Asturias, the fishing of sea urchins has been prohibited since 2016 due to the decline in their populations owing to overexploitation and the changing environment [65]. As expected, the students indicated that they were unaware of this situation.
The students knew the fish consumed came from the local fishing activity, from other fisheries, and from aquaculture. But they were not clear which species came from each activity. The students had difficulties establishing the relationship between industrial fishing and some of the fish available, or identifying species caught in distant seas that were transported thousands of kilometers to reach the supermarket. In the first years of primary education, confusion was also detected in students’ differentiation between sea fish and freshwater fish. This common learning error was also detected in the escape room game on Sustainable Fish Consumption, when students were asked about the origin of rainbow trout.
Regarding the fishing gear, there were comments during the games about nets, angling, hooks, and traps, and the students learned to distinguish one item of fishing gear from another. The issue of fish farms also arose, and they pointed out that they knew that fish or shellfish are raised there. In some cases, they knew local fishermen, or even had them in their close family.
Of the three games used, the memory game (Fishing Resources of Asturias Memory Game) showed more ability to activate students’ prior knowledge. In this context, it is considered that this activation was greater as there were more abundant interactions during the application of the game that were observable without recording. Perhaps the very dynamic of the game, where the students had to stand around the table holding the cards, facilitated the interaction between them more effectively. Although they gave more species of fish as known when viewing the cards, this had to do with reading the name of the fish rather than visual identification of the fish pictures. This allowed those students who did not recognize the fish to associate the names of the fish with their appearance and made it easier to reinforce that learning for those who did recognize some of them.

3.2. Knowledge of Primary Students on Sustainability of Fisheries

The subject of fishing sustainability was known in a rather superficial way by primary school students at the beginning of the sessions. In the curriculum for this stage, fishing appears among the primary economic activities and sustainability among the ecological objectives. Basic knowledge such as the awareness that fishing more than the sea produces is not possible, that there are fishing activities that are more harmful than others for the environment, or that the exploitation of natural resources has limits was part of their action competencies [66]. However, the students could not discuss the specific situation of any species of fish or the different environmental impacts of artisanal or industrial fishing gear. Therefore, the ecosocial education approach [67] was presented to the students before playing each game. This educational model explores the interdependence between personal actions and decisions and the ecological environment, targeting an objective on which educational games revolve, especially the one entitled Sustainable Fish Consumption, where missions/challenges assign students/players the role that we as citizens can adopt to promote the sustainability of fisheries and the conservation of the marine environment.
As the students developed the game activities, the interaction between them to solve the challenges brought them into contact with questions about the sustainability of fisheries and the contamination of our seas and oceans by plastics and microplastics [68]. Regarding the sustainability of fishing, they assumed the role of responsible consumers who would not consume problematized species. They recognized themselves as people with the capacity to influence the sustainability of fishing through responsible consumption, stating their intention to read fish labels carefully [69] when they accompanied their families to the fishmonger’s or to the supermarket. As far as marine pollution is concerned, their comments were mainly directed at not consuming products with plastics and, of course, at raising the awareness of their relatives about the importance of not throwing plastics into the oceans or the environment in general.

3.3. Generation of Shared Knowledge through Game-Based Learning

In the learning situations proposed with these game-based learning tools, students were able to build a shared knowledge [70] about the biodiversity of marine resources and the sustainability of fisheries (see Section 3.1 and Section 3.2). Although it features in the curricular content of the basic education stage, this learning process was different in each educational situation. Previous experiences and knowledge already acquired by students were different. The learning response changed between the students in the first cycle of primary education (students from 6 to 9 years old) compared to the students in the most advanced courses (students from 10 to 12 years old). The teaching methodologies to which both were accustomed also collided with the one proposed by the gamified activities. Despite this, it is necessary to highlight the educational advantages of combining these games in the classroom:
  • The Sustainable Fish Consumption game shows the sustainable use of marine resources through artisanal fishing. In a cooperative learning environment [71], the order of student interactions is regulated so that everyone can face the challenges to be answered within each mission;
  • The Fishing Alphabet virtual game stimulates linguistic competence [72] by proposing that students choose the correct word related to fishing and responsible consumption derived from their previous learning experiences;
  • The Fishing Resources Memory game encourages building a narrative about the natural history of fish and fishing exploitation by mixing anecdotes about the species known and/or consumed by students. Memory as a learning resource [73], although it induces short-term knowledge, should not be underestimated. Combined with the meaningful learning [74] that the other two games induce, it can contribute to strengthening knowledge about biodiversity and the sustainability of fisheries.
In all cases, the formative assessments followed during the application of the didactic games made it possible to collect evidence on the quality and characteristics of the learning that the students were acquiring. These items of evidence were key guidelines for adapting future teaching–learning processes [75].

4. Discussion

The presented game-based learning tools make it possible to understand (or reflect on) environmental and social issues related to biodiversity and the sustainability of fisheries. Similar proposals have already been addressed in different ways and by different authors (Table 2) through the design of didactic games (serious games) that seek to highlight specific aspects of the sustainability of fisheries.
The serious games described in Table 2, analogic (board games) or digital (synchronous or asynchronous online), have been designed to promote learning about fishing sustainability. Their objectives are to increase knowledge about the ocean and marine natural resources, the differences between industrial and artisanal fishing, and the dangers of overfishing, and to raise awareness of serious socio-environmental issues such as climate change and pollution by plastics and microplastics. Naturally, the design or choice of the didactic game should be made considering the desired learning objectives and the characteristics of the proposed educational action. The quality of the learning experience achieved will depend on the methodological approach that the game takes.
Much of the game-based learning design adopts a role-play procedure [78]. These games, which ask students to play a specific role, try to develop deeper thinking or more empathic processes than other types of games [79]. But the different prior knowledge and skills they possess can alter the development of approaches and actions when they must assume roles that are distant from their lived experience [46].
Sharing the same aims, the three games presented (Sustainable Fish Consumption, Fishing Alphabet, and Fishing Resources Memory) provide a new feature in the inclusion of the role of consumers, incorporating education for responsible consumption [55,80]. That is, they expand the framework of SDG 14 and include Sustainable Development Goal 12 (ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns). When used in the classroom or in online practice, they present motivating strategies that seek effective learning through shared knowledge, cooperative reasoning, and ecosocial empathy. Therefore, they propose basic knowledge about biodiversity, sustainable artisanal fishing, and responsible consumption that transcends the educational environment, transferring the learning [81] they contribute to the daily life of students and their relatives. The measure of the achievement of this horizontal learning will indicate the pedagogical value of these educational games.

5. Conclusions

Game-based learning has emerged as a promising methodology to engage primary and secondary school students in thinking about the sustainability of fisheries. It has been successfully implemented by several authors in different countries, demonstrating its effectiveness.
Game design plays a crucial role in determining which aspects of the sustainability of fisheries are addressed, the level of critical thinking required (related to the educational stage in which the activity is implemented), and the expected learning outcomes. Role-playing games, where students assume the roles of stakeholders connected to oceans, fisheries, or coastal communities, are among the most frequently chosen games for environmental education related to fisheries. Additionally, memory games, board games, alphabet games, and escape rooms have also proven to be successful educational activities.
In the described educational experience, three games were utilized: Sustainable Fish Consumption, Fishing Alphabet, and Fishing Resources Memory. These games introduce the role of consumers to primary school students, incorporating education for responsible consumption and aligning with Sustainable Development Goals 12 and 14.
The potential of these games to assess students’ knowledge of ocean literacy and the sustainability of fisheries was found to be very high. They facilitated non-intrusive participation from the students, which is particularly noteworthy as the educational experience was conducted by individuals other than their regular teachers.
One of the key advantages of game-based learning observed in this educational experience is the high level of student motivation it engenders. Whether employed in formal or informal educational settings, games attract students to learn about ecosocial issues, foster shared learning experiences, and promote collaborative reflection.
Reviews of game-based learning in educational experiences with digital games show that there are not always positive or neutral effects from its use and that some negative effects can sometimes occur [33,34,35]. In that circumstance, a true relationship between game and learning objectives, and the combination of the game with other learning resources/activities, can solve some of those problems [35]. In the game-based learning experiences in fisheries included in Table 2, those negative effects are not commented on. Although some problems in its implementation are commented on due to the (scarce) time that could be dedicated to the game-based learning experience, or because of issues with the technology used [61,77], no learning problems were reported. Perhaps the explanation for this is related to the experiences being short-term ones, in which capturing the interest of the students to participate in the training action is essential, without having to maintain that attention on the game in the long term.
In particular, regarding the limitations of this educational experience, its brief application time in the classroom should be noted. Also, the low participation of primary school students in their families’ fish-purchasing decisions is significant. Assessing these aspects requires a qualitative evaluation rather than a quantitative one. To deal with these limitations, it seems advisable to facilitate access to these resources for teachers and integrate the proposed games into long-term educational programs. Obviously, we also suggest training future teachers in their use and implementing gamified activities in the different educational stages (primary, secondary, and higher education).
Overall, game-based learning proves to be an effective approach for fostering engagement, motivation, and learning in students when they explore the sustainability of fisheries. We should address the identified limitations and take strategic actions for future implementation, since this methodology holds great potential for advancing education on critical ecosocial issues such as the sustainability of fisheries and responsible consumption.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: http://hdl.handle.net/10651/64230 (accessed on 29 May 2023). The game is Fishing Resources of Asturias Memory Game.

Author Contributions

All authors have contributed equally to all phases of this article. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Agencia Estatal de Investigación, Spain, though Spanish State Program of R+D+i oriented to the Challenges of Society: Ecos(i)food project code MCI-20-PID2019-108481RB-I00/AEI/10.13039/501100011033.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The competent Committee of Research Ethics of Asturias Principality reviewed the Ecos(i)food project and approved with reference 166/19 on 16 December 2019.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable, no personal data was collected.

Data Availability Statement

Data sharing not applicable, no new dataset was created.

Acknowledgments

We express our gratitude to the teachers and students of primary education for providing the facilities to carry out the educational experience.

Conflicts of Interest

There are no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Böhnke-Henrichs, A.; Baulcomb, C.; Koss, R.; Hussain, S.S.; de Groot, R.S. Typology and indicators of ecosystem services for marine spatial planning and management. J. Environ. Manag. 2013, 130, 135–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Galparsoro, I.; Borja, A.; Uyarra, M.C. Mapping ecosystem services provided by benthic habitats in the European North Atlantic Ocean. Front. Mar. Sci. 2014, 1, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Mulazzani, L.; Malorgio, G. Blue growth and ecosystem services. Mar. Policy 2017, 85, 17–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Townsend, M.; Davies, K.; Hanley, N.; Hewitt, J.E.; Lundquist, C.J.; Lohrer, A.M. The challenge of implementing the marine ecosystem service concept. Front. Mar. Sci. 2018, 5, 359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Steffen, W.; Broadgate, W.; Deutsch, L.; Gaffney, O.; Ludwig, C. The trajectory of the Anthropocene: The great acceleration. Anthr. Rev. 2015, 2, 81–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Halpern, B.S.; Frazier, M.; Potapenko, J.; Casey, K.S.; Koenig, K.; Longo, C.; Lowndes, J.S.; Rockwood, R.C.; Selig, E.R.; Selkoe, K.A.; et al. Spatial and temporal changes in cumulative human impacts on the world’s ocean. Nat. Commun. 2015, 6, 7615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Ripple, W.J.; Wolf, C.; Newsome, T.M.; Galetti, M.; Alamgir, M.; Crist, E.; Mahmoud, M.I.; Laurnce, W.F. 15,364 Scientist Signatories from 184 Countries. World scientists’ warning to humanity: A second notice. BioScience 2017, 67, 1026–1028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Jackson, J.B.; Kirby, M.X.; Berger, W.H.; Bjorndal, K.A.; Botsford, L.W.; Bourque, B.J.; Bradury, R.H.; Cooke, R.; Erlandson, J.; Estes, J.A.; et al. Historical overfishing and the recent collapse of coastal ecosystems. Science 2001, 293, 629–637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Pauly, D.; Christensen, V.; Guénette, S.; Pitcher, T.J.; Sumaila, U.R.; Walters, C.J.; Watson, R.; Zeller, D. Towards sustainability in world fisheries. Nature 2002, 418, 689–695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Pauly, D.; Watson, R.; Alder, J. Global trends in world fisheries: Impacts on marine ecosystems and food security. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 2005, 360, 5–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Zeller, D.; Cashion, T.; Palomares, M.; Pauly, D. Global marine fisheries discards: A synthesis of reconstructed data. Fish Fish. 2018, 19, 30–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Cánovas-Molina, A.; García-Charton, J.A.; García-Frapolli, E. Assessing the contribution to overfishing of small-and large-scale fisheries in two marine regions as determined by the weight of evidence approach. Ocean. Coast. Manag. 2021, 213, 105911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Temple, A.J.; Skerritt, D.J.; Howarth, P.E.; Pearce, J.; Mangi, S.C. Illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing impacts: A systematic review of evidence and proposed future agenda. Mar. Policy 2022, 139, 105033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Campbell, L.M.; Gray, N.J.; Fairbanks, L.; Silver, J.J.; Gruby, R.L.; Dubik, B.A.; Basurto, X. Global oceans governance: New and emerging issues. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2016, 41, 517–543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Bender, M.G.; Machado, G.R.; Silva, P.J.d.A.; Floeter, S.R.; Monteiro-Netto, C.; Luiz, O.J.; Ferreira, C.E.L. Local Ecological Knowledge and Scientific Data Reveal Overexploitation by Multigear Artisanal Fisheries in the Southwestern Atlantic. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e110332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Asche, F.; Garlock, T.M.; Anderson, J.L.; Bush, S.R.; Smith, M.D.; Anderson, C.M.; Bush, S.R.; Smith, M.D.; Anderson, C.M.; Bush, S.R.; et al. Three pillars of sustainability in fisheries. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2018, 115, 11221–11225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Said, A.; Chuenpagdee, R. Aligning the sustainable development goals to the small-scale fisheries guidelines: A case for EU fisheries governance. Mar. Policy 2019, 107, 103599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Fauville, G.; Strang, C.; Cannady, M.A.; Chen, Y.-F. Development of the international ocean literacy survey: Measuring knowledge across the world. Environ. Educ. Res. 2019, 25, 238–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Kelly, R.; Evans, K.; Alexander, K.; Bettiol, S.; Corney, S.; Cullen-Knox, C.; Cvitanovic, C.; de Salas, K.; Emad, G.R.; Fullbrook, L.; et al. Connecting to the oceans: Supporting ocean literacy and public engagement. Rev. Fish Biol. Fisheries 2022, 32, 123–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Ghilardi-Lopes, N.P.; Berchez, F.A.S. (Eds.) Coastal and Marine Environmental Education; Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  21. Fauville, G.; Payne, D.L.; Marrero, M.E.; Lantz-Andersson, A.; Crouch, F. (Eds.) Exemplary Practices in Marine Science Education. A Resource for Practitioners and Researchers; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  22. Gkargkavouzi, A.; Paraskevopoulos, S.; Matsiori, S. Public perceptions of the marine environment and behavioral intentions to preserve it: The case of three coastal cities in Greece. Mar. Policy 2020, 111, 103727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. UNESCO-IOC. Ocean Science for Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Use: How the Ocean Decade Supports the CBD and its Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework; UNESCO: Paris, France, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  24. Ferreira, J.C.; Vasconcelos, L.; Monteiro, R.; Silva, F.Z.; Duarte, C.M.; Ferreira, F. Ocean Literacy to Promote Sustainable Development Goals and Agenda 2030 in Coastal Communities. Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, 62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Vilches, A.; Gil-Pérez, D. La transición a la Sostenibilidad como objetivo urgente para la superación de la crisis sistémica actual. Rev. Eureka Enseñ. Divulg. Cienc. 2016, 13, 395–407. [Google Scholar]
  26. Santoro, F.; Santin, S.; Scowcroft, G.; Fauville, G.; Tuddenham, P. Ocean Literacy for All—A Toolkit; IOC/UNESCO and UNESCO Venice Office (IOC Manuals and Guides): Paris, France, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  27. UNESCO. Education for Sustainable Development Goals: Learning Objectives; United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization: Paris, France, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  28. Barracosa, H.; de los Santos, C.B.; Martins, M.; Freitas, C.; Santos, R. Ocean literacy to mainstream ecosystem services concept in formal and informal education: The example of coastal ecosystems of southern Portugal. Front. Mar. Sci. 2019, 6, 626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Ghilardi-Lopes, N.P.; Pimentel, D.S.; Kremer, L.P.; Almeida, R.; Meireles, C.P. Didactic materials as resources for the promotion of coastal and marine Environmental Education. In Coastal and Marine Environmental Education; Ghilardi-Lopes, N.P., Berchez, F.A.S., Eds.; Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 119–133. [Google Scholar]
  30. Moreira, T.; Santana dos Santos, R.S. Educação Para o Desenvolvimento Sustentável na Escola: ODS 14, Vida Na Água; UNESCO: Brasilia, Brasil, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  31. Schmäing, T.; Grotjohann, N. Out-of-School Learning in the Wadden Sea: The Influence of a Mudflat Hiking Tour on the Environmental Attitudes and Environmental Knowledge of Secondary School Students. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Barab, S.; Dede, C. Games and immersive participatory simulations for science education: An emerging type of curricula. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 2007, 16, 1–3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Wilson, C.D.; Reichsman, F.; Mutch-Jones, K.; Gardner, A.; Marchi, L.; Kowalski, S.; Lord, T.; Dorsey, C. Teacher Implementation and the Impact of Game-Based Science Curriculum Materials. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 2018, 27, 285–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Herrero, M.; Torralba-Burrial, A.; de Moral Pérez, M.E. Revisión de investigaciones sobre el uso de juegos digitales en la enseñanza de las ciencias de la vida en primaria y secundaria. Enseñanza De Las Cienc. 2020, 38, 103–119. [Google Scholar]
  35. Young, M.F.; Slota, S.; Cutter, A.B.; Jalette, G.; Mullin, G.; Lai, B.; Simeoni, Z.; Tran, M.; Yukhymenko, M. Our princess is in another castle: A review of trends in serious gaming for education. Rev. Educ. Res. 2012, 82, 61–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Gardner, M.K.; Strayer, D.L. What Cognitive Psychology Can Tell Us About Educational Computer Games. In Handbook of Research on Serious Games for Educational Applications; Zheng, R., Gardner, M.K., Eds.; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2017; pp. 1–18. [Google Scholar]
  37. Plass, J.L.; Homer, B.D.; Mayer, R.E.; Kinzer, C.K. Theoretical Foundations of Game-Based and Playful Learning. In Handbook of Game-Based Learning; Plass, J.L., Mayer, R.E., Homer, B.D., Eds.; The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2020; pp. 3–24. [Google Scholar]
  38. Barab, S.; Dodge, T.; Tuzun, H.; Job-Sluder, K.; Jackson, C.; Arici, A.; Job-Sluder, L.; Carteaux, R., Jr.; Gilbertson, J.; Heiselt, C. The Quest Atlantis Project: A socially-responsive play space for learning. In The Educational Design and Use of Simulation Computer Games; Shelton, B.E., Wiley, D., Eds.; Sense Publishers: Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 2007; pp. 159–186. [Google Scholar]
  39. Ouariachi, T.; Olvera-Lobo, M.D.; Gutiérrez-Pérez, J. Evaluación de juegos online para la enseñanza y aprendizaje del cambio climático. Enseñanza De Las Cienc. 2017, 35, 193–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Stanitsas, M.; Kirytopoulos, K.; Vareilles, E. Facilitating sustainability transition through serious games: A systematic literature review. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 208, 924–936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Fox, J.; McKnight, J.; Sun, Y.; Maung, D.; Crawfis, R. Using a serious game to communicate risk and minimize psychological distance regarding environmental pollution. Telemat. Inform. 2020, 46, 101320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Arboleya-García, E.; Miralles, L. ‘The Game of the Sea’: An Interdisciplinary Educational Board Game on the Marine Environment and Ocean Awareness for Primary and Secondary Students. Educ. Sci. 2022, 12, 57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Colleton, N.; Lakshman, V.; Flood, K.; Birnbaum, M.; McMillan, K.; Lin, A. Concepts and practice in the emerging use of games for marine education and conservation. Aquat. Conserv. Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 2016, 26, 213–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Koenigstein, S.; Hentschel, L.H.; Heel, L.C.; Drinkorn, C. A game-based education approach for sustainable ocean development. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 2020, 77, 1629–1638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Parrondo, M.; Rayon-Viña, F.; Borrell, Y.J.; Miralles, L. Sustainable Sea: A board game for engaging students in sustainable fisheries management. Appl. Environ. Educ. Commun. 2021, 20, 406–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Weines, J. Exploring fishery history in game form: ‘Never again April 18!’. Rethink. Hist. 2022, 26, 1–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. García-de-la-Fuente, L.; González-Álvarez, J.; García-Flórez, L.; Fernández-Rueda, P.; Alcázar-Álvarez, J. Relevance of socioeconomic information for the sustainable management of artisanal fisheries in South Europe. A characterization study of the Asturian artisanal fleet (northern Spain). Ocean. Coast. Manag. 2013, 86, 61–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. González-Álvarez, J.; García-de-la-Fuente, L.; García-Flórez, L.; Fernández-Rueda, M.; Alcázar-Álvarez, J.L. Identification and Characterization of Métiers in Multi-Species Artisanal Fisheries. A Case Study in Northwest Spain. Nat. Resour. 2016, 7, 295–314. [Google Scholar]
  49. Asturias Government. Estrategia Para el Sector Pesquero de Asturias; Gobierno del Principado de Asturias: Oviedo, Spain, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  50. García-de-la-Fuente, L.; Fernández-Vázquez, E.; Ramos-Carvajal, C. A methodology for analyzing the impact of the artisanal fishing fleets on regional economies: An application for the case of Asturias (Spain). Mar. Policy 2016, 74, 165–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Aguión, A.; Ojea, E.; García-Flórez, L.; Cruz, T.; Garmendia, J.M.; Davoult, D.; Queiroga, H.; Rivera, A.; Acuña-Fernández, J.L.; Macho, G. Establishing a governance threshold in small-scale fisheries to achieve sustainability. Ambio 2022, 51, 652–665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Maesano, G.; Di Vita, G.; Chinnici, G.; Pappalardo, G.; D’Amico, M. The role of credence attributes in consumer choices of sustainable fish products: A review. Sustainability 2020, 12, 10008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Giacomarra, M.; Crescimanno, M.; Vrontis, D.; Pastor, L.M.; Galati, A. The ability of fish ecolabels to promote a change in the sustainability awareness. Marine Policy 2021, 123, 104292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Casares, L.; Martín, M.A. La Educación para el Consumo en la etapa de Educación Primaria. Int. J. Educ. Res. 2014, 1, 70–86. [Google Scholar]
  55. Nubia-Arias, B. El consumo responsable: Educar para la sostenibilidad ambiental. Aibi Rev. Investig. Adm. Ing. 2016, 4, 29–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Rieckmann, M. Key themes in Education for Sustainable Development. In Issues and trends in Education for Sustainable Development; Leicht, A., Heiss, J., Byun, W.J., Eds.; United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO): Paris, France, 2018; pp. 61–84. [Google Scholar]
  57. Manzano-León, A.; Camacho-Lazarraga, P.; Guerrero, M.A.; Guerrero-Puerta, L.; Aguilar-Parra, J.M.; Trigueros, R.; Alias, A. Between level up and game over: A systematic literature review of gamification in education. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Gil-Quintana, J.; Prieto Jurado, E. La realidad de la gamificación en educación primaria. Estudio multicaso de centros educativos españoles. Perfiles Educ. 2020, 42, 107–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Huang, S.Y.; Kuo, Y.H.; Chen, H.C. Applying digital escape rooms infused with science teaching in elementary school: Learning performance, learning motivation, and problem-solving ability. Think. Skills Creat. 2020, 37, 100681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Makri, A.; Vlachopoulos, D.; Martina, R.A. Digital Escape Rooms as Innovative Pedagogical Tools in Education: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability 2021, 13, 4587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Torralba-Burrial, A.; Dopico, E. Experiencias de aprendizaje colaborativo: Consume pescado sostenible. In Conference Proceedings CIVINEDU 2021; Redine, Ed.; Adaya Press: Madrid, Spain, 2021; pp. 269–273. [Google Scholar]
  62. Paredes-Rodríguez, A.C.; Torralba-Burrial, A.; Dopico, E. Teachers’ perceptions on fisheries ecolabels and game-based learning activities in the framework of Education for Sustainable Consumption. In Global Challenges for a Sustainable Society; Benítez-Andrades, J.A., García-Llamas, P., Taboada, A., Estévez-Mauriz, L., Baelo, R., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2023; pp. 468–475. [Google Scholar]
  63. Kangas, M.; Koskinen, A.; Krokfors, L. A qualitative literature review of educational games in the classroom: The teacher’s pedagogical activities. Teach. Teach. 2017, 23, 451–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Schildkamp, K.; van der Kleij, F.M.; Heitink, M.C.; Kippers, W.B.; Veldkamp, B.P. Formative assessment: A systematic review of critical teacher prerequisites for classroom practice. Int. J. Educ. Res. 2020, 103, 101602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Parrondo, M.; Lopez, S.; de la Uz, S.; Rodríguez, C.; Carrasco, J.F.; García-Flórez, L.; Borrell, Y.J. Genetic monitoring of the declining European stony sea urchin Paracentrotus lividus from the central Bay of Biscay (Asturias, northwest Spain) and attempts to restore its wild populations. Aquat. Conserv. Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 2022, 32, 309–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Chen, S.Y.; Liu, S.Y. Developing students’ action competence for a sustainable future: A review of educational research. Sustainability 2020, 12, 1374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Burgh, G.; Thornton, S. Ecosocial citizenship education: Facilitating interconnective, deliberative practice and corrective methodology for epistemic accountability. Child. Philos. 2019, 15, e4279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Uehara, T. Can Young Generations Recognize Marine Plastic Waste as a Systemic Issue? Sustainability 2020, 12, 2586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Galati, A.; Miret-Pastor, L.; Siggia, D.; Crescimanno, M.; Fiore, M. Determinants affecting consumers’ attention to fish eco-labels in purchase decisions: A cross-country study. Br. Food J. 2022, 124, 2993–3013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Dwiyanti, W. The Stage’s of Sharing Knowledge among Students in Learning Environment: A Review of Literatur. Int. J. Educ. Res. 2017, 5, 81–92. [Google Scholar]
  71. Abramczyk, A.; Jurkowski, S. Cooperative learning as an evidence-based teaching strategy: What teachers know, believe, and how they use it. J. Educ. Teach. 2020, 46, 296–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Abdulrahman, N.C.; Ayyash, E.A.S.A. Linguistic competence, communicative competence, and interactional competence. J. Adv. Linguist. 2019, 10, 1600–1616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Korda, A. Thinking with pictures: Memory, imagination, and colour illustration in Victorian teaching and learning. Paedagog. Hist. 2020, 56, 269–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Partovi, T.; Razavi, M.R. The effect of game-based learning on academic achievement motivation of elementary school students. Learn. Motiv. 2019, 68, 101592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Yan, Z.; Li, Z.; Panadero, E.; Yang, M.; Yang, L.; Lao, H. A systematic review on factors influencing teachers’ intentions and implementations regarding formative assessment. Assess. Educ. Princ. Policy Pract. 2021, 28, 228–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Yamada, F.M.; Ribeiro, T.; Ghilardi-Lopes, N.P. Assessment of the prototype of an educational game on climate change and its effects on marine and coastal ecosystems. Rev. Brasil. Inf. Educ. 2019, 27, 1–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. D’Angelo, S.; Pollock, D.H.; Horn, M. Fishing with friends: Using tabletop games to raise environmental awareness in aquariums. In IDC ‘15: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2015; pp. 29–38. [Google Scholar]
  78. Qian, M.; Clark, K.R. Game-based Learning and 21st century skills: A review of recent research. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2016, 63, 50–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Hammer, J.; To, A.; Schrier, K.; Bowman, S.L.; Kaufman, G. Learning and Role-Playing Games. In Role-Playing Game Studies: Transmedia Foundations; Zagal, J.P., Deterding, S., Eds.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2018; pp. 283–299. [Google Scholar]
  80. Paužuolienė, J.; Šimanskienė, L.; Fiore, M. What about Responsible Consumption? A Survey Focused on Food Waste and Consumer Habits. Sustainability 2022, 14, 8509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Clerc, J.; Josseron, L. Transfer of Learning and Flexibility in Childhood. In Cognitive Flexibility: The Cornerstone of Learning; Clément, E., Coord., Eds.; ISTE: London, UK; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2022; pp. 143–173. [Google Scholar]
Figure 1. Flowchart of the memory game on fisheries’ resources, showing the moments when students comment on their knowledge of marine species and fisheries or add their experiences (peer learning and shared knowledge), and when teacher provides feedback and addresses the learning process towards learning aims (ocean literacy and knowledge about the sustainability of fisheries).
Figure 1. Flowchart of the memory game on fisheries’ resources, showing the moments when students comment on their knowledge of marine species and fisheries or add their experiences (peer learning and shared knowledge), and when teacher provides feedback and addresses the learning process towards learning aims (ocean literacy and knowledge about the sustainability of fisheries).
Sustainability 15 12905 g001
Figure 2. Location of the primary education centers where the game-based learning activities were carried out.
Figure 2. Location of the primary education centers where the game-based learning activities were carried out.
Sustainability 15 12905 g002
Figure 3. Formative assessments on ocean literacy and fisheries sustainability in the game-based learning experience.
Figure 3. Formative assessments on ocean literacy and fisheries sustainability in the game-based learning experience.
Sustainability 15 12905 g003
Table 1. Species selection for the memory game.
Table 1. Species selection for the memory game.
Common NameScientific NameReason for Inclusion
AlbacoreThunnus alalungaSocioeconomic and cultural importance.
Natural history narrative
Atlantic mackerel Scomber scombrusEconomic and social importance
Common sole Solea soleaEconomic importance. Natural history narrative
CuttlefishSepia officinalisEconomic importance. Natural history narrative
Edible crab Cancer pagurusEconomic importance
European anglerLophius piscatoriusSocioeconomic and cultural importance.
Natural history narrative
European bass Dicentrarchus labraxEconomic importance
European conger Conger congerEconomic importance. Natural history narrative
European eel Anguilla anguillaEconomic and cultural importance, threatened species. Natural history narrative
European hake Merluccius merlucciusSocioeconomic and cultural importance
European lobster Homarus gammarusEconomic importance
Four-spot megrim Lepidorhombus bosciiEconomic importance. Natural history narrative
Gilt-head sea bream Sparus aurataEconomic importance
Goose barnacle Pollicipes pollicipesSocioeconomic and cultural importance.
Natural history narrative
OctopusOctopus vulgarisSocioeconomic and cultural importance. Part of Asturian octopus fisheries has the MSC ecolabel. Natural history narrative
Red algae RhodophytaEconomic importance. Natural history narrative.
SquidLoligo vulgarisEconomic and cultural importance
TurbotScophthalmus maximusSocioeconomic and cultural importance.
Natural history narrative
Table 2. Comparison between different educational experiences of game-based learning on the sustainability of fisheries.
Table 2. Comparison between different educational experiences of game-based learning on the sustainability of fisheries.
Name of the GameTypeSustainability DimensionObservationsReference
Apicum challengeDigital gamebookClimate change on coastal and marine environments using economy, environment, and society approachSecondary education. No data included on students’ comments or learnings.[29]
Digital role-playing gameGame Maker version. Only one role is possible: student solving a climate change problem. Data on students’ outcomes scarce, used in primary education.[76]
April 18Role-playing gameOverfishing, fisheries depletionStudents play roles in fishing, such as
industrial and artisanal fishermen,
representatives of coastal communities, researchers, sharing arguments and
positions on cod fisheries management.
[46]
Fishing
Alphabet
Virtual
alphabet games
Marine biodiversity, fish species,
fishing gear,
fisheries management
Students check their knowledge of artisanal fishing gear and vessels, species of regional fishing importance, fish markets, environmental impacts, and elements of the ecolabel.[62]
Fishing
Resources Memory
Memory game
with cards
Artisanal fisheries on marine natural resources in Bay of BiscayStudents generate shared knowledge about marine biodiversity, artisanal fishing, and
species of socioeconomic and cultural importance in the region.
This article
Fishing with FriendsMultiplayer tabletop gameOverfishingVisitor groups (each group formed of children and adults) at an aquarium play the role of fishermen, trying to balance fishing profits in the short term with the conservation of natural resources in the long term.[77]
Ocean
Limited
Board gameChallenges to marine
sustainability, motivations and behaviors of ocean stakeholders
Secondary school students assume the roles of real ocean stakeholders and
develop strategies for conflict, collaboration, and social influence to solve marine environmental problems.
[44]
Sustainable fish
consumption
Virtual escape
room
Marine natural resources, biodiversity, fishing areas, artisanal vs. industrial fisheries and fishing gear.
Responsible consumption
Through cooperative learning, students reflect on sustainability of fisheries and the contents of fish labels to choose the most sustainable options.[61]
Sustainable SeaBoard gameSustainability of fisheries:
overexploitation, artisanal vs. industrial fishing, protected areas, fishing bans
The students become members of the
artisanal fishing guild, increase their knowledge about fishing, and become aware of the sustainable exploitation of marine resources.
[45]
The Game of the SeaBoard gameOcean literacy: marine environments, marine biodiversity, marine science, and threats, cultural approach to oceans.Students achieve science learning
objectives and raise awareness about marine conservation.
[42]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Torralba-Burrial, A.; Dopico, E. Promoting the Sustainability of Artisanal Fishing through Environmental Education with Game-Based Learning. Sustainability 2023, 15, 12905. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151712905

AMA Style

Torralba-Burrial A, Dopico E. Promoting the Sustainability of Artisanal Fishing through Environmental Education with Game-Based Learning. Sustainability. 2023; 15(17):12905. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151712905

Chicago/Turabian Style

Torralba-Burrial, Antonio, and Eduardo Dopico. 2023. "Promoting the Sustainability of Artisanal Fishing through Environmental Education with Game-Based Learning" Sustainability 15, no. 17: 12905. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151712905

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop