IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i24p16760-d1298616.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Codesigned Digital Tools for Social Engagement in Climate Change Mitigation

Author

Listed:
  • Hanna Obracht-Prondzyńska

    (Department of Spatial Studies, University of Gdańsk, 80-309 Gdańsk, Poland)

  • Kacper Radziszewski

    (Department of Visual Arts, Faculty of Architecture, Gdańsk University of Technology, 80-233 Gdańsk, Poland)

  • Helena Anacka

    (Department of Economic Sciences, Faculty of Management and Economics, Gdańsk University of Technology, 80-233 Gdańsk, Poland)

  • Ewa Duda

    (Institute of Education, Maria Grzegorzewska University, 02-353 Warsaw, Poland)

  • Magdalena Walnik

    (Department of Visual Arts, Faculty of Architecture, Gdańsk University of Technology, 80-233 Gdańsk, Poland)

  • Kacper Wereszko

    (Faculty of Electronics, Telecommunications and Informatics, Gdańsk University of Technology, 80-233 Gdańsk, Poland)

  • Hanne Cecilie Geirbo

    (Department of Computer Science, Oslo Metropolitan University, 0130 Oslo, Norway)

Abstract

Digital technologies and economies can strengthen participative processes and data- and knowledge-based sustainable urban development. It can also accelerate social integration and the efforts of urban dwellers towards more resilient urban environments. Gap: Most of the tools that strengthen participatory processes were not cocreated with stakeholders. Research shows that codesigned platforms driven by new technological advances and the development of collaborative sharing economy concepts can increase climate change awareness. Still, the rise of participatory innovation technologies does not focus on enabling social engagement in climate change mitigation. Therefore, this paper addresses a research question: can a codesigned community currency stimulate bottom-up initiatives for climate change mitigation, and what is needed for such tools to succeed with the implementation of climate-responsive policies? The aim was to introduce an approach allowing us to codesign an application to encourage pro-environmental behaviors. Hence, the approach of this research was to define the concept of such a tool as a part of a cocreation process with stakeholders in a multidisciplinary and cross-sectoral environment. Method: It uses design thinking enriched with case studies evaluation, workshops, UX design, low fidelity, SUS, and testbeds. Findings and value: The authors introduce the Greencoin concept and argue that the codesigned digital currency operating based on an educational application has the potential to strengthen social engagement in climate change mitigation. Beneficiaries and practical implementation: Such a tool can increase climate awareness by supporting social integration and bottom-up initiatives for climate change mitigation. It can therefore be used by local communities to strengthen their climate-responsive efforts.

Suggested Citation

  • Hanna Obracht-Prondzyńska & Kacper Radziszewski & Helena Anacka & Ewa Duda & Magdalena Walnik & Kacper Wereszko & Hanne Cecilie Geirbo, 2023. "Codesigned Digital Tools for Social Engagement in Climate Change Mitigation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(24), pages 1-21, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:24:p:16760-:d:1298616
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/24/16760/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/24/16760/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hanna Obracht-Prondzyńska & Ewa Duda & Helena Anacka & Jolanta Kowal, 2022. "Greencoin as an AI-Based Solution Shaping Climate Awareness," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(18), pages 1-25, September.
    2. Felix Rauschmayer & Christine Polzin & Mirijam Mock & Ines Omann, 2018. "Examining Collective Action Through the Capability Approach: The Example of Community Currencies," Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(3), pages 345-364, July.
    3. Michael L. Katz & Carl Shapiro, 1994. "Systems Competition and Network Effects," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 93-115, Spring.
    4. Victor Mulas & Michael Minges & Hallie Applebaum, 2016. "Boosting Tech Innovation: Ecosystems in Cities: A Framework for Growth and Sustainability of Urban Tech Innovation Ecosystems," Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization, MIT Press, vol. 11(1-2), pages 98-125, Winter-Sp.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Xuemeng Zhao & Weilun Huang, 2024. "Global Geopolitical Changes and New/Renewable Energy Game," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(16), pages 1-27, August.
    2. Klein, Michael, 1996. "Competition in network industries," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1591, The World Bank.
    3. Kanis Saengchote & Voraprapa Nakavachara & Yishuang Xu, 2023. "Capitalising the Network Externalities of New Land Supply in the Metaverse," PIER Discussion Papers 203, Puey Ungphakorn Institute for Economic Research.
    4. Marta Gancarczyk, 2010. "Model schyłku i odrodzenia klastrów," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 3, pages 1-21.
    5. Estelle Malavolti, 2016. "Single Till or Dual Till at airports: a Two-Sided Market Analysis," Post-Print hal-01406372, HAL.
    6. Honohan, Patrick & Vittas, Dimitri, 1996. "Bank regulation and the network paradigm : policy implications for developing and transition economies," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1631, The World Bank.
    7. Gual, Jordi, 2003. "Market Definition in the Telecoms Industry," CEPR Discussion Papers 3988, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. Kevin J. Boudreau & Andrei Hagiu, 2009. "Platform Rules: Multi-Sided Platforms as Regulators," Chapters, in: Annabelle Gawer (ed.), Platforms, Markets and Innovation, chapter 7, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Colombo, Massimo G. & Garrone, Paola, 1998. "Common carriers' entry into multimedia services," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 77-105, March.
    10. Erzurumlu, S. Sinan, 2013. "The compatibility of durable goods with contingent generic consumables," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 574-585.
    11. Fox, Stephen & Groesser, Stefan N., 2016. "Reframing the relevance of research to practice," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 457-465.
    12. Cecere, Grazia & Corrocher, Nicoletta & Battaglia, Riccardo David, 2015. "Innovation and competition in the smartphone industry: Is there a dominant design?," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 162-175.
    13. Claire M. Weiller & Michael G. Pollitt, 2013. "Platform markets and energy services," Working Papers EPRG 1334, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    14. Slowak, André P., 2009. "Market fields structure & dynamics in industrial automation," FZID Discussion Papers 02-2009, University of Hohenheim, Center for Research on Innovation and Services (FZID).
    15. Kanis Saengchote & Voraprapa Nakavachara & Yishuang Xu, 2023. "Capitalising the Network Externalities of New Land Supply in the Metaverse," Papers 2303.17180, arXiv.org.
    16. Gediminas Adomavicius & Jesse Bockstedt & Alok Gupta, 2012. "Modeling Supply-Side Dynamics of IT Components, Products, and Infrastructure: An Empirical Analysis Using Vector Autoregression," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(2), pages 397-417, June.
    17. Jeroen Struben & Brandon H. Lee & Christopher B. Bingham, 2020. "Collective Action Problems and Resource Allocation During Market Formation," Post-Print hal-02927584, HAL.
    18. Bryan Caplan & Edward Stringham, 2003. "Networks, Law, and the Paradox of Cooperation," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 16(4), pages 309-326, December.
    19. Jing Li & Yulin Zhang, 2021. "More market awareness, more profit? Competitive environments, business expansions, and two‐sided markets," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(2), pages 249-267, March.
    20. Gary Charness & Francesco Feri & Miguel A. Meléndez‐Jiménez & Matthias Sutter, 2014. "Experimental Games on Networks: Underpinnings of Behavior and Equilibrium Selection," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82(5), pages 1615-1670, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:24:p:16760-:d:1298616. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.