R-ACES

Funding programme

Horizon 2020 – Coordination and Support Action (CSA), Secure, Clean and Efficient Energy

Project reference

892429

Period

2020–2023

Coordinating organisation

Stichting S-ISPT – Institute for Sustainable Process Technology (Netherlands)

Participating countries

Netherlands, Belgium, Italy, Denmark, Germany, France

Official project website

Visit official website

R-ACES (fRamework for Actual Cooperation on Energy on Sites and Parks) aimed to support cooperation between industrial stakeholders in order to reduce energy consumption, recover surplus heat and accelerate the transition towards sustainable industrial regions.

The project developed an original educational board game, HEATopoly, to help students and professionals understand the opportunities, barriers and collaborative processes involved in industrial energy cooperation.

Through a fictional industrial region, participants experience how technical, economic, regulatory and social factors influence the development of sustainable energy projects.

Specific learning objectives

• Energy cooperation awareness: Recognise cooperation between industrial stakeholders as a viable strategy for improving regional energy efficiency.
• Industrial symbiosis: Understand how different organisations can exchange surplus energy and make more efficient use of shared resources.
• Energy transition: Explore opportunities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through coordinated industrial investments.
• District heating networks: Understand the basic conditions required to establish heat exchange infrastructure between different organisations.
• Renewable energy: Explore the contribution of renewable energy sources to regional sustainability.
• Technical understanding: Recognise the relevance of heat supply, demand, temperature and geographical distance when establishing energy cooperation projects.
• Economic decision-making: Consider investment costs, financial incentives and the economic feasibility of energy cooperation.
• Regulatory awareness: Understand how permits and administrative procedures influence the implementation of energy infrastructure.
• Stakeholder analysis: Identify the different interests, resources and responsibilities of actors within an industrial region.
• Negotiation: Practise reaching agreements between stakeholders with different objectives and constraints.
• Trust-building: Recognise the importance of mutual confidence and information sharing for successful energy cooperation.
• Conflict management: Explore how competing interests may create barriers to collective sustainability initiatives.
• Collaboration: Develop strategies for coordinating investments and activities between different organisations.
• Systems thinking: Understand how decisions by individual stakeholders affect the wider regional energy system.
• Strategic planning: Evaluate possible investments and cooperation arrangements under limited resources and uncertain conditions.
• Decision-making under uncertainty: Experience how unexpected events can influence project feasibility and economic outcomes.
• Perspective-taking: Understand why stakeholders may support or resist energy cooperation depending on their individual circumstances.
• Critical reflection: Examine personal motivations, stakeholder capacities and possible future participation in energy cooperation projects.
• Professional engagement: Encourage participants to consider establishing or supporting real-world energy cooperation initiatives.

Learning outcome framework

The HEATopoly methodology distinguishes between four interconnected knowledge domains:

• Declarative knowledge: Understanding the technical and socioeconomic conditions associated with energy cooperation.
• Procedural knowledge: Understanding how energy cooperation projects can be established and implemented.
• Effectiveness knowledge: Recognising how different investments and decisions influence economic and environmental outcomes.
• Social knowledge: Understanding the motivations, intentions and capacities of other stakeholders.

The project also addresses three complementary learning dimensions: knowledge, skills and attitudes.

Its overall educational objective is not only to transfer information about energy cooperation, but also to encourage participants to consider taking part in future cooperation initiatives.

R-ACES developed an original educational board game called HEATopoly – A Serious Game About Energy Cooperation.

The game was designed to help students and professionals understand the complexity of industrial energy cooperation through a fictional regional simulation combining stakeholder interaction, resource management and strategic decision-making.

The game was developed within the Horizon 2020 R-ACES project by the Institute for Sustainable Process Technology (ISPT), with contributions from the consortium and specialist game design and facilitation support.

1. HEATopoly – A Serious Game About Energy Cooperation

HEATopoly takes place in R-ACEDONIA, a fictional European industrial region surrounded by natural landscapes, rivers, villages and a growing city.

Although the regional economy is thriving, industrial energy consumption and carbon emissions are increasing. Participants must identify opportunities to establish energy cooperation projects and move towards a more sustainable regional energy system.

Each participant represents a stakeholder with specific technical characteristics, economic resources and individual objectives.

The challenge is to cooperate with other stakeholders to achieve regional environmental improvements while also pursuing individual organisational interests.

Documented game characteristics

• Game type: Custom-designed educational board game and stakeholder simulation.
• Game format: Physical tabletop version and complementary online version.
• Number of players: 6–12.
• Gameplay duration: Approximately 90 minutes.
• Reflection duration: Approximately 45 minutes.
• Complete session: Approximately 2.5 hours, including introduction and facilitation.
• Educational theme: Industrial energy cooperation and regional sustainability.
• Game setting: Fictional industrial region of R-ACEDONIA.
• Collective objective: Reduce regional energy consumption and develop a more sustainable energy system.
• Individual objectives: Pursue stakeholder-specific personal missions.
• Target audience: Energy professionals, industrial stakeholders, policymakers, higher education students and trainees.

Main game mechanics

1. Asymmetric stakeholder roles: Participants receive predefined roles representing different organisations with specific resources, energy requirements and objectives.
2. Hidden information: Stakeholders initially lack complete information about the heat supply and demand of other actors.
3. Information exchange: Participants interact to identify potential opportunities for energy cooperation.
4. Negotiation: Players discuss possible agreements concerning energy exchange, investments and cooperation projects.
5. Collective versus individual objectives: Players must balance the regional sustainability challenge with their own organisational missions.
6. Network construction: Participants establish energy exchange projects by placing pipelines on the regional board.
7. Technical constraints: Connections must satisfy simplified conditions inspired by real heat exchange projects, including temperature and distance considerations.
8. Resource management: Investments and construction activities involve financial resources represented within the game.
9. Regulatory procedures: Certain actions require permits before energy infrastructure can be constructed.
10. Renewable energy investment: Participants can explore investments in renewable energy and supporting infrastructure.
11. Energy infrastructure development: Heat exchangers and heat pumps enable additional opportunities for cooperation.
12. Chance events: Event cards introduce unexpected circumstances that can influence strategies and outcomes.
13. Limited actions: Gameplay takes place over a defined number of rounds in which stakeholders have restricted opportunities to act.
14. Strategic interaction: Decisions influence both individual stakeholders and the wider regional energy system.
15. Structured reflection: A dedicated post-game phase examines decisions, behaviours and possible real-world implications.

Physical board-game components

The documented physical version includes:

• A geographical game board representing R-ACEDONIA.
• Role description cards containing stakeholder objectives and technical information.
• Financial tokens or coins representing investment resources.
• Pipeline and energy infrastructure components.
• Permit documents associated with construction activities.
• Chance cards introducing unexpected events.
• Game rules and facilitator guidance.
• Materials for recording game progress and scores.
• A reflection handbook supporting the educational debriefing.

Physical and digital formats

HEATopoly was initially conceived as an offline board game. However, the COVID-19 pandemic led the development team to create an online version using the Mural collaborative environment.

The online game combines a virtual geographical board with communication platforms such as Microsoft Teams, Zoom or Skype.

A PowerPoint presentation introduces the educational challenge, while a spreadsheet supports score management.

The physical version uses comparable gameplay mechanics but incorporates additional tactile materials and more elaborate permit procedures.

The final physical game was produced as a boxed educational resource containing the game materials and supporting documents.

Game availability

The physical HEATopoly game is not offered as a directly downloadable print-and-play kit on the official website.

Interested educators and professionals can request information about obtaining or facilitating the game through the project organisation.

HEATopoly – Official Game Information and Access

The public technical report D4.4 provides detailed information about the game’s development, design principles, mechanics, testing and facilitation.

HEATopoly – Serious Game Development and Methodology Report (PDF)

Game approach

The appropriate classification is Custom-Designed Educational Games.

HEATopoly was specifically developed within R-ACES rather than adapted from an existing commercial board game.

R-ACES adopted an experiential Board Game-Based Learning methodology through HEATopoly, combining stakeholder simulation, negotiation, collaborative planning and structured reflection.

The methodology was designed to support professional and higher education learning about industrial energy cooperation, with particular attention to the technical, economic, regulatory and social conditions influencing collective energy projects.

Rather than presenting energy cooperation exclusively through lectures or case-study descriptions, HEATopoly allows participants to experience the consequences of decisions and interactions within a simulated industrial region.

Pedagogical foundations

The game’s design draws on several educational principles:

• Experiential learning: Participants explore complex energy cooperation processes through simulated decisions and interactions.
• Constructive alignment: Learning objectives, game activities and intended outcomes are designed to support one another.
• Outcome-based education: The development process begins by identifying what participants should know, understand and be able to demonstrate after gameplay.
• Bloom’s taxonomy: Learning activities address different cognitive processes, from remembering and understanding to analysing and evaluating.
• Knowledge, skills and attitudes: The game addresses factual understanding, practical cooperation abilities and participants’ motivations to engage in sustainable energy initiatives.
• Social learning: Negotiation and interaction allow participants to explore the interests, constraints and perspectives of other actors.
• Systems thinking: Players examine the relationships between individual decisions and collective environmental outcomes.
• Reflective learning: A dedicated debriefing phase encourages participants to connect their experiences with real-world energy cooperation.

Methodological development process

1. Definition of the educational purpose: The consortium established awareness and engagement in energy cooperation as the overarching educational goals.
2. Literature review: Research on environmental education, learning outcomes and serious game design informed the development process.
3. Learning objective formulation: The team identified intended outcomes involving knowledge, practical cooperation skills and attitudes.
4. Consultation with stakeholders: Industrial energy experts, energy brokers and consortium members contributed information about real-world barriers to cooperation.
5. Scenario development: A fictional industrial region was created, drawing partly on an energy cooperation case in Moerdijk, the Netherlands.
6. Game prototyping: A geographical board, stakeholder roles, energy information, financial resources and infrastructure construction mechanisms were developed.
7. Online implementation: The pandemic prompted development of a collaborative online version using the Mural platform.
8. Iterative testing: Six documented sessions generated feedback on gameplay, realism, complexity and educational relevance.
9. Game refinement: Rules and mechanics were modified to improve negotiation, engagement and the relationship with the intended learning objectives.
10. Physical game production: The online prototype informed the development of the final boxed tabletop version.
11. Facilitator preparation: The consortium developed facilitation guidance and organised training to support future implementation.
12. Reflection integration: A dedicated handbook was created to support structured discussion after gameplay.

Educational session structure

The documented methodology consists of two principal educational phases, supported by an introductory explanation.

Phase A – Gameplay (approximately 90 minutes)

1. Participants are introduced to R-ACEDONIA and its industrial energy challenges.
2. Each participant receives a stakeholder role with specific resources, technical characteristics and objectives.
3. Players exchange information to identify possible energy cooperation opportunities.
4. Negotiation rounds allow participants to discuss investments and potential agreements.
5. During action rounds, participants make investments or establish energy cooperation projects.
6. Players consider technical requirements, geographical distance, economic resources and regulatory procedures.
7. Random events introduce additional uncertainty and strategic challenges.
8. Participants pursue both regional sustainability improvements and their individual missions.

Phase B – Structured reflection (approximately 45 minutes)

Participants collectively examine decisions made during gameplay and discuss the factors that enabled or hindered cooperation.

The reflection process addresses:

• How stakeholder interests influenced decisions.
• What made negotiation and collaboration successful or difficult.
• How trust and information sharing affected possible agreements.
• Which technical, regulatory or economic barriers emerged.
• How individual interests interacted with collective environmental objectives.
• What lessons could be transferred to real industrial energy projects.
• Whether participants would consider becoming involved in future cooperation initiatives.

Role of the facilitator

The facilitator has a central role in preparing, coordinating and evaluating the educational experience.

The consortium developed a facilitation handbook and organised a dedicated training workshop for project partners.

Facilitators introduce the context and rules, support role allocation, coordinate gameplay, clarify technical questions and manage the reflection process.

In the physical version, facilitators also support the use of permits, cards, resources and infrastructure components.

Debriefing and transfer of learning

A distinctive feature of HEATopoly is the explicit inclusion of a separate reflection phase within the documented educational design.

The reflection handbook offers activities that facilitators can select according to the characteristics and needs of participants.

This approach recognises that completing the simulated regional challenge does not automatically demonstrate understanding of the mechanisms underlying successful energy cooperation.

Structured reflection is therefore intended to connect in-game decisions with participants’ own professional situations, motivations and possible future actions.

Methodological transferability

HEATopoly provides a transferable model for using multi-stakeholder simulations to explore complex sustainability challenges.

However, implementation requires access to the game materials, appropriate facilitation and an understanding of the technical and institutional context of industrial energy cooperation.

R-ACES was implemented between June 2020 and March 2023 as a Horizon 2020 Coordination and Support Action led by the Institute for Sustainable Process Technology (ISPT) in the Netherlands.

The project sought to support cooperation between industrial companies, local authorities and energy stakeholders through technical tools, knowledge exchange, professional learning and practical capacity-building activities.

Its educational component included the development, testing and production of HEATopoly, an original physical and online serious game.

Project implementation

R-ACES focused on developing energy cooperation within industrial regions, particularly through the exchange of surplus heat, renewable energy investments and improved energy management.

The project’s main pilot ecoregions were located in:

• Antwerp, Belgium.
• Nyborg, Denmark.
• Lombardy, Italy.

The project also worked towards the replication of its methodology in additional European industrial regions.

Three principal technical tools were developed: a Self-Assessment Tool, a Legal Decision Support Tool and an Energy Management Platform.

HEATopoly formed part of the complementary capacity-building activities intended to support stakeholder awareness, communication and cooperation.

Game development and testing

The project’s public deliverable D4.4 documents six game-testing sessions conducted during 2021.

The tests involved consortium members, students, trainees and energy professionals.

Documented testing sessions

• 31 March 2021: Online test involving eight consortium participants.
• 7 April 2021: Online test involving nine students from the Netherlands.
• 15 April 2021: Online test involving eight consortium participants from several European countries.
• 30 April 2021: First physical test involving eight trainees in the Netherlands.
• 30 April 2021: Second physical test involving eleven trainees in the Netherlands.
• 1 June 2021: Online test involving ten energy brokers and energy traineeship participants.

These six sessions represent 54 recorded participations. The report does not establish whether every participation corresponds to a different individual.

Testing and evaluation methodology

Following each test, facilitators collected participant feedback concerning the game experience, perceived strengths and aspects requiring improvement.

The project used this information to revise the game’s mechanics, complexity and educational structure.

Documented modifications

1. Individual missions: Personal objectives were introduced alongside the regional goal to create tension between competition and cooperation.
2. Continuous negotiation: Restrictions on information exchange were reduced to encourage ongoing interaction between stakeholders.
3. Simplified technical rules: Certain conditions, including pressure-related pipeline requirements, were removed to make gameplay more accessible.
4. Expanded infrastructure: Renewable energy, heat exchangers and heat pumps were incorporated into the simulation.
5. Regulatory procedures: Permit requirements were introduced to increase the realism of infrastructure development.
6. Improved facilitation: The consortium developed guidance and training to support consistent educational implementation.

Final game production

The development process resulted in a completed online version and a physical boxed game.

The final materials included game rules, role descriptions, supporting documents and facilitator guidance.

Photographs of the physical game and its components are included in the public development report.

The European Commission’s CORDIS results database lists the completed serious board game among the project’s deliverables.

Additional educational use

The ISPT website documents HEATopoly’s use with students from Wageningen University.

According to the institution, participants explored sustainable energy projects and practised basic negotiation skills while playing the game.

The final CORDIS project report also identifies HEATopoly as a completed capacity-building resource intended to familiarise stakeholders with energy cooperation.

Evaluation evidence

The documented evaluation provides evidence of feasibility testing, participant feedback and iterative game improvement.

However, no controlled experimental evaluation of HEATopoly’s educational effectiveness has been identified.

The available documentation does not establish:

• Validated pretest-posttest measures of energy cooperation knowledge.
• Quantitative improvements in negotiation or collaboration skills.
• Comparisons with alternative training methods.
• Standardised assessments of changes in professional attitudes.
• Long-term evidence that gameplay led participants to establish real energy cooperation projects.

Interpretation of the findings

The six documented tests demonstrate that HEATopoly was implemented and refined through participation by relevant target groups.

They also show that feedback influenced specific modifications to the game’s design.

However, participants’ positive experiences and the development team’s conclusions about engagement should not be interpreted as independently verified improvements in knowledge, skills or professional behaviour.

Similarly, the project’s broader achievements in industrial energy cooperation cannot be attributed specifically to the board game.

Overall evaluation status

R-ACES provides strong evidence of physical game development, testing, production and methodological documentation.

Its educational evaluation is primarily formative, based on iterative testing and participant feedback. The effectiveness of HEATopoly in producing measurable learning gains remains to be established through more rigorous assessment.

R-ACES developed educational and technical resources designed to support industrial energy cooperation, stakeholder capacity building and sustainable regional energy management.

Its educational resources include the HEATopoly serious board game, methodological documentation, facilitator guidance, an online training environment and practical case studies.

1. HEATopoly – Serious Board Game

The principal Board Game-Based Learning resource is HEATopoly, an original physical and online game exploring industrial energy cooperation.

The game presents participants with a fictional industrial region in which different stakeholders negotiate energy investments, establish heat exchange infrastructure and pursue collective and individual objectives.

Documented game materials:

• Physical game board representing R-ACEDONIA.
• Stakeholder role descriptions and individual missions.
• Energy supply and demand information.
• Financial resources and infrastructure components.
• Pipeline construction materials.
• Permit documents and chance cards.
• Game rules and implementation instructions.
• Facilitation handbook.
• Reflection handbook.

The game is designed for 6–12 participants and a facilitated session of approximately 2.5 hours.

HEATopoly – Official Game Information

Availability: The complete physical game is available through direct contact with the project organisation. A public print-and-play download has not been identified.

The official game page provides contact information for arranging access or facilitated sessions.

2. R-ACES Deliverable D4.4 – Serious Game HEATopoly

This publicly accessible methodological report documents the theoretical foundations, learning objectives, development process, game mechanics and testing activities associated with HEATopoly.

It includes:

• Educational objectives and theoretical background.
• Knowledge domains and intended learning outcomes.
• Serious game design principles.
• Game structure, duration and participant requirements.
• Development and prototyping procedures.
• Descriptions of the online and physical versions.
• Six documented test sessions.
• Feedback-based modifications to the game.
• Photographs of the physical game and components.
• Information on facilitation and reflection resources.

R-ACES – Serious Game HEATopoly, Deliverable D4.4 (PDF)

3. HEATopoly Facilitation Handbook

The project developed facilitator documentation explaining how to prepare and coordinate the educational game.

Consortium partners also received training to support the implementation of HEATopoly within their regions.

The handbook is documented in Deliverable D4.4, but a separate publicly downloadable copy has not been verified.

4. HEATopoly Reflection Handbook

The reflection handbook contains activities intended to help participants examine their decisions, cooperation strategies and motivations after gameplay.

The project recommends adapting the reflection activities to the characteristics of the participants.

This resource is particularly important because it provides a structured connection between gameplay and the development of professional understanding and attitudes.

A separate public download of the complete handbook has not been identified.

5. R-ACES Online Training Materials

The project created an online educational environment containing materials related to industrial energy cooperation.

These resources support professional learning and provide additional background information for participants.

R-ACES – Educational Resources and Knowledge Hub

6. R-ACES Use Case Library

The project compiled examples of industrial energy cooperation involving waste heat recovery, district heating, renewable energy and related technologies.

The library provides real-world examples that educators can use to connect HEATopoly’s fictional scenario with practical applications.

R-ACES – Industrial Energy Cooperation Use Case Library

7. R-ACES Technical Toolbox

The project developed three principal tools:

• Self-Assessment Tool: Supports identification and assessment of energy cooperation opportunities.
• Legal Decision Support Tool: Provides guidance on legal and contractual arrangements.
• Energy Management Platform: Supports the monitoring and management of energy flows.

These tools are not educational board games, but they provide relevant technical and institutional context for the topics explored through HEATopoly.

R-ACES – Project Tools and Resources

Resource availability and reuse

The official project website, game description and technical development report remain publicly accessible.

The full physical game package and its separate facilitator materials are not available through a verified direct download.

An independent European project inventory published in 2024 also identifies HEATopoly as a board game that must be ordered.

Consequently, methodological documentation is publicly accessible, but immediate replication of the complete physical game requires obtaining the materials from the project organisation.

No explicit licence permitting unrestricted reproduction or adaptation of the complete physical game has been independently confirmed.

R-ACES is a particularly relevant case for the European Board Game-Based Learning Observatory because it developed an original physical game in which stakeholder negotiation, resource management and infrastructure construction directly represent the processes being taught.

HEATopoly demonstrates how tabletop simulations can introduce participants to complex sustainability challenges involving multiple actors, competing interests, technical constraints and collective objectives.

Its main methodological contribution lies in the integration of game mechanics, educational objectives and structured reflection within a professional learning environment.

Methodological strengths

1. Substantial BGBL component: Although R-ACES was primarily an industrial energy cooperation initiative, HEATopoly represents a clearly documented and implemented educational board-game output.
2. Direct integration of learning and mechanics: Negotiation, resource allocation, infrastructure construction and regulatory procedures correspond to real processes involved in industrial energy cooperation.
3. Asymmetric stakeholder roles: Participants represent actors with different resources, technical characteristics and individual objectives.
4. Collective versus individual goals: The game creates tension between regional sustainability and organisational interests, reflecting an important challenge of real-world cooperation.
5. Information asymmetry: Players initially lack complete information about other stakeholders, making communication and trust-building relevant to gameplay.
6. Systems thinking: The geographical board and energy infrastructure enable participants to explore interdependence between industrial actors.
7. Realistic constraints: Technical requirements, financial resources and administrative permits introduce relevant barriers to cooperation.
8. Structured educational alignment: The development team explicitly connected intended learning outcomes with game design using principles of constructive alignment.
9. Multiple learning dimensions: The methodology distinguishes declarative, procedural, effectiveness and social knowledge, together with skills and attitudes.
10. Documented iterative development: Six testing sessions generated specific modifications to the game’s mechanics and complexity.
11. Physical and online implementation: The project developed two formats that support application in different educational settings.
12. Explicit reflection phase: A dedicated handbook and approximately 45-minute debriefing phase provide opportunities to connect gameplay with professional experiences.
13. Facilitator preparation: The consortium developed instructional resources and trained partners to coordinate the activity.

Methodological limitations and considerations

1. Specialised educational content: The game addresses industrial energy cooperation and may require introductory explanations for participants unfamiliar with energy systems.
2. High facilitation demands: Managing 6–12 stakeholder roles, technical decisions, negotiation and reflection requires preparation and appropriate facilitation.
3. Session duration: A complete activity lasting approximately 2.5 hours may be difficult to integrate into shorter educational sessions.
4. Restricted physical access: The complete board-game package cannot currently be reproduced directly from a verified public download.
5. Limited independent evaluation: The documented testing primarily concerns formative feedback and iterative improvements rather than measured changes in learning outcomes.
6. Unverified behavioural transfer: Although the game aims to encourage participation in real energy cooperation projects, evidence of subsequent professional behaviour change has not been established.
7. Simplified technical representation: The simulation omits certain physical and engineering variables to maintain accessibility and manageable gameplay.
8. Potential differences between formats: Physical and online versions have different interfaces and facilitation procedures, which may influence participant interaction.
9. Limited comparative evidence: No controlled comparison has been identified between HEATopoly and alternative professional training methods.

Connection with modern Board Game-Based Learning

HEATopoly belongs to the category of custom-designed educational games rather than the adaptation of existing commercial board games.

However, its game design differs from educational products that primarily integrate quizzes or factual questions into conventional board-game structures.

The principal educational mechanisms of HEATopoly are embedded in the actions required to play.

For example, participants must exchange information and negotiate to identify opportunities for cooperation. These activities are not simply motivational additions: they correspond directly to the communication and negotiation competences the project seeks to develop.

Similarly, constructing pipelines, assessing technical compatibility and obtaining permits introduce simplified representations of real infrastructure development procedures.

The tension between collective sustainability objectives and individual stakeholder missions provides opportunities to explore cooperation, competition and conflicting incentives.

Consequently, the game offers an example of learning through the operation of a simulated system rather than primarily through knowledge recall.

Importance of debriefing

A particularly valuable feature is the deliberate separation between gameplay and reflection.

The game creates experiences involving negotiation, uncertainty, cooperation and conflict, while the subsequent discussion provides an opportunity to examine these experiences critically.

This distinction is relevant because participants may complete a game without recognising which behaviours, decisions or strategies contributed to particular outcomes.

The reflection process can help transform experiences generated during gameplay into more explicit professional knowledge and awareness.

Nevertheless, the existence of a debriefing handbook should not be confused with demonstrated educational effectiveness. Its actual contribution requires empirical evaluation.

Comparison with other European BGBL initiatives

HEATopoly is methodologically comparable to urbEN, developed within the LOTUS project.

Both games use stakeholder role-playing and negotiation to explore the transition towards more sustainable local energy systems.

However, HEATopoly provides particularly explicit documentation of its educational framework, iterative design decisions and structured reflection phase.

The comparison between these projects offers opportunities to examine how different tabletop simulations represent complex sustainability systems and how facilitation influences learning experiences.

Implications for future BGBL research

HEATopoly suggests several methodological considerations relevant to future educational board-game initiatives:

• Integrate target competences into the decisions and interactions required by gameplay.
• Use asymmetric roles and individual missions to represent competing stakeholder interests.
• Include information asymmetry when communication and trust-building are intended learning outcomes.
• Use physical components to represent real-world systems and relationships.
• Balance technical realism with accessibility and manageable cognitive demands.
• Document iterative testing and the rationale for modifying game mechanics.
• Include facilitator preparation and structured debriefing as explicit elements of the methodology.
• Evaluate not only knowledge acquisition but also negotiation, collaboration and systems thinking.
• Examine whether learning transfers from simulated situations to subsequent professional decisions.
• Preserve complete game materials and implementation guides in accessible repositories.

Overall assessment

R-ACES provides a strong example of custom-designed tabletop simulation for professional learning about industrial energy cooperation.

Its principal strengths are the integration of negotiation and cooperation into the game mechanics, a clearly articulated pedagogical framework, documented prototype testing and a dedicated reflection phase.

The game was developed, produced and tested, providing sufficient evidence for inclusion in the European BGBL Observatory.

Its main limitations concern the restricted accessibility of the physical game package and the absence of independently verified quantitative evidence demonstrating learning gains or long-term professional behaviour change.

HEATopoly is particularly valuable as a case study of how educational board games can model complex stakeholder relationships and support experiential exploration of sustainability challenges.