Development of Environmental Literacy through the Process of Board Game in Primary Schools based on Chiang Mai’s Urban Context
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background and Objectives: This research aims to: 1) explore the spatial context, dynamics, and interrelationships between ecological, social, cultural, political, historical, and technological systems in the Ping River Basin; 2) design and develop a board game for enhancing environmental literacy in primary schools using Chiang Mai’s urban context; and 3) investigate the effects of the developed board game on primary school students’ environmental literacy in terms of knowledge, attitudes, and environmental conservation behaviors.
Methodology: The study employed a research and development methodology across three phases. Phase 1 explored the Ping River Basin context through document analysis, in-depth interviews with 18 key informants (academics, government specialists, local knowledge holders, and civil society representatives), and field surveys documenting physical characteristics and community activities. Phase 2 involved developing the “Ping River Guardians” board game based on the findings from Phase 1, followed by quality assessment conducted by 11 experts (game designers, environmental educators, and teachers) and pilot testing with 30 students. In Phase 3, researchers implemented the refined game with 90 students from grades 4–6 selected through multistage random sampling across three schools, using a one-group pretest–posttestdesign over 12 weeks, with data collected through environmental literacy tests, attitude scales, behavior assessments, and observation forms.
Results: The contextual analysis revealed rich natureculture relationships in the Ping River Basin manifesting through traditional ecological knowledge systems, cultural practices, and collective resource management structures. Specific findings included seven distinct water - knowledge states identified by local elders, river ceremonies dating back 700 years, and community-based adaptations combining traditional knowledge with modern approaches. The Ping River Guardians board game, developed with visual representations of local ecosystems, collaborative mechanics, and culturally relevant scenarios, received high-quality ratings from experts (content validity IOC = 0.87; game mechanics rating 4.52/5.00). The implementation resulted in statistically significant improvements in environmental knowledge (t = 15.28, p < .001; + 49.9%), attitudes (Z = 7.42, p < .001; +32.9%), and conservation behaviors (t = 12.64, p < .001; +75.1%). The most substantial improvements occurred in waste reduction practices (+85%), water conservation behaviors (+72%), community participation (+63%), and family knowledge sharing (+68%).
Discussion: The study demonstrates that board games incorporating local natureculture relationships can effectively enhance environmental literacy by positioning humans as “a part of” rather than “apart from” natural systems. The game successfully bridged the “extinction of experience” (Soga & Gaston, 2016) by creating rehearsal spaces (Lynch & Mannion, 2021) where students developed systems thinking while connecting abstract concepts to local contexts. By integrating human activity, knowledge systems, power dynamics, cognitive development, and culturally responsive learning, the approach addresses multiple dimensions of nature-culture relations identified by the Learning in Places Collaborative (2020).
Conclusion: While acknowledging limitations of the one-group design and 12-week implementation period, the findings provide empirical evidence for integrating traditional ecological knowledge with modern educational approaches. The results suggest that place-based board games offer a promising pathway for developing the environmental literacy needed to address sustainability challenges while strengthening students’ connections to local ecological and cultural heritage.
Article Details

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Boivin, J. A. (2020). Farm-to-table: How one teacher fostered passionate, project-based, place-based learning. Journal of Sustainability Education, 24(1).
Buosonte, R. (2013). Qualitative research in education. Chulalongkorn University Press. (in Thai)
Creswell, J.W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Pearson.
Department of Water Resources. (2009). Local wisdom of water consumption. Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment. (in Thai)
Duhn, I., Malone, K., & Tesar, M. (2017). Troubling the intersections of urban/nature/childhood in environmental education. Environmental Education Research, 23(10), 1357–1368. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2017.1390884
Goodlad, K., & Leonard, A. E. (2018). Place-based learning across the disciplines: A living laboratory approach to pedagogy. A Journal of Scholarly Teaching, 13, 150-164. https://doi.org/10.46504/14201808go
Greenwood, D. A. (2017). Mushrooms and sweetgrass: A biotic harvest of culture and place-based learning. The Journal of Environmental Education, 48(3), 205–212. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.2017.1299675
Haraway, D. (2018). Staying with the trouble for multispecies environmental justice. Dialogues in Human Geography, 8(1), 102-105. https://doi.org/10.1177/2043820617739208
Institute for Local Community Development. (1993). Community forest in Thailand: Development. A tropical rainforest with an overview of community forestry in Thailand. Institute for Local Community Development. (in Thai)
Ito, H., & Igano, C. (2020). Place-based environmental education to promote eco-initiatives: The case of Yokohama, Japan. Regional Studies, Regional Science, 7(1), 292–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/21681376.2020.1794950
Jatuporn, O. (2025). Pre-service teacher preparation model for cultivating posthumanist global citizenship in the urban context. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, 46(1), 460127. https://doi.org/10.34044/j.kjss.2025.46.1.27
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network theory. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199256044.001.0001
Learning in Places Collaborative. (2020). Framework: Nature-culture relations. Learning in Places.
Lynch, J., & Mannion, G. (2021). Place-responsive pedagogies in the anthropocene: Attuning with the more-than-human. Environmental Education Research, 27(6), 864–878. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2020.1867710
Mannion, G., Fenwick, A., & Lynch, J. (2013). Place-responsive pedagogy: Learning from teachers’ experiences of excursions in nature. Environmental Education Research, 19(6), 792–809. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2012.749980
Misiaszek, G.W. (2021). Ecopedagogy: Critical environmental teaching for planetary justice and global sustainable development. Bloomsbury Academic.
Molina-Motos, D. (2019). Ecophilosophical principles for an ecocentric environmental education. Education Sciences, 9(1), 37. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9010037
Patton. M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Sage Publications.
Pollution Control Department. (2024). Thailand state of pollution report 2023. Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment. (in Thai)
Ponrach, P. (2013). A book review in “Ordained forest, destiny revier: Forest and water cultural management”. Journal of Environmental and Sustainable Management, 9(1), 107-123.
Ruengpanit, N. (2003). Natural resources and environment conservation. Kasetsart University Press. (in Thai)
Smith, G. A., & Sobel, D. (2010). Place- and community-based education in schools. Taylor & Francis Group.
Sobel, D. (2004). Place-based education: Connecting classrooms and communities. Orion Society.
Soga, M., & Gaston, K. J. (2016). Extinction of experience: The loss of human-nature interactions. Frontiers in Ecology and Environment, 14(2), 94–101. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.1225
Shimabukuro, M., Toki, T., Shimabukuro, H., Kubo, Y., Takahashi, S., & Shinjo, R. (2022). Development and application of an environmental education tool (board game) for teaching integrated resource management of the water cycle on coral reef islands. Sustainability, 14(24), 16562. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142416562
Somerville, M. (2013). The nature/cultures of children’s place learning maps. Global Studies of Childhood, 3(4), 407-417. https://doi.org/10.2304/gsch.2013.3.4.407
Tsing, A. L. (2015). The mushroom at the end of the world: On the possibility of life in capitalist ruins. Princeton University Press.
Tsai, J.C., Cheng, P.H., Liu, S.Y., & Chang, C. (2019). Using board games to teach socioscientific issues on biological conservation and economic development in Taiwan. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 18(4), 634-645. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/19.18.634
Tsai, J.C., Liu, S.Y., Chang, C.Y., & Chen, S.Y. (2021). Using a board game to teach about sustainable development. Sustainability, 13(9), 4942. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13094942