Navigating Decision-Making Across Borders: A Game-Based Approach to Water Governance

Lake Champlain’s governance presents a special challenge, as it spans two U.S. states, a province, and an international border. Vermont, New York, and Québec each hold jurisdiction over portions of the lake, facing distinct environmental and policy challenges. With multiple stakeholders involved, how are decisions made for this critical water body?

Curt Gervich, a professor at SUNY Plattsburgh and a member of the Lake Champlain Sea Grant (LCSG) Program Advisory Committee, has firsthand experience grappling with these complexities. His work on an International Joint Commission (IJC) board convened to examine frequent flooding in the Lake Champlain Basin and Richelieu River, alongside water resource experts including LCSG Associate Director Kris Stepenuck, revealed critical barriers to effective decision-making at this level. In response, Gervich turned to an unconventional tool—game design—to create an interactive workshop aimed at improving collaboration among scientists and decision makers that approach environmental problem solving from different perspectives.

“I wanted to use my experience to inform others about what decision-making may look like in transboundary scenarios, and give them a chance to develop and practice environmental decision-making competencies outside of a high-stakes process,” Gervich explained. “Too often, the only time we discuss how to make decisions is when it's urgent, like in the aftermath of a flood. But without practicing in a safe place to experiment and make mistakes beforehand, we can’t be expected to be effective when it really matters. Role play and storytelling are great ways to explore and navigate the dynamics of collaborative environmental decision making, just like an athlete would scrimmage before a big game or a musician before a concert.”

Gervich piloted the workshop in early February with LCSG staff and partners. Participants were introduced to a fictional setting: Blue Mountain Lake, a water body situated between three territories—Agricultura, Foresteria, and Mountainia. Like Lake Champlain, Blue Mountain Lake experiences seasonal flooding, though its impacts vary across the region. Lakeshore areas face regular spring flooding, while extreme storms affect headwater streams more acutely. As a result, each territory prioritizes different aspects of the problem and proposes distinct solutions.

The workshop’s scenario positioned participants as members of a Transboundary Water Agency advisory board, tasked with developing a strategy to address flooding in the basin. Roles were randomly assigned, representing scientific experts and decision-makers from a variety of water resource professions. Each character’s profile outlined their environmental management philosophy, governance approach, and knowledge orientation which all ultimately shape their decision-making perspectives.

Through guided discussions and activities, participants worked toward consensus on critical questions, including:

• What is the goal of our project?
• What methods and themes should we consider?
• What does consensus-building look like?
• Who has the authority to make final decisions?
• How do we engage the community in the process?

After two hours of debate and negotiation both in a large group and in small teams, the session concluded with reflections from participants.

“Using fictional roles allowed me to engage with staff members in a way I wouldn’t have in a typical setting,” said LCSG Director Anne Jefferson. “The fictional nature of the game ensured that we all approached the discussion with equal standing. With randomly assigned roles, we   got the chance to explore different perspectives that we might not normally think about.”

For shared resources like Blue Mountain Lake—and by extension, Lake Champlain—decision-making can be complicated by jurisdictional boundaries and competing interests. This game highlights the dynamics that can both help and hinder the process. By creating a space to practice navigating the complexity of collaborative problem-solving, Gervich’s workshop provides a valuable tool for understanding the challenges of transboundary governance and exploring new ways to work together.