Feedback blog 8 (Joan Wildenberg and Carl Kuehl)

Joan Wildenberg. No blog

Carl Kuehl,

The idea you put forth was an interesting concept. The rules are clear and the underlying thought would be learned by playing the game. I don’t know if it would be interesting to play though, but it would definitely be worth a try. One small point of critique though is that I see no reason for some characteristics being transmitted through imitation as the selection of favorable characteristics (status, speed, maintenance costs, fuel efficiency, sustainability, design) is fully random and is actually perceived by the players as random as well. There would be no drive to imitate one another.

Feedback blog 7 (Sway Leung and Ella Baz

Sway Leung. No blog

Ella Baz,

This was very nice to read. I think you went about it structured and logical. The last part where you look at the effectiveness of the policies is a bit short and could have been extended more. During outlining your policies the difference between the use of external control or setting boundary conditions becomes less explicit. After that it comes back again at the end. This could be improved by extending the last part but is not necessary.

Feedback blog 6 (Laura Lucas and Zinzi Wits)

Zinzi Wits,

I like your way of writing. It’s enticing and unpretentious. However, your suggested adjustments to the game are somewhat limited if the goal is to play the game in the classroom. The suggestions are rather to improve the real life example of overfishing. I disagree that marking 25 fish to keep the population up to date keeps the game element alive. However, this could maybe be adjusted in order to do so. Even more, forming a global cooperative undermines the gaming element and in real life, seems highly unlikely. 

Laura Lucas. No blog

Feedback blog 5 (Chloë Lejeune and Thodoris Spathas)

Chloë Lejeune,

The topic is different from what other people use. That is a welcome change. I like the way you structured you content. Your explanation was very straightforward. It is too bad you didn’t find anything more to fill in the content gaps in the end. For the material side of the assignment, I suggest you to look into an explanation how opening his own factory in China actually increases his ability to close material loops. As a producer of dresses he has more power than as a retailer.

Thodoris Spathas. No blog

Feedback blog 4 (Jeroen Huisman and Imme Groet)

Jeroen Huisman,

I thought your article was a bit confusing. You made multiple grammar mistakes which made it difficult to read and gave the impression it was written in a hastly manner. The content was good and to the point. At the end, you maybe could add some side remarks about the feasibility of some of your strategies. For example, the second option you bring forth, that the Chinese government checks the factory on a regular basis, looks like something that either already gets done, China being a rather communist state, or an option Nokia cannot take into account.

Feedback blog 3 (Laurens Boulens and Marco Meloni)

Laurens B, 

I really liked your article. You gave a very detailed and extensive description of all the elements in the SES. However, using Ostrom you dissected the situation very clearly, but in my eyes did not analyze it. You didn’t try to answer a question nor did you write a conclusion about the area. It wasn’t more than a description. However, the entire blog was nice, because in contrast your take on Friedman together with the earlier description actually concluded everything nicely. 

Marco Meloni,

The first part of your blog was comprehensive. The topic is a traditional SES and a very difficult one to analyze at best. I liked your background research and this did provide some extra insight in the situation. However, it is my personal feeling that you did not provide strong arguments in your analysis. ‘The CFP has not managed to induce compliance’. How come? The provision of infrastructure is not a major point according to you, but can’t this be linked to the inability of inducing compliance? If there is more infrastructure at place to check fishing regulation, might this not increase the success by CFP? Finally, a conclusion in this part is also missing, which is always useful when making an analysis. Overall, I believe you should have invested more time in backing up your argumentations or even finding information on the points addressed. 

The second part I though was very original and creative out of the box thinking. Even though, the usability of your proposition is virtually zero, the idea behind it gives a clear statement about how far we have to take it in order to achieve sustainable measures.