The Interplay of Virtual Engagement and Real-World Action in Pro-Environmental Games: Towards a Conceptualisation of an Alternative Virtual Environmental Participation Model - An Analysis of Participation on Alipay Ant Forest

The Interplay of Virtual Engagement and Real-World Action in Pro-Environmental Games: Towards a Conceptualisation of an Alternative Virtual Environmental Participation Model - An Analysis of Participation on Alipay Ant Forest | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Article The Interplay of Virtual Engagement and Real-World Action in Pro-Environmental Games: Towards a Conceptualisation of an Alternative Virtual Environmental Participation Model - An Analysis of Participation on Alipay Ant Forest Qingning Wang This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-6643000/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract This research investigates the interplay between virtual and offline experiences in environmental engagement, using the online social game (OSG) Ant Forest as a case study. It explores the boundary between users’ virtual and offline engagements, arguing that these two realms are effectively blended in facilitating environmental participation through the OSG and creating measurable pro-environmental results. Employing a qualitative approach, the research argues that the roles of digital media in environmental participation extend beyond the traditional model of facilitating communication, raising awareness, and mobilising collective activism. By transferring offline pro-environmental behaviours into virtual social media capital, and then exchanging that virtual capital for real trees, the OSG offers an alternative and innovative mechanism to engage the public in environmental protection. Social science/Cultural and media studies Social science/Environmental studies Social science/Science technology and society virtual environmental participation online social game Ant Forest social media capitals public engagements Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 1. Introduction Environmental participation, a distinct form of public engagement (Landström, 2020 ), involves collective or individual public actions interacting with the natural environment and managing the society-environment relationship. Amid a deepening environmental crisis, growing public concern has led to increased environmental participation (Funk et al., 2020), prompting academic research into its various forms and impacts (Glucker et al., 2013 ). A key debate compares virtual and offline engagements (Mercea, 2012 ; Pina & Royo, 2017; Vissers et al., 2012 ), exploring their interaction and influence on public participation. This debate is significant for critically evaluating the causes, effectiveness, and consequences of different participation types, informing research, engagement, and policy (Stern & Dietz, 2008 ), and for understanding the interplay between virtual and offline public participation (Vissers & Stolle, 2014 ) by analyzing the power dynamics of citizen engagements across both spheres (Di Gennaro & Dutton, 2006 ; Arlt et al., 2018 ). This research examines the virtual and offline environmental participation relationship by focusing on pro-environment online social games (OSG), defined as 'Internet-based games that use social networks to extend in-game functionality' (Balint et al., 2011 : 35). Popular for their social experiences (Ducheneaut & Moore, 2004 ), pro-environment OSGs gamify environmental engagement (Morganti et al., 2017 ) and are crucial for integrating pro-environmental actions into daily life, potentially increasing user motivation (Ashfaq et al., 2022 ). This study aims to explore the boundary between virtual and offline user experiences with these games, arguing that a blended boundary can effectively mobilise public environmental participation. This research employs Ant Forest (Chen et al., 2020 ), a successful pro-environmental OSG integrated within China's Alipay app, as a case study. Developed against a backdrop of increasing environmental awareness in China (Wang & Liu, 2017 ), Ant Forest had amassed over 550 million users and facilitated the planting of over 223 million real trees by 2021 (Chinese Academy of Science, 2021 ), a success acknowledged by the UNFCCC ( 2019 ) for its potential in harnessing digital technology for planetary safeguarding. Its efficacy is thought to stem from its mechanics (Chen et al., 2020 ): a virtual woodland interface where users accrue 'green energy points' via low-carbon activities and social interactions to cultivate virtual trees, which Alipay then corresponds with actual trees in conservation zones (UNFCCC, 2019 ). Ant Forest's mechanics are considered central to its success (Chen et al., 2020 ). Its in-game interface features a virtual forest, with activities focused on tree growth (See Fig. 1 ), fuelled by 'green energy points'. Users gain these points through low-carbon behaviours (like using public transport, cycling, and walking) and in-app social interactions with friends (See Figs. 2 and 3 ). Accumulating enough points allows users to exchange them for trees (See Fig. 4 ). Once a virtual tree has grown on the user's app, Alipay matches it with a real tree in designated conservation areas, thereby contributing to environmental protection (UNFCCC, 2019 ). UNFCCC ( 2019 ) suggested that the initial results of Ant Forest were promising, offering new ideas for using digital technology for environmental engagement. UNFCCC’s suggestion is the starting point of this research, and its purpose is to critically discuss the ‘new ideas’ that the Ant Forest offered for environmental engagement, with a particular focus on the relationship between virtual and offline participations from users. To be more specific: although Ant Forest is an OSG, it would be oversimplified to categorise the engagement through the Ant Forest as virtual participation only. Because the game relies on both virtual and offline participations to protect the environment: it motivates users to engage in offline pro-environmental actions, these actions are measured and rewarded virtually, and then transfer into tangible conservation results (i.e. trees). The Ant Forest proposes an innovative model with a mix of virtual and offline engagements, which are closely linked throughout the process of environmental protections. This research takes a user’s-experience approach to study the virtual and offline participations in the Ant Forest model, with the following questions: 1. How do users differentiate virtual and offline environmental participation in Ant Forest? 1.1 Whether do people regard using Ant Forest as virtual or offline environmental participation? 1.2 Whether do people see their engagement with the Ant Forest as real or virtual environmental participations, or whether the boundary between virtual and real is blurred? 2. What do the users’ experience suggest about virtual and offline environmental participation through OSG, in terms of perceptions, actions and results? Users’ approach is important in the discussions about the Ant Forest’s model, because they can critically demonstrate how digital technology can effectively mobilise the users through combining virtual and offline engagements for optimised results in environmental protections. With such an understanding, it is possible to extend the model to other regions, as UNFCCC ( 2019 ) encouraged. To address these questions, this paper will first define offline and virtual environmental participation and review existing literature on Ant Forest. Employing interviews to gain in-depth understanding of individuals' perceptions of their environmental participation, the empirical results will enhance understanding of the relationship between environmental participation and digital technology, specifically how OSGs can be used for environmental protection and their potential outcomes. Furthermore, these findings can contribute to conceptualising blended environmental participation as a novel model for public environmental mobilisation. 2. Virtual Participations: Definitions and Debates Virtual participation, be it political, social, or environmental, was initially seen as an extension of offline public engagement (Ruess et al., 2023 ), a notion with sceptical implications suggesting it merely transfers old behaviours online without adding value (Lutz & Hoffmann, 2017 ). This view implies virtual participation's dependence on offline activities and limitations (Lutz & Hoffmann, 2017 ), often leading to its dismissal as less meaningful and lacking quality control (Kersting, 2013 ). It was frequently linked to slacktivism (Morozov, 2011 : 186) – participation driven by self-satisfaction and social impression rather than genuine commitment, with easy actions like joining groups or signing petitions seen as unlikely to yield real societal change (Christensen, 2011 ). By associating virtual participation with slacktivism, critics questioned its outcomes and suggested it lacked inherent value without offline impact (Ward et al., 2003 ). Such a view is challenged, as the definitions and understandings of virtual participations are broadened and became more critical. The arguments that virtual participations are less meaningful and cannot generate real impacts, are based on the perceptions that things happened offline are more important and real than virtual, and virtual participations cannot and should not be separated from offline experiences. To challenge them, scholars argue certain virtual activities should be seen as distinctive types, as they emerged exclusively virtual, and generated impacts on individual’s perceptions, behaviours and even on policies, such as hashtag movements (Oser, et. al., 2013 ). To recognise the importance of these types, one needs to firstly accept that virtual participations can generate impacts and results without involving offline elements, and although the impacts and results remain entirely virtual, they still have values. Thus, virtual public participations should thus be differentiated in its conceptualisation from offline participations (Gibson and Cantijoch, 2013 ). A more critical and widely accepted view is that virtual and offline participations are interchangeable, as virtual and offline elements often co-exist and interact with each other (Kersting, 2016 ). Jenkins (2009) argued that virtual participations has constituted a property of culture in modern society. Lutz, et., al. (2014) further interpreted that this culture has three dimensions: the creative dimension, the social dimension and the motivational dimension. Public participate virtually to create and share contents, to socialise with other individuals and groups, and to pursuit certain goals, which can be social, cultural or political. The motivations, actions and results of virtual participations are intimately linked with social production and human experiences, which are indispensable elements in our society. To date, many human experiences are sets of interchangeable activities carried out through different channels (Ruess et. al., 2023 ). Participations can move between virtual and offline freely, and virtual and offline actions often interchange and interact with each other. Therefore, the focus of academic debates have gradually shifted from distinguishing virtual and offline participations to study the interplay between virtual and offline participations (DeHaan et. al., 2013 ; Macafee, 2018 ). This also applies to discussions about environmental participation. 3. Environmental Participation: Virtual and Offline As stated, environmental participation is a type of public participation, and to engage with the environment and to work with human-environment relationship is the purpose of participation. There are no universally agreed ways to categorise types of environmental participations, but often who participate in the process are used as criteria, i.e. whether the participation take place at government, institutional level, or public level (Landström, 2020 ). This research particularly focuses on the public level engagements, namely engagements from the citizens, individually or collectively. Public engagements into environment can take various forms, but overall they can be put into three big categories: To inform/be informed, to educate/be educated and, to express/to listen. This category highlights the importance of information, opinions and education to increase public’s environmental awareness (UN, 2023 ). This category also includes organising and participating in environmental protests and movements, since these are key actions to make voices to be heard (Hutchins & Lester, 2006 ). To embed environmental participations in daily lives and activities, such as reduce personal carbon footprint (Boucher, 2016 ). This category highlights the significance of individual’s everyday life styles for the environment, namely environmental engagements can be embedded into daily routines, thus encourage day-to-day actions. Preservations and conservations through volunteering works (WWF, 2023 ). This category highlights actions outside daily lives, and often require more efforts. Actions such as tree planting in deforested areas, working for nature reserves or parks, and species preservations are put into this category. These categorised environmental participations can all be engaged without the digital media. Indeed environmental participation exited prior to the public use of digital media (Ghai & Vivian, 1995 ). Engaging virtual is a relatively recent idea, and the key debate often draws on how the digital media can better facilitate or limit environmental participations (Kingston, et. al., 2000 ). Studies (Esty, 2004 ) firstly demonstrated that digital media provided public accessible platforms for information sharing and public education, which successfully increased public’s awareness of environmental issues and their knowledge of environmental protection. Other studies (Lester & Hutchins, 2009 ) focused on digital media’s roles in campaign and protest. It is argued that digital technology, the Internet in particular, enabled the organisation of campaigns and protests to be more democratic, transparent and expanded the outreach, scope and length of actions. Recent studies started to pay attention to the day-to-day use of digital media, which are embodied into everyday environmental protection behaviours and talks (Sun, et. al., 2018 ). The most significant day-to-day use of digital media for environmental participation is through social media. Traditionally, social media are regarded as fast, easy access and constant, which provided ideal platforms for the public to gain knowledge and express opinions (Arbatani et. al., 2016 ), to spread and access information about environmental campaigns and to support environmental actions (Kaur and Chahal, 2018 ). Thus they are seen as one of the most effective ways to increase public awareness of environmental issues and to generate impacts. As Fig. 5 showed, the existing literature on virtual environmental participations particularly reinforces the power of the digital media relies on information. The decentralised and networked characteristics of the Internet determine it can afford wider public access and spread of the information, thus increase the inclusiveness and outreach of information (Sullivan & Xie, 2009 ). In this process, the public can access a wide range of ideas and opinions, which are expressed by different stakeholders on different issues, thus they be better educated. Criticism on virtual environmental participations follows the same logics as those for virtual participations in general, namely virtual engagements can hardly generated real offline actions to protect the environments (Wu et. al., 2022 ). Although the Internet has the power to influence what people read and watch, virtual actions are still indirect. To be more specific, posting and reading contents virtual, or engaging in protests virtual can only increase the volume of information related to the environmental participation, but are still different from behaviours that are directly act on the environment, such as recycling and planting trees. The criticism does not mean virtual participation is less meaningful, but rather mean the critics believed there were clear boundaries to define what people can achieve by using the Internet and what they cannot achieve. If we use the above stated three categories of environmental participations to understand the boundary, the critics’ statements showed their limitations. For them, virtual participations are directly associated to information, expression and educations, but are not directly associated to daily activities, preservations and conservations. But indirectness does not mean no impacts can be led to. When people are using the digital media, they can be informed and educated, which then become determining factors to change daily activities, or/and to engage in preservations and conservation. Environmental protection is increasingly become an interchangeable experience between virtual and offline, with virtual participations act as hub for information to facilitate further offline participations. To differentiate virtual and offline may no longer applicable in discussion about the environmental participation and to set firm boundaries between the two also becomes increasingly difficult, or even impossible. The debate should be shifted towards one that examines the interchanges and interactions between virtual and offline actions, and this study of the Ant Forest is among them. 4. Ant Forest: Towards a New Conceptualisation of the Virtual and Offline Environmental Engagements Facing the deepened environmental crisis, different actions have been taken in China at national and local levels by the government, commercial and non-commercial organisations, and public participations are largely encouraged (Zhang & Wen, 2008 ; Li, et., al., 2012). The Internet are believed to be crucial and wildly used by the public to engage in environmental protection (Wang, et. al, 2013 ; Yang, 2003 ). However, different from democratic countries, collective public activisms, protest in particular, are largely restricted in China. So although environmental participations are possible and even popular, it is difficult for them to take forms of demonstration or social movement, and to directly criticise policies and the government (Wang, 2020 ). As a result of the restrictions, Chinese environmental participations often focus on individuals’ lifestyles and behaviours, and seek alternative use of the digital media to impact on daily activities. Ant Forest is one of successful examples. Ant Forest has attracted academic interests since its launch. Studies are particular carried out to examine the behaviours patterns of users (Zhang, et. al., 2020 ), the motivations (Ashfaq, et. al., 2022 ), short term and long term behavioural changes (Mi, et. al., 2021 ), and the impacts and results (Zhang et. al., 2022 ). Yang et. al., ( 2018 ) indicate that Ant Forest is based on a system to ‘integrate green lifestyle with environmental protection, to reward offline pro-environmental daily actives virtually through app, and to allow users to get ‘a sense of accomplishment while being entertained’. More importantly, Ant Forest has created a doubling up effect. As Ashfaq, et. al. ( 2021 ) argued, the design that individuals’ daily offline actions can be transferred into a virtual tree, and the virtual tree can be transferred into a real tree in a deforest area, distinguishes the Ant Forest from other apps. It establishes a model, in which one’s green lifestyle can create two layers of environmental effects: reduce carbon footprint, and preservations of deforested area. The sense of accomplishments by using the Ant Forest excessed other types of virtual participations and became powerful motivation and constant driving force to engage users. The designs and uses of Ant Forest are well explored in previous academic studies, and this study shifts its focus by using the Ant Forest as an important example to understand the blended boundary between virtual and offline actions in environmental participation through using of digital media, by asking how do users differentiate the virtual and offline experiences, and what do their perceptions, actions and results of their actions mean for the innovative model of pro-environmental OSGs. In order discuss the user’s virtual and offline experiences, this research establishes the following theoretical framework that each examines one elements of the environmental participations: Table 1. Theoretical Framework (insert here) Table 1. Theoretical Framework Perceptions Actions Results Element How do users percept their own actions: virtual or offline, or either, or blended Whether the actions are taken virtual or offline, or blended Whether the results of actions are virtual or offline, or blended Significance Enables the research to understand how people define their own usage of Ant Forest. The empirical data leads to discuss whether people regard their participations through the Ant Forest as virtual or offline, or defining the boundary becomes difficult. Enables the research to further explore the nature of actions through the Ant Forest. The empirical data leads to discussion of whether these actions are virtual or real, or a blended of both. And if blended, how. Enables the research to study the results of actions through the Ant Forest. The empirical data leads to discuss whether the results are achieved virtual or offline or a blended of both. And if blended, how. 5. Method Semi-structured interview is used as method. Interview is the most suitable method because this study aims to establish critical and specific understandings of people’s perceptions and actions surrounding the use of Ant Forest. Schmidt ( 2004 : 2955) demonstrated that semi-structured interview is ‘versatile and flexible’,and leads to ‘reciprocity between the interviewer and participant’. Semi-structured interview enables this research to have in-depth and extensive conversations with users of the Ant Forest, to understand how they see and use the app. The collected qualitative data can then lead to critical discussions of the boundary between virtual and offline environmental participations, and to explore whether they are being blended, and if so, how. To conduct the interview, a snowball sampling approach is used through social network on the Ant Forest. This approach is applied because Ant Forest is a social media app, it encourages users to connect with friends on the platform, so they can see and ‘steal’ each other’s energy points (Yang et. al., 2018 ). Using the existing social network, the author can directly approach to Ant Forest users, who are the targets of the research. In July 2023, the author sent out message to all Ant Forest friends on their own network, to invite them for interview. When one friend replied to author’s message, regardless whether they agreed to be interviewed, the author asked them to send message about interview to their friends on Ant Forest, to roll the sampling size. During the period between July 2023 and December 2023, 10 people in the author’s own and extended social network accepted interview request, 8 people were interviewed at the end, and 1 declined at the last stage. Although the interviewee numbers were not big, after a few rounds of interviews, shared and repeated themes were identified that provided rich data for analyses. After interview, data is transcribed and coded. An open coding scheme is applied to organise interview data into three categories: 1) Perceptions, 2) Actions, and 3) Results, which are established according to the theoretical framework. Two coders engaged in this process, the author and a research assistant, to ensure the inter-coder reliability. Both coders worked independently but followed the same criteria in coding: if the interviewees talked about what they thought about the Ant Forest, then the contents are categorised into Perceptions; if they talked about what they did on the Ant Forest, then the Action category, and if they discussed what had been achieved through the OSG, then the Result category. 6. Findings After coding and analysing, it becomes clear that although participants expressed different opinions about Ant Forest, still there was a strong sense that the actions and results associated with this OSG were clearly blended between virtual and real. The following section will unfold the results. 6.1 Perceptions Perceptions refer to how users of the Ant Forest understand and define the nature of the platform, whether do they see it as virtual or real. In the interview, people’s opinions were mixed, as 5 interviewees initially suggested it was offline, and 2 believed it was virtual. But as conversations developed, 5 people started to portray the Ant Forest as a mix of virtual and offline. The differences also appeared when the reasons of their perceptions are asked. Some stated their perceptions were determined by what they are doing on and through the OSG, i.e. their actions; some stated they made the judgements based on what had been achieved through the platform, i.e. the results. For example, in a conversation with Interviewee B: B: “ The trees that I planted in the Ant Forest are virtual. Although the company promised they would match a real tree, still I did not actually see the tree myself . ” Researcher: “ so, you believed your actions were virtual, not real, not offline ?” B: “ emmm…. But my actions were real. I clicked the app and opened it, and these procedures were real. These are the real actions conducted by me. As for the trees, although they were planted in a virtual setting, they were results of my real actions. They (the virtual and real) are related. ” Interviewee D also expressed similar opinions: D: “ If I must choose between real and virtual, I will say it is real .” Researcher: “ If you don’t have to pick one of them? ” D: “ Then I will say it is a mix of virtual and real. I think 75% is real and 25% is virtual. Because I did not actually see the trees, so it made me feel virtual. But because the trees actually existed, so if I see them, they will become real for me . ” B and D held different initial thoughts about Ant Forest, they also had different judging criteria when defining whether the Ant Forest is virtual or real. For B , to percept the platform is virtual because of the actions, but for D , results (trees) became the reason. Actions and results were also mentioned by other participants as their accordance for perceptions. For interviewee A believed the Ant Forest was real, because “ all energies and other things I contributed in the Ant Forest, would lead to something real somewhere…. Although it was indirect, my actions led to real results .” Interviewee S also believed the Ant Forest was real, because “ the fruits trees, the apple trees, offered me real results ”. These answers mean that users’ perceptions of the Ant Forest are often based on what they did, and what was led to. Interviewee S , on the other hand, gave a slightly different interpretation: S: “ No, it does not matter (whether it is real or virtual). The point is I feel I must believe. The precondition (for the Ant Forest) is believing: all my actions will lead to real environmental protections. It is not only a virtual game. It is not the case that a tree and a grass appear in a virtual world. It is the case they existed physically in the real world .” The idea of ‘believing’ stresses on the perception itself, namely the understandings towards the Ant Forest. To choose to engage in environmental protect through the Ant Forest, one must believe the concept of the platform and believe firmly the game they played on their phone can end up with a tree somewhere in the planet. Only by having this perception, users will use and continually use the Ant Forest. To be more critical, this sense of ‘believe’ also means to see the boundary between virtual and real is interchangeable, and accept the concept that use of virtual platform is not separated from the real world. 6.2 Action Most of conversations about the Ant Forest during the interview were related to the actions. As stated, actions were used as key criteria by users to determine whether the Ant Forest was virtual or real. Interviewees thus have made very specific descriptions of their actions. Interestingly, although according to previous literature, virtual environmental participations are often seen as associating with information and education; actually none of the interviewee mentioned about using the Ant Forest to access information, or to express pro-environmental opinions. This digital platform does not act as a mean to exchange information, instead, it functions as a medium to socialise and to facilitate interchanges between virtual and offline environmental protecting actions. 6.2.1 Generating and Collecting the Green Energy To generate and collect energy is the second major theme related to actions. As stated previously, through generating and collecting green energies, users can plant trees on the Ant Forest. The green energies need to be generated through pro-environmental actions that are recognised by the Ant Forest, and can also be generating by using the Alipay to make payment. While one can collect own energies once they are generated, and can also ‘steal’ energies from friends on the Ant Forest. Therefore, when talking about the green energy, both virtual and offline actions occurred in the interview. Walking, taking public transports and riding sharing bikes are three major actions talked by the interviewees to generate energy. Interviewee S said: “ Walking is the most important way. I generate energy by recoding my walking steps. For example, if I walked 10000 steps today, I will have more than 100 green energies the next day ”. Interviewee M , gave a more comprehensive discussion: “ all low-carbon emissions transportation methods, like public transports (can generate energy). But I walk more, because walking can generate more green energies than other methods. Additionally, if I order food delivery (through Alipay’s delivery platform), I will ask the restaurant not to give me any disposable cutlery, I can also generate green .” Energies can also be generated through virtual actions, such as virtual payments. T said: “ I pay everything through the Alipay now to generate green energy .” M took one step further, who indicated: “ At the beginning of each month, I pay my water and electricity bills virtually, make other payment virtually and requiring fapiao virtually (to generate green energy) .” When it comes to collecting the green energy, the actions are taking entirely online. Interviewee E said: “ Before I got up in the morning, I often open the Ant Forest to collect the energy. ” M also has similar routine, who said: “ because the green energy will be ready for collection after 7am. So I have my breakfast at this time while collecting energy .” From the interviews, it is clear that generating and collecting green energy require both virtual and offline actions. The boundary between virtual and offline actions are blended, as offline actions need to claim its value (green energy) through virtual platform, and virtual platform need to rely on offline and virtual actions for recourses to feed the green energy. They cannot be separated from each other, instead, they are a series of inter-related actions that take place virtually and offline synchronously and asynchronously. 6.2.2 Results All interviewees, in their own ways, described the results of using of the Ant Forest was for the environment. Some of them were more specific, regarding trees as results, while other were more general, regarding environment protection as the results. A strong character of blending between virtual and offline was emerged during the interviewees. One interviewee even challenged the very intention to distinguish virtual and offline when discussing the results. The only interviewee believed the results were entirely virtual is E : All of the results were data, or should say datafication of human behaviours. Ant Forest use the data I generated to shape other, or shall I say, to shape business activities . Researcher: “ So even if your actions can lead to an offline result, like a real tree, you still believe they are virtual ?” E: “ It’s like virtual shopping, it will always be different from shopping in a mall. Because from the beginning, we access everything virtual…Also, these results of (planting trees) are self-imaginations. You cannot actually see the proofs .” The argument of datafication, means E regarded everything they created through the Ant Forest belonged to the virtual realm. Because their actions were realised through a virtual platform, and the promised offline results (trees) were not directly accessible by users themselves. On contrast, D firmly stated the results were offline: D: “ Offline. They rely on the virtual platform to increase accessibility, and because of the digital media, more people can participate. The results is that people do not have to go to somewhere to participate in offline volunteering activities, trees can still be planted .” Researcher: “ Does this mean although actions are virtual, the results are offline .” D: “ Yes, because real trees are planted……Although the actions of planting the tree are not conducted personally by myself, still the tree is there, it is real .” D ’s reinforced that the tree was real several times in the conversation, which clearly indicated their attitudes. The nature of the results, i.e. the tree belongs to the offline realm, became the determining factor to make the judgments. While for others, the boundary between virtual and offline results was not clear. As T put: “ I think both (virtual and offline). Because you need to clicked your phone to plant the virtual tree. While by having the virtual tree, there will be a real tree. I felt I planted a tree .” In A’s words: “ (The results) are actually small things in our daily lives. You do small things easily to protect the environment. It is not the case that you need to participate in a specific project (to realise something). The boundary between virtual and offline is thus blurring. ” More critical views are spoken by S : “ I think the line between virtual and offline is blending. This is actually an overall trend of e-commerce. We buy things virtually, but the goods are delivered to us offline. The use of Ant Forest is actually very similar to I make an order online and receive the order offline. As for the Ant Forest, I consumed virtually, or accumulated the energy virtually, and use the energy points to exchange for trees. Although the purpose is to protect the environment, the underlining logics are the same as e-commerce .” S placed the Ant Forest within the big context of e-commerce. Alipay, the hosting platform for the Ant Forest, is one of the key driving forces of e-commerce in China. As a part of the Alipay, the Ant Forest is built on the same mechanism: planting of virtual tree are results of exchange of energy, which occurred in the virtual realm; while the real tree are the commodities generated by virtual exchange and are delivered in the offline realm. In this process, different results interchanged between virtual and offline at different stages, but deliver environmental protection results as a whole. M challenged the researcher’s question about virtual or offline results. As a very dedicated user of Ant Forest, M planted more than 100 trees through Ant Forest. Masaki: “ I planted the trees in the Ant Forest. I accumulated a sufficient amount of energy to exchange for trees, and they were transferred into real trees. I went to Dunhuang before, where Ant Forest planted a lot of haloxylon ammondendrons. When I was about to landing, I indeed saw sudden appearance of an oasis in the dessert. I thought, ah, all the trees that I planted, they actually look like these. ” M: “ The Ant Forest is interchange between virtual and offline. Through a series of virtual actions, the ecosystem in real life is positively impacted…..I also feel it is not necessary to purposely separate the boundary…..I feel as long as a series actions can lead to planting of trees, it does not really matter if they were virtual or offline. Through a series of interchanges and convergence between virtual and offline resources, Ant Forest can realise the results, and the results are collective .” As an active pro-environmental participant, M concerned more about what could be achieved, and concerned less about how to achieve the goal. Holding such a perception, M’ s arguments reinforced that although the final result, i.e., planting of the tree, need to be realised offline, the whole accumulation process is a series of blended virtual and offline actions, which serves one ultimate goal. To talk about the interchange between virtual and offline, M put forward the sense that it is impossible to talk about the offline results without the virtual accumulating process, and it is also inappropriate to talk about virtual actions without considering what can be led offline. 7. Discussion and Conclusion The empirical data show that not only users tended to percept using the Ant Forest as blended virtual and offline participations, but also, they described their engagements, both actions and results, as interchanging between virtual and offline. UNFCCC labels the Ant Forest as an innovative model and such an innovation is achieved through a blending of offline and virtual engagements. Table 2 , which applies users’ approach to de-construct the mechanism of the Ant Forests, shows there are three stages of using the Ant Forest, namely, energy generating, virtual tree planting, and real tree planting: Table 2. Virtual and Offline Participations through Ant Forest Stage 1.Energy generating 2.Virtual tree planting 3.Real tree planting Actions Offline Low-carbon-emission daily activities by users Virtual payments by users Steal energies from friends on Ant Forest by users Collect and accumulate energies by users in Ant Forest Choose trees and exchange them by using the green energy by users in Ant Forest Trees plant in de-forested area by Ant Forest Monitor the trees by users through Ant Forest Types of environmental participations Daily activities Daily activities Conservation and preservation Results Green energies are recorded and visualised on the Ant Forest platform Virtual trees are planted in Ant Forest by users Real trees are planted in De-forested area Table 2 . Virtual and Offline Participations through Ant Forest (insert here) Interviewees suggest stage 1 and 3 involve both virtual and offline actions, while stage 2 involves only virtual actions. Stage 1 and 2 lead to results in virtual realm and stage 3 leads to results in offline realm. Virtual and offline actions and results are interchanging throughout the process, without virtual actions there won’t be offline results, and without offline actions and results there won’t be further virtual actions and results. Under such a circumstance, it became difficult to define whether Ant Forest facilitate virtual or offline environmental participation, because both virtual and offline became indispensable and inseparable to achieve the goal of environmental protection. It is through blending the virtual and offline actions and results, Ant Forest successfully engages the public to protect the environment and motivates users to continue use the app. What is more, Ant Forest provides a different model to discuss the relationship between virtual and offline participations (see Fig. 6). The literature suggests online platforms often act as information hub for people to access opinions and information of environmental issues, or as de-centralised space to organise protests or call for actions, while actions are then taken offline to realise intended purpose (Kersting, 2016 , Ruess et. al., 2023 ). However, Ant Forest was not regarded by any interviewees as an information hub, and either of them use it to engage in environmental protests. Instead, it was described as parts of daily activities. Figure 3 . Alternative Model of Medicated Environmental Participations (insert here) They challenged the traditional categorisation of virtual environmental participation, and demonstrated that virtual engagements can also directly associated with daily activities and directly lead to conservation and preservation. As the boundary between two realms is blending, participating virtually means more than just clicking the phone, accessing information and spreading the words, it also means using the digital technology to engage in daily pro-environmental activities and to conserve and preserve in de-forested areas. The case of the Ant Forest also broadens the debates about the relationship between virtual and offline participations. As demonstrated in Figs. 7 and 8, digital media can act as an interchanger between the offline and virtual to mobilise public and facilitate participations. Daily pro-environmental actions can be datafied into measurable and transformable virtual forest, and the data can then be integrated into offline products, i.e. trees. Figure 4 . Participation Flow of Ant Forest (insert here) Figure 5 . Engagement Model of Pro-Environmental Social Games (insert here) For users of the Ant Forest, the blending boundary means the OSG blended into their daily routines which made environmental participation easier and direct. It materialised daily actions into exchangeable capitals (the green energy), made effective use of these capitals, and resulted in conservation. It also means virtual and offline environmental participations may no longer be treated as separated concepts and actions, but as interchange elements in a blended process and realised through digital media. In other words, it is a blended model, in which behaviours can take places in both realms at the same time or at different times for shared environmental purpose, and actions and results can transfer and exchange in-between two realms to better protect the environment. This research has its limitations. The theoretical framework could be further enhanced if engages with academic literature on social media and capitalism (Fuchs, 2013 ), to expand the scope of the research by discussing how does the e-commerce model of the Alipay influence the interchange between virtual and offline participations. Or to use digital prosumer (Ritzer and Jurgenson, 2012) theory to further enhance the understanding of users’ perceptions and actions. These theoretical engagements can be developed in future studies. Declarations Ethical Approval This study has been reviewed and approved by the Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University, School of Humanities and Social Sciences Ethics Review Panel, under the reference number ER-HSS-11000024520230713190232. The ethical approval was given on 18th June 2023. All methods were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations set forth by the XJTLU. The ethical approval letter is available upon request. Informed consent Prior to participation in the study, all participants were thoroughly informed about the nature of the research, including its aims and objectives, the collect, store and use of data, and participants’ rights and obligations. Written or recorded oral informed consent was obtained from each participant in the period between 22 July and 22 August 2023, ensuring they understood their rights to withdraw from the study at any point without any adverse consequences. Participant confidentiality and anonymity have been strictly maintained throughout the study, with all personal identifiers being removed or anonymised. Author Contribution This research article was independently authored, with one individual undertaking both the research and the writing of the manuscript. References Arbatani, T. R., Labafi, S., & Robati, M. (2016). Effects of social media on the environmental protection behaviour of the public (case study: protecting Zayandeh-rood river environment). International Journal of Environmental Research , 10(2), 237-244. Arlt, D., Hoppe, I., Schmitt, J. B., De Silva-Schmidt, F., & Brüggemann, M. (2018). Climate engagement in a digital age: Exploring the drivers of participation in climate discourse virtual in the context of COP21. Environmental Communication , 12 (1), 84-98. Ashfaq, M., Zhang, Q., Ali, F., Waheed, A., & Nawaz, S. (2021). You plant a virtual tree, we'll plant a real tree: Understanding users' adoption of the Ant Forest mobile gaming application from a behavioral reasoning theory perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production, 310, 127394. Access through: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652621016139. Access on: 22 September 2023. Ashfaq, M., Zhang, Q., Zafar, A. U., Malik, M., & Waheed, A. (2022). Understanding Ant Forest continuance: Effects of user experience, personal attributes and motivational factors. Industrial Management & Data Systems , 122(2), 471-498. Balint, M., Posea, V., Dimitriu, A., & Iosup, A. (2011, June). An analysis of social gaming networks in virtual and face to face bridge communities. In Proceedings of the third international workshop on Large-scale system and application performance (pp. 35-42). Boucher, J. L. (2016). Culture, carbon, and climate change: A class analysis of climate change belief, lifestyle lock-in, and personal carbon footprint. Socijalna ekologija: časopis za ekološku misao i sociologijska istraživanja okoline , 25(1-2), 53-80. Chen, B., Feng, Y., Sun, J., & Yan, J. (2020). Motivation analysis of virtual green users: Evidence from Chinese “Ant Forest”. Frontiers in Psychology , 1335. Chinese Academy of Science (2021) Publication of . Access through: http://dse.rcees.cas.cn/dtxx/dtxxwz/202103/t20210331_632275.html. Access on: 15 Sep 2023. Christensen, H. S. (2011). Political activities on the Internet: Slacktivism or political participation by other means?. First Monday. Access through: https://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/download/3336/2767. Access on: 15 September 2023. DeHaan, S., Kuper, L. E., Magee, J. C., Bigelow, L., & Mustanski, B. S. (2013). The interplay between virtual and offline explorations of identity, relationships, and sex: A mixed-methods study with LGBT youth. Journal of sex research , 50(5), 421-434. Di Gennaro, C., & Dutton, W. (2006). The Internet and the public: Virtual and offline political participation in the United Kingdom. Parliamentary affairs , 59 (2), 299-313. Ducheneaut, N., & Moore, R. J. (2004, November). The social side of gaming: a study of interaction patterns in a massively multiplayer virtual game. In Proceedings of the 2004 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work (pp. 360-369). Esty, D. C. (2004). Environmental protection in the information age. NYUL Rev ., 79, 115-211. Fuchs, C. (2013). Social media and capitalism . Nordicom. Funk, C. Tyson, A., Kennedy, B. And Johnson, C. (2020) Concern over climate and the environment predominates among these publics. Pew Research Center . Access through: https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2020/09/29/concern-over-climate-and-the-environment-predominates-among-these-publics/, access on: 27 August 2023. Ghai, D. P., & Vivian, J. M. (1995). Introduction. Ghai, D. P., & Vivian, J. M. (eds) Grassroots environmental action: people's participation in sustainable development . London: Routledge. Gibson, R., & Cantijoch, M. (2013). Conceptualizing and measuring participation in the age of the Internet: Is virtual political engagement really different to offline? The Journal of Politics , 75(3), 701–716. Glucker, A. N., Driessen, P. P., Kolhoff, A., & Runhaar, H. A. (2013). Public participation in environmental impact assessment: why, who and how?. Environmental impact assessment review , 43 , 104-111. Haider, J. (2012). Interrupting practices that want to matter: The making, shaping and reproduction of environmental information virtual. Journal of Documentation , 68(5), 639-658. Hutchins, B., & Lester, L. (2006). Environmental protest and tap-dancing with the media in the information age. Media, Culture & Society , 28(3), 433-451. Kaur, A., & Chahal, H. S. (2018). Role of social media in increasing environmental issue awareness. Researchers World , 9(1), 19-27. Kersting, N. (2013). Virtual participation: from ‘invited' to ‘invented' spaces. International Journal of Electronic Governance , 6(4), 270-280. Kersting, N. (2016). Participatory Turn? Comparing Citizens' and Politicians' Perspectives on Virtual and Offline Local Political Participation. Lex Localis-Journal of Local Self-Government , 14(2). Kingston, R., Carver, S., Evans, A., & Turton, I. (2000). Web-based public participation geographical information systems: an aid to local environmental decision-making. Computers, environment and urban systems , 24(2), 109-125. Lester, L., & Hutchins, B. (2009). Power games: environmental protest, news media and the internet. Media, Culture & Society, 31(4), 579-595. Li, W., Liu, J., & Li, D. (2012). Getting their voices heard: Three cases of public participation in environmental protection in China. Journal of environmental management , 98, 65-72. Landström, C. (2020). Environmental Participation. [electronic resource] : Practices engaging the public with science and governance (1st ed. 2020.). Springer International Publishing. Lutz, C., Hoffmann, C. P., & Meckel, M. (2014). Beyond just politics: A systematic literature review of virtual participation. First Monday. Access through: https://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/download/5260/4094. Access on: 1 September 2023. Lutz, C., & Hoffmann, C. P. (2017). The dark side of virtual participation: exploring non-, passive and negative participation. Information, Communication & Society , 20(6), 876-897. Macafee, T. (2018). The Interplay between Social Media Politics and Offline Political Participation. American Communication Journal , 20(1). Mercea, D. (2012). Digital prefigurative participation: The entwinement of virtual communication and offline participation in protest events. New media & society , 14 (1), 153-169. Morganti, L., Pallavicini, F., Cadel, E., Candelieri, A., Archetti, F., & Mantovani, F. (2017). Gaming for Earth: Serious games and gamification to engage consumers in pro-environmental behaviours for energy efficiency. Energy Research & Social Science , 29 , 95-102. Mi, L., Xu, T., Sun, Y., Zhao, J., Lv, T., Gan, X., ... & Qiao, L. (2021). Playing Ant Forest to promote virtual green behavior: A new perspective on uses and gratifications. Journal of Environmental Management , 278, 111544. Morozov, E. (2011). The Net Delusion . New York: PublicAffairs Oser, J., Hooghe, M., & Marien, S. (2013). Is virtual participation distinct from offline participation? A latent class analysis of participation types and their stratification. Political research quarterly , 66(1), 91-101. Pina, V., Torres, L., & Royo, S. (2017). Comparing virtual with offline citizen engagement for climate change: Findings from Austria, Germany and Spain. Government Information Quarterly , 34 (1), 26-36. Ritzer, G., Dean, P., & Jurgenson, N. (2012). The coming of age of the prosumer. American behavioral scientist , 56(4), 379-398. Ruess, C., Hoffmann, C. P., Boulianne, S., & Heger, K. (2023). Virtual political participation: the evolution of a concept. Information, Communication & Society , 26(8), 1495-1512. Schmidt, C. (2004). The analysis of semi-structured interviews. A companion to qualitative research, 253(41), 258. Stern, P. C., & Dietz, T. (Eds.). (2008). Public participation in environmental assessment and decision making . National Academies Press. Sun, Y., Graham, T., & Broersma, M. (2018). Environmental talk in the Chinese green public sphere: A comparative analysis of daily green-speak across three Chinese virtual forums. Schwanholz, J., Graham, T., & Stoll, P. T. (Eds) Managing Democracy in the Digital Age: Internet Regulation, Social Media Use, and Virtual Civic Engagement. Gewerbestrasse: Springer , 243-263. Sullivan, J., & Xie, L. (2009). Environmental activism, social networks and the internet. T he China Quarterly , 198, 422-432. UN (2023) Principle 10. Access through: https://www.unep.org/civil-society-engagement/partnerships/principle-10. Access on: 19 September 2023. UNFCCC (2019) Alipay Ant Forest: Using Digital Technologies to Scale up Climate Action | China . Access through: https://unfccc.int/climate-action/momentum-for-change/planetary-health/alipay-ant-forest. Access on 28 April, 2023. Vissers, S., Hooghe, M., Stolle, D., & Maheo, V. A. (2012). The impact of mobilization media on off-line and virtual participation: Are mobilization effects medium-specific?. Social Science Computer Review , 30 (2), 152-169. Vissers, S., & Stolle, D. (2014). The Internet and new modes of political participation: virtual versus offline participation. Information, Communication & Society , 17(8), 937-955. Wang, H., Zhang, T., Quan, Y., & Dong, R. (2013). Research on the framework of the Environmental Internet of Things. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology , 20 (3), 199-204. Wang, Q. (2020). The Chinese Internet: the virtual public sphere, power relations and political communication . London: Routledge. Wang, X., and Liu, L. (2017) Multilevel Analysis of Public Environmental Behaviour intention - Based on 2013 CSS dataset . Journal of Jishou University , Vol.38, No. 1, 80-90. Ward, S., Gibson, R., & Lusoli, W. (2003). Virtual participation and mobilisation in Britain: Hype, hope and reality. Parliamentary affairs , 56(4), 652-668. Wu, W., Wang, W., & Zhang, M. (2022). Does internet public participation slow down environmental pollution?. Environmental Science & Policy , 137, 22-31. WWF (2023) 10 Things You Can Do To Help Save Our Planet. Access through: https://www.wwf.org.uk/thingsyoucando. Access on: 15 September 2023. Yang, G. (2003). Weaving a green web: the internet and environmental activism in China. China Environment Series , 6, 89-93. Yang, Z., Kong, X., Sun, J., & Zhang, Y. (2018). Switching to green lifestyles: Behavior change of ant forest users. International journal of environmental research and public health , 15(9). Access through: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/15/9/1819. Access on: 22 September 2023. Zhang, B., Hu, X., & Gu, M. (2022). Promote pro-environmental behaviour through social media: An empirical study based on Ant Forest. Environmental Science & Policy , 137, 216-227. Zhang, K. M., & Wen, Z. G. (2008). Review and challenges of policies of environmental protection and sustainable development in China. Journal of environmental management , 88(4), 1249-1261. Zhang, Y., Xiao, S., & Zhou, G. (2020). User continuance of a green behavior mobile application in China: An empirical study of Ant Forest. J ournal of Cleaner Production , 242, 118497. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-6643000","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":469132926,"identity":"565c221b-e39e-4d08-b97b-8326ce117447","order_by":0,"name":"Qingning Wang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Qingning","middleName":"","lastName":"Wang","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-05-12 05:23:25","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6643000/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6643000/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":84645092,"identity":"9d80d937-aa22-40b7-a533-d4f0d92c9c89","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-06-15 16:26:05","extension":"jpg","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":64133,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAnt Forest Game Interface (left) and Ant Forest Personal Green Energy Collection Daily Ranking (right)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6643000/v1/62b529ded62486fcae24229b.jpg"},{"id":84644056,"identity":"35d3e75b-34f7-477e-8f3f-37667c1b4b86","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-06-15 16:02:05","extension":"jpg","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":58638,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTraditional Model of Medicated Environmental Communication\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6643000/v1/0db85184449be3297fe8c897.jpg"},{"id":84644711,"identity":"64c7dc3f-f0b4-4d8c-b565-3d21a815960c","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-06-15 16:18:05","extension":"jpg","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":55709,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAlternative Model of Medicated Environmental Participations\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"3.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6643000/v1/6745fbdd70dc2c71780787a9.jpg"},{"id":84645091,"identity":"b13af2b7-6883-456c-9860-4f7037c225cc","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-06-15 16:26:05","extension":"jpg","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":20224,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eParticipation Flow of Ant Forest\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"4.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6643000/v1/15fdfb11b55fdeebdb295ebf.jpg"},{"id":84644062,"identity":"4105a930-dc17-415d-be5d-42374bed4ff2","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-06-15 16:02:05","extension":"jpg","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":17485,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEngagement Model of Pro-Environmental Social Games\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"5.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6643000/v1/c7c91e70f8bea041901b6906.jpg"},{"id":98441306,"identity":"305b4aed-772b-46b6-91ec-31ce734e413e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-17 17:05:09","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1180959,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6643000/v1/004090d7-5452-494a-86af-4d239c9a10f9.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"The Interplay of Virtual Engagement and Real-World Action in Pro-Environmental Games: Towards a Conceptualisation of an Alternative Virtual Environmental Participation Model - An Analysis of Participation on Alipay Ant Forest","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eEnvironmental participation, a distinct form of public engagement (Landström, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), involves collective or individual public actions interacting with the natural environment and managing the society-environment relationship. Amid a deepening environmental crisis, growing public concern has led to increased environmental participation (Funk et al., 2020), prompting academic research into its various forms and impacts (Glucker et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). A key debate compares virtual and offline engagements (Mercea, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Pina \u0026amp; Royo, 2017; Vissers et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e), exploring their interaction and influence on public participation. This debate is significant for critically evaluating the causes, effectiveness, and consequences of different participation types, informing research, engagement, and policy (Stern \u0026amp; Dietz, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e), and for understanding the interplay between virtual and offline public participation (Vissers \u0026amp; Stolle, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e) by analyzing the power dynamics of citizen engagements across both spheres (Di Gennaro \u0026amp; Dutton, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e; Arlt et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis research examines the virtual and offline environmental participation relationship by focusing on pro-environment online social games (OSG), defined as 'Internet-based games that use social networks to extend in-game functionality' (Balint et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e: 35). Popular for their social experiences (Ducheneaut \u0026amp; Moore, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e), pro-environment OSGs gamify environmental engagement (Morganti et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e) and are crucial for integrating pro-environmental actions into daily life, potentially increasing user motivation (Ashfaq et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). This study aims to explore the boundary between virtual and offline user experiences with these games, arguing that a blended boundary can effectively mobilise public environmental participation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis research employs Ant Forest (Chen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), a successful pro-environmental OSG integrated within China's Alipay app, as a case study. Developed against a backdrop of increasing environmental awareness in China (Wang \u0026amp; Liu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e), Ant Forest had amassed over 550\u0026nbsp;million users and facilitated the planting of over 223\u0026nbsp;million real trees by 2021 (Chinese Academy of Science, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), a success acknowledged by the UNFCCC (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) for its potential in harnessing digital technology for planetary safeguarding. Its efficacy is thought to stem from its mechanics (Chen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e): a virtual woodland interface where users accrue 'green energy points' via low-carbon activities and social interactions to cultivate virtual trees, which Alipay then corresponds with actual trees in conservation zones (UNFCCC, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAnt Forest's mechanics are considered central to its success (Chen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Its in-game interface features a virtual forest, with activities focused on tree growth (See Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e), fuelled by 'green energy points'. Users gain these points through low-carbon behaviours (like using public transport, cycling, and walking) and in-app social interactions with friends (See Figs.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e and \u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). Accumulating enough points allows users to exchange them for trees (See Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). Once a virtual tree has grown on the user's app, Alipay matches it with a real tree in designated conservation areas, thereby contributing to environmental protection (UNFCCC, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eUNFCCC (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) suggested that the initial results of Ant Forest were promising, offering new ideas for using digital technology for environmental engagement. UNFCCC’s suggestion is the starting point of this research, and its purpose is to critically discuss the ‘new ideas’ that the Ant Forest offered for environmental engagement, with a particular focus on the relationship between virtual and offline participations from users.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo be more specific: although Ant Forest is an OSG, it would be oversimplified to categorise the engagement through the Ant Forest as virtual participation only. Because the game relies on both virtual and offline participations to protect the environment: it motivates users to engage in offline pro-environmental actions, these actions are measured and rewarded virtually, and then transfer into tangible conservation results (i.e. trees). The Ant Forest proposes an innovative model with a mix of virtual and offline engagements, which are closely linked throughout the process of environmental protections.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis research takes a user’s-experience approach to study the virtual and offline participations in the Ant Forest model, with the following questions:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1. How do users differentiate virtual and offline environmental participation in Ant Forest?\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.1 Whether do people regard using Ant Forest as virtual or offline environmental participation?\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003e1.2 Whether do people see their engagement with the Ant Forest as real or virtual environmental participations, or whether the boundary between virtual and real is blurred?\u003c/em\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003e2. What do the users’ experience suggest about virtual and offline environmental participation through OSG, in terms of perceptions, actions and results?\u003c/em\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsers’ approach is important in the discussions about the Ant Forest’s model, because they can critically demonstrate how digital technology can effectively mobilise the users through combining virtual and offline engagements for optimised results in environmental protections. With such an understanding, it is possible to extend the model to other regions, as UNFCCC (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) encouraged.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo address these questions, this paper will first define offline and virtual environmental participation and review existing literature on Ant Forest. Employing interviews to gain in-depth understanding of individuals' perceptions of their environmental participation, the empirical results will enhance understanding of the relationship between environmental participation and digital technology, specifically how OSGs can be used for environmental protection and their potential outcomes. Furthermore, these findings can contribute to conceptualising blended environmental participation as a novel model for public environmental mobilisation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"2. Virtual Participations: Definitions and Debates","content":"\u003cp\u003eVirtual participation, be it political, social, or environmental, was initially seen as an extension of offline public engagement (Ruess et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e), a notion with sceptical implications suggesting it merely transfers old behaviours online without adding value (Lutz \u0026amp; Hoffmann, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). This view implies virtual participation's dependence on offline activities and limitations (Lutz \u0026amp; Hoffmann, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e), often leading to its dismissal as less meaningful and lacking quality control (Kersting, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). It was frequently linked to slacktivism (Morozov, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e: 186) – participation driven by self-satisfaction and social impression rather than genuine commitment, with easy actions like joining groups or signing petitions seen as unlikely to yield real societal change (Christensen, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). By associating virtual participation with slacktivism, critics questioned its outcomes and suggested it lacked inherent value without offline impact (Ward et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSuch a view is challenged, as the definitions and understandings of virtual participations are broadened and became more critical. The arguments that virtual participations are less meaningful and cannot generate real impacts, are based on the perceptions that things happened offline are more important and real than virtual, and virtual participations cannot and should not be separated from offline experiences. To challenge them, scholars argue certain virtual activities should be seen as distinctive types, as they emerged exclusively virtual, and generated impacts on individual’s perceptions, behaviours and even on policies, such as hashtag movements (Oser, et. al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). To recognise the importance of these types, one needs to firstly accept that virtual participations can generate impacts and results without involving offline elements, and although the impacts and results remain entirely virtual, they still have values. Thus, virtual public participations should thus be differentiated in its conceptualisation from offline participations (Gibson and Cantijoch, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA more critical and widely accepted view is that virtual and offline participations are interchangeable, as virtual and offline elements often co-exist and interact with each other (Kersting, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). Jenkins (2009) argued that virtual participations has constituted a property of culture in modern society. Lutz, et., al. (2014) further interpreted that this culture has three dimensions: the creative dimension, the social dimension and the motivational dimension. Public participate virtually to create and share contents, to socialise with other individuals and groups, and to pursuit certain goals, which can be social, cultural or political. The motivations, actions and results of virtual participations are intimately linked with social production and human experiences, which are indispensable elements in our society. To date, many human experiences are sets of interchangeable activities carried out through different channels (Ruess et. al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Participations can move between virtual and offline freely, and virtual and offline actions often interchange and interact with each other. Therefore, the focus of academic debates have gradually shifted from distinguishing virtual and offline participations to study the interplay between virtual and offline participations (DeHaan et. al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Macafee, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). This also applies to discussions about environmental participation.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"3. Environmental Participation: Virtual and Offline","content":"\u003cp\u003eAs stated, environmental participation is a type of public participation, and to engage with the environment and to work with human-environment relationship is the purpose of participation. There are no universally agreed ways to categorise types of environmental participations, but often who participate in the process are used as criteria, i.e. whether the participation take place at government, institutional level, or public level (Landström, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). This research particularly focuses on the public level engagements, namely engagements from the citizens, individually or collectively. Public engagements into environment can take various forms, but overall they can be put into three big categories:\u003c/p\u003e\u003col\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo inform/be informed, to educate/be educated and, to express/to listen. This category highlights the importance of information, opinions and education to increase public’s environmental awareness (UN, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). This category also includes organising and participating in environmental protests and movements, since these are key actions to make voices to be heard (Hutchins \u0026amp; Lester, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo embed environmental participations in daily lives and activities, such as reduce personal carbon footprint (Boucher, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). This category highlights the significance of individual’s everyday life styles for the environment, namely environmental engagements can be embedded into daily routines, thus encourage day-to-day actions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003ePreservations and conservations through volunteering works (WWF, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). This category highlights actions outside daily lives, and often require more efforts. Actions such as tree planting in deforested areas, working for nature reserves or parks, and species preservations are put into this category.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003c/ol\u003e\u003cp\u003eThese categorised environmental participations can all be engaged without the digital media. Indeed environmental participation exited prior to the public use of digital media (Ghai \u0026amp; Vivian, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1995\u003c/span\u003e). Engaging virtual is a relatively recent idea, and the key debate often draws on how the digital media can better facilitate or limit environmental participations (Kingston, et. al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eStudies (Esty, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e) firstly demonstrated that digital media provided public accessible platforms for information sharing and public education, which successfully increased public’s awareness of environmental issues and their knowledge of environmental protection. Other studies (Lester \u0026amp; Hutchins, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e) focused on digital media’s roles in campaign and protest. It is argued that digital technology, the Internet in particular, enabled the organisation of campaigns and protests to be more democratic, transparent and expanded the outreach, scope and length of actions. Recent studies started to pay attention to the day-to-day use of digital media, which are embodied into everyday environmental protection behaviours and talks (Sun, et. al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). The most significant day-to-day use of digital media for environmental participation is through social media. Traditionally, social media are regarded as fast, easy access and constant, which provided ideal platforms for the public to gain knowledge and express opinions (Arbatani et. al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e), to spread and access information about environmental campaigns and to support environmental actions (Kaur and Chahal, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Thus they are seen as one of the most effective ways to increase public awareness of environmental issues and to generate impacts.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAs Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e showed, the existing literature on virtual environmental participations particularly reinforces the power of the digital media relies on information. The decentralised and networked characteristics of the Internet determine it can afford wider public access and spread of the information, thus increase the inclusiveness and outreach of information (Sullivan \u0026amp; Xie, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e). In this process, the public can access a wide range of ideas and opinions, which are expressed by different stakeholders on different issues, thus they be better educated.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eCriticism on virtual environmental participations follows the same logics as those for virtual participations in general, namely virtual engagements can hardly generated real offline actions to protect the environments (Wu et. al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Although the Internet has the power to influence what people read and watch, virtual actions are still indirect. To be more specific, posting and reading contents virtual, or engaging in protests virtual can only increase the volume of information related to the environmental participation, but are still different from behaviours that are directly act on the environment, such as recycling and planting trees.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe criticism does not mean virtual participation is less meaningful, but rather mean the critics believed there were clear boundaries to define what people can achieve by using the Internet and what they cannot achieve. If we use the above stated three categories of environmental participations to understand the boundary, the critics’ statements showed their limitations. For them, virtual participations are directly associated to information, expression and educations, but are not directly associated to daily activities, preservations and conservations. But indirectness does not mean no impacts can be led to. When people are using the digital media, they can be informed and educated, which then become determining factors to change daily activities, or/and to engage in preservations and conservation. Environmental protection is increasingly become an interchangeable experience between virtual and offline, with virtual participations act as hub for information to facilitate further offline participations. To differentiate virtual and offline may no longer applicable in discussion about the environmental participation and to set firm boundaries between the two also becomes increasingly difficult, or even impossible.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe debate should be shifted towards one that examines the interchanges and interactions between virtual and offline actions, and this study of the Ant Forest is among them.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"4. Ant Forest: Towards a New Conceptualisation of the Virtual and Offline Environmental Engagements","content":"\u003cp\u003eFacing the deepened environmental crisis, different actions have been taken in China at national and local levels by the government, commercial and non-commercial organisations, and public participations are largely encouraged (Zhang \u0026amp; Wen, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e; Li, et., al., 2012). The Internet are believed to be crucial and wildly used by the public to engage in environmental protection (Wang, et. al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Yang, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, different from democratic countries, collective public activisms, protest in particular, are largely restricted in China. So although environmental participations are possible and even popular, it is difficult for them to take forms of demonstration or social movement, and to directly criticise policies and the government (Wang, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). As a result of the restrictions, Chinese environmental participations often focus on individuals\u0026rsquo; lifestyles and behaviours, and seek alternative use of the digital media to impact on daily activities. Ant Forest is one of successful examples.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAnt Forest has attracted academic interests since its launch. Studies are particular carried out to examine the behaviours patterns of users (Zhang, et. al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), the motivations (Ashfaq, et. al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), short term and long term behavioural changes (Mi, et. al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), and the impacts and results (Zhang et. al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Yang et. al., (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e) indicate that Ant Forest is based on a system to \u0026lsquo;integrate green lifestyle with environmental protection, to reward offline pro-environmental daily actives virtually through app, and to allow users to get \u0026lsquo;a sense of accomplishment while being entertained\u0026rsquo;. More importantly, Ant Forest has created a doubling up effect. As Ashfaq, et. al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) argued, the design that individuals\u0026rsquo; daily offline actions can be transferred into a virtual tree, and the virtual tree can be transferred into a real tree in a deforest area, distinguishes the Ant Forest from other apps. It establishes a model, in which one\u0026rsquo;s green lifestyle can create two layers of environmental effects: reduce carbon footprint, and preservations of deforested area. The sense of accomplishments by using the Ant Forest excessed other types of virtual participations and became powerful motivation and constant driving force to engage users.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe designs and uses of Ant Forest are well explored in previous academic studies, and this study shifts its focus by using the Ant Forest as an important example to understand the blended boundary between virtual and offline actions in environmental participation through using of digital media, by asking how do users differentiate the virtual and offline experiences, and what do their perceptions, actions and results of their actions mean for the innovative model of pro-environmental OSGs.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn order discuss the user\u0026rsquo;s virtual and offline experiences, this research establishes the following theoretical framework that each examines one elements of the environmental participations:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eTable 1. Theoretical Framework (insert here)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eTable 1. Theoretical Framework\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"624\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 18.7801%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 28.8925%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePerceptions\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 26.1637%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eActions\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 26.1637%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResults\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 18.7801%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eElement\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 28.8925%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHow do users percept their own actions: virtual or offline, or either, or blended\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 26.1637%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWhether the actions are taken virtual or offline, or blended\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 26.1637%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWhether the results of actions are virtual or offline, or blended\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 18.7801%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSignificance\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 28.8925%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEnables the research to understand how people define their own usage of Ant Forest. The empirical data leads to discuss whether people regard their participations through the Ant Forest as virtual or offline, or defining the boundary becomes difficult.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 26.1637%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEnables the research to further explore the nature of actions through the Ant Forest. The empirical data leads to discussion of whether these actions are virtual or real, or a blended of both. And if blended, how.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 26.1637%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEnables the research to study the results of actions through the Ant Forest. The empirical data leads to discuss whether the results are achieved virtual or offline or a blended of both. And if blended, how.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e"},{"header":"5. Method","content":"\u003cp\u003eSemi-structured interview is used as method. Interview is the most suitable method because this study aims to establish critical and specific understandings of people\u0026rsquo;s perceptions and actions surrounding the use of Ant Forest. Schmidt (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e: 2955) demonstrated that semi-structured interview is \u0026lsquo;versatile and flexible\u0026rsquo;,and leads to \u0026lsquo;reciprocity between the interviewer and participant\u0026rsquo;. Semi-structured interview enables this research to have in-depth and extensive conversations with users of the Ant Forest, to understand how they see and use the app. The collected qualitative data can then lead to critical discussions of the boundary between virtual and offline environmental participations, and to explore whether they are being blended, and if so, how.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo conduct the interview, a snowball sampling approach is used through social network on the Ant Forest. This approach is applied because Ant Forest is a social media app, it encourages users to connect with friends on the platform, so they can see and \u0026lsquo;steal\u0026rsquo; each other\u0026rsquo;s energy points (Yang et. al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Using the existing social network, the author can directly approach to Ant Forest users, who are the targets of the research. In July 2023, the author sent out message to all Ant Forest friends on their own network, to invite them for interview. When one friend replied to author\u0026rsquo;s message, regardless whether they agreed to be interviewed, the author asked them to send message about interview to their friends on Ant Forest, to roll the sampling size. During the period between July 2023 and December 2023, 10 people in the author\u0026rsquo;s own and extended social network accepted interview request, 8 people were interviewed at the end, and 1 declined at the last stage. Although the interviewee numbers were not big, after a few rounds of interviews, shared and repeated themes were identified that provided rich data for analyses.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAfter interview, data is transcribed and coded. An open coding scheme is applied to organise interview data into three categories: 1) Perceptions, 2) Actions, and 3) Results, which are established according to the theoretical framework. Two coders engaged in this process, the author and a research assistant, to ensure the inter-coder reliability. Both coders worked independently but followed the same criteria in coding: if the interviewees talked about what they thought about the Ant Forest, then the contents are categorised into Perceptions; if they talked about what they did on the Ant Forest, then the Action category, and if they discussed what had been achieved through the OSG, then the Result category.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"6. Findings","content":"\u003cp\u003eAfter coding and analysing, it becomes clear that although participants expressed different opinions about Ant Forest, still there was a strong sense that the actions and results associated with this OSG were clearly blended between virtual and real. The following section will unfold the results.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e6.1 Perceptions\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceptions refer to how users of the Ant Forest understand and define the nature of the platform, whether do they see it as virtual or real. In the interview, people\u0026rsquo;s opinions were mixed, as 5 interviewees initially suggested it was offline, and 2 believed it was virtual. But as conversations developed, 5 people started to portray the Ant Forest as a mix of virtual and offline.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe differences also appeared when the reasons of their perceptions are asked. Some stated their perceptions were determined by what they are doing on and through the OSG, i.e. their actions; some stated they made the judgements based on what had been achieved through the platform, i.e. the results.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor example, in a conversation with Interviewee B:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eB: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eThe trees that I planted in the Ant Forest are virtual. Although the company promised they would match a real tree, still I did not actually see the tree myself\u003c/em\u003e. \u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eResearcher: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eso, you believed your actions were virtual, not real, not offline\u003c/em\u003e?\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eB: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eemmm\u0026hellip;. But my actions were real. I clicked the app and opened it, and these procedures were real. These are the real actions conducted by me. As for the trees, although they were planted in a virtual setting, they were results of my real actions. They (the virtual and real) are related.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eInterviewee D also expressed similar opinions:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eD: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eIf I must choose between real and virtual, I will say it is real\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eResearcher: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eIf you don\u0026rsquo;t have to pick one of them?\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eD: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eThen I will say it is a mix of virtual and real. I think 75% is real and 25% is virtual. Because I did not actually see the trees, so it made me feel virtual. But because the trees actually existed, so if I see them, they will become real for me\u003c/em\u003e. \u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eB\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eD\u003c/em\u003e held different initial thoughts about Ant Forest, they also had different judging criteria when defining whether the Ant Forest is virtual or real. For \u003cem\u003eB\u003c/em\u003e, to percept the platform is virtual because of the actions, but for \u003cem\u003eD\u003c/em\u003e, results (trees) became the reason. Actions and results were also mentioned by other participants as their accordance for perceptions. For interviewee \u003cem\u003eA\u003c/em\u003e believed the Ant Forest was real, because \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eall energies and other things I contributed in the Ant Forest, would lead to something real somewhere\u0026hellip;. Although it was indirect, my actions led to real results\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026rdquo; Interviewee \u003cem\u003eS\u003c/em\u003e also believed the Ant Forest was real, because \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003ethe fruits trees, the apple trees, offered me real results\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese answers mean that users\u0026rsquo; perceptions of the Ant Forest are often based on what they did, and what was led to. Interviewee \u003cem\u003eS\u003c/em\u003e, on the other hand, gave a slightly different interpretation:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eS: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eNo, it does not matter (whether it is real or virtual). The point is I feel I must believe. The precondition (for the Ant Forest) is believing: all my actions will lead to real environmental protections. It is not only a virtual game. It is not the case that a tree and a grass appear in a virtual world. It is the case they existed physically in the real world\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe idea of \u0026lsquo;believing\u0026rsquo; stresses on the perception itself, namely the understandings towards the Ant Forest. To choose to engage in environmental protect through the Ant Forest, one must believe the concept of the platform and believe firmly the game they played on their phone can end up with a tree somewhere in the planet. Only by having this perception, users will use and continually use the Ant Forest. To be more critical, this sense of \u0026lsquo;believe\u0026rsquo; also means to see the boundary between virtual and real is interchangeable, and accept the concept that use of virtual platform is not separated from the real world.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e6.2 Action\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eMost of conversations about the Ant Forest during the interview were related to the actions. As stated, actions were used as key criteria by users to determine whether the Ant Forest was virtual or real. Interviewees thus have made very specific descriptions of their actions. Interestingly, although according to previous literature, virtual environmental participations are often seen as associating with information and education; actually none of the interviewee mentioned about using the Ant Forest to access information, or to express pro-environmental opinions. This digital platform does not act as a mean to exchange information, instead, it functions as a medium to socialise and to facilitate interchanges between virtual and offline environmental protecting actions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e6.2.1 Generating and Collecting the Green Energy\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo generate and collect energy is the second major theme related to actions. As stated previously, through generating and collecting green energies, users can plant trees on the Ant Forest. The green energies need to be generated through pro-environmental actions that are recognised by the Ant Forest, and can also be generating by using the Alipay to make payment. While one can collect own energies once they are generated, and can also \u0026lsquo;steal\u0026rsquo; energies from friends on the Ant Forest. Therefore, when talking about the green energy, both virtual and offline actions occurred in the interview.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWalking, taking public transports and riding sharing bikes are three major actions talked by the interviewees to generate energy. Interviewee \u003cem\u003eS\u003c/em\u003e said: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eWalking is the most important way. I generate energy by recoding my walking steps. For example, if I walked 10000 steps today, I will have more than 100 green energies the next day\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;. Interviewee \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e, gave a more comprehensive discussion: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eall low-carbon emissions transportation methods, like public transports (can generate energy). But I walk more, because walking can generate more green energies than other methods. Additionally, if I order food delivery (through Alipay\u0026rsquo;s delivery platform), I will ask the restaurant not to give me any disposable cutlery, I can also generate green\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEnergies can also be generated through virtual actions, such as virtual payments. \u003cem\u003eT\u003c/em\u003e said: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eI pay everything through the Alipay now to generate green energy\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026rdquo; \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e took one step further, who indicated: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eAt the beginning of each month, I pay my water and electricity bills virtually, make other payment virtually and requiring fapiao virtually (to generate green energy)\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhen it comes to collecting the green energy, the actions are taking entirely online. Interviewee \u003cem\u003eE\u003c/em\u003e said: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eBefore I got up in the morning, I often open the Ant Forest to collect the energy.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo; \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e also has similar routine, who said: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003ebecause the green energy will be ready for collection after 7am. So I have my breakfast at this time while collecting energy\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFrom the interviews, it is clear that generating and collecting green energy require both virtual and offline actions. The boundary between virtual and offline actions are blended, as offline actions need to claim its value (green energy) through virtual platform, and virtual platform need to rely on offline and virtual actions for recourses to feed the green energy. They cannot be separated from each other, instead, they are a series of inter-related actions that take place virtually and offline synchronously and asynchronously.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e6.2.2 Results\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAll interviewees, in their own ways, described the results of using of the Ant Forest was for the environment. Some of them were more specific, regarding trees as results, while other were more general, regarding environment protection as the results. A strong character of blending between virtual and offline was emerged during the interviewees. One interviewee even challenged the very intention to distinguish virtual and offline when discussing the results.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe only interviewee believed the results were entirely virtual is \u003cem\u003eE\u003c/em\u003e:\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eAll of the results were data, or should say datafication of human behaviours. Ant Forest use the data I generated to shape other, or shall I say, to shape business activities\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eResearcher: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eSo even if your actions can lead to an offline result, like a real tree, you still believe they are virtual\u003c/em\u003e?\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eE: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eIt\u0026rsquo;s like virtual shopping, it will always be different from shopping in a mall. Because from the beginning, we access everything virtual\u0026hellip;Also, these results of (planting trees) are self-imaginations. You cannot actually see the proofs\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe argument of datafication, means \u003cem\u003eE\u003c/em\u003e regarded everything they created through the Ant Forest belonged to the virtual realm. Because their actions were realised through a virtual platform, and the promised offline results (trees) were not directly accessible by users themselves.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOn contrast, \u003cem\u003eD\u003c/em\u003e firmly stated the results were offline:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eD: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eOffline. They rely on the virtual platform to increase accessibility, and because of the digital media, more people can participate. The results is that people do not have to go to somewhere to participate in offline volunteering activities, trees can still be planted\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eResearcher: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eDoes this mean although actions are virtual, the results are offline\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eD: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eYes, because real trees are planted\u0026hellip;\u0026hellip;Although the actions of planting the tree are not conducted personally by myself, still the tree is there, it is real\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eD\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo;s reinforced that the tree was real several times in the conversation, which clearly indicated their attitudes. The nature of the results, i.e. the tree belongs to the offline realm, became the determining factor to make the judgments.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhile for others, the boundary between virtual and offline results was not clear.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAs \u003cem\u003eT\u003c/em\u003e put: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eI think both (virtual and offline). Because you need to clicked your phone to plant the virtual tree. While by having the virtual tree, there will be a real tree. I felt I planted a tree\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn \u003cem\u003eA\u0026rsquo;s\u003c/em\u003e words: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003e(The results) are actually small things in our daily lives. You do small things easily to protect the environment. It is not the case that you need to participate in a specific project (to realise something). The boundary between virtual and offline is thus blurring.\u003c/em\u003e \u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMore critical views are spoken by \u003cem\u003eS\u003c/em\u003e: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eI think the line between virtual and offline is blending. This is actually an overall trend of e-commerce. We buy things virtually, but the goods are delivered to us offline. The use of Ant Forest is actually very similar to I make an order online and receive the order offline. As for the Ant Forest, I consumed virtually, or accumulated the energy virtually, and use the energy points to exchange for trees. Although the purpose is to protect the environment, the underlining logics are the same as e-commerce\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eS\u003c/em\u003e placed the Ant Forest within the big context of e-commerce. Alipay, the hosting platform for the Ant Forest, is one of the key driving forces of e-commerce in China. As a part of the Alipay, the Ant Forest is built on the same mechanism: planting of virtual tree are results of exchange of energy, which occurred in the virtual realm; while the real tree are the commodities generated by virtual exchange and are delivered in the offline realm. In this process, different results interchanged between virtual and offline at different stages, but deliver environmental protection results as a whole.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e challenged the researcher\u0026rsquo;s question about virtual or offline results. As a very dedicated user of Ant Forest, \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e planted more than 100 trees through Ant Forest.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMasaki: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eI planted the trees in the Ant Forest. I accumulated a sufficient amount of energy to exchange for trees, and they were transferred into real trees. I went to Dunhuang before, where Ant Forest planted a lot of haloxylon ammondendrons. When I was about to landing, I indeed saw sudden appearance of an oasis in the dessert. I thought, ah, all the trees that I planted, they actually look like these.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eM: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eThe Ant Forest is interchange between virtual and offline. Through a series of virtual actions, the ecosystem in real life is positively impacted\u0026hellip;..I also feel it is not necessary to purposely separate the boundary\u0026hellip;..I feel as long as a series actions can lead to planting of trees, it does not really matter if they were virtual or offline. Through a series of interchanges and convergence between virtual and offline resources, Ant Forest can realise the results, and the results are collective\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAs an active pro-environmental participant, \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e concerned more about what could be achieved, and concerned less about how to achieve the goal. Holding such a perception, \u003cem\u003eM\u0026rsquo;\u003c/em\u003es arguments reinforced that although the final result, i.e., planting of the tree, need to be realised offline, the whole accumulation process is a series of blended virtual and offline actions, which serves one ultimate goal. To talk about the interchange between virtual and offline, \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e put forward the sense that it is impossible to talk about the offline results without the virtual accumulating process, and it is also inappropriate to talk about virtual actions without considering what can be led offline.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"7. Discussion and Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe empirical data show that not only users tended to percept using the Ant Forest as blended virtual and offline participations, but also, they described their engagements, both actions and results, as interchanging between virtual and offline. UNFCCC labels the Ant Forest as an innovative model and such an innovation is achieved through a blending of offline and virtual engagements.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, which applies users\u0026rsquo; approach to de-construct the mechanism of the Ant Forests, shows there are three stages of using the Ant Forest, namely, energy generating, virtual tree planting, and real tree planting:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eTable 2. Virtual and Offline Participations through Ant Forest\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"624\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 17.3077%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStage\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 26.1218%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;1.Energy generating\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 30.2885%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2.Virtual tree planting\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 26.2821%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3.Real tree planting\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 17.3077%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eActions\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 26.1218%;\"\u003e\n \u003cul\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eOffline Low-carbon-emission daily activities by users\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eVirtual payments by users\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSteal energies from friends on Ant Forest by users\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003c/ul\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 30.2885%;\"\u003e\n \u003cul\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCollect and accumulate energies by users in Ant Forest\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eChoose trees and exchange them by using the green energy by users in Ant Forest\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003c/ul\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 26.2821%;\"\u003e\n \u003cul\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eTrees plant in de-forested area by Ant Forest\u0026nbsp;\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMonitor the trees by users through Ant Forest\u0026nbsp;\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003c/ul\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 17.3077%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTypes of environmental participations\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 26.1218%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDaily activities\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 30.2885%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDaily activities\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 26.2821%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eConservation and preservation\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 17.3077%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eResults\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 26.1218%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGreen energies are recorded and visualised on the Ant Forest platform\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 30.2885%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVirtual trees are planted in Ant Forest by users\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 26.2821%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eReal trees are planted in De-forested area\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e. \u003cb\u003eVirtual and Offline Participations through Ant Forest (insert here)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eInterviewees suggest stage 1 and 3 involve both virtual and offline actions, while stage 2 involves only virtual actions. Stage 1 and 2 lead to results in virtual realm and stage 3 leads to results in offline realm. Virtual and offline actions and results are interchanging throughout the process, without virtual actions there won\u0026rsquo;t be offline results, and without offline actions and results there won\u0026rsquo;t be further virtual actions and results. Under such a circumstance, it became difficult to define whether Ant Forest facilitate virtual or offline environmental participation, because both virtual and offline became indispensable and inseparable to achieve the goal of environmental protection. It is through blending the virtual and offline actions and results, Ant Forest successfully engages the public to protect the environment and motivates users to continue use the app.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhat is more, Ant Forest provides a different model to discuss the relationship between virtual and offline participations (see Fig.\u0026nbsp;6). The literature suggests online platforms often act as information hub for people to access opinions and information of environmental issues, or as de-centralised space to organise protests or call for actions, while actions are then taken offline to realise intended purpose (Kersting, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e, Ruess et. al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). However, Ant Forest was not regarded by any interviewees as an information hub, and either of them use it to engage in environmental protests. Instead, it was described as parts of daily activities.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFigure \u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e. \u003cb\u003eAlternative Model of Medicated Environmental Participations (insert here)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThey challenged the traditional categorisation of virtual environmental participation, and demonstrated that virtual engagements can also directly associated with daily activities and directly lead to conservation and preservation. As the boundary between two realms is blending, participating virtually means more than just clicking the phone, accessing information and spreading the words, it also means using the digital technology to engage in daily pro-environmental activities and to conserve and preserve in de-forested areas.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe case of the Ant Forest also broadens the debates about the relationship between virtual and offline participations. As demonstrated in Figs.\u0026nbsp;7 and 8, digital media can act as an interchanger between the offline and virtual to mobilise public and facilitate participations. Daily pro-environmental actions can be datafied into measurable and transformable virtual forest, and the data can then be integrated into offline products, i.e. trees.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFigure \u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e. \u003cb\u003eParticipation Flow of Ant Forest (insert here)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFigure \u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e. \u003cb\u003eEngagement Model of Pro-Environmental Social Games (insert here)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor users of the Ant Forest, the blending boundary means the OSG blended into their daily routines which made environmental participation easier and direct. It materialised daily actions into exchangeable capitals (the green energy), made effective use of these capitals, and resulted in conservation. It also means virtual and offline environmental participations may no longer be treated as separated concepts and actions, but as interchange elements in a blended process and realised through digital media. In other words, it is a blended model, in which behaviours can take places in both realms at the same time or at different times for shared environmental purpose, and actions and results can transfer and exchange in-between two realms to better protect the environment.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis research has its limitations. The theoretical framework could be further enhanced if engages with academic literature on social media and capitalism (Fuchs, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e), to expand the scope of the research by discussing how does the e-commerce model of the Alipay influence the interchange between virtual and offline participations. Or to use digital prosumer (Ritzer and Jurgenson, 2012) theory to further enhance the understanding of users\u0026rsquo; perceptions and actions. These theoretical engagements can be developed in future studies.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e \u003ch2\u003eEthical Approval\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e This study has been reviewed and approved by the Xi\u0026rsquo;an Jiaotong-Liverpool University, School of Humanities and Social Sciences Ethics Review Panel, under the reference number ER-HSS-11000024520230713190232. The ethical approval was given on 18th June 2023. All methods were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations set forth by the XJTLU. The ethical approval letter is available upon request.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eInformed consent\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003ePrior to participation in the study, all participants were thoroughly informed about the nature of the research, including its aims and objectives, the collect, store and use of data, and participants\u0026rsquo; rights and obligations. Written or recorded oral informed consent was obtained from each participant in the period between 22 July and 22 August 2023, ensuring they understood their rights to withdraw from the study at any point without any adverse consequences. Participant confidentiality and anonymity have been strictly maintained throughout the study, with all personal identifiers being removed or anonymised.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis research article was independently authored, with one individual undertaking both the research and the writing of the manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eArbatani, T. R., Labafi, S., \u0026amp; Robati, M. (2016). Effects of social media on the environmental protection behaviour of the public (case study: protecting Zayandeh-rood river environment). \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Environmental Research\u003c/em\u003e, 10(2), 237-244.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eArlt, D., Hoppe, I., Schmitt, J. B., De Silva-Schmidt, F., \u0026amp; Br\u0026uuml;ggemann, M. (2018). Climate engagement in a digital age: Exploring the drivers of participation in climate discourse virtual in the context of COP21. \u003cem\u003eEnvironmental Communication\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e(1), 84-98.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAshfaq, M., Zhang, Q., Ali, F., Waheed, A., \u0026amp; Nawaz, S. (2021). You plant a virtual tree, we\u0026apos;ll plant a real tree: Understanding users\u0026apos; adoption of the Ant Forest mobile gaming application from a behavioral reasoning theory perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production, 310, 127394. Access through: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652621016139. Access on: 22 September 2023.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAshfaq, M., Zhang, Q., Zafar, A. U., Malik, M., \u0026amp; Waheed, A. (2022). Understanding Ant Forest continuance: Effects of user experience, personal attributes and motivational factors.\u003cem\u003e Industrial Management \u0026amp; Data Systems\u003c/em\u003e, 122(2), 471-498.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBalint, M., Posea, V., Dimitriu, A., \u0026amp; Iosup, A. (2011, June). An analysis of social gaming networks in virtual and face to face bridge communities. In \u003cem\u003eProceedings of the third international workshop on Large-scale system and application performance\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 35-42).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBoucher, J. L. (2016). Culture, carbon, and climate change: A class analysis of climate change belief, lifestyle lock-in, and personal carbon footprint. \u003cem\u003eSocijalna ekologija: časopis za ekolo\u0026scaron;ku misao i sociologijska istraživanja okoline\u003c/em\u003e, 25(1-2), 53-80.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChen, B., Feng, Y., Sun, J., \u0026amp; Yan, J. (2020). Motivation analysis of virtual green users: Evidence from Chinese \u0026ldquo;Ant Forest\u0026rdquo;. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, 1335.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChinese Academy of Science (2021) Publication of \u0026lt;Ant Forest 2016-2020 Afforestation Project Gross Ecosystem Product (GEP) Accounting Report\u0026gt;. Access through: http://dse.rcees.cas.cn/dtxx/dtxxwz/202103/t20210331_632275.html. Access on: 15 Sep 2023.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChristensen, H. S. (2011). Political activities on the Internet: Slacktivism or political participation by other means?. \u003cem\u003eFirst Monday.\u003c/em\u003e Access through: https://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/download/3336/2767. Access on: 15 September 2023.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDeHaan, S., Kuper, L. E., Magee, J. C., Bigelow, L., \u0026amp; Mustanski, B. S. (2013). The interplay between virtual and offline explorations of identity, relationships, and sex: A mixed-methods study with LGBT youth. \u003cem\u003eJournal of sex research\u003c/em\u003e, 50(5), 421-434.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDi Gennaro, C., \u0026amp; Dutton, W. (2006). The Internet and the public: Virtual and offline political participation in the United Kingdom. \u003cem\u003eParliamentary affairs\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e59\u003c/em\u003e(2), 299-313.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDucheneaut, N., \u0026amp; Moore, R. J. (2004, November). The social side of gaming: a study of interaction patterns in a massively multiplayer virtual game. In \u003cem\u003eProceedings of the 2004 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 360-369).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEsty, D. C. (2004). Environmental protection in the information age. \u003cem\u003eNYUL Rev\u003c/em\u003e., 79, 115-211.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFuchs, C. (2013). \u003cem\u003eSocial media and capitalism\u003c/em\u003e. Nordicom.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFunk, C. Tyson, A., Kennedy, B. And Johnson, C. (2020) Concern over climate and the environment predominates among these publics. \u003cem\u003ePew Research Center\u003c/em\u003e. Access through: https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2020/09/29/concern-over-climate-and-the-environment-predominates-among-these-publics/, access on: 27 August 2023.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGhai, D. P., \u0026amp; Vivian, J. M. (1995). Introduction. Ghai, D. P., \u0026amp; Vivian, J. M. (eds) \u003cem\u003eGrassroots environmental action: people\u0026apos;s participation in sustainable development\u003c/em\u003e. London: Routledge. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGibson, R., \u0026amp; Cantijoch, M. (2013). Conceptualizing and measuring participation in the age of the Internet: Is virtual political engagement really different to offline? \u003cem\u003eThe Journal of Politics\u003c/em\u003e, 75(3), 701\u0026ndash;716.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGlucker, A. N., Driessen, P. P., Kolhoff, A., \u0026amp; Runhaar, H. A. (2013). Public participation in environmental impact assessment: why, who and how?. \u003cem\u003eEnvironmental impact assessment review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e43\u003c/em\u003e, 104-111.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHaider, J. (2012). Interrupting practices that want to matter: The making, shaping and reproduction of environmental information virtual. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Documentation\u003c/em\u003e, 68(5), 639-658.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHutchins, B., \u0026amp; Lester, L. (2006). Environmental protest and tap-dancing with the media in the information age. \u003cem\u003eMedia, Culture \u0026amp; Society\u003c/em\u003e, 28(3), 433-451.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKaur, A., \u0026amp; Chahal, H. S. (2018). Role of social media in increasing environmental issue awareness. \u003cem\u003eResearchers World\u003c/em\u003e, 9(1), 19-27.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKersting, N. (2013). Virtual participation: from \u0026lsquo;invited\u0026apos; to \u0026lsquo;invented\u0026apos; spaces. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Electronic Governance\u003c/em\u003e, 6(4), 270-280.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKersting, N. (2016). Participatory Turn? Comparing Citizens\u0026apos; and Politicians\u0026apos; Perspectives on Virtual and Offline Local Political Participation. \u003cem\u003eLex Localis-Journal of Local Self-Government\u003c/em\u003e, 14(2).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKingston, R., Carver, S., Evans, A., \u0026amp; Turton, I. (2000). Web-based public participation geographical information systems: an aid to local environmental decision-making. \u003cem\u003eComputers, environment and urban systems\u003c/em\u003e, 24(2), 109-125.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLester, L., \u0026amp; Hutchins, B. (2009). Power games: environmental protest, news media and the internet. \u003cem\u003eMedia, Culture \u0026amp; Society,\u003c/em\u003e 31(4), 579-595.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLi, W., Liu, J., \u0026amp; Li, D. (2012). Getting their voices heard: Three cases of public participation in environmental protection in China. \u003cem\u003eJournal of environmental management\u003c/em\u003e, 98, 65-72.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLandstr\u0026ouml;m, C. (2020). \u003cem\u003eEnvironmental Participation. [electronic resource] : Practices engaging the public with science and governance\u003c/em\u003e (1st ed. 2020.). Springer International Publishing.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLutz, C., Hoffmann, C. P., \u0026amp; Meckel, M. (2014). Beyond just politics: A systematic literature review of virtual participation. \u003cem\u003eFirst Monday. \u003c/em\u003eAccess through: https://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/download/5260/4094. Access on: 1 September 2023. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLutz, C., \u0026amp; Hoffmann, C. P. (2017). The dark side of virtual participation: exploring non-, passive and negative participation.\u003cem\u003e Information, Communication \u0026amp; Society\u003c/em\u003e, 20(6), 876-897.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMacafee, T. (2018). The Interplay between Social Media Politics and Offline Political Participation. \u003cem\u003eAmerican Communication Journal\u003c/em\u003e, 20(1).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMercea, D. (2012). Digital prefigurative participation: The entwinement of virtual communication and offline participation in protest events. \u003cem\u003eNew media \u0026amp; society\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e14\u003c/em\u003e(1), 153-169.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMorganti, L., Pallavicini, F., Cadel, E., Candelieri, A., Archetti, F., \u0026amp; Mantovani, F. (2017). Gaming for Earth: Serious games and gamification to engage consumers in pro-environmental behaviours for energy efficiency. \u003cem\u003eEnergy Research \u0026amp; Social Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e29\u003c/em\u003e, 95-102.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMi, L., Xu, T., Sun, Y., Zhao, J., Lv, T., Gan, X., ... \u0026amp; Qiao, L. (2021). Playing Ant Forest to promote virtual green behavior: A new perspective on uses and gratifications. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Environmental Management\u003c/em\u003e, 278, 111544.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMorozov, E. (2011). \u003cem\u003eThe Net Delusion\u003c/em\u003e. New York: PublicAffairs\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOser, J., Hooghe, M., \u0026amp; Marien, S. (2013). Is virtual participation distinct from offline participation? A latent class analysis of participation types and their stratification. \u003cem\u003ePolitical research quarterly\u003c/em\u003e, 66(1), 91-101.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePina, V., Torres, L., \u0026amp; Royo, S. (2017). Comparing virtual with offline citizen engagement for climate change: Findings from Austria, Germany and Spain. \u003cem\u003eGovernment Information Quarterly\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e34\u003c/em\u003e(1), 26-36.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRitzer, G., Dean, P., \u0026amp; Jurgenson, N. (2012). The coming of age of the prosumer. \u003cem\u003eAmerican behavioral scientist\u003c/em\u003e, 56(4), 379-398.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRuess, C., Hoffmann, C. P., Boulianne, S., \u0026amp; Heger, K. (2023). Virtual political participation: the evolution of a concept. \u003cem\u003eInformation, Communication \u0026amp; Society\u003c/em\u003e, 26(8), 1495-1512.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSchmidt, C. (2004). The analysis of semi-structured interviews. A companion to qualitative research, 253(41), 258.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eStern, P. C., \u0026amp; Dietz, T. (Eds.). (2008). \u003cem\u003ePublic participation in environmental assessment and decision making\u003c/em\u003e. National Academies Press.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSun, Y., Graham, T., \u0026amp; Broersma, M. (2018). Environmental talk in the Chinese green public sphere: A comparative analysis of daily green-speak across three Chinese virtual forums. Schwanholz, J., Graham, T., \u0026amp; Stoll, P. T. (Eds) \u003cem\u003eManaging Democracy in the Digital Age: Internet Regulation, Social Media Use, and Virtual Civic Engagement. \u003c/em\u003eGewerbestrasse: Springer\u003cem\u003e, \u003c/em\u003e243-263.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSullivan, J., \u0026amp; Xie, L. (2009). Environmental activism, social networks and the internet. T\u003cem\u003ehe China Quarterly\u003c/em\u003e, 198, 422-432.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eUN (2023) Principle 10. Access through: https://www.unep.org/civil-society-engagement/partnerships/principle-10. Access on: 19 September 2023.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eUNFCCC (2019)\u003cem\u003e Alipay Ant Forest: Using Digital Technologies to Scale up Climate Action | China\u003c/em\u003e. Access through: https://unfccc.int/climate-action/momentum-for-change/planetary-health/alipay-ant-forest. Access on 28 April, 2023.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVissers, S., Hooghe, M., Stolle, D., \u0026amp; Maheo, V. A. (2012). The impact of mobilization media on off-line and virtual participation: Are mobilization effects medium-specific?. \u003cem\u003eSocial Science Computer Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e30\u003c/em\u003e(2), 152-169.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVissers, S., \u0026amp; Stolle, D. (2014). The Internet and new modes of political participation: virtual versus offline participation.\u003cem\u003e Information, Communication \u0026amp; Society\u003c/em\u003e, 17(8), 937-955.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWang, H., Zhang, T., Quan, Y., \u0026amp; Dong, R. (2013). Research on the framework of the Environmental Internet of Things. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Sustainable Development \u0026amp; World Ecology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e20\u003c/em\u003e(3), 199-204.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWang, Q. (2020). \u003cem\u003eThe Chinese Internet: the virtual public sphere, power relations and political communication\u003c/em\u003e. London: Routledge.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWang, X., and Liu, L. (2017) Multilevel Analysis of Public Environmental Behaviour intention - Based on 2013 CSS dataset . \u003cem\u003eJournal of Jishou University\u003c/em\u003e, Vol.38, No. 1, 80-90.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWard, S., Gibson, R., \u0026amp; Lusoli, W. (2003). Virtual participation and mobilisation in Britain: Hype, hope and reality. \u003cem\u003eParliamentary affairs\u003c/em\u003e, 56(4), 652-668.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWu, W., Wang, W., \u0026amp; Zhang, M. (2022). Does internet public participation slow down environmental pollution?. \u003cem\u003eEnvironmental Science \u0026amp; Policy\u003c/em\u003e, 137, 22-31.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWWF (2023) 10 Things You Can Do To Help Save Our Planet. Access through: https://www.wwf.org.uk/thingsyoucando. Access on: 15 September 2023.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYang, G. (2003). Weaving a green web: the internet and environmental activism in China. \u003cem\u003eChina Environment Series\u003c/em\u003e, 6, 89-93.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYang, Z., Kong, X., Sun, J., \u0026amp; Zhang, Y. (2018). Switching to green lifestyles: Behavior change of ant forest users. \u003cem\u003eInternational journal of environmental research and public health\u003c/em\u003e, 15(9). Access through: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/15/9/1819. Access on: 22 September 2023.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZhang, B., Hu, X., \u0026amp; Gu, M. (2022). Promote pro-environmental behaviour through social media: An empirical study based on Ant Forest. \u003cem\u003eEnvironmental Science \u0026amp; Policy\u003c/em\u003e, 137, 216-227.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZhang, K. M., \u0026amp; Wen, Z. G. (2008). Review and challenges of policies of environmental protection and sustainable development in China. \u003cem\u003eJournal of environmental management\u003c/em\u003e, 88(4), 1249-1261.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZhang, Y., Xiao, S., \u0026amp; Zhou, G. (2020). User continuance of a green behavior mobile application in China: An empirical study of Ant Forest. J\u003cem\u003eournal of Cleaner Production\u003c/em\u003e, 242, 118497.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"virtual environmental participation, online social game, Ant Forest, social media capitals, public engagements","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6643000/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6643000/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"This research investigates the interplay between virtual and offline experiences in environmental engagement, using the online social game (OSG) Ant Forest as a case study. It explores the boundary between users’ virtual and offline engagements, arguing that these two realms are effectively blended in facilitating environmental participation through the OSG and creating measurable pro-environmental results. Employing a qualitative approach, the research argues that the roles of digital media in environmental participation extend beyond the traditional model of facilitating communication, raising awareness, and mobilising collective activism. By transferring offline pro-environmental behaviours into virtual social media capital, and then exchanging that virtual capital for real trees, the OSG offers an alternative and innovative mechanism to engage the public in environmental protection.","manuscriptTitle":"The Interplay of Virtual Engagement and Real-World Action in Pro-Environmental Games: Towards a Conceptualisation of an Alternative Virtual Environmental Participation Model - An Analysis of Participation on Alipay Ant Forest","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-06-15 16:02:00","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6643000/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"60c618c9-f782-469f-a79b-c8b2b5118fc2","owner":[],"postedDate":"June 15th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[{"id":49807780,"name":"Social science/Cultural and media studies"},{"id":49807781,"name":"Social science/Environmental studies"},{"id":49807782,"name":"Social science/Science technology and society"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-12-17T12:40:15+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-06-15 16:02:00","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-6643000","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-6643000","identity":"rs-6643000","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}