The first round of GEMS publications is now online on the GEMS website.
The mapping report by Bledar Feta and Ioannis Armakolas is part of the project “Gaming Ecosystem as a Multilayered Security Threat” (GEMS), a Horizon Europe-funded project aimed at curbing the spread of extremism within the diverse world of online gaming. The publication was produced by the Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP) under Work Package 6 (WP6) of the GEMS project, which is coordinated by ELIAMEP’s South East Europe Programme.
A stakeholder mapping exercise was implemented between January-May 2024 by the GEMS research team of ELIAMEP with the aim to serve as a knowledge and referral tool, informing in particular the development of the European Network against Gaming-related Extremism (ENgaGE). The research was conducted with the aim to map the activities of five categories of stakeholders: state-level stakeholders, non-state stakeholders, academic institutions, European and regional organisations, and gaming world stakeholders. In total, the research team identified and analysed the activities of 193 stakeholders, among them 68 state institutions and authorities, 44 gaming world actors, 45 non-governmental organisations, 20 European and regional organisations and 16 academic institutions. As part of their research, the team conducted more than 50 phone consultations to actively engage with the stakeholders and better understand their work and engagement with the gaming-extremism nexus. In addition, the research team sent 193 requests for information to ensure the accuracy of collected data and information.
This mapping report is based on the findings of the mapping exercise. It consists of five different chapters, each one focusing on a specific type of stakeholders. Each one of the five chapters is divided into two sub-chapters. The first sub-chapter describes the role that stakeholders included in this category play in P/CVE. The main objective of this sub-chapter is to provide general information about the involvements of stakeholders in the already existing P/CVE mechanisms. The second sub-chapter puts under the microscope their specific engagement with the gaming-extremism nexus based on the findings of the mapping exercise. The five chapters of this report are structured to provide context-relevant and specific information on key areas of engagement in gaming and extremism as well as highlight actor-relevant findings f or P/CVE.
You can read the full mapping report here.
Executive Summary
In the domain of gaming and extremism, the engagement of state-level stakeholders across the European Union and associated countries is noticeably subdued. This scenario unfolds despite an acknowledged awareness of extremist activities within the gaming ecosystem. However, this recognition has not yet spurred definitive policy actions, nor has it clarified the responsibilities within national prevention institutions.
Public authorities in EU member states and associated countries demonstrate a limited commitment to addressing the challenges at the nexus of gaming and extremism. Contrarily, in the Western Balkans, the issue is treated with even greater indifference and lacks robust institutional support as part of national P/CVE action plans.
Non-state actors, notably from academic circles and civil society organizations, have taken a proactive stance, primarily contributing through research and awareness campaigns. These initiatives aim to elucidate the risks associated with gaming-related threats, targeting diverse audiences including students, media professionals, and educational staff across EU member states. Despite these efforts, the specific issue of the convergence of gaming and extremism remains underexplored in the Western Balkans, where the focus of research tends to gravitate more towards general online radicalisation.
In academic settings, the emphasis is predominantly placed on research over teaching. This skew towards research limits the broader discourse on the gaming-extremism nexus within student communities, a gap increasingly filled by CSOs. These organizations have emerged as crucial actors in the field, addressing the research void left by academia and exploring radicalisation that leads to violent extremism.
The European Union has recognised the significant potential for radicalisation through gaming platforms and has addressed this issue on multiple occasions. Nevertheless, a comprehensive strategy encompassing both prevention and intervention remains elusive. Within this framework, the gaming industry, including game developers, designers, and studios, is acknowledged as a pivotal partner in crafting prevention strategies. These strategies prioritise harm mitigation to enhance the safety of gamers by design.
However, the Western Balkans display a stark contrast, with a comprehensive industry response to extremism in gaming almost entirely absent. This lack of initiative not only impedes effective countermeasures but also shies away from addressing potential incendiary content that may fuel ethnic tensions in a region already sensitive to such issues.
The gaming industry in the Western Balkans urgently needs to foster discussions concerning the exploitation of specific video games by extremists, particularly those that could potentially stimulate real conflicts, such as those from the Yugoslav wars of the 1990’s. Additionally, the industry should assess how discussions in forums related to these games could escalate ethnonationalism and inter-ethnic rivalries.
Moreover, the industry should launch tailored campaigns aimed at informing gamers about the risks posed by the presence of extremists in video gaming platforms and the available reporting mechanisms. Such initiatives would not only protect gamers but also contribute to the overall integrity and reputation of the gaming industry in the region.
All told, the current landscape indicates a significant deficit in the data and proactive responses needed to comprehensively address extremism within online gaming platforms. This highlights a critical area for EU legislators and policymakers to focus on, urging a more proactive and informed approach to bridge the prevailing gaps in engagement and effective response strategies.
