Introduction
The digital transformation of the water sector has become a practical driver of smarter, more sustainable resource management. Climate change, rapid urbanisation and rising demand pile fresh pressure onto already stretched water infrastructure, pushing utilities toward data-driven solutions that shorten reaction times and cut losses1. Recent outreach pilots even show citizens using phone-based augmented reality to explore circular-economy options in real-time.
Among the digital advances, immersive tools—virtual, augmented and mixed-reality—are attracting notice for their potential to re-shape water governance, education and day-to-day operations2. Virtual reality (VR) places users inside fully synthetic environments where they can rehearse tasks such as flood-gate sequencing or membrane-cleaning cycles3. Augmented reality (AR) overlays digital information on real-world objects, enhancing field training, public awareness campaigns, and infrastructure maintenance4. An early example is the NESSIE household-efficiency platform, which coupled AR overlays with smart-meter feedback5. Mixed-reality (MR) blends the two streams, offering real-time, hands-on decision spaces that improve collaboration among stakeholders6. The forthcoming PathoVIEW suite for first responders illustrates how MR can also support crisis management7. When these visual layers tie into digital twins, they unlock predictive analytics and optimisation of complex networks8,9.
The role of the ICT4Water cluster
The ICT4Water Cluster, an initiative of the European Commission, brings together more than 60 projects to advance interoperable smart-water solutions1. A core focus is to strengthen stakeholder participation through digital tools that enable actor engagement, scenario-based decision-making and interactive learning10–12.
Within this framework, the Actor Engagement and Co-Creation Group has undertaken an in-depth assessment of immersive tools created or adopted by Cluster members. In this paper we compile that inventory, and evaluate each tool against four pragmatic criteria, functionality, interoperability, impact and scalability2. Early feedback from developers and end-users highlights key challenges: proprietary data formats, limited accessibility after project close, and the need for structured onboarding and training13,14. These findings echo cross-sector XR-user studies and point to concrete next steps.
Objectives of the study
This study aims to:
1. Identify and catalogue the immersive digital tools used within the ICT4Water Cluster.
2. Evaluate their functionality and interoperability within water management frameworks.
3. Assess their impact and scalability across different use cases, including decision support, education, and infrastructure monitoring.
4. Provide recommendations to enhance adoption, usability, and effectiveness in addressing water-related challenges.
By achieving these objectives, the study contributes to digital innovation in water governance, supporting the EU’s broader policy goals for a sustainable and digitally advanced water sector. The insights gathered will inform future developments, guide industry stakeholders, and contribute to ongoing research in immersive digital technologies for water management.
Literature review
The digital turn in water management
Digitalisation is steadily reshaping European water services, marrying high-frequency sensing, data analytics and customer apps with decades-old pipes and pumps. The European Commission’s ICT4Water Action Plan sketched a “Digital Single Market for Water Services” built on open interfaces, shared vocabularies and cross-utility pilots15. That ambition is echoed in the 2024 Rolling Plan for ICT Standardisation, which puts water-management digitalisation on the Green-Deal priority list16.
Yet progress remains uneven, an ethnographic deep dive into Ghana Water Company shows smart meters and mobile billing being bolted on as stand-alone add-ons, limiting value capture and reinforcing organisational silos17. Similar stories surface elsewhere, reminding us that hardware and code do not, by themselves, dismantle institutional inertia.
Immersive technologies: definitions and capabilities
Immersive media are now on trial across the entire water value chain—from catchment planning to customer engagement. A consolidated summary of definitions, core capabilities, and example use cases is provided in Table 1.
Table 1. Immersive modalities, their core affordances, and illustrative use-cases in the water sector.
| Modality | Core affordance | Illustrative water sector usecase |
|---|
| Virtual-reality (VR) | Full synthetic environment for risk free exploration | Serious game prototype allowing citizens to test flood-mitigation portfolios in a 3-D catchment21 |
| Augmented-reality (AR) | Data overlays anchored to the physical asset | HoloLens based visualisation of underground sewers to s assist condition assessment22 |
| Mixed-reality (MR) | Real time coupling of digital objects and physical space | Field level inspection tool that fuses BIM, IoT and simulation data for water supply pipes23 |
Beyond operations, these media are valued for communicating complex, dynamic risks to non technical audiences and for shortening training cycles in hazardous settings.
Digital twins and interoperability in water systems
Digital twins (DTs) augment conventional SCADA setups with live telemetry, physics based simulators and AI surrogates. Recent work demonstrates how a DT of a municipal network can be queried in VR/MR to rehearse incident response or schedule predictive maintenance18. Similar VR walk-throughs are now being trialed on FIWARE-enabled raw-water twins, showing that the concept is not limited to distribution networks9. Early operational evidence is emerging; Gothenburg’s sewer utility, for example, reports pump-energy savings and overflow reductions after wiring its real-time control system to a DT platform19. Whether these gains scale hinges on common semantics. WaterML 2.0 already standardises time-series exchange, yet immersive front ends still struggle to ‘speak’ to heterogeneous back-ends. Wider uptake of linked-data vocabularies such as SAREF4WATR and RESTful NGSI-LD APIs would close that gap20.
Actor engagement, serious gaming, and capacity building
Gameful environments are a hallmark of the EU SIM4NEXUS project, where stakeholders co designed a policy sandbox to explore long term trade offs across the water energy food land climate nexus24. A meta analysis of 41 urban water games confirms their pedagogical value but notes that only one third were assessed with real end users, limiting generalisability25. Beyond the water domain, a recent review of 230 sustainability focused gamification studies highlights the design levers, narrative framing, social competition, real world rewards, that consistently deliver behavioural change26. Importing these insights could strengthen the next generation of digital water engagement tools.
Gaps in knowledge and need for structured assessment
While pilot studies are everywhere, yet we still lack a panoramic view of how immersive tools perform across regions, governance set-ups and sometimes creaky IT stacks. Comparative metrics for technical readiness, interoperability and socio economic impact are still rare. To fill that gap, we compile a Cluster-wide inventory of immersive applications and, borrowing from the interoperability principles above, we propose a lean rubric others can lift or refine.
Methodology
This study employed a mixed-methods approach combining structured data collection, stakeholder engagement, and comparative analysis to assess immersive digital tools developed or used by members of the ICT4Water Cluster. The methodology was developed under the framework of the Actor Engagement and Co-Creation Group and aligns with the ICT4Water Cluster's broader goals of promoting digital transformation through participatory innovation.
Research design
The assessment was carried out in two consecutive phases, involving separate but complementary rounds of data collection:
1. A Preliminary Questionnaire27 distributed across the ICT4Water community to gather an initial inventory of immersive digital tools, and
2. A Main Survey28, designed to explore specific technical and functional characteristics of each tool, including interoperability, user experience, scalability, and perceived impact.
These instruments were supported by qualitative feedback from respondents, including open-text responses, workshop discussions, and follow-up communications with project representatives. This multi-layered approach provided both breadth and depth in the evaluation.
Sample and participants
The sampling frame comprised all ICT4Water Cluster projects active or completed at the time of the survey period. Invitations were distributed via ICT4Water Cluster channels (mailing list), with one reminder at a 2-week interval.
Preliminary (project-level) questionnaire. Fielded September–December 2023, it targeted all 77 projects (36 ongoing; 41 past) and yielded 28 valid project responses, a 36% response rate (28/77).
Main (tool-level) questionnaire. Fielded April–May 2024, it was addressed to projects that had indicated the use of immersive (XR) tools. It collected 7 valid tool-level responses, each corresponding to a distinct immersive solution.
At the time of data collection, these seven responses represented all immersive tools self-reported by ICT4Water projects that met the inclusion criteria, providing a workable snapshot of the ecosystem.
Survey instruments and indicators
The Preliminary Survey captured high-level information, including: (i) existence and name of immersive tool(s); (ii) XR environment type (VR, AR, MR); (iii) application domain (e.g., training, decision-support, education).
The Main Questionnaire evaluated each identified tool along four dimensions:
Functionality: degree of immersion, online/offline operation, device compatibility, accessibility features;
Interoperability: interfaces with other software, APIs and data systems, conformance to open standards;
Scalability: readiness beyond pilots, modularity, adaptability to new contexts;
Perceived impact: stakeholder engagement, training effectiveness, decision-making support, end-user feedback.
Items combined Likert-type ratings, multiple-choice selections, and open-ended comments. Metadata captured user categories (e.g., researchers, utilities, citizens), usage frequency, and training requirements. Full instruments and a codebook are provided as Extended data27,28.
Ethics and consent
In line with institutional guidance at National Technical University of Athens, this minimal-risk professional survey did not require prior ethics committee approval, as no special-category personal data were collected, and all responses were anonymized. Electronic informed consent was obtained before participants accessed each questionnaire. No IP addresses or geolocation data were stored; free-text responses were screened/redacted prior to data deposit. Preliminary survey contact details are not publicly shared; only aggregated indicators are reported.
Data analysis
The survey data were analysed through a combination of:
Quantitative analysis (e.g., frequency distributions, cross-tabulations) to identify general trends and tool typologies.
Qualitative thematic coding of open-ended responses to extract emerging themes, user concerns, and best practices.
Comparative assessment of tools across projects to identify patterns in usage, strengths, and limitations.
Key findings were visualised using summary tables and figures to support cross-case comparison. Tool functionalities and attributes were mapped to a matrix to assess the overall maturity of immersive technologies in the ICT4Water ecosystem.
Validation and presentation
Findings from the study were presented and validated during the ICT4Water Annual Cluster Meeting on June 19, 2024, as part of the Water Innovation Europe event in Brussels. This provided an opportunity for live feedback, clarification of tool details, and stakeholder input on future priorities. These discussions were incorporated into the final synthesis.
Results & findings
This section presents the key findings from the two-stage survey process and stakeholder engagement activities conducted across ICT4Water Cluster projects. The results are organized around four main analytical dimensions: (1) inventory and typology of tools, (2) functionality and user experience, (3) interoperability and scalability, and (4) perceived impact and challenges. Insights were drawn from 28 responses to the preliminary questionnaire and 7 detailed tool-level responses from the main questionnaire.
Inventory and typology of immersive tools
The survey pinpointed seven immersive solutions that are either being built or actively used inside ICT4Water projects. For clarity, each entry below pairs the tool with the EU project that created—or now deploys—it, drawing directly on the questionnaire responses presented to the Cluster in June 2024:
ARSINOE VR (ARSINOE project) – a virtual reality environment in which regional planners explore multi hazard climate resilience scenarios and negotiate adaptation pathways.
NextGen AR application & authoring tool (NextGen project) – mobile augmented reality overlays that let Living Lab visitors “see” circular water technologies on top of existing assets; an integrated authoring module allows non coders to publish new AR scenes.
iWAYS immersive Decision Support Suite (iWAYS project) – a web based analytics cockpit whose 3 D dashboards support factory managers in optimising heat and water recovery lines before installation.
PathoVIEW AR instruction app (PathoCERT project) – a phone based AR guide that walks first responders through sampling and disinfection steps during pathogen contamination incidents.
NESSIE mixed reality toolset – delivered in two successive builds:
⚬ NESSIE Platform (iWIDGET project): a studio based MR prototype for collaborative design of new water infrastructure layouts.
⚬ NESSIE System (B-WaterSmart project): a field ready evolution that couples a headset with live IoT feeds so on site engineers can inspect hidden assets. Both builds represent iterations of the same tool family rather than separate products.
Immersive Media eXpriences (IMX) exhibitions (ULTIMATE project) – a travelling installation that blends VR headsets, large screen projection and live sensor feeds to bring digital water stories to general audiences.
Mapped to their dominant immersive modes, the portfolio distributes evenly across VR, AR, MR, decision support dashboards and public engagement exhibitions, underscoring the Cluster’s strategy of applying extended reality wherever it offers the greatest value—from high level policy planning through factory optimisation to citizen outreach.
Functionality and user experience
Tool categories were evenly split: VR 2/7 (29%), Digital platform 2/7 (29%), AR 1/7 (14%), MR 1/7 (14%), simulation/DSS 1/7 (14%). The tools vary considerably in terms of immersion levels, user interface design, and technological requirements1:
Connectivity & Use Mode:
Device Compatibility:
Intended User Groups:
⚬ Tools target a wide spectrum of users, including water professionals, researchers, educators, public authorities, and general citizens.
Several respondents highlighted that while immersion enhances engagement, user-friendliness and onboarding remain key barriers. Training resources, language accessibility, and hardware availability were mentioned as critical areas for improvement.
Interoperability and scalability
A key metric in any digital-water roadmap is the ability of tools to interoperate with external platforms and scale beyond pilot contexts:
Interoperability:
⚬ 3/7 (43%) of tools offer data integration or API-level communication with other systems.
⚬ 4/7 (57%) do not currently support interoperability, representing a limitation for wider adoption.
Scalability:
⚬ 4/7 (57%) of tools have been tested for scalability, either via multi-site deployment or stress testing.
⚬ 3/7 (43%) remain in pilot or proof-of-concept stages, requiring further investment and infrastructure.
These figures suggest that while technical innovation is advancing, system-level integration remains an obstacle, particularly for smaller projects or research prototypes.
Perceived impact and user feedback
Respondents reported several positive outcomes from the use of immersive tools:
Enhanced Learning: Users indicated higher retention and comprehension when using immersive training modules, particularly in VR environments simulating complex systems like wastewater plants or flood risk zones, a finding aligned with an urban-water game meta-analysis25.
Increased Engagement: Tools like serious games and AR storytelling were praised for boosting citizen awareness, particularly in educational campaigns and public consultations.
Decision-Making Support: Several tools enabled multi-scenario visualization and stakeholder co-creation, enhancing the transparency of planning processes.
Despite these strengths, common challenges include:
Limited funding and time to support full deployment,
Lack of standard training materials and guidance,
Hardware limitations in field applications (especially for AR).
Cluster-wide trends and maturity levels
An aggregated view of all responses suggests that immersive technologies in the ICT4Water cluster are in a transitional phase:
Most tools are between Technology Readiness Levels (TRL) 5–7, indicating a shift from research to applied development.
There is a growing interest in Digital Twins, often coupled with immersive dashboards or visual simulations (e.g., VR-linked hydraulic models).
Use cases are moving beyond demonstration toward multi-stakeholder engagement platforms, integrating real-time data and AI-assisted analytics.
This comprehensive analysis provides a basis for identifying strategic needs, aligning technological development with stakeholder demand, and advancing immersive tools from innovation to mainstream adoption within digital water governance.
Discussion
Immersive tools added value in the water sector
The findings of this study are showing that immersive tools (VR/AR/MR) help showcase buried assets, subsurface flows, hydraulic behaviour, or the trade-offs behind flood protection. When engineers and operators use AR overlays on site, they can visualise pipe alignments, defects and condition states while standing above the network, which speeds up diagnosis and supports safer decisions. Recent work shows how GIS, AR and machine learning can be combined to render sewer condition dynamically, exactly the kind of “seeing is understanding” we aim for22.
Immersive tools also make participation easier. In serious-game and VR settings, people can explore scenarios together (e.g., upstream retention vs. downstream channel works), see consequences, and then discuss trade-offs without needing expert knowledge. A widely cited study reports that a flood-risk serious game improved stakeholder understanding of options in mixed urban–rural catchments, evidence that play, when well-designed, can support informed dialogue21.
At the citizen level, AR can be used as a lightweight public-engagement path on phones people already carry. Controlled trials of an AR “eco-game” found gains in sustainability knowledge and pro-environmental attitudes, suggesting that simple, well-tested AR interactions can raise awareness at scale. For water utilities and projects, this matters: AR can be the front door to more complex back-end systems (dashboards, simulations, digital twins) without imposing heavy hardware4.
Finally, immersive front ends are most useful when connected to live data. Experience from wastewater utilities shows that when operational digital twins feed a visual interface (not always XR, but compatible with XR), operators get better foresight for storms and can reduce overflows or energy use. That is the direction we recommend for water XR: keep the interface simple, but wire it to real measurements and simulations19.
Technical barriers: interoperability and integration challenges
Most of the tools we inventoried were built as project pilots. They work, but many are “islands”: the app can’t talk easily to other systems, or the data model is bespoke, or there is no stable API after the project ends. This limits reuse and makes it hard to plug XR front ends into live telemetry, simulators, or digital twins. In practice, we see three concrete fixes:
(a) Use shared context APIs. The EU’s NGSI-LD standard gives a common way to publish and subscribe to dynamic “entities” (assets, sensors, events). ETSI guidance shows how to link external vocabularies to NGSI-LD so different systems can speak the same language. For XR, this means the headset or phone can query a single context endpoint and receive the right attributes (location, status, forecast) without custom adapters for each pilot29.
(b) Reuse domain vocabularies. Rather than citing the SAREF portal, we rely on peer-reviewed SAREF literature. The SAREF ontology is well documented in a recent Wiley chapter; for the water domain, multiple scholarly works apply SAREF4WATR to model water assets and observations (e.g., industrial-water knowledge graphs; water-quality and monitoring ontologies; large open knowledge graphs). Using these vocabularies reduces custom mappings and lets XR clients consume consistent semantics across projects20,30–32.
(c) Standardise data models for payloads. Instead of the FIWARE programme page, we cite peer-reviewed studies that operationalise Smart Data Models (and FIWARE/NGSI-LD) at scale: city platforms aligned with Smart Data Models, end-to-end FIWARE reference implementations for context-aware analytics, and new Smart Data Models for flood-risk and satellite imagery. These works show how shared payload schemas shorten integration and help XR interfaces stay plug-compatible33–35.
Finally, our own lineage in web platforms points to a feasible path: earlier iWIDGET work already exposed water-use analytics via the web; newer raw-water supply papers define NGSI/NGSI-LD data models for key hydraulic entities—exactly the substrate that immersive front-ends can render, provided those endpoints are kept stable beyond project end5,9,36.
Human-centric design and equity of access
Beyond technical integration, user-friendliness, training support, and accessibility were frequently cited as gaps by ICT4Water respondents. Immersive tools, while engaging, often assume a level of digital literacy and access to hardware that is not universally available—particularly among smaller utilities or citizen end-users. Previous studies have shown that without deliberate design for inclusivity, digital tools risk reinforcing existing inequalities in environmental governance10,24.
Moreover, language support, offline modes, and platform neutrality (e.g., web-based vs headset-dependent) are crucial for making immersive experiences broadly usable. These limitations must be addressed through co-design practices, involving end users throughout the development cycle37.
Strategic policy alignment with EU goals
The European Commission has emphasized digital water transformation through key policies including the Green Deal, the Digital Europe Programme, and the Digital Water Action Plan. The ICT4Water Cluster is positioned to play a vital role in operationalizing these goals through scalable, interoperable, and participatory digital tools1.
Immersive technologies can directly contribute to:
Meeting Water Framework Directive goals by facilitating stakeholder participation.
Supporting workforce development through digital training environments.
Enhancing adaptive planning by enabling multi-scenario visualizations in urban water systems.
These benefits underscore the need for funding frameworks that support maintenance, scaling, and institutional embedding of immersive tools.
Recommendations for future development
To fully realize the potential of immersive technologies in water governance, this study proposes the following targeted actions:
1. Standardise Interoperability: Support open architectures and shared data formats through alignment with initiatives like the Common European Data Space for Water.
2. Promote Scalable Architectures: Encourage modular design, ensuring tools can evolve beyond demonstration environments.
3. Invest in Inclusive Design: Prioritize user onboarding, multilingual content, and low-tech accessibility to reduce adoption barriers.
4. Integrate Tools with Digital Twin Initiatives: Leverage real-time data environments to deepen the decision-support capacity of immersive tools.
5. Support Ecosystem Development: Fund networks of developers, utilities, and researchers to co-create next-generation immersive solutions for water resilience.
Recommendations
The assessment of immersive digital tools across ICT4Water Cluster projects reveals both substantial opportunities and key barriers. To ensure that these tools evolve from prototypes to impactful digital solutions within water governance, the following targeted recommendations are proposed:
Foster interoperability through open standards
A significant number of tools assessed lack the ability to integrate with existing digital systems. To address this:
Adopt open APIs and standardized protocols, such as those developed by the Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC), to ensure compatibility with other water platforms and legacy systems.
Promote compliance with the Common European Data Space for Water, encouraging tools to contribute and draw from shared, interoperable datasets16.
Prioritize scalability and modularity in tool design
Many immersive solutions remain confined to the pilot stage due to architectural limitations. To enable broader deployment:
Encourage modular architectures that allow tools to be adapted and expanded across geographies and stakeholder contexts.
Provide funding mechanisms for long-term maintenance and scaling, including through Horizon Europe and Digital Europe Programmes.
Improve user experience and accessibility
Barriers to usability—especially for non-experts—can severely limit the adoption of immersive tools. To enhance access:
Co-design tools with diverse user groups, incorporating feedback from utilities, educators, and citizens at early stages37.
Ensure accessibility features, including multilingual support, offline operation, mobile compatibility, and usability for individuals with varying levels of digital literacy.
Embed immersive tools in digital twin and smart city strategies
To maximize impact and visibility:
Integrate immersive solutions with digital twin environments, enabling real-time monitoring, predictive planning, and collaborative engagement8.
Align tool development with smart city initiatives and EU climate adaptation policies, such as the EU Mission on Climate-Neutral and Smart Cities.
Support capacity building and institutional uptake
The successful deployment of immersive tools depends on the ecosystem surrounding them:
Fund training programs and onboarding materials for professionals, municipalities, and community organizations.
Develop a repository of best practices, case studies, and reusable components, hosted within the ICT4Water Cluster and disseminated through EU platforms.
Enable policy integration and long-term planning
To institutionalize immersive technologies:
Recognize immersive tools as valid methods of stakeholder engagement under the Water Framework Directive.
Encourage national and regional water authorities to include digital engagement strategies in their planning processes and procurement guidelines.
By implementing these recommendations, the ICT4Water Cluster and the broader European water community can unlock the full potential of immersive technologies, supporting innovation, inclusivity, and resilience in the face of growing water management challenges.
Conclusions
This study provides the first cross-cluster assessment of immersive digital tools used within the ICT4Water community, offering new insights into how technologies such as Virtual Reality (VR), Augmented Reality (AR), and Mixed-reality (MR) are being applied to support water resilience, stakeholder engagement, and digital transformation.
The findings highlight a growing ecosystem of immersive solutions that span diverse functions, from simulation-based training and scenario planning to interactive public education and participatory co-creation. While the tools demonstrate strong potential for enhancing transparency, inclusivity, and operational awareness, their deployment is often hindered by limited interoperability, low scalability readiness, and uneven user accessibility.
Key barriers such as fragmented architectures, incomplete API integration, and a lack of standardised onboarding point to the need for more coordinated design strategies and alignment with EU-level data and digital policy initiatives. Furthermore, many tools remain in mid-stage development (TRL 5–7), indicating a critical need for funding and technical support to move toward mainstream adoption.
The integration of immersive tools with broader digital water infrastructures, such as digital twins, IoT networks, and decision support systems, presents a compelling pathway forward. Equally, embedding these tools in regulatory frameworks and national strategies will be crucial for institutional uptake and long-term sustainability.
Ultimately, this research contributes to the ongoing vision of the ICT4Water Cluster: promoting a digitally empowered, interoperable, and collaborative European water sector. The recommendations provided offer a roadmap for transforming immersive prototypes into impactful, scalable innovations aligned with European Green Deal objectives and the Digital Europe Programme.
Ethics and consent
In line with institutional guidance at National Technical University of Athens, this minimal-risk professional survey did not require prior ethics committee approval, as no special-category personal data were collected, and all responses were anonymized. Electronic informed consent was obtained before participants accessed each questionnaire. No IP addresses or geolocation data were stored; free-text responses were screened/redacted prior to data deposit. Preliminary survey contact details are not publicly shared; only aggregated indicators are reported.
Data and software availability
Source data
No previously published third-party datasets were analysed.
Privacy note
De-identified data are shared; no IP addresses or geolocation were stored. Free-text fields were screened/redacted to prevent re-identification. (See Ethics & consent.)
Software availability
No new software was developed.
Acknowledgements
We thank colleagues from the ICT4Water Actor Engagement & Co-Creation group and all survey respondents for sharing information about immersive tools and use cases. We are also grateful to peers who provided informal feedback on the screening rubric and early drafts.
AI-use disclosure (F1000 policy): During manuscript preparation we used OpenAI ChatGPT (GPT-5 Thinking; model snapshot August 2025) to assist with language editing for clarity and concision, structuring of the Discussion subsections, and drafting the plain-language summary. All outputs were verified and edited by the authors, who take full responsibility for the content; no data analysis, coding, or generation of scientific results was performed by the tool.
Faculty Opinions recommendedReferences
- 1.
European Commission: Executive agency for small and medium-sized enterprises,
Vamvakeridou-Lyroudia LS: ICT4WATER cluster – vision and showcases. Publications Office, 2021. Reference Source
- 2.
Beisheim N, Kayapinar H, Amann S, et al.:
Using immersive technologies and Digital Twins in a real world with non-orthogonal coordinate systems. In: Cooper A, Trigos F, Stjepandić J, Curran R, Lazar I, editors.
Advances in Transdisciplinary Engineering. IOS Press, 2024; [cited 2025 Sept 25]. Publisher Full Text
- 3.
Li Q, Zhang C, Jiang R:
A BIBLIOMETRIC REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON GAMIFICATION USED IN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, 2014–2024. In: DS 136:
Proceedings of the Asia Design and Innovation Conference (ADIC) 2024.
2024; 305–14. Reference Source
- 4.
Wang K, Tekler ZD, Cheah L, et al.:
Evaluating the effectiveness of an augmented reality game promoting environmental action.
Sustainability.
2021; 13(24): 13912. Publisher Full Text
- 5.
Makropoulos C, Kossieris P, Kozanis S, et al.:
From smart meters to smart decisions: web-based support for the water efficient household. In: Proceedings of 11th International Conference on Hydroinformatics. New York, NY, 2014. Reference Source
- 6.
Trout T, Russell SM, Harrison AV, et al.:
Collaborative Mixed Reality (MxR) and networked decision making. In: Llinas J, Hanratty TP, editors, Next-Generation Analyst VI. Orlando, United States: SPIE, 2018; 21. Publisher Full Text
- 7.
Knecht C, Kanth Kosuru R:
Protecting the First Responders: improving FR situational awareness through multi-modal interfaces leveraging the ubiquitous personal smartphone. In: 2024; [cited 2025 Oct 1]. Publisher Full Text
- 8.
Hossain R, Ahmed F, Kobayashi K, et al.:
Virtual sensing-enabled Digital Twin framework for real-time monitoring of nuclear systems leveraging deep neural operators.
Npj Mater Degrad.
2025; 9(1): 21. Publisher Full Text
- 9.
Kossieris P, Pantazis C, Makropoulos C:
Data-models for fiware-enabled smart applications for raw-water supply system modelling, management and operation. In: 2021. Publisher Full Text
- 10.
Karachalios I:
Utilizing educational gaming to foster sustainability awareness in corporate settings.
Int J Sci Res.
2024; 13(3): 740–4. Publisher Full Text
- 11.
Karachalios I, Manesis N:
Fostering environmental awareness in primary school students: evaluating the impact of a waste management education program.
Eur J Educ Stud.
2025; 12(4): 77–94. Publisher Full Text
- 12.
Karachalios I, Tantaroudas N:
Future greek pre-service teachers’ knowledge, attitudes and self-efficacy in waste management.
Br J Educ.
2025; 13(8): 25–42. Publisher Full Text
- 13.
Killough D, Ji TF, Zhang K, et al.:
XR for all: understanding developers’ perspectives on accessibility integration in extended reality. arXiv. 2024; [cited 2025 Sept 25]. Reference Source
- 14.
Lund GK, Ortova M, Syversen AG:
Using VR technology in the pre-onboarding of temporary employees in a Norwegian SME.
Procedia CIRP.
2023; 120: 320–325. Publisher Full Text
- 15.
European Commission: Directorate general for communications networks, content and technology. ICT4Water.eu. Digital single market for water services action plan: final report. LU: Publications Office, 2018; [cited 2025 July 28]. Reference Source
- 16.
European Commission: Interoperable Europe: Water Management Digitalisation (RP2024). 2024; [cited 2025 Aug 11]. Reference Source
- 17.
Amankwaa G, Heeks R, Browne AL:
Powershifts, organisational value, and water management: digital transformation of Ghana’s public water utility.
Util Policy.
2024; 87: 101724. Publisher Full Text
- 18.
Ciliberti FG, Berardi L, Laucelli DB, et al.:
Digital water services using Digital Twin paradigm. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci. 2023; 1136(1): 012002. Publisher Full Text
- 19.
Lumley D, Jursic Wanninger D, Magnusson Å, et al.:
Implementing a Digital Twin for optimized real-time control of Gothenburg’s regional sewage system.
Water Pract Technol.
2024; 19(3): 657–70. Publisher Full Text
- 20.
García-Castro R, Lefrançois M, Poveda-Villalón M, et al.:
The ETSI SAREF ontology for smart applications: a long path of development and evolution. In: Moreno-Munoz A, Giacomini N, editors. Energy smart appliances. 1st ed. Wiley, 2023; 183–215. Publisher Full Text
- 21.
Khoury M, Gibson MJ, Savic D, et al.:
A serious game designed to explore and understand the complexities of flood mitigation options in urban–rural catchments.
Water.
2018; 10(12): 1885. Publisher Full Text
- 22.
Nguyen LV, Bui DT, Seidu R:
Utilization of augmented reality technique for sewer condition visualization.
Water.
2023; 15(24): 4232. Publisher Full Text
- 23.
Zhao X, Tao Y, Bao Y, et al.:
Mixed reality-based inspection method for underground water supply network with multi-source information integration.
Electronics.
2024; 13(22): 4479. Publisher Full Text
- 24.
Sušnik J, Masia S, Indriksone D, et al.:
System dynamics modelling to explore the impacts of policies on the water-energy-food-land-climate nexus in Latvia.
Sci Total Environ.
2021; 775: 145827. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 25.
Mittal A, Scholten L, Kapelan Z:
A review of serious games for urban water management decisions: current gaps and future research directions.
Water Res.
2022; 215: 118217. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 26.
Mabalay AA:
Gamification for sustainability: a systematic review of applications, trends, and opportunities.
Comput Hum Behav.
2025; 165: 108529. Publisher Full Text
- 27.
Karachalios I:
Preliminary Survey on Tools Used by ICT4Water Cluster Projects. Zenodo. 2025; [cited 2025 Sept 1]. https://zenodo.org/records/17341824
- 28.
Karachalios I:
Main Survey on Immersive Tools in ICT4Water Cluster Projects.
Zenodo.
2025; [cited 2025 Sept 1]. Publisher Full Text
- 29.
ETSI ISG CIM: GR CIM 021 V1.1.1: usage of external data models with NGSI-LD API. 2022. Reference Source
- 30.
Koufakis AM, Tzanakis S, Moumtzidou A, et al.:
OntoAqua: ontology-based modelling of context in water safety and security. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Joint Conference on Knowledge Discovery, Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management. Online Streaming, --- Select a Country ---: SCITEPRESS - Science and Technology Publications, 2021; 194–201. Publisher Full Text
- 31.
Lippolis AS, Lodi G, Nuzzolese AG:
The water health open knowledge graph.
Sci Data.
2025; 12(1): 274. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
- 32.
Papageorgiou N, Pournara D, Apostolou D, et al.:
Managing industrial water treatment processes knowledge with knowledge graphs.
Intell Decis Technol.
2025; 19(2): 687–717. Publisher Full Text
- 33.
Bellini P, Ipsaro Palesi LA, Giovannoni A, et al.:
Managing complexity of data models and performance in broker-based Internet/Web of Things architectures.
Internet Things.
2023; 23: 100834. Publisher Full Text
- 34.
Kouloglou IO, Antzoulatos G, Vosinakis G, et al.:
FIWARE-compatible smart data models for satellite imagery and flood risk assessment to enhance data management.
Information.
2024; 15(5): 257. Publisher Full Text
- 35.
Munoz-Arcentales A, López-Pernas S, Conde J, et al.:
Enabling context-aware data analytics in smart environments: an open source reference implementation.
Sensors (Basel).
2021; 21(21): 7095. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
- 36.
Kossieris P, Kozanis S, Hashmi A, et al.:
A web-based platform for water efficient households.
Procedia Eng.
2014; 89: 1128–1135. Publisher Full Text
- 37.
Brouwer F, Vamvakeridou-Lyroudia L, Alexandri E, et al.:
The nexus concept integrating energy and resource efficiency for policy assessments: a comparative approach from three cases.
Sustainability.
2018; 10(12): 4860. Publisher Full Text
- 38.
Karachalios I:
Responses to the main survey on immersive (XR) tools in ICT4Water cluster projects (anonymised).
Zenodo.
2025; [cited 2025 Sept 7]. http://www.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17073494
