IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/chsofr/v184y2024ics0960077924006106.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Collective-risk social dilemma on the risk-driven dynamic networks

Author

Listed:
  • Hu, Min
  • Chen, Wei

Abstract

A collective-risk social dilemma assumes a risk to lost personal endowments if a common target for individuals fails to achieve. Yet in real-world society, individuals are apt to get away from collective failure. Here, a risk-based coevolution mechanism is proposed to study the evolution of cooperation in the collective-risk social dilemma. Players can avert collective failure in the future by reconfiguring groups in terms of collective failure probability. The results show that increasing the target threshold enhances the evolution. Moreover, frequent underlying network reconfiguration provides a better environment for cooperators to propagate. However, defection is best favored for moderate time scales under the condition of a weak synergetic effect. Nevertheless, the opposite results emerge for a strong synergetic effect. Furthermore, different synergetic effects also impose different impacts on the evolution of cooperation as the function of investment levels. Our work aims to explore how quickly individuals should adjust the partnerships to maximize cooperation and may be helpful in understanding the role of network reconfiguration in the evolution of collective cooperation in avoiding failure.

Suggested Citation

  • Hu, Min & Chen, Wei, 2024. "Collective-risk social dilemma on the risk-driven dynamic networks," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:chsofr:v:184:y:2024:i:c:s0960077924006106
    DOI: 10.1016/j.chaos.2024.115058
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960077924006106
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.chaos.2024.115058?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:sae:envval:v:15:y:2006:i:3:p:397-413 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Liu, Yongkui & Li, Zhi & Chen, Xiaojie & Wang, Long, 2011. "Effect of community structure on coevolutionary dynamics with dynamical linking," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 390(1), pages 43-49.
    3. Zhi Li & Zhihu Yang & Te Wu & Long Wang, 2014. "Aspiration-Based Partner Switching Boosts Cooperation in Social Dilemmas," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-7, June.
    4. Jinming Du, 2018. "Insurance optimizes complex interactive and cooperative behaviors in public goods games," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(5), pages 1-9, May.
    5. Lixia Liu & Yuchao Zhu & Shubing Guo, 2020. "The Evolutionary Game Analysis of Multiple Stakeholders in the Low-Carbon Agricultural Innovation Diffusion," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2020, pages 1-12, February.
    6. Oliver P. Hauser & David G. Rand & Alexander Peysakhovich & Martin A. Nowak, 2014. "Cooperating with the future," Nature, Nature, vol. 511(7508), pages 220-223, July.
    7. Maria Abou Chakra & Arne Traulsen, 2012. "Evolutionary Dynamics of Strategic Behavior in a Collective-Risk Dilemma," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(8), pages 1-7, August.
    8. Vítor V. Vasconcelos & Francisco C. Santos & Jorge M. Pacheco, 2013. "A bottom-up institutional approach to cooperative governance of risky commons," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 3(9), pages 797-801, September.
    9. Francisco C Santos & Jorge M Pacheco & Tom Lenaerts, 2006. "Cooperation Prevails When Individuals Adjust Their Social Ties," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(10), pages 1-8, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ding, Rui & Wang, Xianjia & Liu, Yang & Zhao, Jinhua & Gu, Cuiling, 2023. "Evolutionary games with environmental feedbacks under an external incentive mechanism," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    2. Chica, Manuel & Hernández, Juan M. & Santos, Francisco C., 2022. "Cooperation dynamics under pandemic risks and heterogeneous economic interdependence," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    3. Chen, Wei & Wu, Te & Li, Zhiwu & Wang, Long, 2016. "Friendship-based partner switching promotes cooperation in heterogeneous populations," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 443(C), pages 192-199.
    4. Chica, Manuel & Santos, Francisco C., 2023. "Seeding leading cooperators and institutions in networked climate dilemmas," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    5. Xiaojie Chen & Attila Szolnoki, 2018. "Punishment and inspection for governing the commons in a feedback-evolving game," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(7), pages 1-15, July.
    6. Guo, H. & Jia, D. & Sendiña-Nadal, I. & Zhang, M. & Wang, Z. & Li, X. & Alfaro-Bittner, K. & Moreno, Y. & Boccaletti, S., 2021. "Evolutionary games on simplicial complexes," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    7. Du, Jinming, 2019. "Redistribution promotes cooperation in spatial public goods games under aspiration dynamics," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 363(C), pages 1-1.
    8. Adil Baykasoğlu & Burcu Kubur Özbel, 2021. "Explicit flow-risk allocation for cooperative maximum flow problems under interval uncertainty," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 2149-2179, September.
    9. Helena Fornwagner & Oliver P. Hauser, 2022. "Climate Action for (My) Children," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 81(1), pages 95-130, January.
    10. Jens Abildtrup & Jette Bredahl Jacobsen & Suzanne Elizabeth Vedel & Udo Mantau & Robert Mavsar & Davide Pettenella & Irina Prokofieva & Florian Schubert & Anne Stenger & Elsa Varela & Enrico Vidale & , 2024. "Preferences for climate change policies: the role of co-benefits," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 110-128, January.
    11. Markus Brede, 2013. "Short Versus Long Term Benefits and the Evolution of Cooperation in the Prisoner's Dilemma Game," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(2), pages 1-9, February.
    12. Tanimoto, Jun, 2009. "Promotion of cooperation through co-evolution of networks and strategy in a 2 × 2 game," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 388(6), pages 953-960.
    13. Tami Kim & Leslie K. John & Todd Rogers & Michael I. Norton, 2019. "Procedural Justice and the Risks of Consumer Voting," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(11), pages 5234-5251, November.
    14. Yan, Fang & Hou, Xiaorong & Tian, Tingting & Chen, Xiaojie, 2023. "Nonlinear model reference adaptive control approach for governance of the commons in a feedback-evolving game," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    15. Yu, Fengyuan & Wang, Jianwei & Chen, Wei & He, Jialu, 2023. "Increased cooperation potential and risk under suppressed strategy differentiation," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 621(C).
    16. Yoshio Kamijo & Asuka Komiya & Nobuhiro Mifune & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2016. "Negotiating with the future: Incorporating imaginary future generations into negotiations," Working Papers SDES-2016-13, Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics and Management, revised Oct 2016.
    17. Zhang, Hui & Wang, Li & Hou, Dongshuang, 2016. "Effect of the spatial autocorrelation of empty sites on the evolution of cooperation," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 443(C), pages 296-308.
    18. Valentina Bosetti & Melanie Heugues & Alessandro Tavoni, 2017. "Luring others into climate action: coalition formation games with threshold and spillover effects," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 69(2), pages 410-431.
    19. Yu, Fengyuan & Wang, Jianwei & He, Jialu, 2022. "Inequal dependence on members stabilizes cooperation in spatial public goods game," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 165(P1).
    20. José-Manuel Giménez-Gómez & Jordi Teixidó-Figueras & Cori Vilella, 2016. "The global carbon budget: a conflicting claims problem," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 136(3), pages 693-703, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:chsofr:v:184:y:2024:i:c:s0960077924006106. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Thayer, Thomas R. (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/chaos-solitons-and-fractals .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.