{"title":"boss和国王:配对公共池和公共利益游戏中的不对称权力","authors":"James C. Cox, E. Ostrom, James M. Walker","doi":"10.1145/1807406.1807488","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Social dilemmas characterize environments in which individuals' exclusive pursuit of their own material self-interest can produce inefficient allocations. Two such environments are those characterized by public goods and common pool resources, in which the social dilemmas can be manifested in free riding and tragedy of the commons outcomes. Much field and laboratory research has focused on the effectiveness of alternative political-economic institutions in counteracting individuals' tendencies to under-provide public goods and over-extract common pool resources. Previous research has not focused on the implications of power asymmetries in paired public good and common pool resource environments. In our baseline treatments, we experiment with simultaneous move games in which paired comparisons can be made across environments with public goods and common pool resources. In our central treatments, we experiment with pairs of sequential move games in which second movers with asymmetric power -- bosses and kings -- can have large effects on efficiency and equity. The central questions are whether the bosses and kings do have significant effects on outcomes, and whether those effects differ across the paired public good and common pool resource environments.","PeriodicalId":142982,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral and Quantitative Game Theory","volume":"37 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"18","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bosses and kings: asymmetric power in paired common pool and public good games\",\"authors\":\"James C. Cox, E. Ostrom, James M. Walker\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/1807406.1807488\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Social dilemmas characterize environments in which individuals' exclusive pursuit of their own material self-interest can produce inefficient allocations. Two such environments are those characterized by public goods and common pool resources, in which the social dilemmas can be manifested in free riding and tragedy of the commons outcomes. Much field and laboratory research has focused on the effectiveness of alternative political-economic institutions in counteracting individuals' tendencies to under-provide public goods and over-extract common pool resources. Previous research has not focused on the implications of power asymmetries in paired public good and common pool resource environments. In our baseline treatments, we experiment with simultaneous move games in which paired comparisons can be made across environments with public goods and common pool resources. In our central treatments, we experiment with pairs of sequential move games in which second movers with asymmetric power -- bosses and kings -- can have large effects on efficiency and equity. The central questions are whether the bosses and kings do have significant effects on outcomes, and whether those effects differ across the paired public good and common pool resource environments.\",\"PeriodicalId\":142982,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Behavioral and Quantitative Game Theory\",\"volume\":\"37 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-05-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"18\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Behavioral and Quantitative Game Theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/1807406.1807488\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavioral and Quantitative Game Theory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/1807406.1807488","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Bosses and kings: asymmetric power in paired common pool and public good games
Social dilemmas characterize environments in which individuals' exclusive pursuit of their own material self-interest can produce inefficient allocations. Two such environments are those characterized by public goods and common pool resources, in which the social dilemmas can be manifested in free riding and tragedy of the commons outcomes. Much field and laboratory research has focused on the effectiveness of alternative political-economic institutions in counteracting individuals' tendencies to under-provide public goods and over-extract common pool resources. Previous research has not focused on the implications of power asymmetries in paired public good and common pool resource environments. In our baseline treatments, we experiment with simultaneous move games in which paired comparisons can be made across environments with public goods and common pool resources. In our central treatments, we experiment with pairs of sequential move games in which second movers with asymmetric power -- bosses and kings -- can have large effects on efficiency and equity. The central questions are whether the bosses and kings do have significant effects on outcomes, and whether those effects differ across the paired public good and common pool resource environments.