Public goods games under a nonlinear tax system with an interior dominant strategy equilibrium

Author(s):  
Patrick Julius
2021 ◽  
Vol 58 (1&2) ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Raul Fabella

The COVID-19 pandemic is an eminent threat posed by nature to the survival of the whole community. The cost X it imposes upon the community can be mitigated by the community’s pre-emptive public goods: an early warning system, capacity for monitoring, contact tracing and isolating infected persons, the strength of its public health system and the cultivated readiness to cooperate with anti-COVID protocols. The community provides these public goods in a nonstrategic game N (Nature) where the probability of a “bad outcome” (being symptomatically infected) falls with the total spending on pre-emptive public goods. Aside from N, members of the community play an Economic Dilemma Game (EDG), a symmetric Prisoner’s Dilemma Game (PDG) with strategy set (C, D), where the community earns its economic income which in turn provides the financing of the pre-emptive public goods. Games EDG and N are fused into a composite game N+EDG by defining the probability of a good outcome as increasing with the level of public goods financing. N+EDG has the same strategy set (C, D) as EDG but the payoffs of players are composite: the payoff from EDG less the expected share of the pandemic cost to the members. We show that there is a threshold pandemic cost X0 (Ostrom threshold) so that if X ≥ X0, the N+EDG has dominant strategy in C. At the cooperative equilibrium, the community is at its peak strength: economic output from EDG is largest and the contribution to pre-emptive public good is highest. A severe-enough cost of the pandemic threat as perceived by the group (i) causes players to exhibit an altruistic phenotype (choosing C every time) and (ii) leads to the lowest probability of a bad outcome. We argue that previous experience with pandemics in the last two decades on top of a higher tendency to follow authority in East Asia supported both the provision of better pre-emptive public goods and the higher abidance with anti-COVID protocols. These explain better performance.


2021 ◽  
Vol 185 ◽  
pp. 513-537
Author(s):  
Adriana Alventosa ◽  
Alberto Antonioni ◽  
Penélope Hernández

2021 ◽  
Vol 144 ◽  
pp. 110720
Author(s):  
Maja Duh ◽  
Marko Gosak ◽  
Matjaž Perc

2014 ◽  
Vol 25 (11) ◽  
pp. 1450062 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hong-Bin Zhang ◽  
Hong Wang

We study the evolution of cooperation in public goods games on the square lattice, focusing on the co-player learning mechanism based on the preferential selection that are brought about by wealthy information of groups where participants collect and search for potential imitators from those groups. We find that co-player learning mechanism based on the choice of weighted group can lead to the promotion of public cooperation by means of the information of wealthy groups that is obtained by participants, and after that the partial choice of public goods groups is enhanced with the tunable preferential parameter. Our results highlight that the learning interactions is not solely confined to the restricted connection among players, but co-players of wealthy groups have the opportunity to be as a role model in the promotion of cooperative evolution. Moreover, we also find the size of learning affects the choice of distant players, cooperators (defectors) having more paths to exploit the phalanx of opponents to survive when the value of preferential parameter is small. Besides, the extinction thresholds of cooperators and defectors for different values of noise are also investigated.


2015 ◽  
Vol 12 (103) ◽  
pp. 20141203 ◽  
Author(s):  
The Anh Han ◽  
Luís Moniz Pereira ◽  
Tom Lenaerts

When creating a public good, strategies or mechanisms are required to handle defectors. We first show mathematically and numerically that prior agreements with posterior compensations provide a strategic solution that leads to substantial levels of cooperation in the context of public goods games, results that are corroborated by available experimental data. Notwithstanding this success, one cannot, as with other approaches, fully exclude the presence of defectors, raising the question of how they can be dealt with to avoid the demise of the common good. We show that both avoiding creation of the common good, whenever full agreement is not reached, and limiting the benefit that disagreeing defectors can acquire, using costly restriction mechanisms, are relevant choices. Nonetheless, restriction mechanisms are found the more favourable, especially in larger group interactions. Given decreasing restriction costs, introducing restraining measures to cope with public goods free-riding issues is the ultimate advantageous solution for all participants, rather than avoiding its creation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document