Search

Economic unions are international agreements oriented to increase economic efficiency and establishing political and cultural ties between the member countries. Becoming a member of an existing union usually requires the approval of both the candidate and members, while leaving it may require only the unilateral will of the exiting country. There are many examples of accession of states to previously consolidated economic unions, and a recent example of leaving is the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union. Motivated by the Brexit process, in this paper we propose an agent-based model to study the determinant factors driving withdrawals from an economic union. We show that both Union and local taxes promote the exits, whereas customs fees out of the Union boost cohesion. Furthermore, heterogeneity in both business conditions and wealth distribution promotes withdrawals, while countries' size diversity does not have a significant effect on them. We also deep into the individual causes that lead to dissatisfaction and, ultimately, to exits. We found that, for low Union taxes, the wealth inequality within the country is the leading cause of anti-Union opinion spreading. Conversely, for high Union taxes, the country's performance turns out to be the main driving force, resulting in a risk of wealthier countries leaving the Union. These findings will be helpful for the design of economic policies and effective informative campaigns., Comment: 7 figures, 1 table

Since M. A. Nowak & R. May’s (1992) influential paper, limiting each agent’s interactions to a few neighbors in a network of contacts has been proposed as the simplest mechanism to support the evolution of cooperation in biological and socio-economic systems. The network allows cooperative agents to self-assort into clusters, within which they reciprocate cooperation. This (induced) network reciprocity has been observed in several theoreticalmodels and shown to predict the fixation of cooperation under a simple rule: the benefit produced by an act of cooperation must outweigh the cost of cooperating with all neighbors. However, the experimental evidence among humans is controversial: though the rule seems to be confirmed, the underlying modeling assumptions are not. Specifically, models assume that agents update their strategies by imitating better performing neighbors, even though imitation lacks rationality when interactions are far from all-to-all. Indeed, imitation did not emerge in experiments. What did emerge is that humans are conditioned by their own mood and that, when in a cooperative mood, they reciprocate cooperation. To help resolve the controversy, we design a model in which we rationally confront the two main behaviors emerging from experiments—reciprocal cooperation and unconditional defection—in a networked prisoner’s dilemma. Rationality is introduced by means of a predictive rule for strategy update and is bounded by the assumed model society. We show that both reciprocity and a multi-step predictive horizon are necessary to stabilize cooperation, and sufficient for its fixation, provided the game benefit-to-cost ratio is larger than a measure of network connectivity. We hence rediscover the rule of network reciprocity, underpinned however by a different evolutionary mechanism.

Since Nowak & May's (1992) influential paper, network reciprocity--the fact that individuals' interactions repeated within a local neighborhood support the evolution of cooperation--has been confirmed in several theoretical models. Essentially, local interactions allow cooperators to stay protected from exploiters by assorting into clusters, and the heterogeneity of the network of contacts--the co-presence of low- and high-connected nodes--has been shown to further favor cooperation. The few available large-scale experiments on humans have however missed these effects. The reason is that, while models assume that individuals update strategy by imitating better performing neighbors, experiments showed that humans are more prone to reciprocate cooperation than to compare payoffs. Inspired by the empirical results, we rethink network reciprocity as a rational form of direct reciprocity on networks--networked rational reciprocity--indeed made possible by the locality of interactions. We show that reciprocal altruism in a networked prisoner's dilemma can invade and fixate in any network of rational agents, profit-maximizing over an horizon of future interactions. We find that networked rational reciprocity works better at low average connectivity and we unveil the role of network heterogeneity. Only if cooperating hubs invest in the initial cost of exploitation, the invasion of cooperation is boosted; it is otherwise hindered. Although humans might not be as rational as here assumed, our results could help the design and interpretation of new experiments in social and economic networks

The theory of dynamical systems studies the behavior of solutions of systems, like nonlinear ordinary differential equations (ODEs), depending upon parameters. Using qualitative methods of bifurcation theory, the behavior of the system is characterized for various parameter combinations. In particular, the catalog of system behaviors showing qualitative differences can be identified, together with the regions in parameter space where the different behaviors occur. Bifurcations delimit such regions. Symbolic and analytical approaches are in general infeasible, but numerical bifurcation analysis is a powerful tool that aids in the understanding of a nonlinear system. When computing power became widely available, algorithms for this type of analysis matured and the first codes were developed. With the development of suitable algorithms, the advancement in the qualitative theory has found its way into several software projects evolving over time. The availability of software packages allows scientists to study and adjust their models and to draw conclusions about their dynamics.