Networks and Spatial Economics

, Volume 19, Issue 3, pp 697–715 | Cite as

Market Coordination Under Non-Equilibrium Dynamics

  • Arnaud Z. DragicevicEmail author


In order to study the market coordination under non-equilibrium dynamics, such as the one outlined in catallactics, we consider a multi-agent system with fixed topology, based upon a Hamiltonian structure, subject to flocking behavior. The assumptions of market segmentation and of imperfect competition are introduced. We show that the catallactic framework leads to the emergence of a stable market coordination, but is also a dissipative structure of cyclical nature, such that imperfect competition gives rise to a pseudo-competitive market. In case of risk-sharing, we find that catallactics yields an unstable trading system, which transforms the market risk into a systemic risk.


Network economics Agent-based modeling Catallactics Flocking behavior Risk-sharing 



The author would like to thank François Delarue (CNRS, Université Nice Sophia Antipolis), for his valuable comments on this work, as well as the discussants from CentraleSupélec Laboratory of Mathematics in Interaction with Computer Science (MICS). He is also grateful to the anonymous referees and to the editor for their thorough comments and suggestions, which significantly contributed to improving the quality of the paper.


  1. Abada I, Gabriel S, Briat V, Massol O (2013) A generalized nash-cournot model for the northwestern european natural gas markets with a fuel substitution demand function: the GaMMES model. Networks and Spatial Economics 13:1–42Google Scholar
  2. Allen D, Gale F (2007) Systemic risk and regulation the risks of financial institutions. Chicago University Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  3. Arcak M, Meissen C, Packard A (2016) Networks of dissipative systems briefs in electrical and computer engineering. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  4. Ardaiz O, Artigas P, Eymann T, Freitag F, Navarro L, Reinicke M (2006) The catallaxy approach for decentralized economic-based allocation in grid resource and service markets. Appl Intell 25:131–145Google Scholar
  5. Arthur W (1989) Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events. Econ J 97:642–665Google Scholar
  6. Arthur W (2014) Complexity and the economy. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  7. Asprilla A, Berman N, Cadot O, Jaud M (2016) Trade policy and market power: firm-level evidence. FERDI working papers P161:40Google Scholar
  8. Axelrod R (1997) The complexity of cooperation: agent-based models of competition and collaboration. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  9. Backhaus J, Wagner R (2005) Society, state, and public finance: setting the analytical stage handbook of public finance. Kluwer Academic Publishers, BostonGoogle Scholar
  10. Barry N (1992) Subjectivism, catallactics and the foundations of economic order praxiologies and the philosophy of economics. Transaction Books, New BrunswickGoogle Scholar
  11. Bloom N (2009) The impact of uncertainty shocks. Econometrica 77:623–685Google Scholar
  12. Bonabeau E (2002) Agent-based modeling: methods and techniques for simulating human systems. Proc Natl Acad Sci 99:7280–7287Google Scholar
  13. Bosch-Domènech A, Vried N (2013) On the role of non-equilibrium focal points as coordination devices. J Econ Behav Organ 94:52–67Google Scholar
  14. Bunn D, Martoccia M (2008) Analyzing the price-effects of vertical and horizontal market power with agent based simulation, IEEE power and energy society general meeting – conversion and delivery of electrical energy in the 21st centuryGoogle Scholar
  15. Burguet R, Sákovics J (1999) Imperfect competition in auction design. Int Econ Rev 40:231–247Google Scholar
  16. Caldarelli G (2010) Complex networks. EOLSS Publications, ParisGoogle Scholar
  17. Caton J, Wagner R (2015) Volatility in catallactical systems: austrian cycle theory revisited new thinking in austrian political economy: advances in austrian economics. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, BingleyGoogle Scholar
  18. Cavagna A, Del Castello L, Giardina I, Grigera T, Jelic A, Melillo S, Mora T, Parisi L, Silvestri E, Viale M, Walczak A (2015) Flocking and turning: a new model for self-organized collective motion. J Stat Phys 158:601–627Google Scholar
  19. Chamberlin E (1953) La théorie de la concurrence monopolistique – une nouvelle orientation de la Théorie de la Valeur. Presses Universitaires de France, ParisGoogle Scholar
  20. Cho I-K, Meyn S (2010) Efficiency and marginal cost pricing in dynamic competitive markets with friction. Theor Econ 5:215–239Google Scholar
  21. Crawford V, Haller H (1990) Learning how to cooperate: optimal play in repeated coordination games. Econometrica 58:571–595Google Scholar
  22. Csercsik D (2016) Competition and cooperation in a bidding model of electrical energy trade. Networks and Spatial Economics 16:1043–1073Google Scholar
  23. Cucker F, Smale S (2007) Emergent behavior in flocks. IEEE Trans Autom Control 52:852–862Google Scholar
  24. De Bandt O, Hartmann P (2000) Systemic risk: a survey, european central bank, working paper 35Google Scholar
  25. Debreu G (1959) Theory of value: an axiomatic analysis of economic equilibrium. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  26. Dragicevic A, Sinclair-Desgagné B (2013) Sustainable network dynamics. Ecol Model 270:43–53Google Scholar
  27. Ebeling R (1987) Cooperation in anonymity. Crit Rev 1:50–61Google Scholar
  28. Edgeworth F (1897) The pure theory of taxation classics in the theory of public finance. Macmillan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  29. García-Pedrajas N, Herrera F, Fyfe C, Benítez Sánchez J, Ali M (2010) Trends in applied intelligent systems. In: Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on industrial engineering and other applications of applied intelligent systems, cordobaGoogle Scholar
  30. Ghaderi A, Jabalameli M, Barzinpour F, Rahmaniani R (2012) An efficient hybrid particle swarm optimization algorithm for solving the uncapacitated continuous location-allocation problem. Networks and Spatial Economics 12:421–439Google Scholar
  31. Guttman R, Maes P (2006) Cooperative vs. competitive multi-agent negotiations in retail electronic commerce, cooperative information agents II learning, mobility and electronic commerce for information discovery on the internet. Lect Notes Comput Sci 1435:135–147Google Scholar
  32. Ha S-Y, Kim K-K, Lee K (2013) A mathematical model for multi-name credit based on community flocking. Quant Finan 15:841–851Google Scholar
  33. Harsanyi J, Selten R (1988) A general theory of equilibrium selection in games. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  34. Hart S, Mas-Colell A (2003) Uncoupled dynamics do not lead to nash equilibrium. The American Economic Review 93:1830–1836Google Scholar
  35. Hayek F (1978) Law, legislation and liberty: the mirage of social justice. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  36. Jaeger W (2011) The welfare Effects of Environmental Taxation. Environ Resour Econ 49:101–19Google Scholar
  37. Kapás J (2006) The coordination problems, the market and the firm. New Perspectives on Political Economy 2:14–36Google Scholar
  38. Kennedy J, Eberhart R (1995) Particle swarm optimization. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Neural Networks 4:1942–1948Google Scholar
  39. Klein D (1997) Convention, social order, and the two coordinations. Constit Polit Econ 8:319–335Google Scholar
  40. Lapalu J, Bouchard K, Bouzouane A, Bouchard B, Giroux S (2013) Unsupervised mining of activities for smart home prediction. Procedia Computer Science 19:503–510Google Scholar
  41. Lasry J-M, Lions P-L (2007) Mean field games. Japan J Math 2:229–260Google Scholar
  42. Luo X, Li S, Guan X (2010) Flocking algorithm with multi-target tracking for multi-agent systems. Pattern Recogn Lett 31:800–805Google Scholar
  43. Matsuda T, Kaihara T, Fujii N (2010) Resource allocation analysis in perfectly competitive virtual market with demand constraints of consumers. Advances in Practical Multi-Agent Systems 325:181–200Google Scholar
  44. Mirowski P (1991) More heat than light: economics as social physics physics as nature’s economics. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  45. Müller M., Pyka A (2016) Economic behaviour and agent-based modelling handbook of behavioral economics. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  46. Namatame A, Chen S-H (2016) Agent-based Modeling and network dynamics. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  47. Netjinda N, Achalakul T, Sirinaovakul B (2015) Particle swarm optimization inspired by starling flock behavior. Appl Soft Comput 35:411–422Google Scholar
  48. Ogula D (2003) Attractors, strange attractors and fractals encyclopedia of public administration and public policy: A–J. Marcel Dekker, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  49. Olfati-Saber R (2006) Flocking for multi-agent dynamic systems: algorithms and theory. IEEE Trans Autom Control 51:401–420Google Scholar
  50. Olfati-Saber R, Murray R (2003) Flocking with obstacle avoidance: cooperation with limited communication in mobile networks. IEEE Conference on Decision and Control 42:2022–2028Google Scholar
  51. Papaioannou T (2012) Reading Hayek in the 21st Century: a critical inquiry into his political thought. Palgrave Macmillan, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  52. Raafat R, Chater N, Frith C (2009) Herding in humans. Trends Cogn Sci 13:420–428Google Scholar
  53. Ramamohan Rao T (2016) Risk sharing risk spreading and efficient regulation. Springer India, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  54. Reuvid J (2011) Managing business risk: a practical guide to protecting your business. Kogan Page Publishers, LondonGoogle Scholar
  55. Reynolds C (1987) Flocks, herds and schools: a distributed behavioral model. Comput Graph 21:25–34Google Scholar
  56. Samuelson P, Solow R (1956) A complete capital model involving heterogeneous capital goods. Q J Econ 70:537–562Google Scholar
  57. Sautet F (2002) Economic transformation the pretence of knowledge and the process of entrepreneurial competition. Mimeo, New Zealand TreasuryGoogle Scholar
  58. Schelling T (1960) The strategy of conflict. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  59. Segal I (2003) Coordination and discrimination in contracting with externalities: divide and conquer? J Econ Theory 113:147–181Google Scholar
  60. Smaga P (2014) The concept of systemic risk, systemic risk center of the london school of economics and political science, Special Paper, 5Google Scholar
  61. Smeers Y (2003) Market incompleteness in regional electricity transmission. Part II: the forward and real time markets. Networks and Spatial Economics 3:175–196Google Scholar
  62. Staum J (2008) Incomplete markets. Handbooks in Operations Research and Management Science 15:511–563Google Scholar
  63. Strogatz S (1994) Nonlinear dynamics and chaos. Addison-Wesley, BostonGoogle Scholar
  64. Syz J (2008) Property derivatives: pricing hedging and applications. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  65. Taillard P-A (2006) Quel degré de rationalité Favorise la Coordination des Agents? Rev Econ Polit 116:23–42Google Scholar
  66. Terano T, Kita H, Takahashi S, Deguchi H (2009) Agent-based approaches in economic and social complex systems V. Springer Science and Business Media, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  67. Wang Q, Wang Y (2010) Flocking control protocol design for a class of multi-agent systems based on hamiltonian framework. Proceedings of the Chinese Control Conference 29:4554–4559Google Scholar
  68. Webber M (2016) Market power and the rate of profit. Environ Plan A 48:2529–2531Google Scholar
  69. Weiss G (1999) Multiagent systems: a modern approach to distributed artificial intelligence. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  70. Wicksell K (1896) A new principle of just taxation classics in the theory of public finance. Macmillan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  71. Windrum P, Fagiolo G, Moneta A (2007) Empirical validation of agent-based models: alternatives and prospects. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 10:1–19Google Scholar
  72. Young H (1993) The evolution of conventions. Econometrica 61:57–84Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018
corrected publication August/2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.IRSTEA — The Center of Clermont-FerrandAubièreFrance
  2. 2.AgroParisTech, INRA, IRSTEAUniversité Clermont Auvergne, VetAgro Sup [UMR Territoires]AubièreFrance
  3. 3.İTÜ — Department of EconomicsIstanbul Technical UniversityIstanbulTurkey

Personalised recommendations