Skip to main content

Inequality: Driver or Inhibitor of Collective Action?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 341 Accesses

Part of the book series: Springer Proceedings in Complexity ((SPCOM))

Abstract

Inequality is considered one of the drivers for the emergence of collective action, but conventional wisdom suggests that it is equality among the stakeholders that helps sustain it. Nonetheless, more controversial findings in the collective action literature suggest that inequality can in fact be beneficial for the sustainability of collective action beyond its emergence. In this research, we use simulation to gain more insights into the relationship between inequality and collective action. We simulate an abstract common-pool resource system to model collective action and consider different types of inequality (e.g., wealth, social influence) to study its correlation with the sustainability of the system in terms of resource well-being, wealth levels and distribution. Preliminary results suggest that equality promotes sustained collective action, but also highlight that factors such as social influence and individual behavioural characteristics may be more decisive in determining the overall well-being.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    A convincing account for the case of Rwanda is provided by André and Platteau (1998), who suggest that regional redistribution problems ignited the nation-wide ethnic conflict.

  2. 2.

    We chose Spearman’s ρ due to its rank-based operation that offers a robust analysis of normal vs. non-parametric distributions as well as tolerance against outliers.

  3. 3.

    For the sake of brevity, social influence is referred to as influence in the table.

References

  • Alesina, A., & La Ferrara, E. (2000). Participation in heterogeneous communities. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 115(3), 847–904.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • André, C., & Platteau, J.-P. (1998). Land relations under unbearable stress: Rwanda caught in the malthusian trap. Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organisation, 34, 1–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baland, J.-M., & Platteau, J.-P. (2006). Collective action on the commons: The role of inequality. In J.-M. Baland, P. Bardhan, & S. Bowles (Eds.), Inequality, cooperation, and environmental sustainability (pp. 10–35). Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. New York: General Learning Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bardhan, P. (2005). Scarcity, conflicts, and cooperation. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berman, Y., Ben-Jacob, E., & Shapira, Y. (2016). The dynamics of wealth inequality and the effect of income distribution. PLoS One, 11(4), 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chatterton, P. (2016). Building transitions to post-capitalist urban commons. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 41(4), 403–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ester, M., Kriegel, H.-P., Sander, J., & Xu, X. (1996). A density-based algorithm for discovering clusters in large spatial databases with noise. In E. Simoudis, J. Han, & U. Fayyad (Eds.), Second international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining (pp. 226–231). Portland, Oregon: AAAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghorbani, A., & Bravo, G. (2016). Managing the commons: A simple model of the emergence of institutions through collective action. International Journal of the Commons, 10(1), 200–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griesinger, D. W., & Livingston, J. W. (1973). Toward a model of interpersonal motivation in experimental games. Behavioral Science, 18(3), 173–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keister, L. A., & Moller, S. (2000). Wealth inequality in the United States. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 63–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lichbach, M. I. (1989). An evaluation of “does economic inequality breed political conflict?” studies. World Politics, 41(4), 431–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lijphart, A. (1997). Unequal participation: Democracy’s unresolved dilemma. American Political Science Review, 91(1), 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, R. O., Ackerman, K. A., & Handgraaf, M. J. J. (2011). Measuring social value orientation. Judgment and Decision making, 6(8), 771–781.

    Google Scholar 

  • North, D. C., Wallis, J. J., & Weingast, B. R. (2009). Violence and social orders: A conceptual framework for interpreting recorded human history. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tilly, C. (1998). Durable inequality. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christopher K. Frantz .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Frantz, C.K., Ghorbani, A. (2019). Inequality: Driver or Inhibitor of Collective Action?. In: Payne, D., et al. Social Simulation for a Digital Society. SSC 2017. Springer Proceedings in Complexity. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30298-6_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics