Advertisement

Introduction

  • Carlos M. Lemos
Chapter
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Complexity book series (BRIEFSCOMPLEXITY)

Abstract

In this work, an agent-based model for studying large-scale conflict against a central authority was developed and explored in a set of computer experiments. The model proposed herein is an extension of Epstein’s ABM of civil violence, in which new mechanisms such as deprivation-dependent hardship, vanishing of the risk perception (“massive fear loss”) below a critical ratio between deterrence and “group support,” legitimacy feedback (drop of the central authority’s legitimacy due to uprisings) and network influences were implemented. This introduction contains an overview of the motivation, scope of the work, and methodology of development. It also describes the structure of the remainder of book, which is structured in six chapters, dedicated to state-of-the-art review of social conflict theories and related concepts, discussion of Epstein’s model, analysis of conflict events and social indicators for eight African countries affected by the “Arab Spring,” description of the proposed agent-based model, computer explorations, and conclusions.

Keywords

Social conflict Complexity Mechanisms Agent-based model Social simulation “Arab Spring” 

References

  1. 1.
    K. Allan, The Social Lens: An Invitation to Social and Sociology Theory (SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, 2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    F. Amblard, A. Geller, M. Neumann, A. Srbljinovic, N. Wijermans, NATO Science for Peace and Security Studies - E: Human and Societal Dynamics, volume Complex Societal Dynamics - Security Challenges and Opportunities, chapter Analyzing Social Conflict via Computational Social Simulation: A Review of Approaches (IOS Press, Amsterdam, 2010), pp. 126–141. NATOGoogle Scholar
  3. 4.
    R. Axelrod, The dissemination of culture: a model with local convergence and global polarization. J. Confl. Resolut. 41, 203–226 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 13.
    A. Comninos, Twitter revolutions and cyber crackdowns. User-generated content and social networking in the Arab spring and beyond. Technical report, Association of Progressive Communication (PAC), 2011Google Scholar
  5. 14.
    L.A. Coser, Social conflict and the theory of social change. Br. J. Sociol. 8(3), 197–207 (1957)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 18.
    T.P. Davies, H.M. Fry, A.G. Wilson, S.R. Bishop, A mathematical model of the London riots and their policing. Sci. Rep. 3(1303), (February 2013)Google Scholar
  7. 20.
    J. Doran, Iruba: An Agent-Based Model of the Guerrilla War Process. In: Troitzsch, K. (ed.), Pre-Proceedings of the Third Conference of the European Social Simulation Association, Koblenz, September 5–9, pp. 198–205, September 2005Google Scholar
  8. 21.
    J.M. Epstein, Modeling civil violence: An agent-based computational approach. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99, 7243–7250 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 22.
    J.M. Epstein, Generative Social Science: Studies in Agent-Based Computational Modeling (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2006)Google Scholar
  10. 24.
    J.M. Epstein, J.D. Steinbruner, M.T. Parker, Modeling Civil Violence: An Agent-Based Computational Approach. Center on Social and Economic Dynamics, Working Paper No. 20, January 2001Google Scholar
  11. 25.
    D. Faris, Revolutions Without Revolutionaries? Social Media Networks and Regime Response in Egypt. Ph.D. thesis, University of Pennsylvania, 2010Google Scholar
  12. 26.
    M. Fonoberova, V.A. Fonoberov, I. Mezic, J. Mezic, P. Jeffrey Brantingham, Nonlinear dynamics of crime and violence in urban settings. J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul. 15(1), (2012)Google Scholar
  13. 27.
    D.R. Forsyth, Group Dynamics, 5th edn. (Wadsworth, Cengage Learning, 2010)Google Scholar
  14. 28.
    Freedom House, Freedom in the World, Individual Country Ratings and Status. https://freedomhouse.org/report-types/freedom-world, 2015. Accessed 2015-07-13
  15. 32.
    N. Gilbert, K.G. Troitzsch, Simulation for the Social Scientist, 2nd edn. (Open University Press, Maidenhead, 2005)Google Scholar
  16. 36.
    V. Grimm, U. Bergern, D.L. DeAngelis, J. Gary Polhill, J. Giskee, S.F. Railsback, The ODD protocol: A review and first update. Ecol. Model. 221(221), 2760–2768 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 37.
    T.R. Gurr, Psychological factors in civil violence. World Politics 20(2), 245–278 (1968)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 40.
    A. Ilachinsky, Artificial War. Multiagent-Based Simulation of Combat (World Scientific, Singapore, 2004)Google Scholar
  19. 41.
    J.-W. Kim, R.A. Hanneman, A computational model of worker protest. J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul. 14(3), (January 2011)Google Scholar
  20. 42.
    T. Kuran, Sparks and prairie fires: a theory of unanticipated political revolution. Public Choice 61, 41–74 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 43.
    T. Kuran, Now out of never: The element of surprise in the east european revolution. World Politics 44(1), 7–48 (October 1991)Google Scholar
  22. 46.
    K. Lorenz, On Aggression (Routledge Classics, London, 2002)Google Scholar
  23. 47.
    P. Machamer, L. Darden, C. Craver, Thinking about mechanisms. Philosophy Sci. 67(1), 1–25 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 48.
    M.D. Makowsky, J. Rubin, An agent-based model of centralized institutions, social network technology, and revolution. PLoS ONE 8(11), e80380 (2013)Google Scholar
  25. 49.
    B. Milanovic, All the GINIS Dataset, 2014. Accessed 2016-03-28Google Scholar
  26. 52.
    A. Moro, Understanding the dynamics of violent political revolutions in an agent-based framework. PLoS ONE 11(4), 1–17 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 54.
    North Atlantic Treaty Organization, NATO Standardization Agency, AAP-6 NATO GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND DEFINITIONS, 2008Google Scholar
  28. 60.
    H. Rheingold, Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution (Basic Books, 2002)Google Scholar
  29. 61.
    R.W. Rummel, Understanding Conflict and War Volume 2: The Conflict Helix (SAGE Publications, Beverly Hills, 1976)Google Scholar
  30. 63.
    I. Salehyan, C. Hendrix, Social Conflict Analysis Database Version 3.1, November 2014Google Scholar
  31. 64.
    T.C. Schelling, Models of segregation. Am. Econ. Rev. 59(2), 488–493 (1969)Google Scholar
  32. 65.
    T.C. Schelling, Dynamic models of segregation. J. Math. Sociol. 1, 143–189 (1971)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 68.
    H. Tajfel, J. Turner, An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict, volume The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations, chapter 3, pp. 33–47 (Brooks/Cole Publishing Company, Monterey, 1979)Google Scholar
  34. 69.
    The English Indices of Deprivation 2010, UK Department for Communities and Local Government, March 2011Google Scholar
  35. 70.
    The Fund for Peace, Fragile States Index. http://fsi.fundforpeace.org/data, 2015. Accessed 2015-11-09
  36. 71.
    The Robert S. Strauss Center, Social Conflict Analysis Database. https://www.strausscenter.org/scad.html, 2015. Accessed 2015-07-25
  37. 74.
    Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP), UCDP/PRIO Armed Conflict Dataset Codebook, Version 4-2014a (Centre for the Study of Civil Wars, International Peace Research Institute, Oslo (PRIO), 2014)Google Scholar
  38. 81.
    World Health Organization, Geneva, World Report on Violence and Health: Summary, 2002Google Scholar
  39. 82.
    H. Xia, H. Wang, Z. Xuan, Opinion dynamics: a multidisciplinary review and perspective on future research. Int. J. Knowledge Syst. Sci. 2(4), 72–91 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carlos M. Lemos
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Religion, Philosophy and HistoryUniversity of AgderKristiansandNorway

Personalised recommendations