Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Consensus Building: Process Design Toward Finding a Shared Recognition of Common Goal Beyond Conflicts

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Handbook of Systems Sciences

Abstract

This chapter endeavors to find out the roads to build a consensus from the perspective of social dilemmas. Consensus does not mean making any one party happy and is not merely half measures. Rather, it refers to discovering values that anyone can admit and can share the goals. Even if it appears controversial and conflictive, a consensus is a crystal of the process that everyone attends the attempt to seek and share a common goal. First, the literature on social dilemmas, particularly applying game experiments in social psychology, is introduced. Guiding theories, such as goal expectation theory emphasizing expectation to mutual cooperation, are presented. In the second part, game-simulation is introduced as a tool to understand the consensus process. Three studies using game-simulation are presented, where different types of players are inevitably in conflict with one another due to their different interests. Overall, the findings using game-simulation suggest that a social dilemma is not a target to be resolved but a way of framing to realize the importance of mutual cooperation. The real world is so complicated that social dilemma is one of the aspects or that it is uncertain whether society has a social dilemma structure. Under the complex situation, once individuals recognize an issue as a social dilemma, they begin to seek a common goal desirable for the entire society. Thereby, if shared recognition is established, consensus can be built resolving the conflicts beyond different interests. Attention should be paid to the process of comprehending the common goal.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Abric JC (1982) Cognitive process underlying cooperation: the theory of social representation. In: Derlega VJ, Grzelak J (eds) Cooperation and helping behavior. Academic, New York, pp 74–96

    Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong RHR, Hobson M (1973) ALEA local government gaming-simulation exercise: introduction to the York Bath Summer School exercises. Open University Press, Birmingham

    Google Scholar 

  • Axelrod R (1984) The evolution of cooperation. Basic Book, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Bixenstine VE, Levitt CA, Wilson KR (1966) Collaboration among six persons in a prisoner’s dilemma game. Confl Resolut 10:488–496

    Google Scholar 

  • Brechner KC (1977) An experimental analysis of social traps. J Exp Soc Psychol 14:552–564

    Google Scholar 

  • Caldwell MD (1976) Communication and sex effects in a five-person prisoner’s dilemma. J Pers Soc Psychol 33:273–281

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawes R (1975) Formal models of dilemmas in social decision-making. In: Kaplan M, Schwartz SH (eds) Human judgment and social processes. Academic, New York, pp 87–107

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawes R (1980) Social dilemmas. Annu Rev Psychol 31:169–193

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawes RM, McTavish J, Shaklee H (1977) Behavior, communication and assumptions about other people’s behavior in a commons dilemma situation. J Pers Soc Psychol 35:1–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawes RM, Alphons JC, Kragt AJ, Orbell JM (1990) Cooperation for the benefit of us -not me, or my conscience. In: Mansbridge JJ (ed) Beyond self-interest. The University of Chicago Press, pp 97–110

    Google Scholar 

  • Deci EL (1975) Intrinsic motivation. Plenum, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch M (1958) Trust and suspicion. J Confl Resolut 2:65–79

    Google Scholar 

  • Doba M (2008) Towards symbiosis of individual and society: possibilities of social dilemma approach. In: Doba M, Shinoki M (eds) Struggle between individual and society: possibility of social dilemma approach. Minerva Press, Kyoto, pp 271–293

    Google Scholar 

  • Duke RD, Geurts J (2004) Policy games for strategic management. Rozenberg Publishers, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Edney JJ, Harper CS (1978) The effects of information in a resource management problem: a social trap analog. Hum Ecol 6:387–395

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardin G (1968) The tragedy of the commons. Science 162(3859):1243–1248. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.162.3859.1243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirose Y (1988) When Machiavellist become a free rider? Research group of Mathematical Sociology (eds) Advances in Mathematical Sociology. A Report of Japanese Society for the Promotion of Science, pp 151–161

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirose Y (2000) SIMINSOC as a media for communicating multiple realities. Stud Simul Gaming 10(1):14–21

    Google Scholar 

  • Jerdee TH, Rosen B (1974) Effects of opportunity to communicate and visibility of individual decisions on behavior in the common interest. J Appl Soc Psychol 21:190–197

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitakaji Y, Ohnuma S (2014) Demonstrating that monitoring and penalties increase non-cooperative behavior in a social dilemma game. Jpn J Psychol 85:9–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitakaji Y, Ohnuma S (2016) Even unreliable information disclosure makes people cooperate in a social dilemma: development of the “industrial waste illegal dumping game”. In: Kaneda T, Kanegae H, Toyoda Y, Rizzi P (eds) Simulation and gaming in the network society. Springer, Singapore

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitakaji Y, Ohnuma S (2019) The detrimental effects of punishment and reward on cooperation in the industrial waste illegal dumping game. Simul Gaming 50(5):509–531

    Google Scholar 

  • Lepper MR, Greene D (1978) The hidden costs of reward. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale

    Google Scholar 

  • Livingston SA, Stoll CS (1973) Simulation games. The Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Messick DM, Brewer MB (1983) Solving social dilemmas: a review. Rev Pers Soc Psychol 4:11–44

    Google Scholar 

  • Moscovici S (1961) La psychanalyse, son image et son public. Presses Universitaires de France, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Moscovici S (1963) Attitudes and opinions. Annu Rev Psychol 14:231–260

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulder LB, Van Dijk E, De Cremer D, Wilke HAM (2006) When Sanctions Fail to Increase Cooperation in Social Dilemmas: Considering the Presence of an Alternative Option to Defect. Pers Soc Psychol B 32:1312–1324

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagasaka K, Sato K, Ohnuma S (2012) Development of “Emission Trading Game”: a tool for observing the process of shared social reality in a social dilemma situation. Stud Simul Gaming 22:122–136

    Google Scholar 

  • Ohnuma S (2011) Social dilemma for consensus forming in environmental issues: is it possible to adapt interests between whole society, domestic regions and individuals? In: Hirose Y (ed) Learning social psychology through Simulated International Society Game. Nakanishiya Press, Kyoto, pp 99–113

    Google Scholar 

  • Ohnuma S (2017) Citizen participation and procedural fairness in a policy for reduction of household wastes: process design from planning to implementation in Sapporo. In: Miyauchi T (ed) How environmental conservation succeeds?: how to proceed “adaptive governance” on the fields. Shinsensha Co., Ltd., Tokyo, pp 30–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Ohnuma S, Kitakaji Y (2007) Development of the “industrial waste illegal dumping game” and a social dilemma approach: effects derived from the given structure of asymmetry of incentive and information. Stud Simul Gaming 17(1):5–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Ohnuma S, Kitakaji Y (2017) Social dilemma as a device for recognition of a shared goal: development of “consensus building of wind farm game”. Stud Simul Gaming 25:107–113

    Google Scholar 

  • Orbell JM, Van de Kragt AJ, Dawes RM (1988) Explaining discussion-induced cooperation. J Pers Soc Psychol 54(5):811–819

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom E, Walker JM, Gardner R (1992) Covenants with and without a sword: self-governing is possible. Am Polit Sci Rev 86:404–417

    Google Scholar 

  • Palys TS (1978) Simulation methods and social psychology. J Theory Soc Behav 8(3):341–368. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5914.1978.tb00408.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pruitt DG, Kimmel MJ (1977) Twenty years of experimental gaming: critique, synthesis, and suggestions for the future. Annu Rev Psychol 28:363–392

    Google Scholar 

  • Rapoport A, Chammah A, Dwyer J, Gyr J (1962) Three-person non-zero-sum nonnegotiable games. Behav Sci 7:30–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Rateau P, Moliner P, Guimelli C, Abric JC (2012) Social representation theory. In: Van Lange PAM, Kruglanski AW, Higgins ET (eds) Handbook of theories of social psychology, vol 2. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC, pp 477–497

    Google Scholar 

  • Shubik M (1964) Game theory and related approaches to social behavior. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Shubik M (1971) The Dollar Auction game: a paradox in noncooperative behavior and escalation. J Confl Resolut 15:109–111

    Google Scholar 

  • Trivers R (1985) Social evolution. The Benjamin/Cummings, Menlo Park

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler TR (2010) Why people cooperate: the role of social motivations. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Tylor M (1982) Community, anarchy and liberty. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Lange PAM, Liebrand WBG, Messick DM, Wilke HAM (1992) Social dilemmas: the state of the art: introduction and literature review. In: Liebrand WBG, Messick DM (eds) Social dilemmas: theoretical issues and research findings. International series in experimental social psychology. Pergamon Press, Elmsford, pp 3–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Vugt M, De Cremer D (1999) Leadership in social dilemmas: the effects of group identification on collective actions to provide public goods. J Pers Soc Psychol 76(4):587–599

    Google Scholar 

  • Wit A, Wilke HA (1990) The presentation of rewards and punishments in a simulated social dilemma. Soc Behav 5:231–245

    Google Scholar 

  • Yamagishi T (1986) The provision of a sanctioning system as a public good. J Pers Soc Psychol 51:110–116. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.1.110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamagishi T (1988) Seriousness of social dilemmas and the provision of a sanctioning system. Soc Psychol Q 51:32–42. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2786982

    Google Scholar 

  • Yamagishi T (1992) Group size and the provision of a sanctioning system in a social dilemma. In: Liebrand WB, Messick GDM, Wilke H (eds) Social dilemmas: theoretical issues and research findings. International series in experimental social psychology. Pergamon Press, New York, pp 267–287

    Google Scholar 

  • Yamagishi T, Sato K (1986) Motivational base of the public goods problem. J Pers Soc Psychol 50:67–73

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Behavioral Science, Graduate School of Humanities and Human Sciences, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan

    Susumu Ohnuma

  2. Center for Experimental Research in Social Sciences, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan

    Susumu Ohnuma

Authors
  1. Susumu Ohnuma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Susumu Ohnuma .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Leadership and Management, Saybrook University, Ashland, KY, USA

    Gary S. Metcalf

  2. Grad Sch of Decision Sci & Tech, Tokyo Institute of Technology Grad Sch of Decision Sci & Tech, Meguro-ku, Tokyo, Japan

    Kyoichi Kijima

  3. CABSSS, Tokyo Institute of Technology CABSSS, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan

    Hiroshi Deguchi

Section Editor information

  1. Department of Computer Science, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan

    Hiroshi Deguchi

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Ohnuma, S. (2020). Consensus Building: Process Design Toward Finding a Shared Recognition of Common Goal Beyond Conflicts. In: Metcalf, G.S., Kijima, K., Deguchi, H. (eds) Handbook of Systems Sciences. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-0370-8_68-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-0370-8_68-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-13-0370-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-13-0370-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Business and ManagementReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation