160
8 How Society Works
nature” assumed by Thomas Hobbes. So, how is it possible that cooperation flourishes in our computer simulation, in spite of the fact that there is no powerful state
(a “Leviathan”) to ensure cooperation from the top-down?
The answer relates to the unexpected way success-driven migration affects the
competition between cooperative and uncooperative agents. Even though we didn’t
initially expect that migration would influence cooperation a lot, we put the assumption to the test because of my interest in human mobility. In our computer simulations,
migration first spread people out geographically. This isn’t good for cooperation at all,
but as individuals occasionally change their strategies due to trial-and-error behavior,
cooperative behaviors may sometimes occur for a short time. Such accidental cooperation happens in random places. However, after a sufficiently long time, some of
these cooperative events happen to be located next to each other. In case of such a
coincidence, i.e. when a big enough cluster of cooperative behaviors occurs, cooperation suddenly becomes a successful strategy, and neighbors begin to imitate this
behavior. As a result, cooperation quickly spreads throughout the entire system.
How does this mechanism work? To avoid losses, cooperative individuals obviously move away from uncooperative agents, but they engage repeatedly in interactions with cooperative neighbors. In other words, cooperative behavior is sustainable
over several interactions, while non-cooperative behavior is successful only for a
short time, as exploited neighbors will move away. This leads to the formation of
cooperative clusters, with a few uncooperative individuals at the boundaries. Thus,
the individual behavior and spatial organization evolve in tandem, and the behavior
of an individual is determined by the behavior in his/her surrounding, the “social
milieu”.
In conclusion, when people are allowed to move around freely and to live in the
place they prefer, this can promote cooperation.
17 Thus, migration is not a problem,
if there are opportunities for integration. But integration is not just the responsibility
of migrants—it requires an effort from both sides, the migrants and the host society.
Although it has been a constant feature of human history, migration is not always
welcomed. There are understandable reasons for this weariness; many countries are
struggling to manage migration and integration successfully. However, the USA,
known as the cultural “melting pot”, is a good example of the positive potential of
migration. This success is based on a tradition, where it is relatively easy to interact
with strangers.
Another positive example is provided by the Italian village of Riace.
18 Although
picturesque, the village is located in one of Italy’s poorest regions. The service sector
gradually disappeared as young people moved away to other places. But one day, a
boat with migrants stranded off the coast of Italy. The mayor viewed this as a sign
from God, and decided to use it as an opportunity for his village. Indeed, something
of a miracle occurred. The arrival of the migrants revived the ailing village, and the
gradual decay was reversed with the migrants. Crucially, migrants were not treated
17 Roca and Helbing [12], Efferson et al. [13].
18 The tiny Italian village that opened its doors to migrants who braved the sea, see http://www.the
guardian.com/world/2013/oct/12/italian-village-migrants-sea.
8 How Society Works
nature” assumed by Thomas Hobbes. So, how is it possible that cooperation flourishes in our computer simulation, in spite of the fact that there is no powerful state
(a “Leviathan”) to ensure cooperation from the top-down?
The answer relates to the unexpected way success-driven migration affects the
competition between cooperative and uncooperative agents. Even though we didn’t
initially expect that migration would influence cooperation a lot, we put the assumption to the test because of my interest in human mobility. In our computer simulations,
migration first spread people out geographically. This isn’t good for cooperation at all,
but as individuals occasionally change their strategies due to trial-and-error behavior,
cooperative behaviors may sometimes occur for a short time. Such accidental cooperation happens in random places. However, after a sufficiently long time, some of
these cooperative events happen to be located next to each other. In case of such a
coincidence, i.e. when a big enough cluster of cooperative behaviors occurs, cooperation suddenly becomes a successful strategy, and neighbors begin to imitate this
behavior. As a result, cooperation quickly spreads throughout the entire system.
How does this mechanism work? To avoid losses, cooperative individuals obviously move away from uncooperative agents, but they engage repeatedly in interactions with cooperative neighbors. In other words, cooperative behavior is sustainable
over several interactions, while non-cooperative behavior is successful only for a
short time, as exploited neighbors will move away. This leads to the formation of
cooperative clusters, with a few uncooperative individuals at the boundaries. Thus,
the individual behavior and spatial organization evolve in tandem, and the behavior
of an individual is determined by the behavior in his/her surrounding, the “social
milieu”.
In conclusion, when people are allowed to move around freely and to live in the
place they prefer, this can promote cooperation.
17 Thus, migration is not a problem,
if there are opportunities for integration. But integration is not just the responsibility
of migrants—it requires an effort from both sides, the migrants and the host society.
Although it has been a constant feature of human history, migration is not always
welcomed. There are understandable reasons for this weariness; many countries are
struggling to manage migration and integration successfully. However, the USA,
known as the cultural “melting pot”, is a good example of the positive potential of
migration. This success is based on a tradition, where it is relatively easy to interact
with strangers.
Another positive example is provided by the Italian village of Riace.
18 Although
picturesque, the village is located in one of Italy’s poorest regions. The service sector
gradually disappeared as young people moved away to other places. But one day, a
boat with migrants stranded off the coast of Italy. The mayor viewed this as a sign
from God, and decided to use it as an opportunity for his village. Indeed, something
of a miracle occurred. The arrival of the migrants revived the ailing village, and the
gradual decay was reversed with the migrants. Crucially, migrants were not treated
17 Roca and Helbing [12], Efferson et al. [13].
18 The tiny Italian village that opened its doors to migrants who braved the sea, see http://www.the
guardian.com/world/2013/oct/12/italian-village-migrants-sea.