Note: When clicking on a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number, you will be taken to an external site maintained by the publisher.
Some full text articles may not yet be available without a charge during the embargo (administrative interval).
What is a DOI Number?
Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this site.
-
Munteanu, Ionela (Ed.)Rule enforcement is critical in democratic, self-governing societies. Many political disputes occur when citizens do not understand the fundamental rationales for enforcement (e.g., COVID-19 pandemic). We examined how naïve groups learn and develop wise enforcement systems. Based on theories from behavioral economics, political science, psychology, and education, we predicted that groups need to experience failure of an enforcement system, but be guided on restorative justice principles to collectively learn from this failure. Undergraduate students (N= 288) from a Midwestern U.S. metropolitan university self-governed a simulated common-pool resource with real financial payoffs. Groups began with one of three conditions designed to create different experiences with enforcement and regulatory failure: (a) no enforcement (no communication or peer sanctioning), (b) lax enforcement (communication with peer-sanctioning), or (c) regulatory abuse (peer sanctioning without communication). Half then received facilitated guidance on restorative justice principles (e.g., discuss whether/why to use sanctions). To examine cooperation, we measured how well participants maintained the resource. To examine group learning, we created a novel coding system, which tracked groups’ constitutional decisions about conservation agreements and enforcement, conceptual understanding, and the enforcement systems they created. The no-enforcement and lax-enforcement conditions quickly yielded moderate cooperation via voluntary agreements. However, such agreements prevented groups from discovering how and why to use enforcement (peer sanctioning) to improve performance. Initial exposure to regulatory failure had different effects depending on facilitation. Unfacilitated groups fixated on initial misconceptions, causing them to abandon or create less sophisticated enforcement systems, hindering cooperation. Facilitated groups learned from prior failure—discovering principles of wise enforcement (e.g., collective efficiency, self-restraint)—and created more sophisticated enforcement systems (e.g., coordinated sanctions) that improved cooperation. Guidance on restorative justice principles and experience with regulatory abuse may be necessary preconditions for naïve individuals to understand and develop wiser collective enforcement systems.more » « less
-
Zuckerman, Inon (Ed.)There is limited research about how groups solve collective action problems in uncertain environments, especially if groups are confronted with unknown unknowns. We aim to develop a more comprehensive view of the characteristics that allow both groups and individuals to navigate such issues more effectively. In this article, we present the results of a new online experiment where individuals make decisions of whether to contribute to the group or pursue self-interest in an environment with high uncertainty, including unknown unknowns. The behavioral game, Port of Mars is framed as a first-generation habitat on Mars where participants have to make decisions on how much to invest in the shared infrastructure to maintain system health and how much to invest in personal goals. Participants can chat during the game, and take surveys before and after the game in order to measure personality attributes and observations from the game. Initial results suggest that a higher average social value orientation and more communication are the key factors that explain why some groups are more successful than others in surviving Port of Mars. Neither other attributes of players nor the group’s communication content explain the observed differences between groups.more » « less
-
Schwartz, Russell (Ed.)Computational models are complex scientific constructs that have become essential for us to better understand the world. Many models are valuable for peers within and beyond disciplinary boundaries. However, there are no widely agreed-upon standards for sharing models. This paper suggests 10 simple rules for you to both (i) ensure you share models in a way that is at least “good enough,” and (ii) enable others to lead the change towards better model-sharing practices.more » « lessFree, publicly-accessible full text available January 10, 2026
-
Despite the increasing use of standards for documenting and testing agent-based models (ABMs) and sharing of open access code, most ABMs are still developed from scratch. This is not only inefficient, but also leads to ad hoc and often inconsistent implementations of the same theories in computational code and delays progress in the exploration of the functioning of complex social-ecological systems (SES). We argue that reusable building blocks (RBBs) known from professional software development can mitigate these issues. An RBB is a submodel that represents a particular mechanism or process that is relevant across many ABMs in an application domain, such as plant competition in vegetation models, or reinforcement learning in a behavioural model. RBBs need to be distinguished from modules, which represent entire subsystems and include more than one mechanism and process. While linking modules faces the same challenges as integrating different models in general, RBBs are “atomic” enough to be more easily re-used in different contexts. We describe and provide examples from different domains for how and why building blocks are used in software development, and the benefits of doing so for the ABM community and to individual modellers. We propose a template to guide the development and publication of RBBs and provide example RBBs that use this template. Most importantly, we propose and initiate a strategy for community-based development, sharing and use of RBBs. Individual modellers can have a much greater impact in their field with an RBB than with a single paper, while the community will benefit from increased coherence, facilitating the development of theory for both the behaviour of agents and the systems they form. We invite peers to upload and share their RBBs via our website - preferably referenced by a DOI (digital object identifier obtained e.g. via Zenodo). After a critical mass of candidate RBBs has accumulated, feedback and discussion can take place and both the template and the scope of the envisioned platform can be improved.more » « less
-
Will you be able to run your computational models in the future? Even with well-documented code, this can be difficult due to changes in the software frameworks and operating systems that your code was built on. In this paper we discuss the use of containers to preserve code and their software dependencies to reproduce simulation results in the future. Containers are standalone lightweight packages of the original model software and their dependencies that can be run independent of the platform. As such they are suitable for reuse and sharing results. However, the use of containers is rare in the field of modeling social-environmental systems. We provide an introduction to the basic principles of containerization, argue why it would be beneficial if this tool became common practice in the field, describe a conceptual walkthrough to the process of containerizing a model, and reflect on near future directions of containerization workflows.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Mid-rotation fertilization presents an opportunity to increase the economic return of plantation forests in the southeastern United States (SEUS). For this reason, the Forest Productivity Cooperative established a series of mid-rotation fertilization trials in Pinus taeda L. plantations across the SEUS between 1984 and 1987. These trials identified site-specific responses to nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) fertilizers, resulting in increased stand production for 6–10 years after fertilization. There are successful volume response models that allow users to quantify the gain in stand productivity resulting from fertilization. However, all the current models depend on empirical relationships that are not bounded by biological response, meaning that greater fertilizer additions continue to create more volume gains, regardless of physiological limits. To address this shortcoming, we developed a bounded response model that evaluates relative volume response gain to fertilizer addition. Site index and relative spacing are included as model parameters to help provide realistic estimates. The model is useful for evaluating productivity gain in Pinus taeda stands that are fertilized with N and P in mid-rotation.more » « less
An official website of the United States government
