Would game theory be able to bring light into the discrepancies between the Puerto Ricans that left the island and those that are still there?
For those who are unfamiliar with game theory, this is a study of strategic decision making. Game theory, founded by John Nash and Jon Von Neumann, was created to observe the different outcomes that can evolve with respect to the preferences (or utilities) of the players in observation. There are cooperative games and non-cooperative games, known as extensive games… this classification depends on the ability of the players to cooperate under different preferences for a common good.
From the non-cooperative games, you have relationships that consist on Nash Equilibrium and others that consist on the Prisoner’s Dilemma. The Nash Equilibrium is where neither player gains anything on changing their strategy so they remain in a non-cooperative equilibrium. Au contraire, the Prisoner’s Dilemma is where each player will seek for their purely rational self-interest and not look to cooperate with the other player. The name for this canonical game theory came from an actual prison example, where two prisoners are charged for a crime but there is not enough evidence to convict one for the principal charge… due to this the prisoners have three potential game scenarios:
- Prisoner A and B will betray each other- both get the same years in prison
- Prisoner A betrays but B remains silent – A will be set free and B will have to serve the years in prison
- Prisoner A and B both remain silent – both of them will serve the same years in prison but due to no incrimination the time served in prison will be less.
According to Prisoner’s Dilemma, both prisoners will seek personal interest and will betray each other which will lead to outcome #1, which is not the best outcome from the scenarios.
Now, if we were to take game theory and adapt it to the current relationship between Puerto Rico’s social capital (diaspora vs. Puerto Ricans in the island) we will be looking at a Prisoner’s Dilemma game. The two players are looking into their own interest and not thinking about the common good, which would lead to the better outcome. Below is an example of how Puerto Rico’s Social Capital game would look like:
The players of this game are a) the diaspora and b) Puerto Ricans in the island; the preferences used for this model are: collaborate vs. accuse.
As you can see from the game above, there are 4 possible scenarios where:
- the diaspora wants to collaborate with the Puerto Ricans in the island, but they just constantly accuse the diaspora for abandoning the island
- both look to collaborate
- both accuse
- the Puerto Ricans in the island want to collaborate, but the diaspora accuses them of the current crisis
If we remain in the Prisoner’s Dilemma we currently are, Puerto Rico’s social capital will never reach its full potential. If we decide to go through a Nash Equilibrium we will remain stuck in an “equilibrium”… so I guess the best outcome for Puerto Rico would be for scenario #2 to take place. If all parts of the Puerto Rican social capital collaborate, then the outcome should certainly be a positive one where we would have organized social capital. This doesn’t mean that if Puerto Rico’s diaspora and its citizen in the island collaborate all our problems will be solved, but it sure is a good start.
References:
Game Theory – Roger B. Myerson (hardcopy)
The Strategy of Conflict – Thomas Schelling (hardcopy)
Haz clic para acceder a nature02043_f_born.pdf
Haz clic para acceder a ahnostromwalker_092402.pdf
http://www.bbc.com/mundo/noticias/2015/05/150505_economia_puerto_rico_atrae_millonarios_ms
http://www.bbc.com/mundo/video_fotos/2015/07/150721_video_puerto_rico_exodo_isla_economia_amv
http://www.notiuno.com/joven-boricua-le-contesta-a-quienes-lo-llaman-cobarde-por-cruzar-el-charco/
http://elcalce.com/contexto/comentario/a-los-que-se-fueron/
Copyright © 2015 Capital Social LLC
Capital Social PR 
Deja un comentario