Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-16T19:12:35.929Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Entry #20 - N-Person Prisoner's Dilemma: Tragedy of the Commons

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 October 2009

Harold H. Kelley
Affiliation:
University of California, Los Angeles
John G. Holmes
Affiliation:
University of Waterloo, Ontario
Norbert L. Kerr
Affiliation:
Michigan State University
Harry T. Reis
Affiliation:
University of Rochester, New York
Caryl E. Rusbult
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Paul A. M. Van Lange
Affiliation:
Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam
Get access

Summary

Examples

This situation is a generalization of the two-person Prisoner's Dilemma situation to more than two persons (hence, it is sometimes called an N-person PD or NPD situation; its other most common label is a social dilemma). As in the Prisoner's Dilemma Game (PDG), each person's concern is whether she or he should make a choice which advantages the self but disadvantages others – in this situation, several others (e.g., all members of a group). For example, the police might give each member of a captured N-person criminal gang the same basic choices offered to the two prisoners in the classic PD (e.g., confess and thereby knock 1 year off your own sentence but also thereby add 2 years to every other gang member's sentence). Or, members of a fishing village might choose between maximizing their individual catches (and, hence, profits) versus limiting their catches/profits (but thereby helping to preserve the long-term viability of the fishing grounds upon which this and future generations of the village depend); Hardin's (1968) famous example of the “Tragedy of the Commons” is a very similar social dilemma. Or, members of a group performing some task might choose between working hard (and thereby improving the chances of the group performing well and quickly) or hardly working (and saving themselves effort while still profiting from any group success). In each case, noncooperative behavior brings better outcomes for oneself; but cooperative behavior brings better outcomes to the group as a whole.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×