Can Agent-Based Modelling Really be Useful?

Agent-based modelling on a computer appears to have a special role to play in the development of social science and the formulation of social policy. It offers a means of discovering general and applicable social theory, and grounding it in precise assumptions and derivations, whilst addressing those elements of individual cognition that are central to human society. However, there are important questions to be asked and difficulties to be overcome in achieving this potential. What differentiates agent-based modelling from traditional computer modelling? What different types of agent-based models are there, and what are the structural relationships between them (if any)? Which model types should be used in which circumstances? If it is appropriate to use a complex model, for example one incorporating “deliberative” agents, how can it be validated? If it can only be validated in general terms, does this mean that we are forced into a “theory building” mode in which the focus of the investigation lies in the model’s properties? If so, what types of parameter space may a complex model have? How best can very large parameter spaces be explored? Some of these questions are here addressed and are illustrated by reference to recent agent-based models for the environment. A particular application is then considered in some detail: agent-based modelling of intervention strategies for integrated ecosystem management, especially management of the Fraser River watershed in British Columbia.

[1]  Nils J. Nilsson,et al.  Problem-solving methods in artificial intelligence , 1971, McGraw-Hill computer science series.

[2]  G. Nigel Gilbert,et al.  Simulation for the social scientist , 1999 .

[3]  Elinor Ostrom,et al.  6. Constituting Social Capital and Collective Action , 1994 .

[4]  Joshua M. Epstein,et al.  Growing Artificial Societies: Social Science from the Bottom Up , 1996 .

[5]  Steve Park,et al.  Asynchronous Time Evolution in an Artificial Society Model , 2000, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[6]  Peter Tyson,et al.  Artificial societies , 1997 .

[7]  Carl J. Walters,et al.  Adaptive Management of Renewable Resources , 1986 .

[8]  Jürgen Klüver,et al.  Topology, Metric and Dynamics of Social Systems , 1999, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[9]  Jaime Simão Sichman,et al.  Multi-Agent-Based Simulation , 2002, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[10]  G. Brundtland,et al.  Our common future , 1987 .

[11]  R. Hinde,et al.  Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action Collective Action , 2010 .

[12]  Jim Doran,et al.  Trajectories to complexity in artificial societies: rationality, belief, and emotions , 2000 .

[13]  Christophe Le Page,et al.  Multi-Agent Modelling and Renewable Resources Issues: The Relevance of Shared Representations for Interacting Agents , 2000, MABS.

[14]  Bruce Edmonds,et al.  Mapping the Envelope of Social Simulation Trajectories , 2000, MABS.

[15]  Jim Doran,et al.  From computer simulation to artificial societies , 1997 .

[16]  Nigel Gilbert,et al.  Modeling sociality: the view from Europe , 2000 .

[17]  I. Vernersson.  Open University Press , 2000 .

[18]  Robert V. Foutz,et al.  A new spectral model for binary or categorical-valued time series data , 1997 .

[19]  Timothy A. Kohler,et al.  Be there then: a modeling approach to settlement determinants and spatial efficiency among late ancestral pueblo populations of the Mesa Verde region, U.S. southwest , 2000 .

[20]  Patrick Christie,et al.  Trends in development of coastal area management in tropical countries: From central to community orientation , 1997 .

[21]  Scott Moss,et al.  Critical Incident Management: An Empirically Derived Computational Model , 1998, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[22]  R. Naiman,et al.  River Ecology and Management , 1998 .

[23]  Liz Sonenberg,et al.  Enhancing Multi-Agent Based Simulation with Human-Like Decision Making Strategies , 2000, MABS.

[24]  J. R. Nielsen,et al.  User participation and institutional change in fisheries management: a viable alternative to the failures of ‘top-down’ driven control? , 1999 .

[25]  Gerhard Weiss,et al.  Multiagent Systems , 1999 .

[26]  J. Stephen Lansing,et al.  Anti-chaos, common property, and the emergence of cooperation , 2000 .

[27]  Claudia Pahl-Wostl,et al.  Understanding Climate Policy Using Participatory Agent-Based Social Simulation , 2000, MABS.

[28]  Jim Doran,et al.  Simulating Collective Misbelief , 1998, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[29]  Scott Moss,et al.  Messy Systems - The Target for Multi Agent Based Simulation , 2000, MABS.

[30]  Robert L. Axtell,et al.  Effects of Interaction Topology and Activation Regime in Several Multi-Agent Systems , 2000, MABS.

[31]  Michael Healey.  Seeking sustainability in the lower Fraser Basin : issues and choices , 1999 .

[32]  Paul A. Fishwick,et al.  A multimodeling basis for across-trophic-level ecosystem modeling: the Florida Everglades example , 1998 .

[33]  Lansing,et al.  System-dependent Selection, Ecological Feedback and the Emergence of Functional Structure in Ecosystems. , 1998, Journal of theoretical biology.

[34]  Paul A. Fishwick,et al.  A methodology for dynamic model abstraction , 1996 .

[35]  Stephen R. Carpenter,et al.  Ecological and Social Dynamics in Simple Models of Ecosystem Management , 1999 .

[36]  Peter Norvig,et al.  Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach , 1995 .

[37]  E. Ostrom,et al.  Local Commons and Global Interdependence: Heterogeneity and Cooperation in Two Domains , 1995 .