The Impact Of Boundary Organizations On Decision-Making Under Uncertainty A Multi-Agent Simulation
Modern environmental issues imply that decision-makers have the capacity to take into account possibly conflicting information from distinct domains, such as science and economics. As the development of technology increases the temporal and spatial scopes of risks, decision-makers can no longer consider economic and scientific information separately but should encourage experts to work together. Boundary organizations, institutions that cross the gap between two different domains, are able to act beyond the boundaries while remaining accountable to each side (Guston, 2001). By encouraging a flow of information across the boundaries, they permit an exchange to take place, while maintaining the authority of each domain (Cash et al., 2003; Clark et al., 2002). The goal is to simulate boundary organizations to assess their impact on the diffusion of expertsâ€™ opinions. The hypothesis tested is whether the existence of a boundary organization eases the decision-making process by reducing the number of opinions expressed. The methodology relies on a multi-agent system based on a model of continuous opinion dynamics (Deffuant et al., 2001) extended over two dimensions. The world is defined by two parameters: the uncertainty, that reflects the possible zone of discussion between experts, and the exchange, which represents the openness of discussions. Agents are described by credibility and conviction: the credibility represents how much other agents may be influenced by an agent, and the conviction represents the resistance of an agent to changing its position. Two kinds of agents are left free to interact, modifying their position in their domain (dimension) through one-to-one exchanges. Agents called borgs are introduced: open to trans-disciplinary discussion, they are able to exchange on both dimensions. The results show that the range of expressed opinions is significantly reduced, even at low levels of experts involved in the boundary organization.
Volume (Year): 3 (2009)
Issue (Month): ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.apstract.net/|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:apstra:53532. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.