IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/chm/wpaper/wp2002-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A selected survey of traditional and evolutionary game theory

Author

Listed:
  • Ussif Rashid Sumaila
  • Joseph Apaloo

Abstract

This note reviews the game theoretic literature with the aim of highlighting the similarities and dissimilarities between what we term traditional game theory and evolutionary game theory. The focus is on the contributions of evolutionary game theory to the body of knowledge at the disposal of the game theorist. The note is intended for people with interests in economics and who are familiar with traditional game theory but not necessarily familiar with evolutionary game theory. The main objective is to reach out to the numerous economists and indeed, other social scientists, who are not as yet initiated in the basic theory of of evolutionary games. A major conclusion of this note is that, applications of evolutionary game theory in the analysis of economic problems, especially, in the areas of natural, environmental and development economics are long overdue.

Suggested Citation

  • Ussif Rashid Sumaila & Joseph Apaloo, 2002. "A selected survey of traditional and evolutionary game theory," CMI Working Papers WP 2002:7, CMI (Chr. Michelsen Institute), Bergen, Norway.
  • Handle: RePEc:chm:wpaper:wp2002-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cmi.no/publications/file/834-a-selected-survey-of-traditional-and-evolutionary.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Espen Villanger, 2003. "Company interests and foreign aid policy: Playing donors out against each other," CMI Working Papers WP 2003:5, CMI (Chr. Michelsen Institute), Bergen, Norway.
    2. Espen Villanger, 2004. "Company Influence on Foreign Aid Disbursement: Is Conditionality Credible when Donors Have Mixed Motives?," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 71(2), pages 334-351, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:chm:wpaper:wp2002-7. 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: (Robert Sjursen). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/cmiiino.html .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.