|
|
Developing and Applying Models and Variables
One of the main problems in developing a theory of collective action is the complex nature of groups, such as the array of factors that define individuals in groups. For example, features of the UN would include the security environment; the preferences of member states conditioned by their culture, political tradition, and history; and perceived power structures, as well as the set of rules governing the organisation. These factors are not fixed. In fact, the extent to which any one single feature determines the dynamics of an organisation also depends on a number of other factors. Thus, for a model of collective action to reflect this complexity, it will have to be multidimensional and should be developed at different levels of analysis. Each level may attempt to describe the dynamics between variables or the impact of one or more of the factors in a particular decision environment.10 However, sometimes, the environment more or less determines the way units in a collective interact. An example is the extent to which the political environment could be influenced by the values individual actors place on an expected outcome of a political process. Thus, the environment can also be said to be an important factor in the analysis of social behaviour and the choices individuals make, and this should be considered alongside factors such as the makeup of the individual units.
The application of iterated game theory, for example, to the Cold War interaction not only demonstrates how participants behave in a hostile environment but also shows how the environment itself structures the behaviour and choices individuals make. However, the failure to adjust the game theory or the Prisoner's Dilemma (PD) paradigm to take account of a changing environment demonstrates an inherent weakness of an inflexible and static model. The PD model is useful where it approximates events at a particular time and provides a useful tool for predicting interactions and outcomes of events in static environments. The weakness of this model can be seen in its failure to anticipate the abrupt end to the Cold War. But more importantly, the PD paradigm tends also to support the view that strategic intelligence is incompatible