Advances in Drama Theory for Managing Global Hazards and Disasters. Part I: Theoretical Foundation
Tóm tắt
Global risk and disaster management challenges are complex and ill-structured group decision processes characterized by time-sensitive, multi-faceted, and self-organizing negotiations, high decision stakes, extreme uncertainty, and dynamic, value-laden tradeoffs. Drama theory asserts that conflict resolution requires players to engage in a rational-emotional process of re-defining both the game and their “positions” in it until agreement on a satisfactory resolution is reached. While game theory has been widely applied to problems dealing with hazards, risk, and disasters, it assumes fixed players, options, and preferences, and hence does not allow for the re-definition of the conflict under consideration. Results show that drama theory constitutes a flexible and powerful tool for modeling group decision and negotiation processes involving natural, man-made, and health-related hazards, risk, and catastrophes in the post-911 security environment by modeling emotional responses that, throughout the course of a game, can lead to unanticipated reactions and change basic assumptions. This is achieved through the use of option boards to construct and analyze emergency, disaster, or crisis models that are structurally similar to game models. Finally, drama theory is compared and contrasted to conflict analysis, which developed from common roots in metagame analysis. The strengths and weaknesses of drama theory are critically evaluated in the context of global climate change and the mounting risk of a worldwide influenza pandemic.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Baan AN, Howard N, Tait A (2003) COM as Shooter—operational planning using C2 for confronting and collaborating. CCRTS Symposium 2003; available from http://www.dodccrp.org
Bellavita C (2008) Changing homeland security: what is homeland security?. Homel Secur Aff 2: 1–13
Bragg B (2007) Arctic Alaska villages caught in slow-motion disaster onslaught Anchorage Daily News. http://dwb.adn.com/front/v-printer/story/9398619p-9311989c.html . Accessed 22 Oct 2007
Bryant JW (2003) The six dilemmas of collaboration. Wiley, Chichester
Diamond J (2004) Collapse: how societies choose to fail or succeed. Viking Adult, New York
Fang L, Hipel KW, Kilgour DM (1993) Interactive decision making: the graph model for conflict resolution. Wiley, New York
Fraser NM, Hipel KW (1984) Conflict analysis: models and resolution. North Holland Publishing Co., New York
Howard N (1971) Paradoxes of rationality: games, metagames and political behavior. MIT Press 1971, Available as MIT Classic
Howard N (1994a) Drama theory and its relation to game theory. Part 1: dramatic resolution vs. rational solution. Group Decis Negot 3: 187–206. doi:10.1007/BF01384354
Howard N (1994b) Drama theory and its relation to game theory. Part 2: formal model of the resolution process. Group Decis Negot 3: 207–235. doi:10.1007/BF01384355
Howard N (1998) n-Person ‘Soft’ games. J Oper Res Soc 49: 144–150
Howard N (1999) Confrontation analysis: how to win operations other than war. CCRP publications, Pentagon, Washington DC. Available from http://www.dodccrp.org
Howard N (2000) How to win peace operations: theory Vs practice. CCRTS Symposium, 2000. http://www.dodccrp.org
Howard N (2007) Resolving conflicts in a tree: drama theory in the extensive form. http://www.ima.org.uk/conflict/papers/Howard.pdf
Howard N, Bennett PG, Bryant JW, Bradley M (1992) Manifesto for a theory of drama and irrational choice. J Oper Res Soc 44: 99–103
IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) (2007) The Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) February, 2007 Working Group I, Summary for Policymakers (SPM) “Physical Science Basis of Climate Change.” http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/wg1-report.html
Murray-Jones P, Howard N (2001) Co-coordinated positions in a drama-theoretic confrontation: mathematical foundations for a PO decision support system. CCRTS Symposium, Annapolis MD. http://www.dodccrp.org/html4/events_past.html
Murray-Jones P, Stubbs L, Howard N (2003) Confrontation and collaboration analysis: experimental and mathematical results. CCRTS Symposium, Washington DC. http://www.dodccrp.org/html4/events_past.html
Obeidi A, Hipel KW (2005) Strategic and dilemma analysis of a water export conflict. INFOR 43(3): 247–270
Osborne MJ, Rubinstein A (1994) A course in game theory. MIT Press, New York
Rittel H, Webber M (1973) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sci 4: 155–169. doi:10.1007/BF01405730
Rosenhead J (1989) Rational analysis for a problematic world (editor). Wiley, New York
Smith R, Howard N, Tait A (2001) Confrontations in war and peace. CCRTS Symposium, 2001. Available from http://www.dodccrp.org
Smith R, Howard N, Tait A (2002) Commanding anti-terrorist coalitions: a mid-east illustration. CCRTS Symposium, 2002. Available from http://www.dodccrp.org
Zinni T, Koltz T (2006) The battle for peace: a frontline vision of America’s power and purpose. Palgrave Macmillan, New York