Advances in Drama Theory for Managing Global Hazards and Disasters. Part I: Theoretical Foundation

Abstract

Global risk and disaster management challenges are complex and illstructured 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 weaknessesof 123 304 J. K. Levy et al. drama theory are critically evaluated in the context of global climate change and the mounting risk of a worldwide influenza pandemic.

Conflict analysis in environmental management

“…As Howard (1999) notes, often it is worth making moves that are not advantageous in the short term in order to find a solution that is viable in the long term. Finally, Bryant (2003) furnishes a good description of drama theory while Levy et al (2009aLevy et al ( , 2009b provide an explanation of recent advances in drama theory.…”

Redefining the Game in Local Water Management Conflict: A Case Study

“…Later he again modified it as three dilemmas (Drama Theory 2). In Drama theory 2 (Levy et al 2009), is that all dilemmas are defined in terms of doubts. It is simpler and also more insightful.…”

Advances in sustainable security systems engineering with Drama Theory (DT) II

“…In contrast, drama theory builds a partial tree (i.e., a tree comprised of a subset of the original tree's paths) by observing "only players' stated commitments regarding their actions, stated doubts regarding those commitments, stated responses to those doubts, stated doubts regarding those responses, etc." (Levy et al 2009a). The elimination of dilemmas can be modeled in "extensive form" -a game in which some choices are made after others have become fixed.…”

“…Third, game-theoretic analysis identifies equilibria within a fixed model which requires players to use artificially fixed preferences and options (and to make decisions based on moves in a model calibrated at the beginning of the analysis). This ignores the reality of actual global security conflicts, where time is spent debating how to avoid a cascade of global instability by analyzing dynamic and time-contingent strategies, preferences, and opportunities (Howard 1999, Bryant 2003, Levy et al 2009a). In contrast, DT II constitutes a theory of mutual interactive game design in which players, by communicating with others prior to playing the game, interact to design the game that they will ultimately play (including players, options and beliefs).…”

“…Drama Theory (DT) II (Levy et al 2009a) was developed by the authors, to cope with the weaknesses of traditional game theory and to handle the complex and uncertain (i.e. "wicked") problems associated security challenges.…”