Growing Sovereignty: Modeling the Shift from Indirect to Direct Rule

Cederman, Lars‐Erik; Girardin, Luc

doi:10.1111/j.1468-2478.2009.00576.x

Cited by 11 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…States may just as easily interact in cyberspace with distant states as with geographic neighbours. Our model in its fundamental form, in contrast with some earlier models of statecraft [9,14], eschews geography completely, allowing states to interact without regard to any concept of neighbourhood. However, it should be noted that the model framework is flexible enough that explicit geographies could be easily encoded in future work.…”

Section: Tuning the Model For Cyberspacementioning

confidence: 99%

“…These early studies broadly exposed the possibilities of simulation in this field. They were often concerned with the emergence and dissolution of states in quasi-geographic settings (e.g., Cederman and Girardin [14]) and with the balance between cooperation and competition (e.g., Bearce and Fisher [15] and Majeski [16]). The model reported here builds on this work in the particular context of cyberspace, where power diffusion is a key consideration [3] and geography much less so.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Modelling Hegemonic Power Transition in Cyberspace

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cyberspace is the newest domain of conflict and cooperation between states. In cyberspace, as in all other domains, land, sea, air, and space, these interactions often lead to the emergence of hegemons which are characterised by their predominant influence over global world order and all other states. We examined the emergence and collapse of hegemons in a modelled cyberspace world through the notions of power transition and power diffusion. We used Repast Simphony to construct a simple agent-based model (ABM) of a system of states interacting both competitively and cooperatively in this world. Our simple model parsimoniously captures the character of the real international system of states through simple parameters of wealth and power determining the outcome of attack or cooperation amongst pairwise interacting states. We found hegemons of global world order emerged in cyberspace as they do in the other traditional domains from models with these few parameters. And we found that hegemons, contrary to traditional understanding, are not exceptional states but merely occupy the tail of a continuous distribution of power and lifetimes. We also found that hegemony in the system depends on two perhaps unexpected parameters: the difficulty of acquiring power as wealth increases and the amount of cooperation between states. And as a consequence, we argue that cyberspace, as a power-diffuse domain where cooperation is easier than elsewhere, is less suited to the kind of hegemony we see in the traditional domains of state interaction.

show abstract

Section: Tuning the Model For Cyberspacementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modelling Hegemonic Power Transition in Cyberspace

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cederman and Girardin (2010), for example, model the emergence of territorial states in early modern Europe, while Cioffi-Revilla and Rouleau (2010) examine the effects of insurgency in a complex polity. Most applications of complex systems in international politics rely on agent-based simulations.…”

Section: The Uses and Limits Of Complex Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This article seeks to do so by applying the principles of CAS to two puzzles in international politics: the problem of theorizing change in structural realism, and the dynamics of democratization across state borders. For recent uses of agent-based modeling in international politics, see Earnest (2008), Cioffi-Revilla and Rouleau (2010), and Cederman and Girardin (2010). The approach is not conducive to theory creation because its assumptions are bounded by inherent uncertainty, and thus perform poorly at producing testable hypotheses that lend themselves to empirical verification.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Complexity and theories of change in international politics

Gunitsky

2013

Int Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines how the principles of complex systems can illuminate recurring mechanisms of change in theories of international relations. It applies the logic of complex systems to two specific puzzles in international politicsthe problem of theorizing change in structural realism, and the dynamics of cross-border democratic diffusion. In the first case, by shifting the analysis of anarchy's consequences from state behavior to state attributes, complex systems can illustrate the sources of domestic and international transformations embedded in structural theories. This approach offers a way to think about democratization as a global process of interstate competition and socialization driven by the pressures of anarchy. In the second case, the principles of co-adaptation in complex systems can help reframe diffusion not as the unilinear spread of democracy but as the interplay of self-reinforcing and self-dampening dynamics, whose interaction shapes both actor expectations and democratic outcomes. In both cases, complex systems serve a limited but useful role; although not conducive to theory creation, the approach provides a useful analytical prism for examining patterns of change and continuity in global processes, and highlights concrete ways of improving models of transformations in international politics.

show abstract

“…Until recently there has been only a limited amount of modeling work directly addressing the evolution of large-scale polities (Dacey 1969(Dacey , 1974Bremer and Mihalka 1977;Cusack and Stoll 1990;Cederman 1997, Spencer 1998Cioffi-Revilla 2005;Cederman and Girardin 2010). Most of this work has focused exclusively on polity size, was limited to a small number of simulation runs, and was primarily motivated by questions of interest to political scientists.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cycling in the Complexity of Early Societies

Gavrilets¹,

Anderson²,

Turchin³

2010

CDN

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Warfare is commonly viewed as a driving force of the process of aggregation of initially independent villages into larger and more complex political units that started several thousand years ago and quickly lead to the appearance of chiefdoms, states, and empires. Here we build on extensions and generalizations of Carneiro's (1970) argument to develop a spatially explicit agent-based model of the emergence of early complex societies via warfare. In our model polities are represented as hierarchically structured networks of villages whose size, power, and complexity change as a result of conquest, secession, internal reorganization (via promotion and linearization), and resource dynamics. A general prediction of our model is continuous stochastic cycling in which the growth of individual polities in size, wealth/power, and complexity is interrupted by their quick collapse. The model dynamics are mostly controlled by two parameters, one of which scales the relative advantage of wealthier polities in between and within-polity conflicts, and the other is the chief's expected time in power. Our results demonstrate that the stability of large and complex polities is strongly promoted if the outcomes of the conflicts are mostly determined by the polities' wealth/power, if there exist well-defined and accepted means of succession, and if control mechanisms are internally specialized.

show abstract

Growing Sovereignty: Modeling the Shift from Indirect to Direct Rule

Cited by 11 publications

References 31 publications

Modelling Hegemonic Power Transition in Cyberspace

Modelling Hegemonic Power Transition in Cyberspace

Complexity and theories of change in international politics

Cycling in the Complexity of Early Societies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About