SFeDu
of.211, Gorgoko St., 88 
Rostov-on-Don
Russia
344002
+7 (863) 250-59-54
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
te@sfedu.ru

TERRA ECONOMICUS

  • Home
  • Issues
  • 2021
  • No 4
  • The mentality of economic agents and institutional change: In search of an equilibrium model

The mentality of economic agents and institutional change: In search of an equilibrium model


TERRA ECONOMICUS, , Vol. 19 (no. 4),

The article deals with an generalized agent-based model which describes the system “mentality of economic agents – social institutions”. A complex of features that qualitatively characterize the mentality of the agent is proposed. The dominance of one of these features determines the agents’ mentality type. Social institutions are classified depending on the support of a particular agents’ mental group. In the tradition of agent-based modeling, the model’s space is represented as a lattice (a set of cells) located in a limited plane’s domain. Each cell represents one of the market niches for agents to conduct business activities. The agents’ state in each time step is characterized by parameters of performance and satisfaction. While functioning, agents move from one niche to another, striving to achieve maximum performance and satisfaction with their position, depending on the institutional environment. The results of experiments are analyzed based on scenario approach and conditional synthetic data, which make it possible to estimate the process of achieving an equilibrium state by the system “mentality of economic agents – public institutions”. Research findings confirm the following. First, the higher the minimum labor productivity in society, the faster the system reaches an equilibrium state. Second, fewer agents are forced to leave the system, not finding a suitable niche to conduct activities.
Citation: Kleiner G., Rybachuk M., Ushakov D. (2021). The mentality of economic agents and institutional change: In search of an equilibrium model. Terra Economicus 19(4): 6–20. DOI: 10.18522/2073-6606-2021-19-4-6-20


Keywords: agent-based model; mentality; institutions; equilibrium; computational experiment

JEL codes: D01, D02, C61, C63

References:
  • Белянин А.В. (2017). Homo oeconomicus и Homo postoeconomicus // Журнал Новой экономической ассоциации (1): 157–161. [Belianin A.V. (2017). Homo Oeconomicus and Homo Postoeconomicus. Journal of the New Economic Association (1): 157–161. (In Russian).]
  • Горбунов В.К. (2013). К теории рыночного спроса: регулярность и экономическое равновесие // Экономическая наука современной России (4): 19–36. [Gorbunov V.K. (2013). To the theory of market demand: regularity and economic equilibrium. Economics of Contemporary Russia (4): 19–36. (In Russian).]
  • Журавлев А.Л., Ушаков Д.В., Юревич А.В. (2013). Перспективы психологии в решении задач российского общества. Часть III. На пути к технологиям согласования социальных институтов и менталитета // Психологический журнал 34(6): 5–25. [Zhuravlev A.L., Ushakov D.V. and Yurevich A.V. (2013). Prospects of psychology on Russian society problems’ solving. Part III. Interaction between social institutes and mentality: the ways of optimization. Psikhologicheskii Zhurnal 34(6): 5–25. (In Russian).]
  • Журавлев А.Л., Ушаков Д.В., Юревич А.В. (2017). Менталитет, общество и психосоциальный человек (ответ участникам дискуссии) // Психологический журнал 38(1): 107–112. [Zhuravlev A.L., Ushakov D.V. and Yurevich A.V. (2017). Mentality, society and “homo psychosocialis” (response to the participants of the discussion). Psikhologicheskii Zhurnal 38(1): 107–112. (In Russian).]
  • Капелюшников Р.И. (2020). Кто такой Homo oeconomicus? // Экономическая политика 15(1): 8–39. [Kapeliushnikov R.I. (2020). Who is homo oeconomicus? Economic policy 15(1): 8–39. (In Russian).]
  • Клейнер Г.Б. (2002). Системная парадигма и теория предприятия // Вопросы экономики (10): 47–69. [Kleiner G.B. (2002). System paradigm and the theory of the enterprise. Voprosy Ekonomiki (10): 47–69. (In Russian).]
  • Клейнер Г.Б. (2008). Системная парадигма и системный менеджмент // Российский журнал менеджмента 6(3): 27–50. [Kleiner G.B. (2008). System paradigm and system management. Russian Management Journal 6(3): 27–50. (In Russian).]
  • Клейнер Г.Б., Рыбачук М.А., Ушаков Д.В. (2018). Психологические факторы экономического поведения: системный взгляд // Terra Economicus 16(1): 20–36. [Kleiner G.B., Rybachuk M.A., Ushakov D.V. (2018). Psychological factors of economic behavior: a systemic view. Terra Economicus 16(1): 20–37. (In Russian).]
  • КлейнерГ.Б., РыбачукМ.А., УшаковД.В. (2019). Агент-ориентированная модель профессиональной экспертизы и принятия решений о поддержке индивидуальных общественно значимых инициатив // Terra Economicus 17(2): 23–39. [Kleiner G.B., Rybachuk M.A. and Ushakov D.V. (2019). Agent-oriented model of professional expertise and decision making on individual public significant initiatives support. Terra Economicus 17(2): 23–39. (In Russian).]
  • Комаровская Н.В. (2016). Эволюция «homo economicus» // Вестник МГИМО университета (1): 129–141. [Komarovskaia N.V. (2016). Тhe evolution of homo economicus. MGIMO Review of International Relations (1): 129–141. (In Russian).]
  • Кондратьева Т.В. (2014). Институциональное равновесие как фактор экономического развития // Азимут научных исследований: экономика и управление (1): 59–62. [Kondratieva T.V. (2014). Institutional equilibrium as a factor of economic growth. Azimuth of Scientific Research: Economics and Management (1): 59–62. (In Russian).]
  • Макаров В.Л., Бахтизин А.Р., Бекларян Г.Л., Акопов А.С. (2021). Цифровой завод: методы дискретно-событийного моделирования и оптимизации производственных характеристик // Бизнес-информатика 15(2): 7–20. [Makarov V.L., Bakhtizin A.R., Beklaryan G.L. and Akopov A.S. (2021). Digital plant: methods of discrete-event modeling and optimization of production characteristics. Business Informatics 15(2): 7–20. (In Russian).]
  • Макаров В.Л., Бахтизин А.Р., Сушко Е.Д., Агеева А.Ф. (2020). Моделирование эпидемии COVID-19 – преимущества агент-ориентированного подхода // Экономические и социальные перемены: факты, тенденции, прогноз 13(4): 58–73. [Makarov V.L., Bakhtizin A.R., Sushko E.D. and Ageeva A.F. (2020). COVID-19 epidemic modeling – advantages of an agent-based approach. Economic and Social Changes: Facts, Trends, Forecast 13(4): 58–73. (In Russian).]
  • Салыев В.Р. (2007). О взаимосвязи институционального равновесия и экономического роста // Terra Economicus 5(4-2): 207–214. [Salyev V.R. (2007). On the relationship between institutional equilibrium and economic growth. Terra Economicus 5(4-2): 207–214. (In Russian).]
  • Сторчевой М.А. (2011). Новая модель человека для экономической науки // Вопросы экономики (4): 78–98. [Storchevoy M.A. (2011). A new model of man in economics. Voprosy Ekonomiki (4): 78–98. (In Russian).]
  • Тамбовцев В.Л. (2001). Институциональный рынок как механизм институциональных изменений // Общественные науки и современность (5): 25–38. [Tambovtsev V.L. (2001). An Institutional market as a mechanism of institutional change. Social Sciences and Contemporary World (5): 25–38. (In Russian).]
  • Тамбовцев В.Л. (2005). Роль рынка для институтов в институциональной эволюции // Terra Economicus 3(4): 28–36. [Tambovtsev V.L. (2005). The role of the market for institutions in institutional evolution. Terra Economicus 3(4): 28–36. (In Russian).]
  • Ушаков Д.В. (2020). Менталитет и социально-экономические достижения стран // Вестник Российской академии наук 90(3): 224–231. [Ushakov D.V. (2020). Mentality and the socioeconomic achievements of countries. Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences 90(2): 142–148. (In Russian).]
  • Akopov A.S., Beklaryan L.A., Saghatelyan A.K. (2019). Agent-based modelling of interactions between air pollutants and greenery using a case study of Yerevan, Armenia. Environmental Modelling & Software 116: 7–25.
  • Arrow K.J. (1974). General economic equilibrium: purpose, analytic techniques, collective choice. The American Economic Review 64(3): 253–272.
  • Bednar J., Page S.E. (2018). When order affects performance: culture, behavioral spillovers, and institutional path dependence. American Political Science Review 112(1): 82–98.
  • Bednar J., Jones-Rooy A., Page S.E. (2015). Choosing a future based on the past: Institutions, behavior, and path dependence. European Journal of Political Economy 40: 312–332.
  • Carbo J., Sanchez-Pi N., Molina J.M. (2018). Agent-based simulation with NetLogo to evaluate ambient intelligence scenarios. Journal of Simulation 12(1): 42–52.
  • Chiacchio F., Pennisi M., Russo G., Motta S., Pappalardo F. (2014). Agent-based modeling of the immune system: NetLogo, a promising framework. BioMed Research International 2014(1–4): 907171. DOI: 10.1155/2014/907171
  • de Bruijn H., Gro?ler A., Videira N. (2020). Antifragility as a design criterion for modelling dynamic systems. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 37(1): 23–37.
  • Hicks J. (1980). IS-LM: An explanation. Journal of Post Keynesian Economics 3(2): 139–154.
  • Hodgson G.M. (2014). The evolution of morality and the end of economic man. Journal of Evolutionary Economics 24(1): 83–106.
  • Jackson J.C., Rand D., Lewis K., Norton M.I., Gray K. (2017). Agent-based modeling: A guide for social psychologists. Social Psychological and Personality Science 8(4): 387–395.
  • Jaxa-Rozen M., Kwakkel J.H., Bloemendal M. (2019). A coupled simulation architecture for agent-based/geohydrological modelling with NetLogo and MODFLOW. Environmental Modelling & Software 115: 19–37.
  • Kahneman D. (2003). Maps of bounded rationality: Psychology for behavioral economics. American economic review 93(5): 1449–1475.
  • King R.G. (2000). The new IS-LM model: language, logic, and limits. FRB Richmond Economic Quarterly 86(3): 45–104.
  • Koch J., Eisend M., Petermann A. (2009). Path dependence in decision-making processes: Exploring the impact of complexity under increasing returns. BuR Business Research Journal 2(1).
  • Markey-Towler B. (2018). Antifragility, the Black Swan and psychology. Evolutionary and Institutional Economics Review 15(2): 367–384.
  • Newell B.R., Lagnado D.A., Shanks D.R. (2015). Straight Choices: The Psychology of Decision Making. Psychology Press, 318 p.
  • Salecker J., Sciaini M., Meyer K.M., Wiegand K. (2019). The NLRX R package: A next-generation framework for reproducible NetLogo model analyses. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 10(11): 1854–1863.
  • Schiliro D. (2016). Economics and psychology. The framing of decisions. Journal of Mathematical Economics and Finance II(2(3)): 77–88.
  • Shepsle K.A. (1979). Institutional arrangements and equilibrium in multidimensional voting models. American Journal of Political Science 23(1): 27–59.
  • Shepsle K.A. (1986). Institutional Equilibrium and Equilibrium Institutions, pp. 51–82. In: H. Weisberg (ed.) Political Science: The Science of Politics. New York: Agathon.
  • Sulis E., Tambuscio M. (2020). Simulation of misinformation spreading processes in social networks: an application with NetLogo. IEEE 7th International Conference on Data Science and Advanced Analytics (DSAA), pp. 614–618.
  • Taffler R.J., Spence C., Eshraghi A. (2017). Emotional economic man: Calculation and anxiety in fund management. Accounting, Organizations and Society 61: 53–67.
  • Taleb N.N. (2012). Antifragile: Things That Gain from Disorder. New York: Random House, 521 p.
  • Thaler R.H. (2000). From homo economicus to homo sapiens. Journal of Economic Perspectives 14(1): 133–141.
  • Thiele J.C. (2014). R marries NetLogo: Introduction to the RNetLogo package. Journal of Statistical Software 58(2): 1–41.
  • Thiele J.C., Kurth W., Grimm V. (2012). RNetLogo: An R package for running and exploring individual-based models implemented in NetLogo. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 3(3): 480–483.
  • Tiebout C.M. (1956). A pure theory of local expenditures. Journal of Political Economy 64(5): 416–424.
  • Urbina D.A., Ruiz-Villaverde A. (2019). A critical review of homo economicus from five approaches. American Journal of Economics and Sociology 78(1): 63–93.
  • Von Neumann J. (1971). A model of general economic equilibrium, pp. 1–9. In: Readings in the Theory of Growth. Palgrave Macmillan, London.
  • Wilensky U., Rand W. (2015). An Introduction to Agent-Based Modeling: Modeling Natural, Social, and Engineered Complex Systems with NetLogo. The MIT Press, 504 p.
  • Wilkin J. (2011). Institutional equilibrium. What is it about and what is its role in the economy? Ekonomia (15): 26–37.
  • Yin X., Wang H., Yin P., Zhu H. (2019). Agent-based opinion formation modeling in social network: A perspective of social psychology. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications 532: 121786.
Publisher: Southern Federal University
Founder: Southern Federal University
ISSN: 2073-6606