Uwe Matzat – Complexiteit: Schelling/Ising 1
A social science variation:
Schelling’s segregation models
http://www.gisagents.blogspot.com/
Uwe Matzat – Complexiteit: Schelling/Ising 2
Thomas Schelling
Basics are from 70s Several fascinating “think out loud”
books (and much more)
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2005/schelling-lecture.html
Uwe Matzat – Complexiteit: Schelling/Ising 3
FYI: book list
1. The Strategy of Conflict (Schelling, 1960). 2. Micromotives and Macrobehavior (Schelling, 1978). 3. Arms and Influence (Schelling, 1966). 4. ‘‘Dynamic Models of Segregation’’ (Schelling, 1971a). 5. ‘‘The Life You Save May Be Your Own’’ (Schelling, 1968, reprinted in
Choice andConsequence). 6. Choice and Consequence (Schelling, 1984a), subtitled on its cover
but not on its titlepage Perspectives of an Errant Economist. 7. ‘‘Self-command in Practice, in Policy, and in a Theory of Rational
Choice’’ (Schelling, 1984b). 8. ‘‘Some Economics of Global Warming’’ (Schelling, 1992). 9. ‘‘Hockey Helmets, Concealed Weapons, and Daylight Saving: A Study
of BinaryChoices with Externalities’’ (Schelling, 1973, reprinted in Micromotives andMacrobehavior).
10.‘‘An Essay on Bargaining’’ (Schelling, 1956, reprinted in The Strategy of Conflict).
Uwe Matzat – Complexiteit: Schelling/Ising 4
Segregation: background
In many (American) cities, races segregate This has unwanted consequences Why does this happen, and what can we do about it?
Basic hypothesis: this is because people of different kinds don’t like each other
If that would be true, high-tolerance cities would have lower segregation than low-tolerance cities …
… but empirically this does not hold.
Uwe Matzat – Complexiteit: Schelling/Ising 5
Just a rough idea…
New York
Los Angeles
Uwe Matzat – Complexiteit: Schelling/Ising 6
Percentage niet-Westerseallochtonen per stad
Segregatie-index per stad
Uwe Matzat – Complexiteit: Schelling/Ising 7
Algemene ontwikkeling ... wat bevolkingscijfers
Inw W.Allocht. NW.Allocht. T M S1996 15.5 1.3 1.2 0.27 0.23 0.282000 15.9 1.4 1.4 0.31 0.26 0.302005 16.3 1.4 1.7 0.36 0.32 0.332010 16.8 1.5 1.9 0.38 0.35 0.34
(bron: CBS)
Uwe Matzat – Complexiteit: Schelling/Ising 8
Schelling’s segregation model Reds and greens live on a
checkerboard (torus) Each red and green has a
happiness function: happy if enough neighbors of same color, unhappy if not (same for all reds and greens)
At random, one agent is chosen. If agent is unhappy -> agent moves to another place on the board where he is happy
Process repeats until everybody happy, or no movements possible any more
Uwe Matzat – Complexiteit: Schelling/Ising 9
Upcoming …
Main conclusion(s) of a simulation like this
For sure, this model is an abstraction of reality. How or in which direction can/should we extend the model?
Uwe Matzat – Complexiteit: Schelling/Ising 10
Check this out in NetLogo
Netlogo allows uploads of changed models (see e.g. http://www.personal.kent.edu/~mdball/pareto_schelling_mobility.htm)
<check out NetLogo model now>
http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/
Uwe Matzat – Complexiteit: Schelling/Ising 11
Schelling’s conclusion
Harsh preferences are not necessary to create segregation. In other words: ever under ‘mild’ circumstances, segregation can occur
And the simulation shows that segregation also depends on for instance how full the checkerboard is (if crowded, moving is more difficult)
Uwe Matzat – Complexiteit: Schelling/Ising 12
Schelling’s segregation model (repeat) Reds and greens live on a
checkerboard (torus) Each red and green has a
happiness function: happy if enough neighbors of same color, unhappy if not (same for all reds and greens)
At random, one agent is chosen. If agent is unhappy -> agent moves to another place on the board where he is happy
Process repeats until everybody happy, or no movements possible any more
Uwe Matzat – Complexiteit: Schelling/Ising 13
Extending the model
How or in which direction can/should we extend the model?
Uwe Matzat – Complexiteit: Schelling/Ising 14
Kinds of analyses on these models
Run the model for different parameters, save results in data set, do (statistical) analysis on data set. Then derive (testable) predictions
For the mathematically savvy: Markov chain models
Comparisons with empirical segregation data
…
Uwe Matzat – Complexiteit: Schelling/Ising 15
However…
What does it mean if we can create simple local models that seem to mimic observed aggregate behavior?
At best, we can argue that preferences need not play a role. Let’s have a look at some empirical data …
Uwe Matzat – Complexiteit: Schelling/Ising 16
This is a black vs other issue …
Three-quarters of African-Americans live in highly segregated neighborhoods today, whereas 90-100% of other groups experience only moderate levels of segregation.
Massey, Douglas S. and Mary J. Fischer. 2000. “How Segregation Concentrates Poverty.” Ethnic and Racial Studies 23(4): 670-691.
Black White
Hispanic
Asian
…
Uwe Matzat – Complexiteit: Schelling/Ising 17
1992 Detroit Survey on Neighborhood Preference
Als de buurt 20% zwart iswil een derde van de blanken daar liever niet leven
Als de buurt 33% zwart is, wil 60% van de blanken daar niet meer leven, 44% zou zich niet meer comfortabel voelen, and 29%
zou willlen gaan zoeken om te verhuizen
Als de buurt 50% zwart is: dit is niet acceptabel meer voor bijna alle blanken,
op een kleine minderheid
Uwe Matzat – Complexiteit: Schelling/Ising 18
1992 Detroit Survey on Neighborhood Preference
For African-Americans: The most popular choice is a neighborhood that is half black
and half white. 87% willing to live in a neighborhood that is 20% black.
Uwe Matzat – Complexiteit: Schelling/Ising 19
Gevolg: een kettingreactie
In een buurt met 20% zwarten, krijg je minder of geen instroom van blanken meer, en juist wel van zwarten.
Nu wordt het bijvoorbeeld 70% blank en 30% zwart. Een deel van de blanken begint hun huis te verkopen en verhuist
De buurt wordt 50-50 en zwarten gaan niet meer weg maar er komen er wel bij (voor hen is dit ideaal), terwijl blanken vertrekken
zwarte buurt (zie Amerika in de jaren 80 en 90)
Uwe Matzat – Complexiteit: Schelling/Ising 20
Wisselwerking tussen empirie en simulatie
Uwe Matzat – Complexiteit: Schelling/Ising 21
Eenvoudige aannames op micro-niveau leiden tot “verrassend” gedrag op macro-niveau
Bijv: milde preferenties over segregatie leiden toch tot segregatie
“complexity light”
Uwe Matzat – Complexiteit: Schelling/Ising 22
There is plenty more where this came from …
“Wealth distribution” (Pareto’s law) Traffic simulation Crowd panic Flocking birds / fish Ant movements … and many others (including Ising)
Uwe Matzat – Complexiteit: Schelling/Ising 23
This is Ising-like, but with …
agents moving instead of switching or flipping a binary operator for the state of the agent local interaction, but agents can see the aggregate …
As in Ising, the Schelling model shows that simple (quasi-)local interaction can lead to surprisingly complex aggregate behavior. The link between the models is not perfect though.
Uwe Matzat – Complexiteit: Schelling/Ising 24
Same model (almost), different questions
“The goal of statistical physics is to not to predict all of these detailed motions but only to calculate certain average properties of these motions, for example, how many spins on average are pointing up, what is the mean energy etc.”
In social science also, or rather: process / speed of segregation (asymptotic results don’t count) what can be done to overcome segregation?