Difference between stag hunt and prisoner's dilemma
Answers
In game theory, the stag hunt is a game that describes a conflict between safety and social cooperation. Other names for it or its variants include "assurance game", "coordination game", and "trust dilemma". Jean-Jacques Rousseau described a situation in which two individuals go out on a hunt. Each can individually choose to hunt a stag or hunt a hare. Each player must choose an action without knowing the choice of the other. If an individual hunts a stag, they must have the cooperation of their partner in order to succeed. An individual can get a hare by himself, but a hare is worth less than a stag. This has been taken to be a useful analogy for social cooperation, such as international agreements on climate change.[1]We have already simplified the situation drastically in this description, so it is easy to model.
Consider first the now-familiar Prisoner’s Dilemma, which is here reproduced so we can
compare it with the second model more easily. Recall that this game involves two actors, A
and B, who must decide whether they want to cooperate with each other or not. Here, one
can cooperate, C, by not building the weapon, or defect, D, by building it. There are four
possible outcomes: hD; Di (both build weapons; an arms race), hC; Di (only B builds the
weapon; defeat for A and victory for B), hD; Ci (only A builds the weapon; victory for A
and defeat for B), and hC; Ci (neither builds the weapon; status quo).
We now need to decide on the preferences the actors have over these four outcomes.
Since the disputed issue is assumed to be very important and the unilateral possession of
the weapon guarantees that it will be resolved in the possessor’s favor, each actor most
prefers to be the one who has the weapon. Conversely, the worst possible outcome is to be
forced to concede the issue because your opponent has the weapon but you do not. In other