Department of Political Science, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2011 Apr 13;6(4):e18545. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0018545.
Suppressing damaging aggregate behaviors such as insurgency, terrorism, and financial panics are important tasks of the state. Each outcome of these aggregate behaviors is an emergent property of a system in which each individual's action depends on a subset of others' actions, given by each individual's network of interactions. Yet there are few explicit comparisons of strategies for suppression, and none that fully incorporate the interdependence of individual behavior.
Here I show that suppression tactics that do not require the removal of individuals from networks of interactions are nearly always more effective than those that do. I find using simulation analysis of a general model of interdependent behavior that the degree to which such less disruptive suppression tactics are superior to more disruptive ones increases in the propensity of individuals to engage in the behavior in question.
Thus, hearts-and-minds approaches are generally more effective than force in counterterrorism and counterinsurgency, and partial insurance is usually a better tactic than gag rules in quelling financial panics. Differences between suppression tactics are greater when individual incentives to support terrorist or insurgent groups, or susceptibilities to financial panic, are higher. These conclusions have utility for policy-makers seeking to end bloody conflicts and prevent financial panics. As the model also applies to mass protest, its conclusions provide insight as well into the likely effects of different suppression strategies undertaken by authoritarian regimes seeking to hold on to power in the face of mass movements seeking to end them.
抑制破坏性的群体行为，如叛乱、恐怖主义和金融危机，是国家的重要任务。这些群体行为的每一个结果都是系统涌现的属性，其中每个个体的行为取决于其他人行为的子集，这些行为由个体的相互作用网络决定。然而，几乎没有对抑制策略的明确比较，也没有完全纳入个体行为的相互依存性。
在这里，我表明，不需要将个体从相互作用网络中移除的抑制策略几乎总是比那些需要移除个体的策略更有效。我发现，通过对相互依存行为的一般模型的模拟分析，这种破坏性较小的抑制策略相对于更具破坏性的策略的优越性程度，随着个体参与所讨论行为的倾向的增加而增加。
因此，在反恐和反叛乱方面，攻心战术通常比武力更有效，在遏制金融危机方面，部分保险通常比禁令更有效。当个人支持恐怖主义或叛乱团体的动机或易受金融危机影响的程度较高时，抑制策略之间的差异就会更大。这些结论对于寻求结束血腥冲突和防止金融危机的政策制定者具有实用价值。由于该模型也适用于大规模抗议活动，因此其结论还为面对寻求结束它们的大规模运动的威权政权采取的不同抑制策略的可能效果提供了见解。
