Tag: Cooperation

Russian Doll model of public safety

Some goods are best produced privately, and some perform better in the public goods market. Production in the former is enhanced by the division of labor, whereas in the latter, crowdsourcing is vital. The recent high-profile apprehension of a person of interest in the death of a local CEO is illustrative.

Let’s break down the Russian Dolls. The largest doll is the level of law enforcement, which is officially put in place by the government and funded through taxation. These forces fall under territorial boundaries. Since the attack against the healthcare executive took place on the sidewalk in front of the Hilton in Manhattan, the NYPD is in charge of the case.

These uniformed professionals went to work and quickly found the getaway route the suspected assailant took leaving the scene. He fled on foot and then jumped on an e-bike. He went through Central Park and ended up at a bus station. The officers were fortunate to find out the suspect had spent the night at a local youth hostel (Time).

A senior law enforcement official is quoted as telling the Times that the person of interest photographed used a fake New Jersey identification to book a room at a hostel, checking in on Nov. 24 after arriving in the city via bus. He then checked out of the hostel on Nov. 29, before checking back in the next day.

The real breakthrough from this local contact was a photo of the normally masked man who had been snapped in the hostel lobby. He showed his features at the friendly receptionist’s request. A citizen can contribute to an investigation simply by following the rules of their employment.

As the manhunt continued into other states, the following levels of Russian Dolls were engaged. Even though the NYPD remained in charge of the official investigation, it depended upon the work and resources of many other branches across state lines. These details remained in their reporting realm. While the media activated public interest in the case, they kept the general public interested in the pursuit.

This brings us to the McDonald’s worker who noticed a similar-looking young man in his restaurant. He could have looked the other way. Now we are down to the last Russian doll. Not everyone at this level will engage. How many others saw the perp, became suspicious, and stayed quiet? There’s a potential cost of reporting, and not everyone is willing to take the risk.

Fortunately, the greater society doesn’t need everyone to report. Only one person needs to step up. This is not pay-by-the-hour employment; it is a job one does under the influence of a shared vision when the duty shows up on the other side of your counter at McDonald’s.

Public goods respond well to this blended model of paid personnel in conjunction with a more significant population of people who follow the norms, like the youth hostel receptionist, and those willing to take risks and report. But I do hope the McDonald’s worker gets a bonus.

Boettke sets up the situation

There was a presumption toward voluntarism in human affairs, but in recognition that our nature is divided between a cooperative nature and an opportunistic nature we must figure out a way to curb our opportunistic side if we hope to realize the fruits of our cooperative side. While our cooperative nature is reflected in our propensity to truck, barter and exchange (which no other species actually exhibits), our opportunistic side is revealed in the warring nature witnessed throughout human history. Political economy solved the puzzle by suggesting that we could sacrifice in a small way the presumption of voluntarism in order to create a government which will curb our opportunistic side and enable our cooperative side to flourish. Thus was born the argument for limited, but effective, government that was the core of classical liberal thought from John Locke, David Hume and Adam Smith to more contemporary writers such as Frank Knight, Ludwig von Mises, F.A. Hayek, Milton Friedman and James Buchanan.

Cooperation, Altruism and Moral Judgement

People often conflate cooperation with doing good or what is right. The thought goes that is everyone just gets along and cooperates, than it’s a win for everyone. And getting along is exactly what those nice churchy people do when they reach out into the community with a helping hand to those in need. Out of a sense of duty to our fellow person, an altruist will act to augment the welfare of others.

And this is true. But there are other examples of cooperation that have not a thing to do with do-gooders in their Sunday best.

We’ve been reading David Skarbek’s book The Puzzle of Prison Order. It’s a thoughtful book of comparative analysis. By looking at various prisons, both their physical structures and their management structures, the author elucidates the emergence of a variety of levels of self-governence throughout the convict community. In South America, prisoners maybe responsible for virtually all necessities behind their wardens’ wall. While in Norway the prisoner to guard ratio is virtually one-on-one creating little need for the captive take on any duties.

From the case studies it is clear that where few services are provided, prisoners organize to allocate housing, maintain safety standards, and supplement the meager amount of food provided to them.

In San Pedro prison, governance emerges in the political realm (in the form of housing associations), in the commercial realm (markets and exchange with the outside world), and in civil society (as with the parents association).

Whereas in Bolivia the time invested by the inmates is extensive, in a small Californian prison for the gay and trans population only one position was necessary to be the intermediary between the prison population and the guards. A House Mouse takes on the duties of go between with the prison staff. Skarbek’s examination of the various spontaneous arrangement throws light on the various levels of investments demanded of the convicts. Depending on the need for governance, individuals rise to the occasion and donate their labor hours to the endeavor (one might say the socially necessary amount of labor hours, but that’s for another post).

But wait. It’s easy to forget that these are criminals who have been removed from civil society. Their emerging cooperation is forced upon them as a result of immoral behavior against their countrymen and women. They are not do-gooders. They are not altruists- at least not to the outside. Altruism delivered through self-organization is to noone’s benefit but them and theirs. And the moral behavior is dictated by their own set of rules.

Cooperation is a descriptor for a type of societal action. It’s the act of foregoing a bit of freedom to be apart of a group. Cooperation is a technique to attain an aim for an ingroup while withholding it from an outgroup. Cooperation has no moral compass. Resulting outcomes can either be good or bad depending on which wall surrounds you.

It is not equivalent to altruism. Altruism is a gift for which no duty or repayment is required.