یک بار در یادداشتی به حسن کریمی اشاره کرده بودم. دوستی که سالهاست از او دورادور خبر دارم، جزء دوستانی که ترک وطن کرد، احتمالا برای این که فهرست رفتگان مرا همچنان پر و پیمان نگهدارد! چند روز پیش او آمده و برای یکی از یادداشتهای مجازی بودن چنین نظری گذاشته است:
You have pointed out a very interesting and illusive thing. It’s called Prisoner’s Dilemma! I strongly suggest you to read about this in the internet.
Hereby, I just wonder to discuss what I know about the topic, which seems has made you interested. It’s a hot topic in Economics and some great guys have won Nobel Prize for their research on it such as Stiglitz and Akerlof in 1990s and Myerson in 2000s. A kind of summary of the findings is that the level of “effort” in any “agent-principal problem” (which can be applied to any situation where a principal hires an agent to do something and at the same time doesn’t have a full control of the agent’s attempt to accomplish the job) totally depends to the contract hold between the two parties. A well-accepted result is that if you relate the agent’s payment to the quality of the job he does (or share the achieved profits), then he/she may show more effort; good for both parties. So, you may think that they should definitely reach an agreement to enjoy the benefits.
Let’s get out of this abstract world and think of the real world. Actually, this idea has been applied to many different fields, not even in Economics but also in Politics and Sociology. About what you have observed, I mention one general rule and then use what I just said to explain your problem, sort of brain storming!
The general rule: any stylized (not sudden, impulsive) behavior observed from people is based on some rationality, so it’s the best action or reaction that they can show. In fact, any belief that they are stupid, insane, or whatever doesn’t get us to any understanding.
Regarding the observation, a serious barrier for progress and development in Iran is the law, both written and unwritten. The law, which necessarily should be thought as the structure of contacts, has not been formed in way that shares the achieved profits among the agents (Iranians) and the principal (the government). I can give you a lot of evidence to show how much the government interferes in the economy (just as one example, government-owned companies generate about 70% of the total value of industrial production in Iran). I want to say that, in practice, people (as agents) are working for government (as principal) in Iran AND since there isn’t an effective profit sharing rule between people and government, people choose the seemingly worst case. Here, by choosing the worst case, the Prisoner’s Dilemma has come to play some role! They simply choose to work less, and both will worse off. The most exciting part of this argument is that this reaction is rational if you think that both are playing a game against each other.
What’s the solution? Changing the rules by modifying the law. But this not gonna be easy because you need to have wise scholars and elites understanding the importance of such a direction in changing the law and, at the same time, fight against pressure groups benefiting from the existing situation. For example, you need to know that privatization is important and you need to know that it’s not realistic to expect the government (as the principal or the main beneficiary of the existing situation) accomplish it! So, what can we do? My idea is that such dilemmas can always lead us to a dead-end. That’s why we are facing another revolution these days (almost a revolution in each 30-year). The only hope is that achieving some degrees of democracy may help us to get efficient rules in the society because when you share the power with people, then you got to share profits!
I hope I didn’t confused you by using some economic jargon.
عذر میخواهم که ترجمه متن را نگذاشتم، اگر میخواستم چنین کنم باید زمانی صرف میکردم که این روزها در اختیار ندارم. بعد هم معلوم نبود تا چه اندازه از پس کار برآیم. همچنین میخواهم تاکید کنم که بعد هفت سال نوشتن وبلاگ و انتشار نزدیک به هزار یادداشت، چنین نظراتی به آدم میگوید که تلاشهایاش چندان به هدر نرفته است. ممنونم حسن.
Comments (6) 
