Sustainable Altruism: Simulating the Future of Prosociality and Peacebuilding—A Conceptual Review-Journal of Sustainability Research-CSCIED科技核心评价数据库-手机版

Sustainable Altruism: Simulating the Future of Prosociality and Peacebuilding—A Conceptual Review

Sustainable Altruism: Simulating the Future of Prosociality and Peacebuilding—A Conceptual Review

ES评分 0 浏览量：390 下载量：0

DOI	10.20900/jsr20250033
刊名	Journal of Sustainability Research JSR
年，卷(期)	2025, 7(2)
作者	F. LeRon Shults*,Justin E. Lane,Michael Gantley,Katherine O’Lone,
作者单位	Institute for Global Development and Social Planning, University of Agder, Universitetsveien 25, Kristiansand 4630, Norway ; CulturePulse, Inc., 131 Continental Drive, Suite 305, Newark, DE 19713, United States ; School of Social Sciences, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK ;
Abstract	In this article, we argue for the potential value of participatory multi-agent artificial intelligence (MAAI) modeling for addressing the pragmatic challenge of promoting a sustainable altruism among individuals and groups that will enable us to find pathways of collective action that lead toward more peaceful coexistence. Along the way, we note that this approach to modeling also addresses the scientific challenge within computer science and social simulation of creating more psychologically realistic artificial agents whose interactions occur in more realistic social networks. We identify some of the evolved cognitive and coalitional biases that make it so difficult to achieve an equilibrium of sustainable altruism in contemporary human societies, describe some of the innovative ways in which recent advances in MAAI approaches to psychological and cultural modeling open up new opportunities for simulating solutions to these challenges, and address some of the ethical issues associated with using modeling and simulating methods to help us proactively navigate the Anthropocene.
KeyWord	sustainability; altruism; prosociality; social simulation; Anthropocene; multi-agent artificial intelligence; computer modeling; ethics
基金项目
页码	-

参考文献
相关文献

1.McNeill JR, Engelke P. The Great Acceleration: An Environmental History of the Anthropocene since 1945. Cambridge (UK): Belknap Press of Harvard University Press; 2016.

2.Steffen W, Rockström J, Richardson K, Lenton TM, Folke C, Liverman D, et al. Trajectories of the Earth System in the Anthropocene. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018;115(33):8252-9.

3.Cork S, Peterson GD, Janssen MA, Anderies JM, Elmqvist T, DeClerck F, et al. Exploring Alternative Futures in the Anthropocene. Annu Rev Environ Resour. 2023;48(1):25-54.

4.Ellis EC. The Anthropocene condition: evolving through social–ecological transformations. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci. 2024;379(1893):20220255.

5.Lindahl T, Schill C, Lindahl J, Moore JC, Schlüter M, Biggs R, et al. Titanic lessons for Spaceship Earth to account for human behavior in institutional design. Npj Clim Action. 2024;3(1):56.

6.Beckage B, Lacasse K, Winter JM, Metson GS, Orians CM, Whitney CK, et al. Linking models of human behaviour and climate alters projected climate change. Nat Clim Change. 2018;8(1):79.

7.BenDor TK, Scheffran J. Agent-Based Modeling of Environmental Conflict and Cooperation. Boca Raton (US): CRC Press; 2018.

8.Bury TM, Bauch CT, Anand M. Charting pathways to climate change mitigation in a coupled socio-climate model. PLoS Comput Biol. 2019;15(6):e1007000.

9.Shults FL, Wildman WJ, Toft MD, Danielson A. Artificial Societies in the Anthropocene: Challenges and Opportunities for Modeling Climate, Conflict, and Cooperation. Proc Winter Simul Conf. 2021;1-12. doi: 10.1109/WSC52266.2021.9715391

10.Gilbert N, Ahrweiler P, Barbrook-Johnson P, Narasimhan KP, Wilkinson H. Computational Modelling of Public Policy. J Artif Soc Soc Simul. 2018;21(1):1-19.

11.Hofman JM, Sharma A, Watts DJ, Stewart BM, Mislove A, Airoldi EM. Integrating explanation and prediction in computational social science. Nature. 2021;595(7866):181-8.

12.Lazer DM, Pentland A, Watts DJ, Aral S, Athey S, Contractor N, et al. Computational social science: Obstacles and opportunities. Science. 2020;369(6507):1060-2.

13.Lane J. Method, theory, and multi-agent artificial intelligence: Creating computer models of complex social interactions. J Cogn Sci Relig. 2013;1(2):161-80.

14.United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). 2023/2024 UN Human Development Report - Breaking the gridlock: Reimaging cooperation in a polarized world. 2024. Available from: https://hdr.undp.org/system/files/documents/global-report-document/hdr2023-24reporten.pdf. Accessed on 01 May 2025.

15.Shults FL. Simulation, Science, and Stakeholders: Challenges and Opportunities for Modelling Solutions to Societal Problems. Complexity. 2023;2023:1375004.

16.Shults FL. Gilles Deleuze and the Atheist Machine: The Achievement of Philosophy. Edinburgh (UK): Edinburgh University Press; 2024.

17.Borghesi S. Intergenerational altruism and sustainable development. 1999. Available from: https://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/725/1999_EUI%20WP_ECO_040.pdf. Accessed on 01 May 2025.

18.Halali E, Perez O. Binding the Future: Far-looking altruism boosts long-term sustainability. Available from: https://scholar.archive.org/work/pc7eiloypffsfhc6j34cylrw7m/access/wayback/https://files.osf.io/v1/resources/9szky/providers/osfstorage/65840165034461161468f4f3. Accessed on 01 May 2025.

19.Bréchet T, Lambrecht S. Altruism and sustainability: a framework for analysis. 2004. Available from: https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=fc19b1ccf0f9bf61f9bcfaaaeca1c93373b44213. Accessed on 01 May 2025.

20.De Dominicis S, Schultz PW, Bonaiuto M. Protecting the environment for self-interested reasons: Altruism is not the only pathway to sustainability. Front Psychol. 2017;8:1065.

21.Fossas-Tenas A, Ibelings BW, Kasparian J, Krishnakumar J, Laurent-Lucchetti J. Paradoxical effects of altruism on efforts to mitigate climate change. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1):13072.

22.Schäpke N, Rauschmayer F. Going beyond efficiency: including altruistic motives in behavioral models for sustainability transitions to address sufficiency. Sustain Sci Pract Policy. 2014;10(1):29-44.

23.de Morais LHL, Pinto DC, Cruz-Jesus F. Circular economy engagement: Altruism, status, and cultural orientation as drivers for sustainable consumption. Sustain Prod Consum. 2021;27:523-33.

24.Romeiro AR. Sustainable development and institutional change: the role of altruistic behavior. Texto Para Discussão. 2000. Available from: http://www.eco.unicamp.br/images/arquivos/artigos/1727/texto97.pdf. Accessed on 01 May 2025.

25.Schill C, Schlüter M, Lindahl T, Moore JC, Orach K, Wijermans N, et al. A more dynamic understanding of human behaviour for the Anthropocene. Nat Sustain. 2019;2(12):1075-82.

26.Tapia-Fonllem C, Corral-Verdugo V, Fraijo-Sing B, Durón-Ramos MF. Assessing sustainable behavior and its correlates: A measure of pro-ecological, frugal, altruistic and equitable actions. Sustainability. 2013;5(2):711-23.

27.Tripathi RC, Singh S. Psychosocial Pathways Towards a Sustainable Society: The Role of Greed, Altruism and Social Capital. Psychol Dev Soc. 2017;29(2):200-20.

28.Dawkins R. The Selfish Gene: 30th Anniversary Edition. 30th ed. Oxford (UK): Oxford University Press; 2006.

29.Harman O. A history of the altruism–morality debate in biology. Behaviour. 2014;151(2–3):147-65.

30.Trivers RL. The evolution of reciprocal altruism. Q Rev Biol. 1971;46(1):35-57.

31.Kurzban R, Burton-Chellew MN, West SA. The Evolution of Altruism in Humans. Annu Rev Psychol. 2015;66(1):575-99.

32.Lane JE, Shults FL, Wildman WJ. A potential explanation for self-radicalisation. Behav Brain Sci. 2018;41.

33.Lane J. Cultural Cybernetics of Religion: Computation and Information Transmission in Religion. In: The Routledge Handbook of Evolutionary Approaches to Religion. London (UK): Routledge; 2022. p. 409-25.

34.Malti T, Speidel R. Prosocial cascades: Understanding and nurturing the potential for positive developmental trajectories. Adv Child Dev Behav. 2023;64:189-216.

35.Homme GA, Shults FL. The Shaping of the Self: Patterns and Pathways in Bowlby, Kohut, and Bowen. Aust N Z J Fam Ther. 2020;41(4):367-80.

36.Malti T, Speidel R. Development of prosociality and the effects of adversity. Nat Rev Psychol. 2024;1-12.

37.Purzycki BG, Apicella C, Atkinson QD, Cohen E, McNamara RA, Willard AK, et al. Moralistic gods, supernatural punishment and the expansion of human sociality. Nature. 2016;530:327-30.

38.Bourrat P, Atkinson QD, Dunbar RIM. Supernatural punishment and individual social compliance across cultures. Relig Brain Behav. 2011;1(2):119-34.

39.Fehr E, Gächter S. Altruistic punishment in humans. Nature. 2002;415(6868):137-40.

40.Krasnow MM, Delton AW, Cosmides L, Tooby J. Group Cooperation without Group Selection: Modest Punishment Can Recruit Much Cooperation. PLoS One. 2015;10(4):e0124561.

41.Rusch H. The evolutionary interplay of intergroup conflict and altruism in humans: a review of parochial altruism theory and prospects for its extension. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci. 2014;281(1794):20141539.

42.Abbink K, Brandts J, Herrmann B, Orzen H. Parochial altruism in inter-group conflicts. Econ Lett. 2012;117(1):45-8.

43.Choi JK, Bowles S. The coevolution of parochial altruism and war. Science. 2007;318(5850):636-40.

44.Sheikh H, Atran S, Ginges J, Wilson L, Obeid N, Davis R. The Devoted Actor as Parochial Altruist: Sectarian Morality, Identity Fusion, and Support for Costly Sacrifices. Cliodynamics. 2014;5(1):23-40.

45.Bernhard H, Fischbacher U, Fehr E. Parochial altruism in humans. Nature. 2006;442(7105):912-5.

46.Kustov A. Borders of Compassion: Immigration Preferences and Parochial Altruism. Comp Polit Stud. 2021;54(3–4):445-81.

47.Epstein RA. Altruism: Universal and Selective. Soc Serv Rev. 1993;67(3):388-405.

48.Zwick M, Fletcher JA. Levels of Altruism. Biol Theory. 2014;9(1):100-7.

49.Ma HK. The development of altruism with special reference to human relationships: A 10-stage theory. Front Public Health. 2017;5:271.

50.Österblom H, Paasche Ø. Earth altruism. One Earth. 2021;4(10):1386-97.

51.Piech RM, Strelchuk D, Knights J, Hjälmheden JV, Olofsson JK, Aspell JE. People with higher interoceptive sensitivity are more altruistic, but improving interoception does not increase altruism. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):15652.

52.Liu JH, Choi SY, Lee IC, Leung AK, Lee M, Lin MH, et al. Behavioral evidence for global consciousness transcending national parochialism. Sci Rep. 2023;13(1):21413.

53.Tsang J-A, Al-Kire RL, Ratchford JL. Prosociality and religion. Curr Opin Psychol. 2021;40:67–72.

54.Galen L, Sharp M, McNulty A. Nonreligious Group Factors Versus Religious Belief in the Prediction of Prosociality. Soc Indic Res. 2015;122(2):411–432.

55.Zuckerman P. Society without God: What the Least Religious Nations Can Tell Us About Contentment. New York (US): NYU Press; 2010.

56.Shults FL. Practicing Safe Sects: Religious Reproduction in Scientific and Philosophical Perspective. Leiden: Brill Academic; 2018.

57.Paul G. The Chronic Dependence of Popular Religiosity upon Dysfunctional Psychosociological Conditions. Evol Psychol. 2009;7(3):398–441.

58.Norris P, Inglehart R. Sacred and Secular: Religion and Politics Worldwide, 2nd edition. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press; 2011.

59.Hardin G. DISCRIMINATING ALTRUISMS. Zygon®. 1982;17(2):163–186.

60.Reinhardt L, Whitehouse H. Why care for humanity? R Soc Open Sci. 2024;11(4):231632.

61.Braver SL, Barnett B. Effects of modeling on cooperation in a Prisoner’s Dilemma game. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1976;33(2):161.

62.Alexander JM. Evolutionary game theory. 2023. Available: https://www.cambridge.org/core. Accessed on 02 Jan 2025.

63.Ibrahim AM. The conditional defector strategies can violate the most crucial supporting mechanisms of cooperation. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1):15157.

64.Greenberg J, et al. Evidence for Terror Management Theory II: The Effects of Mortality Salience on Reactions to Those Who Threaten or Bolster the Cultural Worldview. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1990;58(2):308–318.

65.Mcgregor HA, et al. Terror Management and Aggression: Evidence That Mortality Salience Motivates Aggression Against Worldview-Threatening Others. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1998;74(3):590–605.

66.Bonin K, Lane JE. Identity fusion, devoted actor theory, and extremism. In: Routledge Handbook of Evolution and Religion. New York (US): Routledge; 2022.

67.Hodder I. Simulation studies in archaeology. In: New directions in archaeology. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press; 1978.

68.Doran J, Palmer M, Gilbert N, Mellars P. The EOS project: Modelling Upper Palaeolithic social change. In: Gilbert N, Doran J, eds. Simulating Societies: The Computer Simulation of Social Phenomena. London (UK): UCL Press; 1994:195–221.

69.Schelling TC. Dynamic models of segregation. J Math Sociol. 1971;1(2):143–186.

70.McNamara JM. Towards a richer evolutionary game theory. J R Soc Interface. 2013;10(88):20130544.

71.Jager W. Enhancing the realism of simulation (EROS): On implementing and developing psychological theory in social simulation. J Artif Soc Soc Simul. 2017;20(3). doi: 10.18564/jasss.3522

72.Hofstede GJ, Frantz C, Hoey J, Scholz G, Schroder T. Artificial Sociality Manifesto. Rev Artif Soc Soc Simul. 2021. Available: https://rofasss.org/2021/04/08/artsocmanif/. Accessed on 05 Jan 2025.

73.Tzafestas E. Modeling Meta-Cultures. Available: http://www.softlab.ece.ntua.gr/~brensham/Publications/ESSA2011.pdf. Accessed on 05 Jan 2025.

74.Gotts NM, et al. Agent-based modelling of socio-ecological systems: Models, projects and ontologies. Ecol Complex. 2019;40:100728.

75.Schaat S, Jager W, Dickert S. Psychologically plausible models in agent-based simulations of sustainable behavior. In: Agent-Based Modeling of Sustainable Behaviors. Cham (Switzerland): Springer; 2017; pp. 1–25.

76.Mitsopoulos K, et al. Psychologically-valid generative agents: A novel approach to agent-based modeling in social sciences. In: Proceedings of the AAAI Symposium Series. 2023:340–348. Available: https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/AAAI-SS/article/view/27698. Accessed on 05 Jan 2025.

77.Wijermans N, Scholz G, Neumann M, Paolillo R, Templeton A. Social identity modelling. JASSS. 2023;26(3):15.

78.Costantini A, Scalco A, Sartori R, Tur EM, Ceschi A. Theories for computing prosocial behavior. Nonlinear Dyn Psychol Life Sci. 2019;23:297–313.

79.Sotnik G, Shannon T, Wakeland W. A new agent-based model offers insight into population-wide adoption of prosocial common-pool behavior. J Math Sociol. 2023;47(4):311–338.

80.Kerkmann AM, Cramer S, Rothe J. Altruism in coalition formation games. Ann Math Artif Intell. 2024;92(3):601–629.

81.Crabtree SA, Wren CD, Dixit A, Levin SA. Influential individuals can promote prosocial practices in heterogeneous societies: a mathematical and agent-based model. PNAS Nexus. 2024;3(7):224.

82.Wu X, Ren X, Liu C, Zhang H. The motive cocktail in altruistic behaviors. Nat Comput Sci. 2024;4(9):659-676.

83.Tversky A, Kahneman D. Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science. 1974;185(4157):1124–1131.

84.Kahneman D. Thinking, Fast and Slow, Reprint edition. New York (US): Farrar, Straus and Giroux; 2013.

85.Ostrom E, Burger J, Field CB, Norgaard RB, Policansky D. Revisiting the Commons: Local Lessons, Global Challenges. Science. 1999;284(5412):278–282.

86.Ostrom E. A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science. 2009;325(5939):419–422.

87.Ostrom E. Collective action and the evolution of social norms. J Econ Perspect. 2000;14(3):137–158.

88.Ostrom E. Do institutions for collective action evolve? J Bioeconomics. 2014;16(1):3–30.

89.Kliemt H. Tayloring Game Theory the Ostrom Way. Good Soc. 2011;20(1):37–49.

90.Frischmann BM, Marciano A, Ramello GB. Retrospectives: Tragedy of the commons after 50 years. J Econ Perspect. 2019;33(4):211–228.

91.Wilson DS, Philip MM, MacDonald IF, Atkins PW, Kniffin KM. Core design principles for nurturing organization-level selection. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):13989.

92.Diallo S, Wildman WJ, Shults FL, Tolk A, eds. Human Simulation: Perspectives, Insights, and Applications. Berlin (Germany): Springer; 2019.

93.Shults FL. Progress in simulating human geography: Assemblage theory and the practice of multi-agent artificial intelligence modeling. Prog Hum Geogr. 2022;46(1):108-120.

94.Shults FL, Lane JE, Diallo S, Lynch C, Wildman WJ, Gore R. Modeling Terror Management Theory: Computer Simulations of the Impact of Mortality Salience on Religiosity. Relig Brain Behav. 2018;8(1):77–100.

95.Gore R, Lemos C, Shults FL, Wildman WJ. Forecasting changes in religiosity and existential security with an agent-based model. J Artif Soc Soc Simul. 2018;21:1–31.

96.Shults FL, Gore R, Wildman WJ, Lynch C, Lane JE, Toft M. A Generative Model of the Mutual Escalation of Anxiety Between Religious Groups. J Artif Soc Soc Simul. 2018;21(4):1-25.

97.Shults FL, Wildman WJ, Diallo S, Puga-Gonzalez I, Voas D. The Artificial Society Analytics Platform. In: Advances in Social Simulation. Cham (Switzerland): Springer; 2020.

98.Galen L, Gore R, Shults FL. Modeling the Effects of Religious Belief and Affiliation on Prosociality. Secul Nonreligion. 2021;10(1).

99.Cragun R, McCaffree K, Puga-Gonzalez I, Wildman W, Shults FL. Religious exiting and social networks: computer simulations of religious/secular pluralism. Secul Nonreligion. 2021;10(1).

100.Puga-Gonzalez I, Shults FL, Gore R, Talmont-Kaminski K. An agent-based model of prosocial equilibrium: Simulating the role of religiously motivated behavior in the formation and maintenance of large-scale societies. In: Advances in Social Simulation. Cham (Switzerland): Springer; 2023.

101.Lane JE, Shults FL. Cognition, Culture, and Social Simulation. J Cogn Cult. 2018;18:451–461.

102.Shults FL. Simulating theory and society: How multi-agent artificial intelligence modeling contributes to renewal and critique in social theory. Theor Soc. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11186-025-09606-6. Accessed on 14 Feb 2025.

103.Ahrweiler P, Gilbert N, Pyka A. Joining complexity science and social simulation for innovation policy: agent-based modelling using the SKIN platform. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge Scholars Publishing; 2016.

104.Mehryar S, Sliuzas R, Sharifi A, Reckien D, van Maarseveen M. A structured participatory method to support policy option analysis in a social-ecological system. J Environ Manage. 2017;197:360–372.

105.Shults FL, Wildman WJ. Human Simulation and Sustainability: Ontological, Epistemological, and Ethical Reflections. Sustainability. 2020;12(23):10039.

106.Shults FL, Lane JE, O’Lone K. Simulating Sustainable Societies: Uncertainty, Complexity and Multi-Agent Artificial Intelligence Modelling. UNDP 2024 Human Development Report Background Paper. 2024. Available online: https://hdr.undp.org/system/files/documents/background-paper-document/2023flshultsjelanesimulatingsustainablesocieties.pdf. Accessed on 01 May 2025.

107.O’Lone K, Gantley M, Lane JE, Shults FL. Employing Multi-Agent AI to Model Conflict and Cooperation in Northern Ireland. N Engl J Public Policy. 2024. Available: https://scholarworks.umb.edu/nejpp/vol36/iss1/6/. Accessed on 06 Sep 2024.

108.Sheikh H, Ginges J, Coman A, Atran S. Religion, group threat and sacred values. Judgment Decis Making. 2012;7(2):110–118.

109.Gilbert D. The UN Hired an AI Company to Untangle the Israeli-Palestinian Crisis. WIRED; 2023. Available: https://www.wired.com/story/culturepulse-ai-israeli-palestinian-crisis/. Accessed on 26 March 2024.

110.UNDP Innovation. Global Innovation Series | Harnessing AI for Social Cohesion in Bosnia & Herzegovina. 2024 Aug 15. Available: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogym2xJTwEc. Accessed on 06 Jan 2025.

111.Shults FL, Wildman WJ. Ethics, Computer Simulation, and the Future of Humanity. In: Diallo SY, Wildman WJ, Shults FL, Tolk A, eds. Human Simulation: Perspectives, Insights, and Applications. Cham (Switzerland): Springer International Publishing; 2019; p. 21–40.

112.Diallo SY, Shults FL, Wildman WJ. Minding morality: ethical artificial societies for public policy modeling. Ai Soc. 2021;36(1):49–57.

113.Shults FL, Wildman WJ, Dignum V. The ethics of computer modeling and simulation. In: 2018 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC). New York (US): IEEE; 2018; p. 4069–4083.

114.Shults FL, Wildman WJ. Artificial Social Ethics: Simulating Culture, Conflict, and Cooperation. Proc SpringSim 2020 Conf. 2020:1–10.

引用本文

F. LeRon Shults*,Justin E. Lane,Michael Gantley,Katherine O’Lone. Sustainable Altruism: Simulating the Future of Prosociality and Peacebuilding—A Conceptual Review, Journal of Sustainability Research. 2025; 7; (2). https://doi.org/10.20900/jsr20250033.

文献评论

相关学者

相关机构