Modelling the Process of Market Emergence
We have run the set-up for 73 periods. What we get is not too dissimilar to what we observe. Employment, for example, does not decrease steadily through the simulation. It does not show any dramatic changes at all although it has not been stable reflecting changes in the demand for the labour force following variations in production activities over the whole early period of simulation. The time path of employment is given in figure 2.
Figure 2: Total Employment
In production we observed a collapse after an initial surge (due probably to initial simulation conditions) but starting from date 7 production trends varied from sector to sector. The production of corn remained remarkably stable because corn has at least one relatively stable source of demand in the form of households. The production of both spades and iron shows considerable oscillation but it develops accordingly with the picture of unit sales which demonstrates certain cyclical pattern. Series for production is shown in figure 3 and for unit sales in figure 4.
Figure 3: Sectorial Production
Total inter-enterprise debt increased dramatically over the course of the simulation run. The time series is reproduced here in figure 5. Though it lacks the slight upward trend of Figure 1, it is not badly out of line with what we observe.
Figure 5: Debts
Our experience in developing simulation set-ups is the most important effort in developing the representation of the agents' modelling activities. The results reported here, however, are based on the assumption that the agents have an extremely limited modelling language which did not enable them to specialize and generalize their models as appropriate. Two examples of agent's models are given in table 2 and table 3. The symbols beginning with `?' are symbolic variables. In this case they take numerical values but the values could be (and in other settings usually are) non-numerical symbols, lists or logical clauses. The first of these models simply says that if the last order value from farm-5 was larger than the current order value, then predict an increased value of sales. Such a model would imply that the input ordered from farm-5 is a constraint on the output of farm-13. Purchasing more from farm-5 would therefore allow greater sales by farm-13. The second model makes the same statement about the relationship between the cash holdings of farm-13 and its orders from farm-5. In this case, the relationships are well confirmed since they have been observed for three periods.
Table 2: The models of farm-13 at period 19 (a)
Table 3: The models of farm-13 at period 19 (a)
Generated with CERN WebMaker