On 6/26/07, Owen Densmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
So in the Schelling model of segregation, you
can't predict which neighborhood will become a ghetto, but you can
predict with near-statistical-mechanics-certainty that segregation
will occur. And all with a simple preference behavior.
-- Owen
In other words, this is an explanation that works in some cases but not in
others? And there's no a priori way of discriminating between the occasions
the explanation will work and the times it won't. So how can we consider it
an explanation?
Also, when I did a quick check into the research on segregation and
residential preferences (I found papers from W.A.V. Clarke at UCLA, Farley
at al in Housing Policy Debate, Fossett at Texas A & M), none of them gave
single factor explanations for segregation. There's all these other things
like cost of housing, availability of employment, overt discrimination in
housing and lending markets, all sorts of demographic stuff.
I think the Schelling example illustrates my point: ABMs can suggest an
explanation but it requires real social science research to provide an
explanation.
Robert
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
