In the heart of Bihar, a village gathers around a shared well. Each family must choose -- contribute to its upkeep, or let others bear the cost. The well sustains all, but only if all sustain the well.
Can a group of strangers cooperate for the common good, or will self-interest prevail? Experience the free-rider problem firsthand.
Each round, you and 4 AI players each receive 100 tokens. Decide how many to contribute to a shared pot. The pot is multiplied by 1.6x then split equally among all 5 players. Keep what you don't contribute.
How many of your 100 tokens will you put in the public pot? ? The Multiplier: All contributions are pooled and multiplied by 1.6, then split 5 ways. If everyone puts in 100, each gets back 160. But if only you contribute 100 and others contribute 0, you get back only 32 while keeping nothing.
10 rounds of the Public Good Game are complete. Here are the results.
Arjun consistently contributed less than the group average while still receiving an equal share of the multiplied pot. This is the free-rider problem -- individuals benefit from public goods without paying their fair share.
The Nash equilibrium in this game is for everyone to contribute 0 tokens -- no individual can gain by contributing more if others don't. Yet this leads to the worst collective outcome.
The Pareto optimal outcome is for everyone to contribute 100 tokens. Each player would earn 160 tokens per round (1,600 total) instead of just 100. Cooperation beats defection -- if everyone does it.
Taxes, vaccination, climate action, open-source software -- all public goods face this exact tension between individual self-interest and collective welfare.