Expected Utility
Sun Tzu anticipated Expected Utility with the advice, “If it does not profit the state, do not deploy your armies. If the objective cannot be seized, do not give battle.” Bueno de Mesquita’s (1981, 1992) “Expected Utility Theory” grew out of the Correlates of War project.
It assumes as a necessary but not a sufficient condition that leaders choose war only when the advice and factors they consider leads them to expect to gain more by war than by pursuing any alternative—that is, they act to maximize their expected utility. The three core assumptions are:· Decision makers are instrumentally rational.5 They can order or rank, but need not be able to rate, their preferences
· Decision makers consider options in terms of probabilities associated with possible outcomes multiplied by utilities associated with those outcomes.
· Decision makers choose the option with the highest expected utility.
The equation for the expected utility of a challenge to the existing policy is:

Where:
E(U)c = expected utility of challenging the policy
Ps = probability of successful challenge
Us = utility of successful challenge
Uf = utility of failed challenge
The equation for the expected utility of not challenging the status quo is:

Where:
E(U)nc = expected utility of not challenging the policy
Pq = probability that the policy will not change
Uq = utility of the policy
Pb = probability that the policy will change with positive utility
Ub = utility of a positive policy change
Uw = utility of a negative policy change
The overall expected utility is the difference between the two equations:

If E(U) is greater than 1, it is rational to initiate a war. That is, a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition for starting a war is that the expected utility of victory must be greater than the expected utility of defeat.
De Mesquita does not claim that leaders actually work through these equations to make decisions, any more than, say, a rock calculates how fast it should fall by consulting Newton’s Theory of Gravity. Rather, he claims, the formula predicts how leaders will act regardless of whose advice and what factors they actually consider.De Mesquita initially tested his ideas by using the Correlates of War data for 251 conflicts and crises from 1816 to 1974, limiting his analysis to cases in which the initiator was clear. He incorporated both attitude toward risk and relative power into the formula to determine utility after considerable ingenuity developing ways to estimate each.
Initiators won 75% of their wars. In most cases that they lost, the formula results in a negative utility. That is, the leader made a mistake in choosing war. Of the remaining cases, the expected utility score is so close to zero that it is within the margin of error. None of this should come as a surprise. Most leaders do not go to war lightly, although their reasons for accepting or avoiding the risk and the amount of risk they can tolerate may vary considerably.
More on the topic Expected Utility:
- Prospect Theory
- C Different Meanings of Rationality; Different Solutions to Problems
- Preliminaries
- DEMOCRACY AND CONFLICT WITHIN STATES
- Exercises
- INTRODUCTION
- B The Hypothesis in Science Education
- Clearly, there is no shortage of theories as to the causes, processes, outcomes and management of conflict.
- Distributional Conflict and Economic Growth in a Simple Society
- REVIEW OF FORENSIC ASSESSMENT INSTRUMENTS