Biological Institutions: The Political Science of Animal Cooperation

Erol Akçay, J. Roughgarden, J. Fearon, J. Ferejohn, Barry R. Weingast
{"title":"Biological Institutions: The Political Science of Animal Cooperation","authors":"Erol Akçay, J. Roughgarden, J. Fearon, J. Ferejohn, Barry R. Weingast","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2370952","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Social evolution is one of the most rapidly developing areas in evolutionary biology. A main theme is the emergence of cooperation among organisms, including the factors that impede cooperation. Although animal societies seem to have no formal institutions, such as courts or legislatures, we argue that biology presents many examples where an interaction can properly be thought of as an informal institution, meaning there are evolved norms and structure to the interaction that enable parties to reach mutually beneficial outcomes. These informal institutions are embedded in the natural history of the interaction, in factors such as where and when parties interact, how long and how close they stay together, and so on. Institutional theory thus widens the scope of behavioral ecology by considering not only why animals evolve to choose the strategies they choose, but also asking both why it is that they find themselves in those particular interaction setups and how these particular interactions can be sustained. Institutions frequently enable interacting parties avoid inefficient outcomes and support efficient exchange among agents with conflicting interests. The main thesis of this paper is that the organization of many biological interactions can properly be understood as institutions that enable mutually beneficial outcomes to be achieved relative to an unstructured interaction. To do this, institutions resolve or regulate the conflicts of interests among parties. The way conflicts of interests affect the outcome depends on the structure of the interaction, which can create problems of commitment, coordination and private information. Institutional theory focuses on how to address each of these issues, typically focusing on the development of social norms, rules, and other constraints on individual behaviors. We illustrate our thesis with examples from cooperative breed and genes as within-body-mechanism-design.","PeriodicalId":408482,"journal":{"name":"Law & Evolution eJournal","volume":"75 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law & Evolution eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2370952","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

Abstract

Social evolution is one of the most rapidly developing areas in evolutionary biology. A main theme is the emergence of cooperation among organisms, including the factors that impede cooperation. Although animal societies seem to have no formal institutions, such as courts or legislatures, we argue that biology presents many examples where an interaction can properly be thought of as an informal institution, meaning there are evolved norms and structure to the interaction that enable parties to reach mutually beneficial outcomes. These informal institutions are embedded in the natural history of the interaction, in factors such as where and when parties interact, how long and how close they stay together, and so on. Institutional theory thus widens the scope of behavioral ecology by considering not only why animals evolve to choose the strategies they choose, but also asking both why it is that they find themselves in those particular interaction setups and how these particular interactions can be sustained. Institutions frequently enable interacting parties avoid inefficient outcomes and support efficient exchange among agents with conflicting interests. The main thesis of this paper is that the organization of many biological interactions can properly be understood as institutions that enable mutually beneficial outcomes to be achieved relative to an unstructured interaction. To do this, institutions resolve or regulate the conflicts of interests among parties. The way conflicts of interests affect the outcome depends on the structure of the interaction, which can create problems of commitment, coordination and private information. Institutional theory focuses on how to address each of these issues, typically focusing on the development of social norms, rules, and other constraints on individual behaviors. We illustrate our thesis with examples from cooperative breed and genes as within-body-mechanism-design.
生物制度:动物合作的政治科学
社会进化是进化生物学中发展最为迅速的领域之一。一个主要的主题是生物之间合作的出现,包括阻碍合作的因素。虽然动物社会似乎没有正式的机构,如法院或立法机构,但我们认为,生物学提供了许多例子,其中相互作用可以适当地被认为是一种非正式的制度,这意味着相互作用有进化的规范和结构,使各方能够达成互利的结果。这些非正式的制度嵌入在互动的自然历史中,在诸如各方互动的地点和时间,他们在一起的时间和亲密程度等因素中。因此,制度理论拓宽了行为生态学的范围,不仅考虑了为什么动物进化到选择它们选择的策略,而且还询问了为什么它们发现自己处于这些特定的相互作用设置中,以及这些特定的相互作用如何能够持续。制度经常使相互作用的各方避免低效的结果,并支持利益冲突的代理人之间的有效交换。本文的主要论点是,许多生物相互作用的组织可以被恰当地理解为能够实现相对于非结构化相互作用的互利结果的制度。为了做到这一点,制度解决或规范各方之间的利益冲突。利益冲突影响结果的方式取决于互动的结构,这可能会产生承诺、协调和私人信息的问题。制度理论侧重于如何解决这些问题,通常侧重于社会规范、规则和对个人行为的其他约束的发展。我们以合作品种和基因作为体内机制设计的例子来说明我们的论点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信