Cooperation and diversity. An evolutionary approach

Bruni, Luigino and Smerilli, Alessandra (2010): Cooperation and diversity. An evolutionary approach. Unpublished.

Abstract

n this paper we propose a pluralistic and multi-dimensional ap- proach to cooperation. Specifically, we seek to show that, in certain settings, less unconditional forms of cooperation may be combined with more gratuitous ones. Starting with the prisoner’s dilemma game, the evolution of cooperation is analyzed in the presence of different strate- gies, which represent the heterogeneity of the forms of cooperation in civil life. There are many behaviour patterns, though not all of them are based on self-interest and conditionality. The dynamics of coop- eration are studied through the use of evolutionary games applied in contexts that are either one-shot or repetitive. One of the most impor- tant results of the paper is the conclusion that cooperation is favoured by heterogeneity.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: cooperation, Prisoner’s Dilemma, reciprocity, hetero- geneity, evolutionary game theory
• Subjects: D - Microeconomics > D6 - Welfare Economics > D64 - Altruism; C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C7 - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory > C73 - Stochastic and Dynamic Games; Evolutionary Games; Repeated Games; C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C7 - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory > C72 - Noncooperative Games

References

[1] Antoci A., Sacco P. e Zarri L. (2004) “Coexistence of Strategies and Culturally- Specific Common Knowledge: An Evolutionary Analysis”, Journal of Bioeconomics, vol. 6, pp. 165-194

[2] Binmore K. (2005) Natural Justice, Oxford University Press, USA

[3] Binmore K. (2006) “Why do people cooperate?”, Politics, Philosophy and Economics, vol. 5 (1), pp. 81-96.

[4] Bomze I. (1983) “Lotka-Volterra Equation and Replicator Dynamics: A Two- Dimensional Classification”, Biological Cybernetics, vol. 48, pp. 201-211.

[5] Bowles S. e Gintis H. (2004) "The evolution of strong reciprocity: coop- eration in a heterogeneous population." Theoretical Population Biology, vol. 65, pp. 17- 28.

[6] Fehr E. and Gachter S. (2000) “Fairness and Retaliation: The Eco- nomics of Reciprocity”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 14, pp. 159- 181.

[7] Gintis H (2004) “Modeling Cooperation Among Self-Interested Agents: A Critique”, The Journal of Socio-Economics, 33, pp. 311-322.

[8] Heckathorn D. (1996) “The dynamics and dilemmas of collective action”, American Sociological Review, vol. 61, pp. 250-277.

[9] Hirshleifer J., Martinez Coll J. (1991) “The limits of reciprocity”, Ra- tionality and Society, vol. 3, pp. 35-64.

[10] Sugden R. (2003) “The logic of team reasoning”, Philosophical explo- rations, vol. 6, pp. 165-181.

[11] Sugden R. (2004) The economics of rights, cooperation and welfare, second edition, Palgrave Macmillian, London.