IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-03048825.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Does kin discrimination promote cooperation?

Author

Listed:
  • Gonçalo Faria

    (IAST - Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse, School of Biology [University of St Andrews] - University of St Andrews [Scotland])

  • Andy Gardner

    (School of Biology [University of St Andrews] - University of St Andrews [Scotland])

Abstract

Genetic relatedness is a key driver of the evolution of cooperation. One mechanism that may ensure social partners are genetically related is kin discrimination, in which individuals are able to distinguish kin from non-kin and adjust their behaviour accordingly. However, the impact of kin discrimination upon the overall level of cooperation remains obscure. Specifically, while kin discrimination allows an individual to help more-related social partners over less-related social partners, it is unclear whether and how the population average level of cooperation that is evolutionarily favoured should differ under kin discrimination versus indiscriminate social behaviour. Here, we perform a general mathematical analysis in order to assess whether, when and in which direction kin discrimination changes the average level of cooperation in an evolving population. We find that kin discrimination may increase, decrease or leave unchanged the average level of cooperation, depending upon whether the optimal level of cooperation is a convex, concave or linear function of genetic relatedness. We develop an extension of the classic ‘tragedy of the commons' model of cooperation in order to provide an illustration of these results. Our analysis provides a method to guide future research on the evolutionary consequences of kin discrimination.

Suggested Citation

  • Gonçalo Faria & Andy Gardner, 2020. "Does kin discrimination promote cooperation?," Post-Print hal-03048825, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03048825
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-03048825
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-03048825/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John C. Harsanyi, 1955. "Cardinal Welfare, Individualistic Ethics, and Interpersonal Comparisons of Utility," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 63(4), pages 309-309.
    2. Markus Zöttl & Dik Heg & Noémie Chervet & Michael Taborsky, 2013. "Kinship reduces alloparental care in cooperative cichlids where helpers pay-to-stay," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 4(1), pages 1-9, June.
    3. Sarah E. Reece & Damien R. Drew & Andy Gardner, 2008. "Sex ratio adjustment and kin discrimination in malaria parasites," Nature, Nature, vol. 453(7195), pages 609-614, May.
    4. Okasha, Samir, 2012. "Social Justice, Genomic Justice And The Veil Of Ignorance: Harsanyi Meets Mendel," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(1), pages 43-71, March.
    5. Pau Carazo & Cedric K. W. Tan & Felicity Allen & Stuart Wigby & Tommaso Pizzari, 2014. "Within-group male relatedness reduces harm to females in Drosophila," Nature, Nature, vol. 505(7485), pages 672-675, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Thomas W. Scott & Alan Grafen & Stuart A. West, 2022. "Multiple social encounters can eliminate Crozier’s paradox and stabilise genetic kin recognition," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-19, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ehud Kalai & Roger B. Myerson, 1977. "Values of Games Without Sidepayments," Discussion Papers 267, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    2. Mark Kelman & Tamar Admati Kreps, 2014. "Playing with Trolleys: Intuitions About the Permissibility of Aggregation," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(2), pages 197-226, June.
    3. Antoinette Baujard, 2016. "Utilitarianism and anti-utilitarianism," Chapters, in: Gilbert Faccarello & Heinz D. Kurz (ed.), Handbook on the History of Economic Analysis Volume III, chapter 40, pages 576-588, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Elodie Brahic & Jean-Michel Salles, 2008. "La question de l’équité dans l’allocation initiale des permis d’émission dans le cadre des politiques de prévention du changement climatique : Une étude quasi-expérimentale," Working Papers 08-11, LAMETA, Universtiy of Montpellier, revised Jul 2008.
    5. Hans Gersbach, 2004. "Fiscal Constitutions," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 3-25, March.
    6. Paulo B. Brito, 2022. "The dynamics of growth and distribution in a spatially heterogeneous world," Portuguese Economic Journal, Springer;Instituto Superior de Economia e Gestao, vol. 21(3), pages 311-350, September.
    7. Medin, Hege & Nyborg, Karine & Bateman, Ian, 2001. "The assumption of equal marginal utility of income: how much does it matter?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 397-411, March.
    8. Omer F. Baris, 2018. "Timing effect in bargaining and ex ante efficiency of the relative utilitarian solution," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 84(4), pages 547-556, June.
    9. Che-Yuan Liang, 2017. "Optimal inequality behind the veil of ignorance," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 83(3), pages 431-455, October.
    10. Heckman, James, 2001. "Accounting for Heterogeneity, Diversity and General Equilibrium in Evaluating Social Programmes," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 111(475), pages 654-699, November.
    11. Tim Krieger & Christine Meemann & Stefan Traub, 2022. "Inequality, Life Expectancy, and the Intragenerational Redistribution Puzzle - Some Experimental Evidence," CESifo Working Paper Series 9677, CESifo.
    12. David Bjerk, 2016. "In front of and behind the veil of ignorance: an analysis of motivations for redistribution," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(4), pages 791-824, December.
    13. Crès, Hervé & Tvede, Mich, 2022. "Aggregation of opinions in networks of individuals and collectives," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    14. Fleurbaey, Marc & Zuber, Stéphane, 2017. "Fair management of social risk," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 666-706.
    15. Kolm, Serge-Christophe, 1998. "Chance and justice: Social policies and the Harsanyi-Vickrey-Rawls problem," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(8), pages 1393-1416, September.
    16. Manel Baucells & Rakesh K. Sarin, 2003. "Group Decisions with Multiple Criteria," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(8), pages 1105-1118, August.
    17. Hammitt, James K., 2022. "Prevention, Treatment, and Palliative Care: The Relative Value of Health Improvements under Alternative Evaluation Frameworks," TSE Working Papers 22-1339, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    18. Alessandro Morselli, 2021. "Individual decisions and collective choices in the history of economic thought," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 3, pages 77-96,97-11.
    19. Blackorby, Charles & Bossert, Walter, 2004. "Interpersonal comparisons of well-being," Economic Research Papers 269605, University of Warwick - Department of Economics.
    20. Thibault Gajdos & Jean-Christophe Vergnaud, 2013. "Decisions with conflicting and imprecise information," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 41(2), pages 427-452, July.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03048825. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.