IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wop/safiwp/00-03-017.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Optimal Parochialism: The Dynamics of Trust and Exclusion in Networks

Author

Listed:
  • Samuel Bowles
  • Herbert Gintis

Abstract

Networks such as ethnic credit associations, close-knit residential neighborhoods, "old boy' networks, and ethnically linked businesses play an important role in economic life but have been little studied by economists. These networks are often supported by cultural distinctions between insiders and outsiders and engage in exclusionary practices which we call parochialism. We provide an exonomic analysis of parochial networks in which the losses incurred by not trading with outsiders are offset by an enhanced ability to enforce informal contracts by fostering trust among insiders. We first model one-shot social interactions among self-regarding agents, demonstrating that trust (i.e., cooperating without using information about one's trading partner) is a best response in a mixed-strategy Nash equilibrium if the quality of information about one's partner is sufficiently high. We show that since larger networks have lower quality information about specific individuals and greater trading opportunities, there may be an optimal (payoff-maximizing) network size. We then model the growth and decline of networks, as well as their equilibrium size and number. We show that in the absence of parochialism, networks may not exist, and the appropriate level of parochialism may implement an optimal network size. Finally, we explore the welfare implications and reasons for the evolutionary success of exclusion on parochial and other grounds.

Suggested Citation

  • Samuel Bowles & Herbert Gintis, 2000. "Optimal Parochialism: The Dynamics of Trust and Exclusion in Networks," Working Papers 00-03-017, Santa Fe Institute.
  • Handle: RePEc:wop:safiwp:00-03-017
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Craig, Ben & Pencavel, John, 1992. "The Behavior of Worker Cooperatives: The Plywood Companies of the Pacific Northwest," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(5), pages 1083-1105, December.
    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. Dasgupta, Indraneel & Kanbur, Ravi, 2001. "Class, Community, Inequality," Working Papers 127671, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    2. Röttgers, Dirk, 2016. "Conditional cooperation, context and why strong rules work — A Namibian common-pool resource experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 21-31.
    3. Brian S. Collins & Robin Mansell, 2004. "Cyber trust and crime prevention: a synthesis of the state-of-the-art science reviews," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 4252, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Michèle Forté & Sylvie Monchatre & Géraldine Rieucau & Marie Salognon & Ariel Sevilla & Carole Tuchszirer, 2012. "Pratiques de recrutement et sélectivité sur le marché du travail," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00971684, HAL.
    5. Kirman, Alan & Markose, Sheri & Giansante, Simone & Pin, Paolo, 2007. "Marginal contribution, reciprocity and equity in segregated groups: Bounded rationality and self-organization in social networks," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 2085-2107, June.

    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. Tortia, Ermanno, 2014. "L'impresa come bene comune," AICCON Working Papers 131-2013, Associazione Italiana per la Cultura della Cooperazione e del Non Profit.
    2. Gabriel Burdí­n & Andrés Dean, 2009. "Las decisiones de empleo y salarios de cooperativas de trabajo y empresas capitalistas : evidencia para Uruguay en base a datos de panel," Documentos de Trabajo (working papers) 09-02, Instituto de Economía - IECON.
    3. Michael Kremer, 1997. "Why are Worker Cooperatives So Rare?," NBER Working Papers 6118, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Dean, Andrés, 2019. "Do successful worker-managed firms degenerate?," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 317-329.
    5. Ran Abramitzky, 2008. "The Limits of Equality: Insights from the Israeli Kibbutz," Discussion Papers 07-048, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    6. Morley Gunderson & Jeffrey Sack & James McCartney & David Wakely & Jonathan Eaton, 1995. "Employee Buyouts in Canada," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 33(3), pages 417-442, September.
    7. Sacchetti, Silvia & Tortia, Ermanno, 2012. "The internal and external governance of cooperatives: the effective membership and consistency of value," AICCON Working Papers 111-2012, Associazione Italiana per la Cultura della Cooperazione e del Non Profit.
    8. Gary Gorton & Frank Schmid, 2000. "Class Struggle Inside the Firm: A Study of German Codetermination," NBER Working Papers 7945, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Federica VIGANO & Andrea SALUSTRI, 2015. "Matching profit and Non-profit Needs: How NPOs and Cooperative Contribute to Growth in Time of Crisis. A Quantitative Approach," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 86(1), pages 157-178, March.
    10. Douglas L. Kruse & Richard B. Freeman & Joseph R. Blasi, 2010. "Do Workers Gain by Sharing? Employee Outcomes under Employee Ownership, Profit Sharing, and Broad-Based Stock Options," NBER Chapters, in: Shared Capitalism at Work: Employee Ownership, Profit and Gain Sharing, and Broad-based Stock Options, pages 257-289, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Flavio Delbono & Diego Lanzi & Carlo Reggiani, 2022. "Beyond Illyria: Workers' Firm in Mixed Oligopoly," Working Papers wp1170, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    12. Bowles, Samuel & Gintis, Herbert, 2004. "Persistent parochialism: trust and exclusion in ethnic networks," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 1-23, September.
    13. Tortia, Ermanno C., 2021. "Employment protection regimes and dismissal of members in worker cooperatives," MPRA Paper 109214, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Chaddad, Fabio Ribas, 2006. "Investment Constraints in Agricultural Cooperatives: Theory, Evidence and Solutions," 44th Congress, July 23-27, 2006, Fortaleza, Ceará, Brazil 143259, Sociedade Brasileira de Economia, Administracao e Sociologia Rural (SOBER).
    15. Fidan Ana Kurtulus & Douglas Kruse, 2018. "An Empirical Analysis of the Relationship between Employee Ownership and Employment Stability in the US: 1999–2011," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 56(2), pages 245-291, June.
    16. Gregory Dow, 1996. "Replicating Walrasian equilibria using markets for membership in labor-managed firms," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 2(1), pages 147-162, December.
    17. Chong-En Bai & Chenggang Xu, 2001. "Ownership, Incentives and Monitoring," STICERD - Theoretical Economics Paper Series 413, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
    18. J. Rosser & Marina Rosser, 2008. "A critique of the new comparative economics," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 21(1), pages 81-97, March.
    19. Gabriel Burdín, 2016. "Equality Under Threat by the Talented: Evidence from Worker‐Managed Firms," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 126(594), pages 1372-1403, August.
    20. Guillermo Alves & Gabriel Burdin & Paula Carrasco & Andrés Dean & Andrés Rius, 2012. "Empleo, remuneraciones e inversión en cooperativas de trabajadores y empresas convencionales: nueva evidencia para Uruguay," Documentos de Trabajo (working papers) 12-14, Instituto de Economía - IECON.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Networks; community; trust games.;
    All these keywords.

    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:wop:safiwp:00-03-017. 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: Thomas Krichel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/epstfus.html .

    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.