Is altruism bad for cooperation?

被引:22
作者
Hwang, Sung-Ha [1 ]
Bowles, Samuel [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Sogang Univ, Sch Econ, Seoul, South Korea
[2] Santa Fe Inst, Santa Fe, NM 87501 USA
[3] Univ Siena, I-53100 Siena, Italy
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
Public goods; Altruism; Spite; Reciprocity; Punishment; Cooperation; STRONG RECIPROCITY; HIDDEN COSTS; PUBLIC-GOODS; PUNISHMENT; INCENTIVES; ECONOMICS; FAIRNESS; NORM;
D O I
10.1016/j.jebo.2012.06.001
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Some philosophers and social scientists have stressed the importance for good government of an altruistic citizenry that values the well being of fellow citizens. Economists, however, have emphasized the need for incentives that induce even the self-interested to contribute to the public good. Implicitly most have assumed that these two approaches are complementary or at worst additive. But this need not be the case. Behavioral experiments find that if reciprocity-minded subjects feel hostility towards free riders and enjoy inflicting harm on them, the incentives provided by the anticipated punishment support near efficient levels of contributions to a public good. Cooperation may also be supported if altruistic individuals internalize the group benefits that their contributions produce. But the effects of these two supports for high levels of cooperation may be less than additive. Using a utility function embodying both reciprocity and altruism we show that unconditional altruism attenuates the punishment motive and thus may reduce the level of punishment inflicted on defectors, resulting in lower levels of contribution. Increases in altruism may also reduce the level of benefits from the public project net of contribution costs and punishment costs. The range over which altruism inhibits cooperation and reduces material payoffs is greater, the stronger is the reciprocity motive among group members. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:330 / 341
页数:12
相关论文
共 45 条
[11]   The evolution of strong reciprocity: cooperation in heterogeneous populations [J].
Bowles, S ;
Gintis, H .
THEORETICAL POPULATION BIOLOGY, 2004, 65 (01) :17-28
[12]  
Bowles S., 2005, EC COMPLEX EVOLVING, P337
[13]  
Bowles S., 2012, J ECON LIT, V50, P1
[14]   Social preferences and public economics: Mechanism design when social preferences depend on incentives [J].
Bowles, Samuel ;
Hwang, Sung-Ha .
JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ECONOMICS, 2008, 92 (8-9) :1811-1820
[16]   PUNISHMENT ALLOWS THE EVOLUTION OF COOPERATION (OR ANYTHING ELSE) IN SIZABLE GROUPS [J].
BOYD, R ;
RICHERSON, PJ .
ETHOLOGY AND SOCIOBIOLOGY, 1992, 13 (03) :171-195
[17]   Coordinated Punishment of Defectors Sustains Cooperation and Can Proliferate When Rare [J].
Boyd, Robert ;
Gintis, Herbert ;
Bowles, Samuel .
SCIENCE, 2010, 328 (5978) :617-620
[18]   THE ROTTEN-KID THEOREM MEETS THE SAMARITANS DILEMMA [J].
BRUCE, N ;
WALDMAN, M .
QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, 1990, 105 (01) :155-165
[19]  
Buchanan JamesM., 1975, ALTRUISM MORALITY EC, P71
[20]   Strong reciprocity and team production: Theory and evidence [J].
Carpenter, Jeffrey ;
Bowles, Samuel ;
Gintis, Herbert ;
Hwang, Sung-Ha .
JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC BEHAVIOR & ORGANIZATION, 2009, 71 (02) :221-232