IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2306.05971.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Risk aversion promotes cooperation

Author

Listed:
  • Jay Armas
  • Wout Merbis
  • Janusz Meylahn
  • Soroush Rafiee Rad
  • Mauricio J. del Razo

Abstract

Cooperative dynamics are central to our understanding of many phenomena in living and complex systems, including the transition to multicellularity, the emergence of eusociality in insect colonies, and the development of full-fledged human societies. However, we lack a universal mechanism to explain the emergence of cooperation across length scales, across species, and scalable to large populations of individuals. We present a novel framework for modelling cooperation games with an arbitrary number of players by combining reaction networks, methods from quantum mechanics applied to stochastic complex systems, game theory and stochastic simulations of molecular reactions. Using this framework, we propose a novel and robust mechanism based on risk aversion that leads to cooperative behaviour in population games. Rather than individuals seeking to maximise payouts in the long run, individuals seek to obtain a minimum set of resources with a given level of confidence and in a limited time span. We explicitly show that this mechanism leads to the emergence of new Nash equilibria in a wide range of cooperation games. Our results suggest that risk aversion is a viable mechanism to explain the emergence of cooperation in a variety of contexts and with an arbitrary number of individuals greater than three.

Suggested Citation

  • Jay Armas & Wout Merbis & Janusz Meylahn & Soroush Rafiee Rad & Mauricio J. del Razo, 2023. "Risk aversion promotes cooperation," Papers 2306.05971, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2306.05971
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2306.05971
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Matthias Sutter & Stefan Haigner & Martin G. Kocher, 2010. "Choosing the Carrot or the Stick? Endogenous Institutional Choice in Social Dilemma Situations," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 77(4), pages 1540-1566.
    2. Francisco C. Santos & Marta D. Santos & Jorge M. Pacheco, 2008. "Social diversity promotes the emergence of cooperation in public goods games," Nature, Nature, vol. 454(7201), pages 213-216, July.
    3. Carpenter, Jeffrey P., 2007. "Punishing free-riders: How group size affects mutual monitoring and the provision of public goods," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 31-51, July.
    4. A. Ahmadi-Javid, 2012. "Entropic Value-at-Risk: A New Coherent Risk Measure," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 155(3), pages 1105-1123, December.
    5. Wolfram Barfuss & Janusz Meylahn, 2022. "Intrinsic fluctuations of reinforcement learning promote cooperation," Papers 2209.01013, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2023.
    6. William Nordhaus, 2015. "Climate Clubs: Overcoming Free-Riding in International Climate Policy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(4), pages 1339-1370, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Anya Savikhin & Roman Sheremeta, 2010. "Visibility of Contributions and Cost of Information: An Experiment on Public Goods," Working Papers 10-22, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
    2. Dickinson, David L. & Masclet, David & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2015. "Norm enforcement in social dilemmas: An experiment with police commissioners," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 74-85.
    3. Nicklisch, Andreas & Grechenig, Kristoffel & Thöni, Christian, 2016. "Information-sensitive Leviathans," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 1-13.
    4. Choi, Jung-Kyoo & Ahn, T.K., 2013. "Strategic reward and altruistic punishment support cooperation in a public goods game experiment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 17-30.
    5. Patel, Amrish & Cartwright, Edward & Mark, Van Vugt, 2010. "Punishment Cannot Sustain Cooperation in a Public Good Game with Free-Rider Anonymity," Working Papers in Economics 451, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    6. Anya Savikhin Samek & Roman Sheremeta, 2014. "Recognizing contributors: an experiment on public goods," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 17(4), pages 673-690, December.
    7. Kurt A. Ackermann & Ryan O. Murphy, 2019. "Explaining Cooperative Behavior in Public Goods Games: How Preferences and Beliefs Affect Contribution Levels," Games, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-34, March.
    8. Reuben, Ernesto & Riedl, Arno, 2013. "Enforcement of contribution norms in public good games with heterogeneous populations," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 122-137.
    9. Hui-Chun Peng, 2022. "Effects of majority-vote reward mechanism on cooperation: a public good experimental study," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 59(4), pages 989-1008, November.
    10. Simon Gaechter & Benedikt Herrmann, 2008. "Reciprocity, culture, and human cooperation: Previous insights and a new cross-cultural experiment," Discussion Papers 2008-14, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    11. Jensen, Thomas & Markussen, Thomas, 2021. "Group size, signaling and the effect of democracy," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 187(C), pages 258-273.
    12. Lim Wooyoung & Zhang Jipeng, 2020. "Endogenous Authority and Enforcement in Public Goods Games," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 20(2), pages 1-22, June.
    13. Tobias Cagala & Ulrich Glogowsky & Veronika Grimm & Johannes Rincke, 2019. "Public Goods Provision with Rent-extracting Administrators," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 129(620), pages 1593-1617.
    14. Anabela Botelho & Glenn W. Harrison & Lígia M. Costa Pinto & Don Ross & Elisabet E. Rutström, 2022. "Endogenous choice of institutional punishment mechanisms to promote social cooperation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 191(3), pages 309-335, June.
    15. Anya Samek & Roman Sheremeta, 2013. "Recognizing Contributors and Cost of Information: An Experiment on Public Goods," Artefactual Field Experiments 00430, The Field Experiments Website.
    16. Gürerk, Özgür & Irlenbusch, Bernd & Rockenbach, Bettina, 2009. "Voting with Feet: Community Choice in Social Dilemmas," IZA Discussion Papers 4643, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Faillo, Marco & Grieco, Daniela & Zarri, Luca, 2013. "Legitimate punishment, feedback, and the enforcement of cooperation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 271-283.
    18. Markussen, Thomas & Putterman, Louis & Tyran, Jean-Robert, 2016. "Judicial error and cooperation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 372-388.
    19. Thomas Markussen & Louis Putterman & Liangjun Wang, 2017. "Governing Collective Action in the Face of Observational Error," Working Papers 2017-2, Brown University, Department of Economics.
    20. Dongil Chung & Kyongsik Yun & Jin Ho Kim & Bosun Jang & Jaeseung Jeong, 2011. "Different Gain/Loss Sensitivity and Social Adaptation Ability in Gifted Adolescents during a Public Goods Game," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(2), pages 1-11, February.

    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:arx:papers:2306.05971. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.