Abstract
AbstractA major goal in evolutionary biology is to elucidate common principles that drive human and other animal societies to adopt either a warlike or peaceful nature. One proposed explanation for the variation in aggression between human societies is the democratic peace hypothesis. According to this theory, autocracies are more warlike than democracies because autocratic leaders can pursue fights for private gain. However, autocratic and democratic decision-making processes are not unique to humans and are widely observed across a diverse range of non-human animal societies. We use evolutionary game theory to evaluate whether the logic of democratic peace may apply across taxa; specifically adapting the classic Hawk-Dove model to consider conflict decisions made by groups rather than individuals. We find support for the democratic peace hypothesis without mechanisms involving complex human institutions and discuss how these findings might be relevant to non-human animal societies. We suggest that the degree to which collective decisions are shared may explain variation in the intensity of intergroup conflict in nature.
Funder
RCUK | Natural Environment Research Council
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference78 articles.
1. Choi, J.-K. & Bowles, S. The coevolution of parochial altruism and war. Science 318, 636–640 (2007).
2. Gat, A. War in Human Civilisation. (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2008).
3. Keeley, L. H. War Before Civilization: The Myth of the Peaceful Savage. (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1996).
4. Rummel, R. J. Death by Government. (Transaction Publishers, 1997).
5. Allen, M. W., Bettinger, R. L., Codding, B. F., Jones, T. L. & Schwitalla, A. W. Resource scarcity drives lethal aggression among prehistoric hunter-gatherers in central California. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 113, 12120–12125 (2016).