Fear or Greed? Duty or Solidarity? Motivations and Stages of Moral Reasoning

Abstract

As institutional economists recognize the limits of the canonical self-interest assumption, the lack of a theory of human valuation specifying the determinants of individuals’ utility judgments renders the prediction of behavior in collective action dilemmas virtually impossible. This problem hinders our ability to devise institutions to help cope with a variety of pressing social dilemmas that persist. We suggest that scholars can overcome this difficulty by integrating models of sociocognitive and moral development into the framework of institutional analysis and that such integration aligns with a new revolutionary shift in the social sciences. This shift is evidenced by the “rehabilitation” of key notions once downplayed due to the dominance of positivism. We present results from hypothesis testing linked to a cognitivist-developmental theory of human valuations. These results demonstrate that cooperative motivations and choices in public goods provision dilemmas are associated with further stages of interior development of the participants. We conclude that institutions addressing choices in morally relevant conflicts of action should be designed to promote swifter movement of individuals along the path of interior growth.