When it comes to motivating people to cooperate for the greater good, punishment and shame tend to work best in democratic societies

Pitch In Do it for the team…or else! www.fairpack.org

The unsettling prospects of climate change seem to be inspiring a flurry of research on the innate ability of humans to cooperate for the common good. In my last post, I described a clever game by German scientists that found that freeloading impedes cooperation among a group of individuals chipping in to prevent a global warming disaster. (Think G8 summit.) And in the latest issue of Science, economists announced that the punishment of people who don’t contribute varies markedly among countries. In fact, in some societies punishing freeloaders can backfire, causing the freeloaders to retaliate against the punishers. This, the scientists concluded, can stifle collaboration even further.

The international study, which was led by researchers from the University of Nottingham, presented a similar game where players collectively built a pool of cash to benefit the group. This setup is designed to mimic real-world scenarios where cooperation leads to a beneficial outcome for the group but is jeopardized by selfish incentives to ride free on others' contributions. Examples: taxes, recycling, tackling climate change, voting. The economists found that players from each of the 16 countries punished freeloaders for their transgressions by reducing their earnings.

In more democratic countries like Denmark, Switzerland, the U.S., and yes, Germany, freeloaders who were punished became quickly remorseful and the group became more collaborative as a result. But in more authoritarian nations like Greece, Oman, Russia, and Saudi Arabia, freeloaders often retaliated against their punishers and cooperation broke down. "Our results show that punishment opportunities are socially beneficial only if complemented by strong social norms of cooperation," the authors wrote.

Why would a group punish its punishers? "One plausible reason," the authors say, "is that people might not accept punishment and therefore seek revenge. Revenge is a "human universal" and part of a culture of honor in many societies."

Humans have evolved complex abilities to work together—it’s the very foundation of our social networks. For organized groups to succeed, individuals must repress (at least some) selfish acts. But as the Nottingham study emphasizes, the nuances of our different social systems can go far to encourage—or hamper—our species’ ability to play nicely with others.

Flaking out can be tempting, and opportunities to free-ride on others' contributions to society abound. As our species sinks deeper into global environmental quagmires, it’ll be interesting to see if scientists can assess whether higher ecological stakes are inspiring more people to pull their own weight.

This is the second post in our Future Human series, which covers the prospects of Homo sapiens and the future of humanity.

Check out earlier posts here, where you can also subscribe to an RSS feed.

Want to learn more about the environment, solar energy, sustainability, and more? Subscribe to Popular Science today, for less than $1 per issue!

2 Comments

svseigel

from APO, AE

Economics and Game Theory are about trade-offs: costs vs. benefits. Punishments should be an "incentive of last resort." Rewards tend to get the job done much better. Unfortunately, it seems like every economic problem involving networks becomes intractable, but I don't think this one must.

When a truck arrives at the local store, it should return to its base loaded with tons of empty reusable packaging containers. High quality reusable containers could and even should cost about as much as whatever they contain. Something like this plan works wonderfully here in Germany--though the return values need to be higher to assure better compliance.

The initial start-up costs include the actual deposit money (typically paid by customers, but potentially offset by a government grant for a start-up period), more durable packaging, perhaps some additional semi-trailers, and a rethinking of transportation networks. Presently numerous tractors ferry trailers carrying diverse loads to multiple stores. If a "localized distribution center" model is adopted, each store would get a single trailer as often as needed. This trailer would be unhitched at the store and a "returns" trailer would be attached. The returns trailer would be loaded with all the reusable materials the store had collected since it's last delivery. Then the store workers would unload the trailer as needed and replace the load with recyclables.

Such a scheme would reduce the need for warehouse space which offsets the additional cost for trailers. Larger stores might receive three trailers, one each for meats/produce/dairy, frozen items and everything else. The great challenge in packaging will be to remove control of the industry from packaging companies who make the most money from disposable packaging. Or we could just penalize severely for making disposable materials.

Another system that could be better developed is bulk foods and customer-owned packaging. Bulk foods are far cheaper than individually packaged foods. If this model seems strange, consider how we buy meat at a butcher, most things at a deli or bakery, produce normally almost everywhere (though sadly the produce model is changing). All presently follow the bulk foods model.

Without a doubt, the packaging industry makes BILLION$ polluting our environment and squandering our resources!

I am wondering by which standards is Greece considered authoritarian. I live in Greece, I looked up the definition of "authoritarianism" at Wikipedia and it doesn't sound very familiar.


138 years of Popular Science at your fingertips.

Innovation Challenges



Popular Science+ For iPad

Each issue has been completely reimagined for your iPad. See our amazing new vision for magazines that goes far beyond the printed page



Download Our App

Stay up to date on the latest news of the future of science and technology from your iPhone or Android phone with full articles, images and offline viewing



Follow Us On Twitter

Featuring every article from the magazine and website, plus links from around the Web. Also see our PopSci DIY feed


February 2012: The Future of Fun

Science is reinventing play, from extreme sports to gamification to ridiculous roller coasters to the playgrounds of tomorrow, and this issue is chock full of fun. Also, on a less fun note: Did global warming destroy my hometown?


circ-top-header.gif
circ-cover.gif