Hammerstein Peter, Noë Ronald
Institute for Theoretical Biology, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin 10115, Germany
Faculté Psychologie, Université de Strasbourg, Strasbourg 67000, France.
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2016 Feb 5;371(1687):20150101. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2015.0101.
Cooperation between organisms can often be understood, like trade between merchants, as a mutually beneficial exchange of services, resources or other 'commodities'. Mutual benefits alone, however, are not sufficient to explain the evolution of trade-based cooperation. First, organisms may reject a particular trade if another partner offers a better deal. Second, while human trade often entails binding contracts, non-human trade requires unwritten 'terms of contract' that 'self-stabilize' trade and prevent cheating even if all traders strive to maximize fitness. Whenever trading partners can be chosen, market-like situations arise in nature that biologists studying cooperation need to account for. The mere possibility of exerting partner choice stabilizes many forms of otherwise cheatable trade, induces competition, facilitates the evolution of specialization and often leads to intricate forms of cooperation. We discuss selected examples to illustrate these general points and review basic conceptual approaches that are important in the theory of biological trade and markets. Comparing these approaches with theory in economics, it turns out that conventional models-often called 'Walrasian' markets-are of limited relevance to biology. In contrast, early approaches to trade and markets, as found in the works of Ricardo and Cournot, contain elements of thought that have inspired useful models in biology. For example, the concept of comparative advantage has biological applications in trade, signalling and ecological competition. We also see convergence between post-Walrasian economics and biological markets. For example, both economists and biologists are studying 'principal-agent' problems with principals offering jobs to agents without being sure that the agents will do a proper job. Finally, we show that mating markets have many peculiarities not shared with conventional economic markets. Ideas from economics are useful for biologists studying cooperation but need to be taken with caution.
生物体之间的合作通常可以像商人之间的贸易一样被理解为服务、资源或其他“商品”的互利交换。然而,仅凭互利不足以解释基于贸易的合作的演变。首先,如果另一个伙伴提供了更好的交易,生物体可能会拒绝某一特定的交易。其次,虽然人类贸易通常需要有约束力的合同,但非人类贸易需要不成文的“合同条款”来“自我稳定”贸易并防止欺骗行为,即使所有交易者都努力使适应性最大化。只要可以选择贸易伙伴,自然界中就会出现类似市场的情况,研究合作的生物学家需要考虑到这一点。仅仅是能够选择伙伴这一可能性就稳定了许多否则会被欺骗的贸易形式,引发了竞争,促进了专业化的演变,并且常常导致复杂的合作形式。我们讨论一些选定的例子来说明这些一般观点,并回顾在生物贸易和市场理论中重要的基本概念方法。将这些方法与经济学理论进行比较,结果发现传统模型——通常被称为“瓦尔拉斯式”市场——与生物学的相关性有限。相比之下,在李嘉图和古诺的著作中发现的早期贸易和市场方法包含了一些思想元素,这些元素启发了生物学中有用的模型。例如,比较优势的概念在贸易、信号传递和生态竞争中具有生物学应用。我们还看到后瓦尔拉斯经济学与生物市场之间的趋同。例如,经济学家和生物学家都在研究“委托 - 代理”问题,即委托人向代理人提供工作,但不确定代理人是否会做好工作。最后,我们表明交配市场有许多传统经济市场所没有的独特之处。经济学的观点对研究合作的生物学家有用,但需要谨慎对待。