Intrafamily and intragenomic conflicts in human warfare

Female cooperation: evolutionary, cross-cultural and ethnographic evidence

Women and girls cooperate with each other across many domains and at many scales. However, much of this information is buried in the ethnographic record and has been overlooked in theoretic constructions of the evolution of human sociality and cooperation. The assumed primacy of male bonding, hunting, patrilocality and philopatry has dominated the discussion of cooperation without balanced consideration. A closer look at the ethnographic record reveals that in addition to cooperative childcare and food production, women and girls collectively form coalitions, have their own cooperative political, ceremonial, economic and social institutions, and develop female-based exchange and support networks. The numerous ethnographic examples of female cooperation urge reconsideration of gender stereotypes and the limits of female cooperation. This review brings together theoretic, cross-cultural and cross-lifespan research on female cooperation to present a more even and empirically supported view of female sociality. Following the lead from trends in evolutionary biology and sexual selection theory, the hope going forward is that the focus shifts from rote characterizations of sex differences to highlighting sources of variation and conditions that enhance or constrain female cooperative engagement. This article is part of the theme issue 'Cooperation among women: evolutionary and cross-cultural perspectives'.

Fitness consequences of outgroup conflict

In social species across the animal kingdom, conspecific outsiders threaten the valuable resources of groups and their members. This outgroup conflict is recognised as a powerful selection pressure, but we argue that studies explicitly quantifying the fitness consequences need to be broader in scope: more attention should be paid to delayed, cumulative, and third-party fitness consequences, not just those arising immediately to group members involved in physical contests. In the first part of this review, we begin by documenting how single contests can have survival and reproductive consequences either immediately or with a delay. Then, we step beyond contests to describe fitness consequences that can also result from interactions with cues of rival presence and the general landscape of outgroup threat, and beyond single interactions to describe cumulative effects of territorial pressure and elevated outgroup-induced stress. Using examples from a range of taxa, we discuss which individuals are affected negatively and positively, considering both interaction participants and third-party group members of the same or the next generation. In the second part of the review, we provide suggestions about how to move forward. We highlight the importance of considering how different types of outgroup conflict can generate different selection pressures and of investigating variation in fitness consequences within and between species. We finish by discussing the value of theoretical modelling and long-term studies of natural populations, experimental manipulations, and meta-analyses to develop further our understanding of this crucial aspect of sociality.

Evolution of warfare by resource raiding favours polymorphism in belligerence and bravery

From protists to primates, intergroup aggression and warfare over resources have been observed in several taxa whose populations typically consist of groups connected by limited genetic mixing. Here, we model the coevolution between four traits relevant to this setting: (i) investment into common-pool resource production within groups (helping); (ii) proclivity to raid other groups to appropriate their resources (belligerence); and investments into (iii) defense and (iv) offense of group contests (defensive and offensive bravery). We show that when traits coevolve, the population often experiences disruptive selection favouring two morphs: 'Hawks', who express high levels of both belligerence and offensive bravery; and 'Doves', who express neither. This social polymorphism involves further among-traits associations when the fitness costs of helping and bravery interact. In particular, if helping is antagonistic with both forms of bravery, coevolution leads to the coexistence of individuals that either: (i) do not participate into common-pool resource production but only in its defense and appropriation (Scrounger Hawks) or (ii) only invest into common pool resource production (Producer Doves). Provided groups are not randomly mixed, these findings are robust to several modelling assumptions. This suggests that inter-group aggression is a potent mechanism in favouring within-group social diversity and behavioural syndromes. This article is part of the theme issue 'Intergroup conflict across taxa'.

Intergroup conflict: origins, dynamics and consequences across taxa

Although uniquely destructive and wasteful, intergroup conflict and warfare are not confined to humans. They are seen across a range of group-living species, from social insects, fishes and birds to mammals, including nonhuman primates. With its unique collection of theory, research and review contributions from biology, anthropology and economics, this theme issue provides novel insights into intergroup conflict across taxa. Here, we introduce and organize this theme issue on the origins and consequences of intergroup conflict. We provide a coherent framework by modelling intergroup conflicts as multi-level games of strategy in which individuals within groups cooperate to compete with (individuals in) other groups for scarce resources, such as territory, food, mating opportunities, power and influence. Within this framework, we identify cross-species mechanisms and consequences of (participating in) intergroup conflict. We conclude by highlighting crosscutting innovations in the study of intergroup conflict set forth by individual contributions. These include, among others, insights on how within-group heterogeneities and leadership relate to group conflict, how intergroup conflict shapes social organization and how climate change and environmental degradation transition intergroup relations from peaceful coexistence to violent conflict.

This article is part of the theme issue ‘Intergroup conflict across taxa’.

Relatedness within and between Agta residential groups

Theoretical models relating to the evolution of human behaviour usually make assumptions about the kinship structure of social groups. Since humans were hunter-gatherers for most of our evolutionary history, data on the composition of contemporary hunter-gatherer groups has long been used to inform these models. Although several papers have taken a broad view of hunter-gatherer social organisation, it is also useful to explore data from single populations in more depth. Here, we describe patterns of relatedness among the Palanan Agta, hunter-gatherers from the northern Philippines. Across 271 adults, mean relatedness to adults across the population is r = 0.01 and to adult campmates is r = 0.074, estimates that are similar to those seen in other hunter-gatherers. We also report the distribution of kin across camps, relatedness and age differences between spouses, and the degree of shared reproductive interest between camp mates, a measure that incorporates affinal kinship. For both this this measure (s) and standard relatedness (r), we see no major age or sex differences in the relatedness of adults to their campmates, conditions that may reduce the potential for conflicts of interest within social groups.

Exploitative leaders incite intergroup warfare in a social mammal

A classic explanation for the prevalence of complex warfare in human societies is leadership by exploitative individuals who reap the benefits of conflict while avoiding the costs. Here, we extend the classic hawk−dove model to show that leadership of this kind can also explain the evolution of severe collective violence in certain animal societies. We test our model using long-term data from wild banded mongooses, and show that female leaders incite fights with rival groups to gain genetic benefits, while males bear the costs of fighting. The result is unusually severe levels of intergroup violence. Our findings suggest that the decoupling of leaders from the costs that they incite amplifies the destructive nature of intergroup conflict.

Collective conflicts among humans are widespread, although often highly destructive. A classic explanation for the prevalence of such warfare in some human societies is leadership by self-serving individuals that reap the benefits of conflict while other members of society pay the costs. Here, we show that leadership of this kind can also explain the evolution of collective violence in certain animal societies. We first extend the classic hawk−dove model of the evolution of animal aggression to consider cases in which a subset of individuals within each group may initiate fights in which all group members become involved. We show that leadership of this kind, when combined with inequalities in the payoffs of fighting, can lead to the evolution of severe intergroup aggression, with negative consequences for population mean fitness. We test our model using long-term data from wild banded mongooses, a species characterized by frequent intergroup conflicts that have very different fitness consequences for male and female group members. The data show that aggressive encounters between groups are initiated by females, who gain fitness benefits from mating with extragroup males in the midst of battle, whereas the costs of fighting are borne chiefly by males. In line with the model predictions, the result is unusually severe levels of intergroup violence. Our findings suggest that the decoupling of leaders from the costs that they incite amplifies the destructive nature of intergroup conflict.

How evolutionary behavioural sciences can help us understand behaviour in a pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought science into the public eye and to the attention of governments more than ever before. Much of this attention is on work in epidemiology, virology and public health, with most behavioural advice in public health focusing squarely on 'proximate' determinants of behaviour. While epidemiological models are powerful tools to predict the spread of disease when human behaviour is stable, most do not incorporate behavioural change. The evolutionary basis of our preferences and the cultural evolutionary dynamics of our beliefs drive behavioural change, so understanding these evolutionary processes can help inform individual and government decision-making in the face of a pandemic. Lay summary: The COVID-19 pandemic has brought behavioural sciences into the public eye: Without vaccinations, stopping the spread of the virus must rely on behaviour change by limiting contact between people. On the face of it, "stop seeing people" sounds simple. In practice, this is hard. Here we outline how an evolutionary perspective on behaviour change can provide additional insights. Evolutionary theory postulates that our psychology and behaviour did not evolve to maximize our health or that of others. Instead, individuals are expected to act to maximise their inclusive fitness (i.e, spreading our genes) - which can lead to a conflict between behaviours that are in the best interests for the individual, and behaviours that stop the spread of the virus. By examining the ultimate explanations of behaviour related to pandemic-management (such as behavioural compliance and social distancing), we conclude that "good of the group" arguments and "one size fits all" policies are unlikely to encourage behaviour change over the long-term. Sustained behaviour change to keep pandemics at bay is much more likely to emerge from environmental change, so governments and policy makers may need to facilitate significant social change - such as improving life experiences for disadvantaged groups.

The demography of human warfare can drive sex differences in altruism

Recent years have seen great interest in the suggestion that between-group aggression and within-group altruism have coevolved. However, these efforts have neglected the possibility that warfare - via its impact on demography - might influence human social behaviours more widely, not just those directly connected to success in war. Moreover, the potential for sex differences in the demography of warfare to translate into sex differences in social behaviour more generally has remained unexplored. Here, we develop a kin-selection model of altruism performed by men and women for the benefit of their groupmates in a population experiencing intergroup conflict. We find that warfare can promote altruistic, helping behaviours as the additional reproductive opportunities winners obtain in defeated groups decrease harmful competition between kin. Furthermore, we find that sex can be a crucial modulator of altruism, with there being a tendency for the sex that competes more intensely with relatives to behave more altruistically and for the sex that competes more intensely with non-relatives in defeated groups to receive more altruism. In addition, there is also a tendency for the less-dispersing sex to both give and receive more altruism. We discuss implications for our understanding of observed sex differences in cooperation in human societies.

Why war is a man's game

Interest in the evolutionary origins and drivers of warfare in ancient and contemporary small-scale human societies has greatly increased in the last decade, and has been particularly spurred by exciting archaeological discoveries that suggest our ancestors led more violent lives than previously documented. However, the striking observation that warfare is an almost-exclusively male activity remains unexplained. Three general hypotheses have been proposed, concerning greater male effectiveness in warfare, lower male costs, and patrilocality. But while each of these factors might explain why warfare is more common in men, they do not convincingly explain why women almost never participate. Here, we develop a mathematical model to formally assess these hypotheses. Surprisingly, we find that exclusively male warfare may evolve even in the absence of any such sex differences, though sex biases in these parameters can make this evolutionary outcome more likely. The qualitative observation that participation in warfare is almost exclusive to one sex is ultimately explained by the fundamentally sex-specific nature of Darwinian competition—in fitness terms, men compete with men and women with women. These results reveal a potentially key role for ancestral conditions in shaping our species' patterns of sexual division of labour and violence-related adaptations and behavioural disorders.

Parental investment in Tibetan populations does not reflect stated cultural norms

In this paper, we examined both stated norms of sex preference and actual sex-biases in parental investment in a Tibetan pastoralist society. We collected detailed demographic data on infant mortality, infant feeding, the length of interbirth intervals, and a decision when giving gifts, to examine sex-biased parental investment. Our results indicate a mismatch between self-reported son preference and measures of actual parental investment that favor daughters. We interpret this female-biased parental investment as a possible response to daughters generating more economic resources. However, the stated sex preferences of both sexes reflect cultural norms that appear to have remained unchanged over a long period, which may reflect the importance of male roles in the past. Our behavioral measures of parental investment are those most likely to be in the control of women (such as breastfeeding and interbirth interval), so this mismatch between stated and actual investment may be especially true of women.

Adult sex ratios and partner scarcity among hunter-gatherers: implications for dispersal patterns and the evolution of human sociality

Small populations are susceptible to high genetic loads and random fluctuations in birth and death rates. While these selective forces can adversely affect their viability, small populations persist across taxa. Here, we investigate the resilience of small groups to demographic uncertainty, and specifically to fluctuations in adult sex ratio (ASR), partner availability and dispersal patterns. Using 25 years of demographic data for two Savannah Pumé groups of South American hunter-gatherers, we show that in small human populations: (i) ASRs fluctuate substantially from year to year, but do not consistently trend in a sex-biased direction; (ii) the primary driver of local variation in partner availability is stochasticity in the sex ratio at maturity; and (iii) dispersal outside of the group is an important behavioural means to mediate locally constrained mating options. To then simulate conditions under which dispersal outside of the local group may have evolved, we develop two mathematical models. Model results predict that if the ASR is biased, the globally rarer sex should disperse. The model's utility is then evaluated by applying our empirical data to this central prediction. The results are consistent with the observed hunter-gatherer pattern of variation in the sex that disperses. Together, these findings offer an alternative explanation to resource provisioning for the evolution of traits central to human sociality (e.g. flexible dispersal, bilocal post-marital residence and cooperation across local groups). We argue that in small populations, looking outside of one's local group is necessary to find a mate and that, motivated by ASR imbalance, the alliances formed to facilitate the movement of partners are an important foundation for the human-typical pattern of network formation across local groups.This article is part of the themed issue 'Adult sex ratios and reproductive decisions: a critical re-examination of sex differences in human and animal societies'.