Rethinking the evolution of property and possession: A review and methodological proposition

Abstract

Property is a key feature of modern human society; however, identifying the origin of this multifaceted behavior poses a formidable challenge. Here, we explore the methodologies for researching the origin of property. We discuss how an interdisciplinary approach can shed light on how our human ancestors shifted behaviorally from possessing an object to having exclusive property control over it. Possession occurs when social group members only respect an individual's claim to have exclusive access to an object when the individual has physical control over the object. Property occurs when an individual can claim exclusive access to an object, without challenge, regardless of whether the object is in their physical control or not. Researchers across different disciplines have asked what, if anything, distinguishes human property behavior from the behavior of other animals? Further, when and how did this behavior evolve in our lineage? Due to the considerable methodological challenges posed by researching this topic, few studies have been able to directly address these questions. In this review, we explore the challenges involved in defining property and possession and suggest a two‐step approach to interdisciplinary definitions. Next, we evaluate four core approaches to the study of property behavior: evolutionary game theory, ethology, comparative cognition, and developmental psychology. Finally, we propose an empirical study, using an ethological approach to test the presence of property and possessive behavior in a natural setting, using our closest living relative, the chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes). Overall, we argue that this field of research is at a turning point, where the novel integration of various methods may provide an explanation to the origin of property.

Children, but not great apes, respect ownership

“…Given that the term ‘ownership’ is used differently across disciplines (Tibble & Carvalho, ), we believe that future research would benefit from differentiating between the concept of ‘possession’ as referring to the physical control of or close proximity to an object and ‘ownership’ as mutually recognized and respected norms regulating how different agents relate to an object (irrespective of current possession). This would increase conceptual clarity and reduce the possibility for misunderstandings when drawing on insights from across disciplines.…”

“…Respect for first possession can prevent protracted and escalated conflicts (Smith & Price, ), though the precise mechanisms underlying it are debated (Grafen, ; Kokko et al, ; Sherratt & Mesterton‐Gibbons, ). One key factor appears to be an individual's constant use or physical control of the contested resources (Kummer, ; Tibble & Carvalho, ).…”

Humans have always been unique!

“…Non-material traits are more challenging: King's (2016) treatment of nonhuman mourning provides useful operational definitions for some aspects of grief (e.g., sustained behavioral change), but other aspects defy easy measurement (e.g., meaning across time and space). Similarly clarified constraints and opportunities apply to such things as possession (i.e., behavior) and property (i.e., concept) (Tibble & Carvalho, 2018). Even some aspects of the most-often cited example of human uniqueness, language, can be unpicked and tackled by those energetic and imaginative enough to do so (Townsend et al 2018).…”

Human infants can override possessive tendencies to share valued items with others

“…We combined these data with a previous dataset, yielding a large sample of infants (N = 192), and identified sociocultural factors that may calibrate young infants' sharing of objects with others. The current findings show a proclivity that is rare or absent in our closest living relatives-the capacity to override possessive behavior toward personally valued objects by sharing those same desired objects with others.To different degrees, all primate species show possessive behavior toward objects starting from early in development [1][2][3] . This behavior can be balanced against a countervailing tendency that often overrides it-the sharing of objects with others 4-6 .…”

“…To different degrees, all primate species show possessive behavior toward objects starting from early in development [1][2][3] . This behavior can be balanced against a countervailing tendency that often overrides it-the sharing of objects with others 4-6 .…”