The Paradox of Civilization: Preinstitutional Sources of Security and Prosperity

Abstract

The production of economic surplus, or “prosperity,” was fundamental to financing the rise of pristine civilizations. Yet, prosperity attracts predation, which discourages the investments required for civilization. To the extent that the economic footing of civilization creates existential security threats, civilization is paradoxical. We claim that, in addition to surplus production, civilizations require surplus protection, or “security.” Drawing from archaeology and history, we model the trade-offs facing a society on its path to civilization. We emphasize preinstitutional forces, especially the geographical environment, that shape growth and defense capabilities and derive the conditions under which these capabilities help escape the civilizational paradox. We provide qualitative illustration of the model by analyzing the rise of the first two civilizations, Sumer and Egypt.

Notes from the Editors

“…We also find that a table that lists all the terms in a model along with their names, and ideally, substantive interpretations and real-world referents, can make a model more accessible to readers. Dal Bó, Hernández-Lagos, and Mazzuca (2021) provide this handy kind of guide for their complex model of the rise of a civilization that must become prosperous while also fending off predators that are drawn to prosperity. These devices not only make a model more accessible but also draw readers into the mechanics.…”

“…Finally, empirical cases give authors leverage over cases for which we do not have data. For instance, Dal Bó, Hernández-Lagos, and Mazzuca (2021) draw on archaeological and historical studies of the first two civilizations, Sumer and Egypt, to trace the two different paths to civilization predicted by their model.…”

Beasts of Burden, Trade, and Hierarchy: The Long Shadow of Domestication

“…Within this broader body of literature, recent work has specifically focused on the factors influencing the emergence of early forms of hierarchy (e.g. Turchin, 2009;Dow and Reed, 2013;Fenske, 2014;Schönholzer, 2020;Bertinelli and Litina, 2021;Dal Bo et al, 2022;Mayshar et al, 2022;Mayoral and Olsson, 2022). Turchin (2009) highlights the importance of antagonistic interactions between nomadic pastoralists and settled agriculturalists for the development of state structures.…”

“…Schönholzer (2020) and Mayoral and Olsson (2022) find empirical evidence for Carneiro's circumscription hypothesis (Carneiro, 1970), by showing that land quality only matters for the development of early states in areas that are circumscribed by lower-quality land. Dal Bo et al (2022) theoretically link increased insecurity to the emergence of hierarchy structures. In recent work, Mayshar et al (2022) demonstrate that the development of hierarchy strongly depends on the types of crops that are available within a region.…”

Beijing’s central role in global artificial intelligence research

“…In this paper, we document dependencies that take the form of networks of AI citations, research collaboration and scientists' migration.Our focus is on networks of cities rather than countries, as aggregating knowledge production at the countrylevel blunts important variation across cities. Cities have always been the engines of innovation and wealth creation as well as the hot spots of production and consumption [33][34][35][36][37][38][39] . In our study of cities, we focus on AI research papers due to the role that science plays in stimulating innovation and diffusing knowledge across borders without frictions 40 .…”