Public choice of species for the ark: Phylogenetic similarity and preferred wildlife species for survival

Humans play a role in deciding the fate of species in the current extinction wave. Because of the previous Similarity Principle, physical attractiveness and likeability, it has been argued that public choice favours the survival of species that satisfy these criteria at the expense of other species. This paper empirically tests this argument by considering a hypothetical ‘Ark’ situation. Surveys of 204 members of the Australian public inquired whether they are in favour of the survival of each of 24 native mammal, bird and reptile species (prior to and after information provision about each species). The species were ranked by percentage of ‘yes’ votes received. Species composition by taxon in various fractions of the ranking was determined. If the previous Similarity Principle holds, mammals should rank highly and dominate the top fractions of animals saved in the hierarchical list. We find that although mammals would be over-represented in the ‘Ark’, birds and reptiles are unlikely to be excluded when social choice is based on numbers ‘voting’ for the survival of each species. Support for the previous Similarity Principle is apparent particularly after information provision. Public policy implications of this are noted and recommendations are given.

Experimental evidence that partner choice is a driving force in the payoff distribution among cooperators or mutualists: the cleaner fish case

Supply and demand largely determine the price of goods on human markets. It has been proposed that in animals, similar forces influence the payoff distribution between trading partners in Sexual selection, intraspecific cooperation and interspecific mutualism. Here we present the first experimental evidence supporting biological market theory in it study on cleaner fish, Labroides dimidiatus. Cleaners interact with two classes of clients: choosy client species with access to several cleaners usually do not queue for service and do not return if ignored, while resident client species with access to only one cleaning station do queue or return. We used plexiglas plates with equal amounts of food to stimulate these behaviours of the two client classes. Cleaners soon inspected 'choosy' plates before 'resident' plates. This supports previous field observations that suggest that client species with access to several cleaners exert choice to receive better(immediate) service.

Eugenics or empowered choice? Community issues arising from prenatal testing

The prevention of inherited disabilities is viewed in two contrasting ways – either as enhancing reproductive choice and improving population health, or as discriminating against disabled community members. We argue that modern clinical genetics, including preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), reflects a persistent and defensible desire by the community to prevent disability, rather than as increasing discrimination or threatening to produce a 'new eugenic' society. Screening should be presented as a distinct issue for decision-making about the prevention or acceptance of disability, rather than as a routinely accepted component of antenatal care. The community must improve its understanding of the experiences of those who manage disability, and continue to debate the issues of discrimination, selective genetic prevention and enhancement, reproductive freedom, and eugenics.

The Limits of Rational Choice: New Institutionalism in the Test Bed of Central Banking Politics in Australia

This paper tests the explanatory capacities of different versions of new institutionalism by examining the Australian case of a general transition in central banking practice and monetary politics: namely, the increased emphasis on low inflation and central bank independence. Standard versions of rational choice institutionalism largely dominate the literature on the politics of central banking, but this approach (here termed RC1) fails to account for Australian empirics. RC1 has a tendency to establish actor preferences exogenously to the analysis; actors' motives are also assumed a priori; actor's preferences are depicted in relatively static, ahistorical terms. And there is the tendency, even a methodological requirement, to assume relatively simple motives and preference sets among actors, in part because of the game theoretic nature of RC1 reasoning. It is possible to build a more accurate rational choice model by re-specifying and essentially updating the context, incentives and choice sets that have driven rational choice in this case. Enter RC2. However, this move subtly introduces methodological shifts and new theoretical challenges. By contrast, historical institutionalism uses an inductive methodology. Compared with deduction, it is arguably better able to deal with complexity and nuance. It also utilises a dynamic, historical approach, and specifies (dynamically) endogenous preference formation by interpretive actors. Historical institutionalism is also able to more easily incorporate a wider set of key explanatory variables and incorporate wider social aggregates. Hence, it is argued that historical institutionalism is the preferred explanatory theory and methodology in this case.