Formal institutions play a prominent, indeed a predominant role in human societies. Such was not always the case. Modern humans (Homo sapiens) are thought to have evolved from precursor variants of the Homo species about 100,000 years ago (Bogucki 1999; Mithen 1996). By contrast, evidence of formal institutions in human society dates from less than 10,000 years ago. In other words, over 90% of modern human existence was guided exclusively by informal institutions.
Anthropologists and evolutionary psychologists believe that modern humans came equipped with an evolved mental capacity for social organization by way of informal institutions, such as norms. Formal institutions are not natural in the sense of being an evolved part of our genetic heritage, thus formal institutions may be regarded as artificial. (1) This paper is exploratory in nature, seeking to identify possibilities, which may account for this sea-change in human institutional environments. That is, the paper seeks to outline a plausible explanation for the introduction of a powerful and consequential institutional form in the (relatively) recent past.
One of the distinguishing characteristics of institutional research is that it starts with a question, not an axiom (Atkinson and Oleson 1996). For the present paper, the focal issues involve formal institutions and the central question is what was it that stimulated the appearance and widespread use of formal institutions out of an historical background, which had contained only informal institutions. (2) Here, the term formal refers to an institution in which a recognized elite has appropriated the power to control the rules and other meaningful content of the institution.
The Historical Context
Based on observations of contemporary hunter-gatherer societies, anthropologists believe that prior to the dawn of "civilization" humans were organized as hunter-gatherer bands of about 100-150 individuals (Mithen 1996). These bands were highly mobile, possessed little in the way of individual property and were thought to have been governed by strong norms of egalitarianism and sharing. Anthropologists further believe that the informal norms of egalitarianism and sharing were not simply present, but were actively monitored and enforced by group members in order to suppress the ability of one individual to exercise control over others (Bogucki 1999; Boehm 1999). This ethos of informal governance includes a moralistic suppression of status rivalry, consensual decision-making, and curbing of free riders (Boehm 1997). These norms of conduct have survival value for groups living in an environment of variable munificence and with members of variable skill at obtaining food. Although limited in terms of material goods, it is not thought to have been a particularly harsh or mean existence. (3)
That way of life began to change with the nascent development of agriculture, 8,000-9,000 years ago. This corresponds to the transition from the era, which Thorstein Veblen termed the primitive (or savage) stage to the predatory (or barbaric) stage. The primitive stage was characterized by a peaceable disposition and limited ownership of property, while the predatory stage was characterized by exploitation, class differentiation and extensive ownership of property (Veblen  1965). The egalitarian ethos that had prevailed throughout previous human history was a casualty of the formalization process in the predatory stage.
Population and Economic Dynamics
Changes in social behavior, hence in customs, usually have their origin in some significant alteration in life conditions (Murdock 1971). After the last major ice-age episode, there was a significant warming of the environment, starting about 12,000 years ago, resulting in new flora and fauna variants that were more amenable to domestication. Subsequently, an increasing number of hunter-gatherers experimented with and adopted an agricultural way of life. (4) In consequence, a growing number of people became sedentary. Sedentarism allowed for storage of food and other goods, while the withering of norms of sharing resulted in an accumulation of personal stores of wealth. Households became increasingly autonomous from the control of the group, resulting in an erosion of consensus decision-making (Bogucki 1999). (5) Erosion of the egalitarian ethos meant it became acceptable for some individuals to control the activities of others.
The changed way of life stimulated population growth and a "chain reaction" of economic and social changes (Johnson and Earle 1987). There is archeological evidence of specialist craftsmen by about 6,500 BC (Mithen 2004). By about 5,000 BC, the first of the ancient civilizations appeared in the Fertile Crescent (Meadow 1971). Also noted at this juncture are the creation of urban centers (Schusky 1989), employment of administrative specialists (Meadow 1971), specialist practitioners of religion (Mithen 2004), development of political centralization (Boehm 1999), and social stratification (Hallpike 1986). This transformation of society has been...