> As for non-robbing, I was thinking that while robbing could be an
advantage to particular colonies, robbing could be inefficient behavoir for
a whole population (of all the colonies in an area.)  In other words, while
one colony might benefit, all the colonies would suffer a net loss of
production, because energy would be devoted to zero-sum-gain activity that
might otherwise be devoted to net-sum-gain activity.  

Reply:

But are you not now assuming that there is some "benefit" for the species to
have large numbers of colonies? It seems fairly obvious that fewer, stronger
colonies would be a better scenario for the species than a large number of
colonies competing for the same resources. 

It appears that robbing is a good example of how the individual colony is
trying to prevail, at the expense of any and all others. Where this would
lead, perhaps, is fewer and fewer more powerful colonies, -- but this is
offset by swarming. 

When you think about it, you might wonder why a colony should swarm at all?
Why not just become bigger and bigger? In nature, though, honey bee colonies
do not become huge; perhaps there is an average size that is most efficient
for the colony -- neither too small, nor too large.

But of course, we know that there has to be a minimum number of individuals
in a population or they become so inbred that they can go extinct. So there
is a maximum and a minimum number of individuals of a species can survive.
The complicated system of outcrossing that honey bees have seems to have
arisen to prevent inbreeding where there are a small number of colonies. 

By the way, so far as I know, there are no final answers on any of this.
Science is process of discovery. There will always be more to be found out,
to be learned, and perhaps to be unlearned as new information is uncovered!

pb

-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and  other info ---