Ancient Andean civilization dates to 3000 B. C. E., and its beginning is defined by the construction of temples (ceremonial centers). When Andean people started constructing temples, they did not cultivate crops such as maize or potato intensively and they did not use ceramics. During the Formative Period (3000-50 B.C.E.), Andean people constructed many temples and their area of distribution spread, but they did not form politically centralized social organizations such as states. The Formative Period is subdivided into 5 phases : Initial Formative Phase (3000-1500 B.C.E.), Early Formative Phase (1500-1200 B.C.E.), Middle Formative Phase (1200-800 B.C.E.), Late Formative Phase (800-250 B. C. E.), and Final Formative Phase (250-50 B. C. E.). Each temple was renovated at the same place using building materials such as stone or adobe and this resulted in gradual aggrandizement. Parallel to the continuous construction and renovation of temples, Andean formative societies were also aggrandized, and their complexity increased. As the dimensions of temples increased, the scale of societies also increased, so we can say that quantitative change brought about qualitative change. But it was impossible to enlarge temples indefinitely ; at some point every temple was abandoned without continued renovations. Thus, Andean temples changed in quality and did not maintain the same conditions. Temples themselves were material objects external to the human body and their size did not indicate the power of the people who led the construction but was related to the amount of manpower accumulated over a long period. Unintended consequences were brought about by the practices of the human ritual groups that constructed the temples. Andean societies of the Formative Period cannot be defined appropriately by models of political organization such as the state or chiefdom, so the concept of "rituality" is introduced in this paper. Rituality applies to societies that emphasized the ritual, communal, and group solidarity on which these entities were founded. The ritual part of Andean formative societies is of primary significance and is not a characteristic incidental to the polity. Rituality and polity are treated as distinct layers of a society and the society's character can be explained by their interrelationship. I introduce the concept "ritual economy" to analyze the relationship between religious ritual and material objects such as temples. Ritual economy is defined as "a theoretical construct that concerns the materialization of socially negotiated values and beliefs through acquisition and consumption aimed at managing meaning and shaping interpretation." By this term we explain a relationship in which political and economic elements are imbedded within ritual. In the case of Andean formative societies, it is constructive to analyze primarily ritual aspects that are not supplemental to political ones. In the case of Andean civilization, the material was tied to the ritual aspect and the complexity of the ritual aspect preceded the political one. Lastly, I try to explain the mechanism of early temples' renovation activities by using the concepts "cooperation" and "collective action, " not "competition" or "leadership of individuals." Cooperation is defined as "actions that require individuals to incur some cost or risk associated with other individuals receiving a benefit" and ritual activities at temples can be seen as a consequence of cooperation, not of competition. Groups of individuals with common interests are expected to act on behalf of their common interests, and collective action treats problems in which the optimal strategy from the perspective of an individual differs from the optimal strategy viewed from the perspective of a group. It is supposed that the population size of an Andean formative society was around 3, 000, and did not exceed it. And the question is how it is possible that social size grows in scale without compulsion or