The ecological constraints hypothesis is widely accepted as an explanation for the evolution of delayed dispersal in cooperatively breeding birds. Intraspecific studies offer the strongest support. Observational studies have demonstrated a positive association between the severity of ecological constraints and the prevalence of cooperation, and experimental studies in which constraints on independent breeding were relaxed resulted in helpers moving to adopt the vacant breeding opportunities. However, this hypothesis has proved less successful in explaining why cooperative breeding has evolved in some species or lineages but not in others. Comparative studies have failed to identify ecological factors that differ consistently between cooperative and noncooperative species. The life history hypothesis, which emphasizes the role of life history traits in the evolution of cooperative breeding, offers a solution to this difficulty. A recent analysis showed that low adult mortality and low dispersal predisposed certain lineages to show cooperative behaviour, given the right ecological conditions. This represents an important advance, not least by offering an explanation for the patchy phylogenetic distribution of cooperative breeding. We discuss the complementary nature of these two hypotheses and suggest that rather than regarding life history traits as predisposing and ecological factors as facilitating cooperation, they are more likely to act in concert. While acknowledging that different cooperative systems may be a consequence of different selective pressures, we suggest that to identify the key differences between cooperative and noncooperative species, a broad constraints hypothesis that incorporates ecological and life history traits in a single measure of ‘turnover of breeding opportunities’ may provide the most promising avenue for future comparative studies.