Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Ecological Anthropology
Ecological Anthropology
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/2155736?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
Annual Reviews is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Annual Review of
Anthropology
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Ann. Rev. Anthropol. 1980. 9:235-73
Copyright i 1980 by Annual Reviews Inc. All rights reserved
ECOLOGICAL +9656
ANTHROPOLOGY
Benjamin S. Orlove
INTRODUCTION
235
0084-6570/80/1015-0235$01.00
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
236 ORLOVE
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ECOLOGICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 237
although different authors did not agree on the nature of these functions.
They also observed that the elements formed coherent structures. The
influence of British social anthropology, itself changed somewhat over the
decades, has begun to be felt in ecological anthropology only recently (36a);
the history of ecological anthropology for many years remained primarily
American.
Ecological anthropology emerged from the Boasian school of historical
particularism (136, 223). It can be seen as having passed through two stages
and now entering a third. The term "stage" is used to refer to a set of works
that share theoretical approaches, modes of explanation, and choices of
research problems. The term also suggests that the stages follow one an-
other chronologically and that each is an intellectual outgrowth of the one
that preceded it. The first stage ran from about 1930 to 1960, and the second
from about 1960 to the early 1970s. These dates cannot be exact, since many
writers continue to employ earlier approaches after new ones have been
introduced. In addition, some researchers have shifted from one stage to the
next, but others have remained with the previous ones. The stages thus refer
to analytical frameworks rather than to specific periods in time or the
writings of specific individuals.
As an intellectual endeavor, contemporary ecological anthropology can
be clearly attributed to two individuals: Julian Steward and Leslie White.
These men shared a strong Boasian training; Steward at Berkeley and White
at Chicago were both taught by students of Boas, who had founded these
departments (Alfred Kroeber and Robert Lowie, Fay Cooper Cole and
Edward Sapir, respectively.) It is an apparent paradox that Steward, who
received more contact with individuals outside this Boasian circle in his
graduate student days, made the less definitive break with historical particu-
larism.
Steward's work in ecological anthropology was motivated by a consistent
set of intellectual concerns (177). His contact at Berkeley with the noted
geographer Carl Sauer led him to examine the effect of environment on
culture. This interest characterizes his early postdoctoral work in the Great
Basin and his later more comparative work elsewhere. (Sauer also in-
fluenced Daryll Forde, one of the more ecologically oriented British social
anthropologists.) His "method of cultural ecology" (292, 294) demonstrates
his materialist emphasis. This method entails the study of the relation
between certain features of the environment and certain traits of the culture
possessed by the sets of people living in that environment. Within the
environment, Steward emphasized the quality, quantity, and distribution of
resources. The aspects of culture that he examined most closely were tech-
nology, economic arrangements, social organization, and demography, al-
though he included other aspects as well. Steward stressed the fact that the
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
238 ORLOVE
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ECOLOGICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 239
Neoevolutionism
The neoevolutionists, drawing inspiration from the centennial of Darwin's
publication, The Origin ofSpecies, established a series of evolutionary stages
and used the notions of specific and general evolution (266a) to accommo-
date Steward's method of cultural ecology to White's work on unilineal
evolution. The term neoevolutionism serves to distinguish their writings
from those of earlier evolutionists such as Tylor and Morgan. General
evolution, which tends to be unilinear, included features from Steward's
work (level of integration) as well as from White's (energy use per capita
per year). Elman Service (276), for example, dedicated his Primitive Social
Organization: An Evolutionary Approach to Steward and White. General
evolution strongly resembles the long discarded view in biology that evolu-
tion is progressive and leads toward new and better forms in succeeding
periods. Much of this work has involved the establishment of a small
number of evolutionary stages. These formulations also show the influence
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
240 ORLOVE
Neofunctionalism
The neofunctionalist school represents a second line of resolution of Stew-
ard and White. It is associated with Marvin Harris and the early work of
Andrew Vayda and Roy Rappaport; like the first line of resolution, it was
concentrated for a number of years at Columbia and Michigan universities.
The term neofunctionalism is used because the followers of this approach
see the social organization and culture of specific populations as functional
adaptations which permit the populations to exploit their environments
successfully without exceeding their carrying capacity. This approach
differs from other functionalist approaches in the social sciences in that the
unit which is maintained is a population rather than a social order. It also
differs from the treatment of adaptation in biological ecology by treating
populations rather than individuals as the units which adapt to environ-
ments. It forms a school, although there are differences between individuals
in it (Harris's greater concern with causality, Vayda and Rappaport's with
system functioning), and some members have shifted their theoretical posi-
tion in recent years.
In general, neofunctionalists explain specific aspects of social organiza-
tion and culture in terms of the functions which they serve in adapting local
populations to their environments. A close parallel might be noted between
White's technological, social, and ideological components of culture and
Harris's division of sociocultural adaptations into ecological patterns (in-
cluding technoenvironmental and demographic aspects), social structure,
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ECOLOGICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 241
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
242 ORLOVE
baga society and Polynesian kingdoms, for example, follows this view.] It
is not surprising that several of the most frequently cited ecology texts are
the different editions of E.P. Odum's Fundamentals of Ecology (209).
The neofunctionalists and neoevolutionists have examined the mecha-
nisms which link social structure and culture to the environment. They
follow biological ecologists in emphasizing survival and reproduction as the
goals of organisms (165), and they therefore emphasize population pressure
as one of the principal mechanisms of change (124). Unlike biologists, they
do not have a principle like natural selection which generates these goals,
and instead tend to fall back on implicit and poorly operationalized con-
cepts of adaptation. Systems should tend toward homeostatic equilibrium
(238, 239), with populations at or close to carrying capacity; population
growth above these limits induces change. The carrying capacity reflects
environmental variables and technology, and may be influenced by the
presence of other neighboring groups of trade partners, political enemies,
and the like. Population pressure, however, does not translate immediately
into human motivation, and some ecological anthropologists, seeking to
explain change, have had to appeal rather generally to notions of human
desires for survival or to the gradual replacement of less efficient systems
of production by more efficient ones (5). In a more recent discussion, Harris
(131) lists the desires for food, sex, and love and affection and a tendency
toward the expenditure of the minimum amount of effort necessary as
universal human constraints from which social and cultural systems can be
built, although this recapitulation of Malinowski is difficult to use in con-
crete cases. Values and preferences are explained by being reduced to the
ecological functions they serve, as in treatments of factors which influence
the levels of effort and efficiency of tropical forest hunters (249, 281) or in
the female infanticide-male warfare complex (70, 145, 200). This lack of an
ability to account for motivation and values in a more direct way has
attracted a great deal of criticism, and may account in part for the rift
between ecological anthropologists and their opponents (24). Such a lack,
however, has been addressed in the third stage of ecological anthropology,
as will be discussed later.
The neoevolutionists and neofunctionalists, although they examine popu-
lations of different sizes in different time scales, share a great deal. They
accepted the issues which Steward and White had outlined as worthy of
investigation, although they took different approaches in their study. They
both added a strong systems orientation to an earlier materialism, although
the neofunctionalists emphasized negative feedback mechanisms linking
energy use, food production, and population size, and the neoevolutionists
stressed positive feedback mechanisms among the same variables. They
developed strong interpersonal and institutional links; the departments at
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ECOLOGICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 243
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
244 ORLOVE
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ECOLOGICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 245
librium are difficult to assess because they require a long time scale. The
work also tends to present a sharp disjuncture between synchronic equilib-
rium and long-term macroevolution corresponding to the separation be-
tween the neofunctionalists and the neoevolutionists. Mechanisms of
short-term cultural evolution are also often lacking. [See, however, Leeds's
(169) treatment of microinvention.]
In contrast to the work of Steward and White and the neoevolutionary and
neofunctionalist schools, a third set of approaches in ecological an-
thropology has begun to emerge in recent years. The research that is bein
carried out cannot be characterized as strongly as in the two previous stages
as sharing a large number of assumptions, but it does question the neofunc-
tionalist approach along the lines indicated above. This work will be called
"processual" ecological anthropology. The use of the term "process" has
been used earlier by other writers (16, 158, 171, 186) to refer to the impor-
tance of diachronic studies in ecological anthropology and to the need to
examine mechanisms of change. However, the term "processual ecological
anthropology" to describe current developments in the field does appear to
be new. Important trends are (a) the examination of the relation of demo-
graphic variables and production systems, stimulated in part by Boserup's
work (31); (b) the response of populations to environmental stress (268,
311, 312); (c) the formation and consolidation of adaptive strategies (22-24,
27, 37, 38) which follow Barth's early work on the use of the concept of
the niche (11); and (d) new work in Marxism, including the emerging
interest of anthropologists in political economy and structural Marxism.
The studies are called processual because they seek to overcome the split
in the second stage of ecological anthropology between excessively short
and long time scales (15, 84-86). More concretely, they examine shifts and
changes in individual and group activities, and they focus on the mecha-
nisms by which behavior and external constraints influence each other.
These points indicate the importance of the incorporation of decision-
making models into ecological anthropology. Like the neofunctionalist and
neoevolutionist ecological anthropology, processual ecological an-
thropology examines the interaction of populations and environments (5
rather than treating the latter as a passive background to the former. Th
are strong parallels between processual ecological anthropology and curre
work in biological ecology; the nature of these resemblances is the subje
of some analyses which seek to link anthropology and biology in a mor
rigorous manner than has previously been the case.
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
246 ORLOVE
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ECOLOGICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 247
making by locating the cognized alternatives and the procedures for choos-
ing among them. Quinn (234, p. 42) distinguishes within these among
"information processing models," "retrodictive models," and "models of
cultural principles." These types all tend to be employed to analyze contexts
in which individuals must select among a small number of alternatives,
often on the basis of consideration of social status. Postmarital residence
and adoption are common topics. These models offer useful links between
studies of native systems of classification and actual behavior; such ethnose-
mantic models have been developed for the planting decisions of Brazilian
sharecroppers (154-156) and the marketing decisions of West African fish
vendors (108). These models often are applied to situations in which alter-
natives are finite and may be distinguished by discrete rather than continu-
ous variables. The parameters which affect the choices tend to be few in
number, and the outcomes of choices are certain, or nearly so.
The microeconomic models resemble economic models of choice making.
Actors operating under a set of constraints allocate scarce resources to a
hierarchical series of ends or goals. Many such models assume that actors
attempt to maximize some valued state, although some authors have
proposed more complex models of optimizations such as "satisficing," mini-
max strategies, and hierarchies of strategies (18, 274). In this fashion they
avoid the rigidities often attributed to models of rational actors (139). There
is a larger concern with the outcome of the decision and less emphasis on
the process of decision making. These models are applied to situations with
greater uncertainty and ambiguity, where the range of alternatives and the
outcomes of choices are less well defined. The alternatives may be distin-
guished by continuous as well as discrete variables, and many parameters
may influence them. Barth's (12) efforts at generative models of social
organization are an example of such work. Borrowing from game theory,
he attempts to explain political organization among Pathans as a structure
which had emerged from a large number of individual decisions made by
actors operating under different constraints. Ortiz's (220, 221) studies of
planting and marketing decisions by small-scale farmers in Colombia are
another example. Although these models can be criticized for taking the
goals and constraints as givens and failing to examine the patterns of
resource distribution, they have been of considerable use in anthropology
as in political science and economics.
The potential links between ecological anthropology and actor-based
models are strong, but they have not been utilized extensively. Ecological
anthropology, particularly in its first two historical stages, emphasized the
importance of environmental factors in shaping collective patterns of behav-
ior. The neglect of the examination of individuals which this focus has often
produced may be explained in part by the repudiation of the examination
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
248 ORLOVE
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ECOLOGICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 249
not generate as powerful results as were expected, and system modeling and
simulation has also been relatively unrewarding. Both biological and human
ecology have shifted from system-level statics and dynamics to utilizing
individual action as a basis for emergent higher-level processes (252). Many
biologists have begun to challenge the order and regularity of the sequence
of successional stages. The links among diversity, stability, and ecosystem
maturity are also questioned (58, 75, 157); the stability of some ecosystems
has been shown to rely on climatic stability rather than on mechanisms
internal to the ecosystem. The role of external stresses and catastrophes in
influencing ecosystem structure and function has also attracted consider-
able attention (41, 65, 218, 224), paralleling the interest in the response of
populations to environmental stress in ecological anthropology. The links
with demography and biological ecology have led in many cases to in-
creased efforts to define and operationalize variables, to include new meth-
odological procedures for assessment of environmental variables, and to
apply tests of statistical inference with greater rigor (166a). Furthermore,
these parallels between cultural and biological ecology have generallly been
proposed (245) more cautiously than was the case with the neofunctional-
ists. Rather than claiming that natural selection forces organisms to behave
as if they operated with the same rational calculus that human actors are
presumed to use, it can be suggested that these homologous optimization
models facilitate the examination of the ways in which human action affects
ecosystems and environmental constraints influence human decision mak-
ing. They also allow interdisciplinary research efforts to proceed more
easily. The questioning of the neofunctionalist approach has led to an ability
to study productive activities (83, 166b, 332), settlement patterns (166, 324),
and the like without attempting to show how they maintain human popula-
tions in equilibrium with their environments. In this way the processual
approach and Stewardian cultural ecology may be seen to share some
approaches. (The "principle of alternating generations" also links them.)
Some research (207) on hunting typifies this work. Hunting behavior in
traditional settings has been compared to the predictions of hypotheses on
optimal foraging strategies in biological ecology. In some cases the hunters
deviate from these predictions, because the most prestigious or culturally
desirable meat is not always the most efficient or least risky to catch in
energetic terms (80), or because fear of observation by members of other
social groups constrains patterns of movement (179, 180).
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
250 ORLOVE
in this section. They bear on the recent work in demography and an-
thropology which has contributed to processual ecological anthropology.
Neofunctionalist work emphasized negative feedback mechanisms which
maintained populations at static levels: neoevolutionists looked at the broad
details of human demographic history, and often missed the details of
particular cases.
A seminal work in this field is Boserup's The Conditions of Agricultural
Growth (31). Her well-known hypotheses reverse Malthusian descriptions
of human demography to suggest that population pressure causes rather
than follows agricultural intensification; people shift from more efficient
extensive systems to less efficient intensive ones only when driven by the
necessity of feeding more individuals. The general outlines of her argument
and the details of her sequence of stages in agricultural intensification have
attracted a great deal of attention. Many authors have pointed out the
shortcomings of her excessively simple scheme, and indicate that other
factors can also influence the sequences of agricultural intensification; these
include market systems, political pressures, and environmental variables.
Boserup's work and studies by Spooner (286) and others (14, 17, 25, 37, 61,
113, 124, 126, 190, 203, 307, 325) stimulated by it may be classified as
processual, for several reasons. The effort to assess the links between popu-
lation pressure and agricultural intensification have led to diachronic stud-
ies (190) in which changes in single groups are traced through time;
research in other areas for which little historical reconstruction is possible
has been carried out by examining the covariation of population density and
agricultural intensity (34a), with the assumption that current distribution
of associations resembles past sequences. The studies often rest on an im-
plicit decision-making model in which actors actually allocate scarce re-
sources (labor) in order to achieve goals (food production). The
mechanisms of change are seen in the connection between population and
resources, linked through systems of agricultural production and the neces-
sity to feed local populations. Individual decisions have cumulative conse-
quences which lead to broader change; shortening of fallow periods may
lead to a shift from communal tenure to private property, for instance.
Other work links demographic and ideological change (20).
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ECOLOGICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 251
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
252 ORLOVE
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ECOLOGICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 253
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
254 ORLOVE
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ECOLOGICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 255
quality or availability; Harris & Ross (133) present a contrary position, that
preferences for different sorts of meat mirror their availability and quality.
Sahlins argues by alluding to the symbolic meanings attached to animals in
other domains, which transform biologically edible animals such as cattle,
swine, dogs, and horses into distinct cultural degrees of edibility and inedi-
bility; Ross (251) juxtaposes data on animal production and meat preserva-
tion in the United States with statements on relative preference for cattle
and swine. One might argue that the truth lies somewhere in between, as
does one analyst (322) of American commodities interested in predicting
future levels of consumption; if the price of one type of meat goes down,
people will buy more of it, but certain traditional preferences change slowly.
It might also be argued that both are wrong since neither one focuses on
individuals as actors, but rather on superorganic systems. It is difficult for
Sahlins to account for changing food preferences, and Harris & Ross (133)
cannot explain lags in changing availability and consumption patterns.
Decisions about diet, like many other decisions, are not always made fully
consciously, and they reflect a number of goals and constraints, yet their
cumulative impact is large.
The relative isolation of island societies and the recent settlement of some
make the examination of the interrelation of social and cultural patterns
with the environment particularly clear in the Pacific case. Another similar
case, however, may be found in Europe. In a study of an alpine valley in
northern Italy, Cole & Wolf (54) find striking differences between a Ger-
manic and a Romance-speaking village, despite similarities in environment,
technology, and population. Though both villages are Catholic, they par-
take of the somewhat different cultures of northern Europe and the Medi-
terranean. The inheritance patterns (335) in each, for instance, represent a
compromise between the respective cultural ideals of impartible and parti-
ble inheritance on the one hand and the exigencies of alpine agriculture and
livestock raising on the other; the two are close but still distinct. Settlement
patterns and village political systems also reflect the cultural differences
between the two. These facts are taken to indicate some "doubts ... about
the usefulness of ecological anthropology in the study of complex societies"
(54, p. 284); it might better be argued that it is neofunctional ecological
anthropology whose utility is dubious. The history of each village includes
a series of contacts with other villages and wider political units; this, how-
ever, is also true of most Melanesian and many Polynesian societies as well.
The two villages are the outcome of a long history of interaction between
environment, social structure, and culture in the valley and surrounding
region. The debate about whether they really have more in common as
Alpine peasants or less in common as Germanics and Latins is not wholly
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
256 ORLOVE
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ECOLOGICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 257
can readily be drawn with the previous examples of Oceanic societies and
high-altitude peasant groups in the Alps and Andes (244). It should be
stressed that these analogies are not intended to suggest that the same
processes or mechanisms operate in human history and biological evolution,
nor that culture and species are similar entities.
Mechanisms of Change
In processual ecological anthropology, decision-making models can provide
a mechanism of change because there is interaction between the choices
which actors make, behaviors on an individual and group level, and the
biological, social, and cultural systems which influence the distribution of
resources, constrain the possible adaptive strategies, and provide some of
the goals which the actors attempt to meet. In this view, culture and
ideology are not seen as epiphenomena but as proximate causes which shape
human action. They influence the options among which individuals select
and in turn are influenced by the cumulative consequences of such choices.
This view facilitates the synthesis of recent Marxist work and ecological
anthropology. These points are supported by recent literature on Highland
New Guinea (31a, 187, 188, 195, 279, 299, 320), the Philippines (7, 74, 82),
pastoral nomads (148, 225, 226, 269, 270, 278a, 305), and other groups (64,
78, 115, 275, 288, 329).
Other writers, dissatisfied with such eclecticism, have sought more con-
cise and formalized presentations of mechanisms of change. One approach
is the previously mentioned cultural determinism of Sahlins and others. His
treatment of "transformations" (265), however, looks at qualitative change
without examining the quantitative change with which it is inextricably and
dialectically linked. To draw an analogy, he would suggest that a compari-
son of a few frames from a film is sufficient to depict the events and processes
which were recorded. Such still photographs, though, even if they were
analyzed in detail, could not portray motion. The view of sociobiology (47)
is that human behavior, like that of other species, is shaped by the dictates
of natural selection on genetic variation. This point resembles that of other
writers who emphasize population size and growth as an indication of
adaptation, although it differs on insisting on a genetic rather than a cultural
basis of behavior. The debates surrounding this approach will not be sum-
marized here. [It is worth noting, however, that arguments made in sociobi-
ological terms can frequently be recast without any reference to the genetic
basis for behavior. Thus, in a recent article, Dyson-Hudson & Smith (81)
present an argument that human territorial behavior follows the predictions
of ecological theory with regard to spatial patterns of resource use and
defense; they show that territoriality among Basin-Plateau Indians, the
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
258 ORLOVE
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ECOLOGICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 259
Specific Cases
Two recent works which exemplify processual ecological anthropology are
The Raft Fishermen (98) and Fields of the Tzotzil (55). The former analyzes
the retention of fishing from rafts in a Brazilian village where boats, which
would permit larger catches, are also available. The study examines a local
population but places it in the contexts of extralocal economic and political
systems. Forman's explanation begins with the decisions that individual
actors make. He shows that local elites would be able to dominate the
fishermen even more thoroughly than they currently do if the shift in fishing
techniques took place. The fishermen accurately perceive that they would
have an absolutely as well as a relatively smaller share of the total catch if
that catch were increased by shifting to boat fishing. The lack of change is
thus a dynamic rather than a static equilibrium; if certain aspects of external
domination were to change (such as the system of patron-client relations
on the regional and national level), the local situation would change as well.
[However, Forman (97) has recently been criticized (60, 186) for leaning
toward neofunctionalism in making relatively unsubstantiated claims that
secrecy about identifying fishing spots serves to reduce competition and
prevent overfishing, and his analysis of kinship has been challenged on
methodological grounds (191).]
Collier's study in southern Mexico addresses a generally similar question,
the reasons for the retention of traditional identities among peasants, as
Indians in distinction to ladinos and as members of specific communities
(municipios) in distinction to other such communities. He shows the bene-
fits that these identities would confer on individuals and the difficulties
which the loss of identities would bring about. He examines local systems
of production in detail and shows the consequences of demographic increase
and external pressures on them. He thus retains much of the systems
orientation of earlier work without falling into a functionalist bias. The
detailed data on changing patterns of lineage composition, land tenure, and
labor utilization systematically document the response of individuals to
shifting environmental and demographic constraints, and the historical
material shows the impact of the cumulative consequences of these deci-
sions on the environment and wider economic and political systems. He also
integrates regional and national level processes with the study of local
populations more thoroughly than Forman. This work thus draws on the
areas of processual ecological anthropology mentioned earlier-the relation
of demographic variables and production systems, the response of popula-
tions to environmental stress, and the formation and consolidation of adap-
tive strategies. This work, however, has been criticized recently both
implicitly and explicitly for failing to analyze correctly the role of Chiapas
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
260 ORLOVE
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ECOLOGICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 261
thropologists, notably Barth (13) and Leeds (170), both of whom have used
actor-based models with considerable success in the analysis of social and
economic organization of complex societies. Some nonstate settings have
also attracted processual ecological anthropologists (36a). New Guinea
allows for the testing of Boserup's hypothesis on demographic pressure and
agricultural intensification, and the nature of Melanesian social and politi-
cal organization makes actor-based models particularly appealing. Never-
theless, many of the factors identified in complex societies are at work
elsewhere, and even the supposedly isolated local populations studied by
neofunctionalist ecological anthropologists have undergone processes of
historical change and rely on extralocal resources, as shown by Anderson's
(5) criticisms of Rappaport's (236) analysis of Tsembaga in highland New
Guinea, Helms' (142) analysis of Miskito Indians in lowland Central Amer-
ica, studied by Nietschmann (207), and Schrire's (275a) reexamination of
the San (166, 166b) of southern Africa.
CONCLUSIONS
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
262 ORLOVE
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ECOLOGICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 263
Eric Ross, Leslie Sponsel, Robert Wasserstrom, and David Sloan Wilson.
I also wish to thank my research assistants, Aaron Zazueta and Gary
Newport, for their help in locating and classifying references, and the
secretaries, Wanda Greene, Cecelia Odelius, Lyn Schonewise, and Clifford
Shockney, who patiently typed various drafts of this manuscript. Finally,
I would like to acknowledge the useful discussions and insights generated
by the students in the Anthropology/Ecology 211 seminar on cultural
ecology.
Literature Cited
1. Abruzzi, W. S. 1979. Population pres- Econ. Monogr. Soc. Anthropol. No. 19.
sure and subsistence strategies among London: Athlone
the Mbuti pygmies. Hum. Ecot 13. Barth, F. 1961. Nomads ofSouth Persia:
7:183-89 The Basseri Tribe of the Khamseh
2. Acheson, J. S. 1975. The lobster fiefs: Confederacy. Oslo: Oslo Univ. Press
economic and ecological effects of terri- 14. Basehart, H. W. 1973. Cultivation in-
toriality in the Maine lobster industry. tensity, settlement patterns, and home-
Hum. Ecol 3:183-207 stead forms among the Matengo of Tan-
2a. Adams, R. N. 1975. Energy and Struc- zania. Ethnology 12:57-73
ture: A Theory of Social Power. Austin/ 15. Bates, D. G., Lees, S. H. 1977. The role
London: Univ. Texas Press of exchange in productive specializa-
3. Alberti, G., Mayer, E., eds. 1974. Recip- tion. Am. Anthropol 79:824-41
rocidad e intercambio en los Andes 16. Bates, D. G., Lees, S. H. 1979. The
peruano& Lima: Inst. Estud. Peru. myth of population regulation. See Ref.
4. Alland, A. Jr. 1975. Adaptation. Ann. 47, pp. 273-89
Rev. Anthropol 4:59-73 17. Bayliss-Smith, T. 1974. Constraints on
5. Anderson, J. N. 1973. Ecological an- population growth: the case of the
thropology and anthropological Polynesian outlier atolls in the precon-
ecology. In Handbook of Social and tract period. Hum. Ecol 2:259-95
Cultural Anthropology, ed. J. J. Honig-18. Becker, G. S. 1976. The Economic Ap-
mann, pp. 179-239. Chicago: Rand proach to Human Behavior. Chicago:
McNally Univ. Chicago Press
6. Azzi, C. 1974. More on India's sacred 19. Beckerman, S. 1979. The abundance of
cattle. Curr. Anthropol. 15:317-21 protein in Amazonia: a reply to Gross.
7. Bacdayan, A. S. 1974. Securing water Am. Anthropol. 81:533-60
for drying rice terraces: irrigation, com-20. Bell, R. M. 1979. Fate and Honor, Fam-
munity organization, and expanding so- ily and Village: Demographic and Cul-
cial relationships in a Western Bontoc tural Change in Rural Italy Since 1800.
group, Philippines. Ethnology 13(3): Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
247-60 21. Bennett, A. F., Ruben, J. A. 1979. En-
8. Barrau, J. 1965. L'humide et le sec: an dothermy and activity in vertebrates.
essay on ethnological adaptations to Science 206:649-54
contrastive environments in the Indo- 22. Bennett, J. W. 1969. Northern Plains-
Pacific area. J. Polynesian Soc. 74: men: Adaptive Strategy and Agrarian
329-46 Life. Chicago: Aldine
9. Barlett, P. F. 1976. Labor efficiency and 23. Bennett, J. W. 1976. The Ecological
the mechanisms of agricultural evolu- Transition: Cultural Anthropology and
tion. J. Anthropot Res. 32:124-40 Human Adaptation. London: Perga-
10. Barlett, P. F. 1977. The structure of de- mon
cision-making in Paso. Am. Ethnol. 24. Bennett, J. W. 1976. Anticipation, ad-
4:285-307 aptation, and the concept of culture in
11. Barth, F. 1956. Ecological relationships anthropology. Science 192:847-953
of ethnic groups in Swat, Northern Pa- 25. Berreman, G. D. 1978. Ecology,
kistan. Am. Anthropol. 58:1079-89 demography and domestic strategies in
12. Barth, F. 1959. Political Leadership the western Himalayas. J. Anthropol.
Among Swat Pathans. London Sch. Res 34:326-68
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
264 ORLOVE
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ECOLOGICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 265
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
266 ORLOVE
86. Ellen, R. F. 1978. Problems and 103. Friedman, J., Rowlands, M. J. 1977.
The
progress in the ethnographic analysis ofEvolution of Social Systems. Lon-
small-scale human ecosystems. Man don: Duckworth
(NS) 13:290-303 104. Fuenzalida, F., Villarin, J. L., Golte, J.,
87. Errington, S. 1977. Order and power in Valiente, T. 1968. Estructuras tradi-
Karavar. In The Ethnography of Power: cionales y economia de mercado: La
Ethnographic Studies from Asia, comunidad de indigenas de Huayo-
Oceania and the New World, ed. R. D. pampa Lima: Inst. Estud. Peru.
Fogelson, R. W. Adams, pp. 23-43. 105. Gadacz, R. R. 1975. Montagnais hunt-
New York/London: Academic ing dynamics in historico-ecological
88. Feldman, M. W., Cavalli-Sforza, L. L. perspective. Anthropologica 17:149-67
1975. Models for cultural inheritance: a106. Gage, T. B. 1979. The competitive in-
general linear model. Ann. Hum. Biol. teractions of man and deer in prehis-
2:215-26 toric California. Hum. Ecol. 7:253-68
89. Feldman, M. W., Cavalli-Sforza, L. L. 107. Geertz, C. 1972. The wet and the dry:
1976. Cultural and biological evolution- traditional irrigation in Bali and
ary processes: selection for a trait under Morocco. Hum. Ecol 1:23-39
complex transmission. Theor. Popul 108. Gladwin, C. H. 1975. A model of the
Biol 9:238-59 supply of smoked fish from Cape Coast
90. Feldman, M. W., Cavalli-Sforza, L. L. to Kumasi. In Formal Methods in Eco-
1977. The evolution of continuous vari-
nomicAnthropology, ed. S. Plattner, pp.
ation II: complex transmission and as- 77-127. Washington: Am. Anthropol.
sortative mating. Theor. Popul. Biot. Assoc.
11:161-81
109. Gladwin, C. H. 1979. Production func-
91. Feldman, M. W., Cavalli-Sforza, L. L.
tions and decision models: complemen-
1981. Interactions between genetic and
tary models. Am. Ethnol. 6:653-78
cultural evolution. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst.
110. Glickman, M. 1972. The Nuer and the
In preparation
Dinka: a further note. Man (NS)
92. Firth, R. 1951. Elements ofSocial Orga-
7:586-94
nization. London: Watts
111. Godelier, M. 1977. Perspectives in
93. Firth, R. 1954. Social organization and
Marxist Anthropology. Cambridge:
social change. J. R. Anthropol. Inst.
Cambridge Univ. Press
84:1-20
112. Goldman, I. 1970. Ancient Polynesian
94. Firth, R. 1964. Essays on Social Organ-
ization and Values. London: Athlone
Society. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
113. Goldstein, M. C. 1976. Fraternal poly-
95. Flannery, K. V. 1972. The cultural evo-
lution of civilizations. Ann. Rev. Ecol andry and fertility in a high Himalayan
valley in Northwest Nepal. Hum Ecol
Syst. 3:399-426
4:223-33
96. Flores-Ochoa, J. 1970. Los pastores de
Paratia: Una introduccion a su estudio. 114. Gomez-Ibaiiez, D. A. 1977. Energy,
Mexico: Inst. Indig. Interam. economics and the decline of transhu-
97. Forman, S. 1967. Cognition and the mance. Geogr. Rev. 67:284-98
catch: the locating of fishing spots in 115.
a Goody, J. 1976. Production and Repro-
Brazilian coastal village. Ethnology duction:A Comparative Study of the Do-
6:417-26 mestic Domain. Cambridge: Cambridge
98. Forman, S. 1970. The Raft Fishermen: Univ. Press
Tradition and Change in the Brazilian 116. Gould, R. H., Fowler, D. D., Fowler,
Peasant Economy. Bloomington: Indi- C. S. 1972. Diggers and doggers: paral-
ana Univ. Press lel acculturation in the deserts of West-
99. Freeman, M. M. R. 1971. A social and ern Australia and the Great Basin.
ecologic analysis of systematic female Southwest J. Anthropol. 28:265-81
infanticide among the Netsilik Eskimo. 117. Gross, D.R. 1971. Ritual and confor-
Am. Anthropol 73:1011-78 mity: a religious pilgrimage to North-
100. Freilich, M. 1963. The natural experi- eastern Brazil. Ethnology 10:12948
ment, ecology and culture. Southwest. J. 118. Gross, D. R. 1975. Protein capture and
Anthropol 19:21-37 cultural development in the Amazon
101. Fried, M. H. 1967. The Evolution of Po- Basin. Am Anthropol 77:526-49
litical Society: An Essay in Political An-119. Gross, D. R., Eilen, G., Flowers, N. M.,
thropology. New York: Random House Leoi, F. M., Ritter, M. L., Werner, K.
102. Friedman, J. 1974. Marxism, structur- W. 1979. Ecology and acculturation
alism and vulgar materialism. Man among native peoples of central Brazil.
9:444-69 Science 206-1043-50
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ECOLOGICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 267
120. Hailpike, C. R. 1973. Functionalist in- in the New Guinea highlands. Mankind
terpretations of primitive warfare. Man 11:198-207
8:451-70 139. Heath, A. 1975. Rational Choice and
121. Hardesty, D. L. 1972. The human eco- Social Exchange: A Critique of Ex-
logical niche. Am. Anthropol. 74: change Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge
458-66 Univ. Press
122. Hardesty, D. L. 1975. The niche con- 140. Heinen, H. D. 1975. On cultural materi-
cept: suggestions for its use in human alism, Marx, and the "Hegelian Mon-
ecology. Hum. Ecol. 3:71-85 key." Curr. Anthropoi 16:450-53
123. Hardesty, D. L. 1977. Ecological An- 141. Helm, J. 1968. Essays on the Problem oj
thropology. New York: Wiley the Tribe. Seattle: Univ. Washington
124. Harner, M. 1970. Population pressure Press
and the social evolution of agricultural- 142. Helms, M. 1969. The cultural ecology
ists. Southwest. J. Anthrol. 26:67-86 of a colonial tribe. Ethnology 8:76-84
125. Harner, M. 1977. The ecological basis 143. Hicks, F. 1979. "Flower war" in Aztec
of Aztec sacrifice. Am. Ethnol. history. Am Ethnol 6:87-92
4:117-35
144. Hill, J. 1977. Explanation of Prehistoric
126. Harris, G. T. 1978. Responses to popu- Change. Albuquerque: Univ. New
lation pressure in the Papua New Mexico Press
Guinea Highlands, 1957-74. Oceania 145. Hirschfeld, L., Howe, J., Levin, B.
48:284-98
1978. Warfare, infanticide, and statisti-
127. Harris, M. 1965. The myth of the sacred
cal inference: a comment on Divale and
cow. In Man, Culture, and Animals:
Harris. Am Anthropol. 80:110-15
The Role ofAnimals in Human Ecologi-
146. Hirschlifer, J. 1977. Economics from a
cal Adjustments, ed. A. Leeds, A. P.
biological viewpoint. J. Law Econ.
Vayda, pp. 217-28. Washington: Am.
20:1-52
Assoc. Adv. Sci.
147. Howard, A., Ortiz, S. 1971. Decision
128. Harris, M. 1966. The cultural ecology
making and the study of social process.
of India's sacred cattle. Curr. Anthropol.
Acta Sociol. 14:213-226
7:51-59
148. Irons, W. 1974. Nomadism as a politi-
129. Harris, M. 1975. Culture, People, Na-
ture: An Introduction to General An- cal adaptation: the case of the Yomut
thropology. New York: Crowell. 2nd ed.
Turkmen. Am. Ethnol. 1:635-58
130. Harris, M. 1977. Cannibals and Kings: 149. Irons, W. 1979. Natural selection, adap-
The Origins of Cultures. New York: tation, and human social behavior. See
Random House Ref. 47, pp. 4-39
131. Harris, M. 1979. Cultural Materialism: 150. Irons, W. 1979. Culture and biological
The Struggle for a Science of Culture. success. See Ref. 47, pp. 257-72
New York: Random House 151. Isaac, B. L. 1977. The Siriono of East-
132. Harris, M. 1979. The human strategy. ern Bolivia: a reexamination. Hum.
Nat. Hist. 88:30-36 Ecol. 5:137-54
133. Harris, M., Ross, E. B. 1978. How beef152. Jarvenpa, R. 1977. Subarctic Indian
became king. Psychol. Today 12:88-94 trappers and band society: the econom-
134. Harris, M., Sahlins, M. D. 1979. 'Can- ics of male mobility. Hum. Ecol.
nibals and kings': an exchange. NYRev. 5:223-59
Books 26:45-70 153. Johannes, R. E. 1978. Traditional ma-
135. Harris, 0. 1978. El parentesco y la eco- rine conservation methods in Oceania
nomia vertical en el Ayllu Laymi (norte and their demise. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst.
de Potosi). Avances (La Paz, Bolivia) 9:349-64
1:51-64 154. Johnson, A. 1971. Sharecroppers of the
136. Hatch, E. 1973. The growth of eco- Sertdo: Economics and Dependence on
nomic, subsistence, and ecological stud- a Brazilian Plantation. Stanford: Stan-
ies in American anthropology. J. An- ford Univ. Press
thropol. Res. 29:22143 155. Johnson, A. W. 1972. Individuality and
137. Hayden, B. 1975. The carrying capacity experimentation in traditional agricul-
dilemma: an alternative approach. Pop- ture. Hum. Ecol. 1:149-59
ulation Studies in Archaeotogy and Bio- 156. Johnson, A. W. 1974. Ethnoecology
logicalAnthropology: A Symposium, ed. and planting practices in a swidden ag-
A. C. Swedlund. Soc. Am. Archaeol. ricultural system. Am. Ethnol. 1:87-
Mem 30:11-21 101
157. Karr, J. R. 1976. Seasonality, resource
138. Healey, C. J. 1978. The adaptive signifi-
cance of ceremonial exchange and trade availability, and community diversity in
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
268 ORLOVE
tropical bird communities. Am. Nat. in the American tropics. Hum. Ecol.
110:973-94 4:331-49
158. Kottack, C. 1977. The process of state 174. Lomax, A., Arensberg, C. M. 1977. A
formation in Madagascar. Am. Ethnol. worldwide evolutionary classification of
4:136-55 cultures by subsistence systems. Curr.
159. Krech, S. III. 1978. Disease, starvation Anthropol. 18:659-701
and Northern Athapaskan social orga- 175. Love, T. F. 1977. Ecological niche the-
nization. Am Ethnol. 5:710-32 ory in sociocultural anthropology: a
160. Labby, D. 1976. The Demystification o0 conceptual framework and an applica-
Yap: Dialectics and Culture on a Mi- tion. Am. Ethnol. 4:27-41
cronesian Island. Chicago: Univ. 176. MacArthur, R. H., Wilson, E. 0. 1967.
Chicago Press The Theory of Island Biogeography.
161. Lambert, B. 1977. Bilaterality in the Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press
Andes. See Ref. 62, pp. 1-28 177. Manners, R. A. 1973. Julian Haynes
162. Langdon, S. 1979. Comparative Tlingit Steward, 1902-1972. Am. Anthropol.
and Haida adaptation to the West coast 75:886-903
of the Prince of Wales archipelago. Eth- 178. Margolis, M. 1977. Historical perspec-
nology 18:101-19 tives on frontier agriculture as an adap-
163. Laughlin, C. D. Jr. 1974. Deprivation tive strategy. Am. Ethnol. 4:42-64
and reciprocity. Man 9:380-96 179. Marks, S. A. 1976. Large Mammals and
164. Laughlin, C. D. Jr. 1974. Maximiza- a Brave People: Subsistence Hunters in
tion, marriage and residence among the Zambia Seattle: Univ. Washington
So. Am. Ethnol. 1:129-41 Press
165. Laughlin, C. D. Jr., Brady, I. A., eds. 180. Marks, S. A. 1977. Hunting behavior
1978. Extinction and Survival in Hu- and strategies of the Valley Bisa in
man Populations. New York: Columbia Zambia. Hum. Ecol. 5:1-36
Univ. Press 181. Marshall, J. F., Polgar, S., eds. 1976.
166. Lee, R. B. 1972. !Kung spatial organiza- Culture, Natality and Family Planning.
tion: an ecological and historical per- Chapel Hill: Carolina Popul. Cent.,
spective. Hum. Ecol. 1(2):125-47 Univ. North Carolina
166a. Lee, R. B. 1979. The IKung San: Men, 182. Maserang, C. H. 1977. Carryingcapacity
Women, and Work in a Foraging Soci- and low population growth. J. An-
ety. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press thropol. Res. 33:474-92
166b. Lee, R. B., DeVore, I. 1976. Kalahari 183. Mayer, E., Fonseca, C. 1979. Sistemas
Hunter-Gatherers: Studies of the IKung agrarios en la cuenca del Rio Canete.
San and Their Neighbors. Cambridge: Lima: Impresa ONERN
Harvard Univ. Press 184. Mayer, E., Zamalloa, C. 1974. Recip-
167. Leeds, A. 1960. The ideology of the rocidad en las relaciones de producci6n.
Yaruro Indians in relation to socio-eco- See Ref. 3, pp. 66-85
nomic organization. Antropol6gica 185. Maynard Smith, J. 1978. Optimization
[Caracas, Venezuela] 9:1-10 theory in evolution. Ann. Rev. Ecol.
168. Leeds, A. 1962. Ecological determi- Syst. 9:31-56
nants of chieftainship among the Yaruro 186. McCay, B. J. 1978. Systems ecology,
Indians of Venezuela. Akten des 34. In- people ecology, and the anthropology of
ternationalen Amerikanistenkongresses, fishing communities. Hum. Ecol.
pp. 597-608 6:397-422
169. Leeds, A. 1962. Microinvention as an 187. Meggitt, M. 1972. System and subsys-
evolutionary process. Trans. NYAcad. tem: The Te exchange cycle among the
Sci 24:930-43 Mae Enga. Hum. Ecol. 1:111-23
170. Leeds, A. 1969. The significant vari- 188. Meggitt, M. 1977. Blood is Their Ar-
ables determining the character of gument: Warfare Among the Mae Enga
squatter settlements. Am. Lat. (Rio de Tribesmen of the New Guinea High-
Janeiro) 12:44-86 lands. Palo Alto: Mayfield
171. Lees, S. H. 1974. Hydraulic develop- 189. Mencher, J. P. 1966. Kerala and Ma-
ment as a process of response. Hum. dras: a comparative study of ecology
Ecol. 2:159-75 and social structure. Ethnology
172. Legros, D. 1977. Chance, necessity, and 5:135-71
mode of production: A Marxist critique 190. Messerschmidt, D. A. 1976. Ecological
of cultural evolutionism. Am. An- change and adaptation among the Gu-
thropol. 79:26-41 rung of the Nepal Himalaya. Hum.
173. Linares, 0. F. 1976. "Garden Hunting" EcoL 4:167-85
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ECOLOGICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 269
191. Mitchell, S. 1974. The influence of kin- 207. Nietschmann, B. 1972. Hunting and
ship in the social organization of North fishing focus among the Miskito Indi-
East Brazilian fishermen: a contrast in ans, Eastern Nicaragua. Hum. Ecol.
case studies. J Lat. Am. Stud. 6:301-13 1:41-67
192. Mitchell, W. P. 1976. Irrigation and 208. Odend'hal, S. 1972. Energetics of In-
community in the Central Peruvian dian cattle in their environment. Hum.
Highlands. Am. Anthropol. 78(1):25-44 Ecol. 1:3-22
193. Montgomery, E. 1977. Human ecology 209. Odum, E. P. 1953. Fundamentals of
and the population concept: the Yel- Ecology. Philadelphia: Saunders
nadu Reddi population in India. Am.209a. Okrent, D. 1980. Comment on societal
Ethnol. 4:175-89 risk. Science 208:372-75
194. Moran, E. F. 1979. Human Adapt- 210. Oliver-Smith, A. 1977. Traditional agri-
ability: An Introduction to Ecological culture, central places, and postdisaster
Anthropology. North Scituate: Duxbury urban relocation in Peru. Am. Ethnol.
195. Moylan, T. 1973. Disequilibrium in a 4:102-16
New Guinea local ecosystem. Mankind 211. Orans, M. 1975. Domesticating the
9:61-70 functional dragon: an analysis of Pid-
196. Murphy, R. F. 1977. Introduction: The docks's potlatch. Am. Anthropol.
anthropological theories of Julian H. 77:312-28
Steward. In Evolution and Ecology: Es- 212. Orlove, B. S. 1977. Integration through
says on Social Transformation, ed. J. H. production: the use of zonation in Espi-
Steward, pp. 1-39. Urbana: Univ. Illi- nar. Am. Ethnol. 4:84-101
nois Press 213. Orlove, B. S. 1977. Alpacas, Sheep and
197. Murphy, R. F., Steward, J. H. 1955. Men: The Wool Export Economy and
Tappers and trappers: parallel pro- Regional Society in Southern Peru. New
cesses in acculturation. Econ. Dev. Cult. York: Academic
Change 4:335-55 214. Orlove, B. S. 1977. Cultural Ecology: A
198. Murra, J. V. 1975. Formaciones eco- Critical Essay and a Bibliography. Inst.
n6micas y politicas del mundo andino. Ecology Publ. 13. Univ. California, Da-
Lima: Inst. Estud. Peru. vis
199. Nabhan, G. P., Sheridan, T. E. 1977. 215. Orlove, B. S. 1978. Systems of produc-
Living fence rows of the Rio San Mig- tion and Indian peasant insurrections: a
uel, Sonora, Mexico: traditional tech- general discussion and three specific
nology for flood plain management. cases. Actes du XLII Congres Interna-
Hum. Ecol. 5:97-111 tionaldesAme'ricanistes, Paris 3:127-44
200. Naroll, R., Divale, W. T. 1976. Natural 216. Orlove, B. S. 1978. The tragedy of the
selection in cultural evolution: warfare commons revisited: land use and envi-
versus peaceful diffusion. Am. Ethnol. ronmental quality in high-altitude An-
3:97-129 dean grasslands. In Proc. Int. Hill
201. Netting, R. M. 1968. Hill Farmers of Lands Symp. pp. 208-14. Morgantown:
Nigeria: Cultural Ecology of the Kofyar W. Va. Univ. Books
of the Jos Plateau. Seattle: Univ. Wash- 217. Orlove, B. S. 1980. Landlords and offi-
ington Press cials: the sources of domination in
202. Netting, R. M. 1969. Ecosystems in Surimana and Quehue. In Land and
process: a comparative study of change Power in Latin America: Agrarian Econ-
in two West African societies. In Con- omies and Social Processes in the Andes,
tributions to Anthropology: Ecological ed. B. S. Orlove, G. Custred. New York:
Essays, ed. D. Damas. Natl. Mus. Can. Homes & Meier. In press
Bull. 230:102-12 218. Orlove, B. S. 1980. El complejo andino
203. Netting, R. M. 1973. Fighting, forest de pastoreo: nuevos estudios sobre los
and the fly: some demographic regula- pastores tradicionales de la puna alta
tors among the Kofyar. J. Anthropol. andina. Avances (La Paz, Bolivia) 3-4.
Res. 29:164-79 In press
204. Netting, R. M. 1976. What alpine peas- 219. Orlove, B. S., Custred, G. 1980. The
ants have in common: observations on alternative model of agrarian society in
communal tenure in a Swiss village. the Andes: households, networks and
Hum. Ecol. 4:13546 corporate groups. See Ref. 217. In press
205. Netting, R. M. 1977. Cultural Ecology 220. Ortiz, S. 1973. Uncertainties in Peasant
Menlo Park: Cummings Farming: A Colombian Case. London
206. Newcomer, P. 1972. The Nuer are Sch. Econ. Monogr. Soc. Anthropol.
Dinka. Man (NS) 7:5-11 46. London: Athlone
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
270 ORLOVE
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ECOLOGICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 271
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
272 ORLOVE
the Middle East. J Asian Afr. Stud. 303. Torry, W. I. 1976. Residence rules
7:122-31 among the Gabra nomads: some ecolog-
288. Stauder, J. 1971. The Majangir: Ecology ical considerations. Ethnology 15:
and Society of a Southwest Ethiopian 269-85
People. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. 304. Valentine, J. W. 1970. Resource supply
Press and species diversity patterns. Lethaia
289. Steward, J. H. 1937. Ecological aspects 4:51-61
of southwestern society. Anthropos 305. Van Horn, L. 1972. Double descent and
32:87-104 subsistence among the Herero of South-
290. Steward, J. H. 1949. Cultural causality west Africa and Botswana. Anthropol.
and law: a trial formulation of the devel- J. Can. 10:2-15
opment of early civilizations. Am. An- 306. VanStone, J. W. 1976. The Yukon
thropol. 51:1-27 River Ingalik: subsistence, the fur trade
291. Steward, J. H. 1946-1950. The Hand- and a changing resource base. Ethnohis-
book ofSouth American Indians, Wash- tory 23:199-212
ington: GPO. 6 vols. 307. Vasey, D. E. 1979. Population and agri-
292. Steward, J. H. 1955. Theory of Culture cultural intensity in the humid tropics.
Change: The Methodology of Multilin- Hum. Ecol. 7:269-83
ear Evolution. Urbana: Univ. Illinois 308. Vayda, A. P. 1969. The study of the
Press
causes of war with special reference to
293. Steward, J. H. 1960. Evolutionary prin-
headhunting raids in Borneo. Ethnohis-
ciples and social types. In Evolution Af- tory 16:211-24
ter Darwin, ed. S. Tax, 2:169-86.
309. Vayda, A. P. 1974. Warfare in ecologi-
Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
cal perspective. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst.
294. Steward, J. H. 1968. The concept and
5:183-93
method of cultural ecology. In Interna-
310. Vayda, A. P. 1976. On the "New
tional Encyclopedia of The Social
Ecology" paradigm. Am. Anthropol.
Sciences, ed. D. L. Sills, 4:337-44. New
78:645-6
York: Macmillan
311. Vayda, A. P., MacKay, B. 1975. New
295. Steward, J. H. 1977. Evolution and
Ecology: Essays on Social Transforma- directions in ecology and ecological an-
thropology. Ann. Rev. Anthropol.
tion, ed. J. C. Steward, R. F. Murphy.
4:293-306
Urbana: Univ. Illinois Press
296. Street, J. 1969. An evaluation of the 312. Vayda, A. P., MacKay, B. 1977. Prob-
concept of carrying capacity. Prof. lems in the identification of environ-
Geogr. 21:104-7 mental problems. In Subsistence and
297. Suttles, W. 1960. Affinalties, subsis- Survival: Rural Ecology in the Pacific,
tence and prestige among the Coast Sa- ed. T. P. Bayliss-Smith, R. G. A. Fea-
lish. Am. Anthropol. 62:296-300 chem. New York/London: Academic.
298. Testart, A. 1977. Les chasseurs-cueil- In press
leurs dans la perspective ecologique. 313. Vayda, A. P., Rappaport, R. 1968.
Soc. Sci Inf/ 16:389-418 Ecology, cultural and non-cultural. In
299. Thomas, D. J. 1976. Interpretation of Introduction to Cultural Anthropology,
social proffles of production in Tsem- ed. J. A. Clifton, pp. 476-98. Boston:
baga-Maring, Simbai Valley, Eastern Houghton Mifflin
Highlands, New Guinea. Oceania 314. Waddell, E. 1975. How the Enga cope
47:21-35 with frost: responses to climatic pertur-
300. Thomas, P. A. 1976. Contrastive subsis- bations in the Central Highlands of
tence strategies and land use as factors New Guinea. Hum. Ecol. 3:249-73
for understanding Indian-White rela- 315. Wall, L. L. 1976. Anuak politics,
tions in New England. Ethnohistory ecology, and the origins of Shilluk king-
23:1-18 ship. Ethnology 15:151-62
301. Thomas, R. B. 1973. Human adaptation 316. Wasserstrom, R. 1976. La investigacion
to a high Andean energy flow system. regional en ciencias sociales: una per-
Occas. Pap. Anthropol. 7. Penn. State spectiva chiapaneca. Hist. Soc. 9:58-73
Univ. Dep. Anthropol. 317. Wasserstrom, R. 1977. Land and labour
302. Thomas, W. L. Jr. 1963. The variety of in central Chiapas: A regional analysis.
physical environments among Pacific Dev. Change 8:441-65
Islands. In Man's Place in the Island 318. Wasserstrom, R. 1978. The exchange of
Ecosystem: A Symposium, ed. F. R. saints in Zinacantan: the socioeconomic
Fosberg, pp. 7-37. Honolulu: Bishop bases of religion in southern Mexico.
Mus. Press Ethnology 17:179-211
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
RCOTOGTCAT, ANTHROPOLOGY 273
This content downloaded from 14.139.45.242 on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:17:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms