The population ecology of hunter-gatherers and their prey

In this paper we combine foraging theory and population biology models to simulate dynamic relationships between hunter-gatherers and their prey resources. Hunter-gatherer population growth responds to the net marginal rate of foraging; prey population growth responds logistically to exploitation. Thus conceived, the relationship between forager and prey biomass is time-dependent and nonlinear. It changes from stable equilibrium to damped and stable cycles with modest adjustments of input parameters. And, it produces the largest sustainable human population at intermediate levels of individual work effort. At equilibrium the forager takes all prey types with a pursuit and handling rate greater than or equal to its maintenance foraging rate. The structural properties of the model compel us to reject standard anthropological interpretations of the carrying capacity concept; they provide new insights on old issues such as original affluence and intensification. Analysis of the interaction of human population, diet selection, and resource depletion requires microecological models in part because the relevant processes occur on time scales largely invisible to both ethnography and archaeology.     

Organic Public Geographies: “Making the Connection”

Abstract: A new field of “public geographies” is taking shape ( Fuller 2008 ) in geography's mainstream journals. While much is “traditional”, with intellectuals disseminating academic research via non‐ academic outlets ( Castree 2006 ; Mitchell 2008 ; Oslender 2007 ), less visible is the “organic” work and its “more involved intellectualizing, pursued through working with area‐based or single‐interest groups, in which the process itself may be the outcome” ( Ward 2006 :499; see Fuller and Askins 2010 ). A number of well‐known projects exist where research has been “done not merely for the people we write about but with them” ( Gregory 2005 :188; see also Cahill 2004 ; Johnston and Pratt 2010 ). However, collaborative writing of academic publications which gives research participants authorial credit is unusual ( mrs kinpainsby 2008 ; although see Sangtin Writers and Nagar 2006 ). This paper is about an organic public geographies project called “Making the connection”. It is written by a diverse collection of (non‐)academic participants who contributed to the project before it had started, as it was undertaken, and/or after it had finished. This is a “messy”, process‐oriented text ( Cook et al. 2007 ) working through the threads (partially) connecting the activities of its main collaborators, including a referee who helped get the paper to publication.