Economic anthropology
In the past, anthropologists have studied a variety of economic systems. Subsistence economies are some of the simplest forms of economic systems and can be divided into groups such as food foragers, horticulturalists, pastoralists and agriculturalist. The context of this essay will compare and contrast food foragers and horticulturalists.
Economic anthropology is the study of the social and cultural basis of economic behaviour(Wolf, 1997). It is also the study that looks at how people use the material in the world to express themselves in social groups. It compares economics while studying them. Their concern is more within the two questions: how are economic systems organised in different societies and what is the motivation …show more content…
They have no permanent settlement, they move place to place aimlessly their lifestyle is nomadic therefore the society is a nomadic society in which most or all food is obtained from wild plants and animals. There is no class structure as to how it can be followed. They have no complete power over the land as they do not claim or defend any area of land. They do not put any limit or keep the land usage under control. The land itself have no value(Fagan, 1989).
According to Richard Borshay Lee, gathering is a far more important source of food than is hunting for the majority of non-agricultural societies. Hunter-gatherer settlements may be either enduring, impermanent, or some combination of both, this depends on the flexibility of the community. Mobile communities naturally construct shelters using buildings materials that are not permanent, natural rock shelters can be used too, where they are available(Lee, 1992).
It is the family that decides as to how food will be divided or shared among the group and how children are to be entertained, and which provides for the protection of its members. They are usually small groups, not less than fifty members in the group. The level of interdependence is high. The division of labour is highly depending on sex. The men do all the hunting and the women are to be responsible for …show more content…
It includes the cultivation of fruits, vegetables, nuts, seeds, herbs, sprouts, mushrooms, algae, flowers, seaweeds and non-food crops such as grass and ornamental trees and plants(Hagen, 1957).
They use skills and simple technology to grow food. There is no artificial application of water to the sand or soil to assist the growth in agricultural crops and there is also no usage of fertilisation techniques being taken in help of growth. They deal more with ground crops and harvested fruits.
The allocation of land is being plotted for families to use. There is no individual or family ownership of a certain land as much as they use the land but that does not mean personal ownership in any land being plotted for them.
The food being cultivated is owned and shared by the people of the community or public. Three is no individual ownership, the land is owned by all contributes. When the land is no more fertile or usable they move to a new location where the land is rich, huge or even better than there other one they moved from(Solomon,
In the past, anthropologists have studied a variety of economic systems. Subsistence economies are some of the simplest forms of economic systems and can be divided into groups such as food foragers, horticulturalists, pastoralists and agriculturalist. The context of this essay will compare and contrast food foragers and horticulturalists.
Economic anthropology is the study of the social and cultural basis of economic behaviour(Wolf, 1997). It is also the study that looks at how people use the material in the world to express themselves in social groups. It compares economics while studying them. Their concern is more within the two questions: how are economic systems organised in different societies and what is the motivation …show more content…
They have no permanent settlement, they move place to place aimlessly their lifestyle is nomadic therefore the society is a nomadic society in which most or all food is obtained from wild plants and animals. There is no class structure as to how it can be followed. They have no complete power over the land as they do not claim or defend any area of land. They do not put any limit or keep the land usage under control. The land itself have no value(Fagan, 1989).
According to Richard Borshay Lee, gathering is a far more important source of food than is hunting for the majority of non-agricultural societies. Hunter-gatherer settlements may be either enduring, impermanent, or some combination of both, this depends on the flexibility of the community. Mobile communities naturally construct shelters using buildings materials that are not permanent, natural rock shelters can be used too, where they are available(Lee, 1992).
It is the family that decides as to how food will be divided or shared among the group and how children are to be entertained, and which provides for the protection of its members. They are usually small groups, not less than fifty members in the group. The level of interdependence is high. The division of labour is highly depending on sex. The men do all the hunting and the women are to be responsible for …show more content…
It includes the cultivation of fruits, vegetables, nuts, seeds, herbs, sprouts, mushrooms, algae, flowers, seaweeds and non-food crops such as grass and ornamental trees and plants(Hagen, 1957).
They use skills and simple technology to grow food. There is no artificial application of water to the sand or soil to assist the growth in agricultural crops and there is also no usage of fertilisation techniques being taken in help of growth. They deal more with ground crops and harvested fruits.
The allocation of land is being plotted for families to use. There is no individual or family ownership of a certain land as much as they use the land but that does not mean personal ownership in any land being plotted for them.
The food being cultivated is owned and shared by the people of the community or public. Three is no individual ownership, the land is owned by all contributes. When the land is no more fertile or usable they move to a new location where the land is rich, huge or even better than there other one they moved from(Solomon,