The differences between Human Behavioral Ecology and Niche Construction Theory are few, but they are central to the theories themselves. Human Behavioral Ecology is a highly generalized theory that provides several different methods to analyze data; however, Niche Construction Theory uses a model that includes human agency. In Method and Theory in Paleoethnobotany, chapter 17 “Human Behavioral Ecology and Paleoethnobotany”, by Kristen Gremillion, and chapter 18, “Documenting Human Niche Construction in the Archaeological Record”, by Bruce Smith, delve into these two respective theories. Through comparing these two theories, I argue that Niche Construction Theory is the stronger of the two, as it considers real variables within its model of
…show more content…
The ability for organisms to change the environment surrounding them affects the evolutionary process, through changing selective pressures for all living in the niche (Smith 2014:381). Niche construction, both deliberate and accidental, allows for greater predictability and dispersion of specific plant and animal taxa, which can then be used for human subsistence (Smith 2014:381). To interpret human behaviors, one must be able to identify if the niche was created by humans or through other means; however, niche construction is most easily identified in plants, so this theory works well in a paleoethno-botanical context (Smith 2014:382). Nevertheless, it is difficult to discern the differences between anthropogenic and natural environments, as the evidence of human interaction is easily overgrown if it is not continuously kept up, especially in cases of management (Smith 2014:383). Smith (2014) uses case studies to demonstrate the usefulness of utilizing NCT, such as the garden rockwork construction in the NW coast and transplanting perennials to locations closer to human habitation (384,387). Throughout these case studies, he lists useful ways to determine the use of niche construction in archaeological contexts, often relying on palynology or morphological changes within the …show more content…
A major aspect of human nature HBE fails to account for is culture. However, the sole acknowledgement of agency does not provide enough variables to analyze the variety of human behavior. Instead, one must move past the use of models and employ human agency within theories in order to understand human behavioral patterns. Through including these variables, the paleoethnobotanical data in question can be imbued with a deeper analysis of how sociocultural elements and agency affect behavior. As mentioned above, Darwinian evolutionary theory proposes that humans are affected by the environments that surround them (Gremillion 2014:364). Once NCT is considered, the environment is no longer a concrete structure that cannot be changed by humans. Furthermore, since the entirety of human action is surrounded by the context of culture, it stands to reason that culture affects how humans evolve. If humans are affected by culture and in turn change their surrounding environments, that means culture affects the environment. If paleoethnobotanical data are found within the context of the remnants of material culture or cultural activity, the cultural aspects of this society must be identified to understand the way agency occurred and changed the environment surrounding
The ability for organisms to change the environment surrounding them affects the evolutionary process, through changing selective pressures for all living in the niche (Smith 2014:381). Niche construction, both deliberate and accidental, allows for greater predictability and dispersion of specific plant and animal taxa, which can then be used for human subsistence (Smith 2014:381). To interpret human behaviors, one must be able to identify if the niche was created by humans or through other means; however, niche construction is most easily identified in plants, so this theory works well in a paleoethno-botanical context (Smith 2014:382). Nevertheless, it is difficult to discern the differences between anthropogenic and natural environments, as the evidence of human interaction is easily overgrown if it is not continuously kept up, especially in cases of management (Smith 2014:383). Smith (2014) uses case studies to demonstrate the usefulness of utilizing NCT, such as the garden rockwork construction in the NW coast and transplanting perennials to locations closer to human habitation (384,387). Throughout these case studies, he lists useful ways to determine the use of niche construction in archaeological contexts, often relying on palynology or morphological changes within the …show more content…
A major aspect of human nature HBE fails to account for is culture. However, the sole acknowledgement of agency does not provide enough variables to analyze the variety of human behavior. Instead, one must move past the use of models and employ human agency within theories in order to understand human behavioral patterns. Through including these variables, the paleoethnobotanical data in question can be imbued with a deeper analysis of how sociocultural elements and agency affect behavior. As mentioned above, Darwinian evolutionary theory proposes that humans are affected by the environments that surround them (Gremillion 2014:364). Once NCT is considered, the environment is no longer a concrete structure that cannot be changed by humans. Furthermore, since the entirety of human action is surrounded by the context of culture, it stands to reason that culture affects how humans evolve. If humans are affected by culture and in turn change their surrounding environments, that means culture affects the environment. If paleoethnobotanical data are found within the context of the remnants of material culture or cultural activity, the cultural aspects of this society must be identified to understand the way agency occurred and changed the environment surrounding