This article explores the sexual division of labor among foragers, focusing on resource availability and constraints on women’s foraging activities. The authors conclude that “there is a greater division of foraging labor in more seasonal habitats where less gathering is possible and more extractive, tool-based foraging is required” (191).

This article explores the sexual division of labor among foragers, focusing on resource availability and constraints on women’s foraging activities. The authors conclude that “there is a greater division of foraging labor in more seasonal habitats where less gathering is possible and more extractive, tool-based foraging is required” (191).

This article examines the quality of forager habitats to determine whether agriculturalists occupy the most productive areas while modern forager groups are relegated to poor habitats. Findings indicate that there are slight but insignificant differences in the net primary productivity of foragers’ land and agriculturalists’ land. Further analysis of types of agriculturalists suggest that horticulturalists live in the most productive habitats, followed by intensive agriculturalists and finally pastoralists.

This article examines the quality of forager habitats to determine whether agriculturalists occupy the most productive areas while modern forager groups are relegated to poor habitats. Findings indicate that there are slight but insignificant differences in the net primary productivity of foragers’ land and agriculturalists’ land. Further analysis of types of agriculturalists suggest that horticulturalists live in the most productive habitats, followed by intensive agriculturalists and finally pastoralists.

The authors critique Anderson et al. (2023) article, "The Myth of Man the Hunter: Women’s contribution to the hunt across ethnographic contexts." The latter article is an ethnographic study showing that women hunt in 79% of foraging societies in their sample. The aim was to demystify the idea that only men have had a role in hunting and to question the stereotypes of labor. Venkataraman et al. (2024) critiqued Anderson et al.'s statements, as empirical evidence shows the existence of gendered divisions among hunter-gatherers. To test its veracity, they reproduced the original study, finding sample selection bias and coding errors. Lastly, they agree with Anderson et al.'s intention to dispel the false notion that forager women are unable to hunt, but they emphasize the existence of gendered divisions of labor in the ethnographic record.

The authors critique Anderson et al. (2023) article, "The Myth of Man the Hunter: Women’s contribution to the hunt across ethnographic contexts." The latter article is an ethnographic study showing that women hunt in 79% of foraging societies in their sample. The aim was to demystify the idea that only men have had a role in hunting and to question the stereotypes of labor. Venkataraman et al. (2024) critiqued Anderson et al.'s statements, as empirical evidence shows the existence of gendered divisions among hunter-gatherers. To test its veracity, they reproduced the original study, finding sample selection bias and coding errors. Lastly, they agree with Anderson et al.'s intention to dispel the false notion that forager women are unable to hunt, but they emphasize the existence of gendered divisions of labor in the ethnographic record.

After noticing that recent archaeological research has found evidence that women in pre-history were probably hunters, the authors use the ethnographic record from 63 foraging populations to explore the role of women in hunting. They explore what proportion of societies expect women to contribute to hunting, if women hunt, what proportion was opportunistic or intentional, whether women hunters were skilled, and whether women hunted with children.

After noticing that recent archaeological research has found evidence that women in pre-history were probably hunters, the authors use the ethnographic record from 63 foraging populations to explore the role of women in hunting. They explore what proportion of societies expect women to contribute to hunting, if women hunt, what proportion was opportunistic or intentional, whether women hunters were skilled, and whether women hunted with children.

The authors present a bioeconomic model of hunter-gatherer foraging effort to quantitatively represent forager intensification. Using cross-cultural data, the model is evaluated as a means to better understand variation in residential stability and resource ownership.

This study exmaines the presence of High Gods in societies as a function of subsistence type, population size, and stratification. High Gods are thought to be a mechanism to encourage collective action in the face of environmental challenges. Animal husbandry was found to be a strong predictor of High Gods, especially gods that are active in human affairs or morally supportive.