The Behavioral Ecology of Food Sharing among North Siberian Foragers

Characteristics	Altruistic Resource Transfer	Buffering/ Reciprocal Cooperation	Value Transfer
Genealogical kin	+	+/-	-
Package size	small, medium or large	medium or large	large
Synchrony in Production	+	-	+/-
Return equivalency	-	+	-
Marginal Value	-	+	+
Cooperative hunting	+/-	+	+/-
Predictions	- Distribution is positively correlated with genealogical relatedness, other things equal. - As specific costs increase (such as household distance), closer relatives favored. - As specific benefits increase (such as low age of recipients) more distant relatives favored.	- Individuals that do not hunt should not be included. - Mean quantities of resources are similar, but variance is high. 1. Giving is less costly to the giver than it is gainful to the recipient.	- Giving is less costly to the giver than it is gainful to the recipient. - Mean quantities and types of resources are dissimilar. - Larger households should keep more for themselves.

Broader Implications

Nonmarket intragroup exchange is an integral tradition in contemporary foraging societies, helping to maintain community viability and cultural continuity. This research will add to the literature on hunter-gatherer food sharing and its role in the post-Soviet economy of indigenous Taimyr peoples. Empirical data on food sharing among contemporary foragers in Siberia will provide a fundamental geographical and ethnographic point of comparison for the existing behavioral ecological research on foragers' exchange, which has largely been conducted in tropical regions (e.g., Kaplan and Hill 1985a, 1985b; Betzig and Turke 1986; Hawkes 1993; Bailey and Peacock 1993; Hart and Hart 1993; Bliege Bird and Bird 1997; cf. Smith 1985, 1991).

Preliminary Results

A number of factors when taken together appear to favor common-pool land tenure in the study community, including ancestral proscriptions against overhunting; cross-cutting genealogical- and affinal-kinship relationships; cooperative hunting; non-market distribution of meat and fish; and economic leveling; as well as the migratory nature of the prey species, the distance from urban centers, and the high cost of transportation due to the lack of roads. Boundaries of hunting territories and favorite spots in the common pool zone are not defended as private property. Rather, social boundaries, maintained through cooperation of close bilateral kin and other local hunters, are implemented to manage the use of common hunting grounds. Non-local people are the most likely not to be included in user groups.