000			01899cab a2200229 a 4500
999			_c24527 _d24527
001			024527
003			UAHC_CL
005			20170810120614.0
008			010801b xx j 000 1 eng
040			_aUAHC_CL _cUAHC_CL _dUAHC_CL
100	1		_aDavis Stone, Glenn
245	1	0	_aNon-boserupian ecology and agricultural risk : _bethnic politics and land control in the arid southwest.
260			_aArlington _bAmerican Antropological Association _c1999
500			_aEn: American Anthropologist. -- Vol. 101 No. 1(marzo 1999), pp. 113-128. ISSN 00027294
520			_aNumerous cases of increasing population without fallow shortening or intensification without population pressure have been cited as disproof of the Boserup model of agricultural change. In this paper we argue that the model is an efficient explanation for agricultural change but only when certain agroecological conditions are met: higher marginal input costs must be both necessary and sufficient to raise production. Elsewhere, conditions are non-Boserupian, and other kinds of responses should be expected. Wupatki, a prehistoric agricultural frontier, is a case in point. Boserupian intensification was mostly impossible here, and with population influx, fanners turned instead to sociopolitical means of protecting the land base for extensive agriculture. A contemporary example from Nigeria illustrates territorial control by groups consolidated along ethnic lines. The strategy of relying on increasing numbers and monumental construction to back up territorial claims had unintended long-term consequences that led to abandonment of Wupatki.
650		4	_aAGRICULTURA _xPOLITICA _zAFRICA
700	1		_aDownum, Christian E.
773	0		_tAmerican anthropologist _w024522
900			_aAM. ANTHROPOL.-01/99
942			_cREVA _2ddc