Advertisement

Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory

, Volume 21, Issue 2, pp 343–363 | Cite as

Social Cooperation and Resource Management DynamicsAmong Late Hunter-Fisher-Gatherer Societies in Tierra del Fuego (South America)

  • Ivan Briz i Godino
  • José Ignacio Santos
  • José Manuel Galán
  • Jorge Caro
  • Myrian Álvarez
  • Débora Zurro
Article

Abstract

This paper presents the theoretical basis and first results of an agent-based model (ABM) computer simulation that is being developed to explore cooperation in hunter–gatherer societies. Specifically, we focus here on Yamana, a hunter-fisher-gatherer society that inhabited the islands of the southernmost part of Tierra del Fuego (Argentina–Chile). Ethnographical and archaeological evidence suggests the existence of sporadic aggregation events, triggered by a public call through smoke signals of an extraordinary confluence of resources under unforeseeable circumstances in time and space (a beached whale or an exceptional accumulation of fish after a low tide, for example). During these aggregation events, the different social units involved used to develop and improve production, distribution and consumption processes in a collective way. This paper attempts to analyse the social dynamics that explain cooperative behaviour and resource-sharing during aggregation events using an agent-based model of indirect reciprocity. In brief, agents make their decisions based on the success of the public strategies of other agents. Fitness depends on the resource captured and the social capital exchanged in aggregation events, modified by the agent’s reputation. Our computational results identify the relative importance of resources with respect to social benefits and the ease in detecting—and hence punishing—a defector as key factors to promote and sustain cooperative behaviour among population.

Keywords

ABM Cooperation Computer simulation Yamana Ethnoarchaeology 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Dr. Luis R. Izquierdo and Dr. F. J. Miguel Quesada for their helpful advice and comments on this paper. The authors acknowledge support from the Spanish Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación (projects CONSOLIDER-INGENIO 2010 SimulPast-CSD2010-00034 and HAR2009-06996) as well as from the Argentine Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (project PIP-0706) and the Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research (project GR7846). The authors especially appreciate the help and cooperation of Dr. Natalie P. Goodall and the Bridges-Goodall family, who gave us the opportunity to access the diaries of Rv. T. Bridges. Sara Casamiquela and Javier Ruiz helped with the ethnographical sources. The fruitful discussions held during the SimulPast project enriched these pages. Finally, the authors wish to thank their anonymous reviewers for their valuable and constructive comments.

References

  1. Agorsah, K. E. (1990). Ethnoarchaeology: the search for a self-corrective approach to the study of past human behaviour. The African Archaeological Review, 8, 189–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aldenfender, M. (2001). Andean pastoral origins and evolution: the role of ethnoarchaeology of pastoralism. In L. A. Kuznar (Ed.), Ethnoarchaeology of Andean South America. Contributions to Archaeological Method and Theory (pp. 19–30). Ann Arbour: Oxbow.Google Scholar
  3. Alexander, J. M. (2008). Cooperation. In S. Sarkar & A. Plutynski (Eds.), A Companion to the Philosophy of Biology Malden. MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  4. Apicella, C. L., Marlowe, F. W., Fowler, J. H., & Christakis, N. A. (2012). Social networks and cooperation in hunter–gatherers. Nature, 481(7382), 497–501. doi: 10.1038/nature10736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Axelrod, R. M. (1986). An evolutionary approach to norms. American Political Science Review, 80(4), 1095–1111. doi: 10.2307/1960858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Axelrod, R. M. (1997). The complexity of cooperation. Agent-based models of competition and collaboration. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Axtell, J. (1979). Ethnohistory: an historian’s viewpoint. Ethnohistory, 26(1), 3–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Béyries, S. (1997). Ethnoarchéologie: un mode d’expérimentation. Préhistoire anthropologie méditerranéenne (pp. 185–196). Aix-en-Provence: Université de Provence-CNRS.Google Scholar
  9. Béyries, S. & Pétrequin, P. (2001). Ethnoarchaeology and its transfers. Papers from a session held at the European Association of Archaeologists Fifth Annual Meeting in Bournemouth. Bournemouth.Google Scholar
  10. Binford, L. (1977). Introduction. In L. Binford (Ed.), For Theory Building in Archaeology (pp. 1–10). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  11. Bliege Bird, R., & Smith, E. A. (2005). Signalling theory, strategic interaction and symbolic capital. Current Anthropology, 46(2), 221–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a Theory of Practise. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bowles, S., & Gintis, H. (2003). Origins of human cooperation. In P. Hammerstein (Ed.), The Genetic and Cultural Origins of Cooperation (pp. 429–443). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  14. Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. J. (2005). Solving the puzzle of human cooperation. In S. Levinson (Ed.), Evolution and Culture (pp. 105–132). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  15. Boyd, R., Gintis, H., & Bowles, S. (2010). Coordinated punishment of defectors sustains cooperation and can proliferate when rare. Science, 328, 617–620. doi: 10.1126/science.1183665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Bridges, T. (1870, March 28th). Personal Diaries. References: Ref Type: Unpublished Work.Google Scholar
  17. Bridges, T. (1870, October 26th). Personal Diaries. References: Ref Type: Unpublished Work.Google Scholar
  18. Bridges, T. (1871, November 20th). Personal Diaries. References: Ref Type: Unpublished Work.Google Scholar
  19. Bridges, T. (1872, January 2nd) Personal Diaries. References: Ref Type: Unpublished Work.Google Scholar
  20. Bridges, T. (1872, January 15th) Personal Diaries. References: Ref Type: Unpublished Work.Google Scholar
  21. Bridges, T. (1872, March 19th) Personal Diaries. References: Ref Type: Unpublished Work.Google Scholar
  22. Bridges, T. (1872, May 5th) Personal Diaries. References: Ref Type: Unpublished Work.Google Scholar
  23. Bridges, T. (1872, June 14th). Personal Diaries. References: Ref Type: Unpublished Work.Google Scholar
  24. Bridges, T. (1876, May 26th) Personal Diaries. References: Ref Type: Unpublished Work.Google Scholar
  25. Bridges, T. (1877, June15th) Personal Diaries. References: Ref Type: Unpublished Work.Google Scholar
  26. Bridges, T. (1877, July 17th). Personal Diaries. References: Ref Type: Unpublished WorkGoogle Scholar
  27. Bridges, T. (1933). The Yamana-English dictionary. Zaguier y Urruti Editions.Google Scholar
  28. Briz, I. (2010). Etnoarcheologia: che cosa, come, verso dove? Quaderni di Thule, IX, Atti del XXXI Convegno Internazionale di Americanistica (Perugia, 2009) (pp. 549–559). Perugia: CSACA.Google Scholar
  29. Briz, I., Álvarez, M., Zurro, D., & Caro, J. (2009). Meet for lunch in Tierra del Fuego: a new ethnoarchaeological project. Antiquity, 83(322): http://antiquity.ac.uk/projgall/briz322/.
  30. Carballo, D. M., Roscoe, P., & Feinman, G. M. (2012). Cooperation and collective action in the cultural evolution of complex societies. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory. doi: 10.1007/s10816-012-9147-2.Google Scholar
  31. Carlson, N. (2009). Reviving Witiko (Windigo): an ethnohistory of "Cannibal Monsters" in the Athabasca District of Northern Alberta, 1878–1910. Ethnohistory, 56(3), 355–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Chapman, A. M. (2010). European encounters with the Yamana people of Cape Horn, before and after Darwin. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  33. David, N., & Kramer, C. (2001). Ethnoarchaeology in Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Davidson, I. (2006). Arqueología etnohistórica. In I. Briz, I. Clemente, X. Terradas, A. Toselli, A. Vila, & D. Zurro (Eds.), Etnoarqueología de la Prehistoria: más allá de la analogía, Treballs d’Etnoarqueologa, 6 (pp. 257–271). Madrid: CSIC.Google Scholar
  35. De Rojas, J. L. (2008). La Etnohistoria de América. Los indígenas, protagonistas de su historia. Buenos Aires: Editorial SB.Google Scholar
  36. de Waal, F. B. M., & Suchak, M. (2010). Prosocial primates: selfish and unselfish motivations. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, B: Biological Sciences, 365(1553), 2711–2722. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2010.0119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Durkheim, E. (1909). Lec¸ons sur la morale. Textes 2: Religion, morale, anomie (pp. 292–312). Paris: Editions de Minuit.Google Scholar
  38. Durkheim, E. (1917). Introduction a` la morale. Textes 2: Religion, morale, anomie (pp. 313–331). Paris: Editions de Minuit.Google Scholar
  39. Edmonds, B. (2001). The use of models—making MABS actually work. In S. Moss & P. Davidsson (Eds.), Multi-Agent-Based Simulation, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 1979 (pp. 15–32). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  40. Elliott, E., & Kiel, L. D. (2002). Exploring cooperation and competition using agent-based modelling. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 99(Suppl 3), 7193–7194. doi: 10.1073/pnas.102079099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Epstein, J. M. (1999). Agent-based computational models and generative social science. Complexity, 4(5), 41–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Estévez, J., & Vila, A. (1996). Etnoarqueología: el nombre de la cosa. In J. Estévez & A. Vila (Eds.), Encuentros en los conchales fueguinos (pp. 17–23). Barcelona-Madrid: UAB-CSIC.Google Scholar
  43. Field, S. A. (1998). Human altruism: group selection should not be ignored. Journal of Social and Evolutionary Systems, 21(2), 125–131. doi: 10.1016/S1061-7361(00)80002-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Gould, R. A. (1980). Living Archaeology, New Studies in Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Gumerman, G. J., Swedlund, A. C., Dean, J. S., & Epstein, J. M. (2003). The evolution of social behaviour in the prehistoric American Southwest. Artificial Life, 9(4), 435–444. doi: 10.1162/106454603322694861.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Gusinde, M. (1937). Die Feuerland-Indianer, II: Die Yamana. Mödling. Buenos Aires: CAEA.Google Scholar
  47. Henrich, J. (2004). Cultural group selection, coevolutionary processes and large-scale cooperation. Journal of Economic Behaviour & Organisation, 53(1), 3–35. doi: 10.1016/S0167-2681(03)00094-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Henrich, J., & Boyd, R. (2001). Why people punish defectors: weak conformist transmission can stabilise costly enforcement of norms in cooperative dilemmas. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 208(1), 79–89. doi: 10.1006/jtbi.2000.2202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Henrich, J., & Gil-White, F. J. (2001). The evolution of prestige: freely conferred deference as a mechanism for enhancing the benefits of cultural transmission. Evolution and Human Behaviour, 22(3), 165–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Henrich, J., & Henrich, N. (2006). Culture, evolution and the puzzle of human cooperation. Cognitive Systems Research, 7(2–3), 220–245. doi: 10.1016/j.cogsys.2005.11.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Henrich, J., Boyd, R., Bowles, S., Camerer, C., Fehr, E., Gintis, H., & McElreath, R. (2001). Cooperation, reciprocity and punishment in fifteen small-scale societies. American Economic Review, 91(2), 73–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Hill, K. (2002). Altruistic cooperation during foraging by the Ache, and the evolved human predisposition to cooperate. Human Nature, 13(1), 105–128. doi: 10.1007/s12110-002-1016-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Huxley, T. H. (1888). The struggle for existence in human society. Collected Essays (Vol. 9) (pp. 195–236). London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  54. Hyades, P. & Deniker, J. (1891). Antropologie et Ethnographie. Mission Scientifique du Cap Horn (1882–1883). Paris: VII.Google Scholar
  55. Ingold, T. (1988). Notes on the foraging mode of production. In T. Ingold, D. Riches, & J. Woodburn (Eds.), Hunter-Gatherers I. History, evolution and social change (pp. 269–314). Oxford: Berg Publishers.Google Scholar
  56. Izquierdo, L. R., Izquierdo, S. S., Galan, J. M., & Santos, J. I. (2009). Techniques to Understand Computer Simulations: Markov Chain Analysis. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 12(1): 6, http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/12/1/6.html
  57. Kohler, T. A., & van der Leeuw, S. E. (2007). The model-based archaeology of socionatural systems. Santa Fe, N.M: School for Advanced Research Press.Google Scholar
  58. Kohler, T. A., Cockburn, D., Hooper, P. L., Bocinsky, R. K., & Kobti, Z. (2012). The coevolution of group size and leadership: an agent-based public goods model for Prehispanic Pueblo Societies. Advances in Complex Systems, 15(1 & 2), 1150007. doi: 10.1142/S0219525911003256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Kropotkin, P. (1902). Mutual aid. London: William Heinemann.Google Scholar
  60. Lothrop, S. (1928). The Indians of Tierra del Fuego. Nueva York: Museum of the American Indians, Heye Foundation.Google Scholar
  61. Lull, V. (1988). Hacia una teoría de la representación en arqueología. Revista de Occidente, 81, 62–76.Google Scholar
  62. Lull, V. (2005). Marx, Producción, Sociedad y Arqueología. Trabajos de Prehistoria, 62(1), 7–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Malinowski, B. (1961). Argonauts of the Western Pacific. New York: Dutton.Google Scholar
  64. Martial, L. F. (1888). Histoire du voyage. Mission Scientifique du Cap Horn (1882–1883). ParisGoogle Scholar
  65. Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1977). The German Ideology. London: Lawrence and Wishart.Google Scholar
  66. Mauss, M. (1931). La cohe´sion sociale dans les socie´te´s polysegmentaires. Communication pre´sente´e a` l’Institut franc¸ais de sociologie. Extrait du Bulletin de l’Institut français de sociologie, 1, 1931. In J. M. Tremblay (Ed.), Les classiques des sciences sociales.Google Scholar
  67. Melis, A. P., & Seemann, D. (2010). How is human cooperation different? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, B: Biological Sciences, 365, 2663–2674. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2010.0157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Mithen, S. (1994). Simulating prehistoric hunter–gatherer societies. In N. Gilbert & J. Doran (Eds.), Simulating Societies. The computer simulation of Social Phenomena (pp. 165–193). London: UCL Press.Google Scholar
  69. Narotzky, S. (2007). The project in the model. Reciprocity, social capital and the politics of ethnographic realism. Current Anthropology, 48(3), 403–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Nowak, M. A. (2006). Five rules for the evolution of cooperation. Science, 314(5805), 1560–1563. doi: 10.1126/science.1133755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Nowak, M. A., & Sigmund, K. (2000). Cooperation versus competition. Financial Analysts Journal, 56, 13–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Ohtsuki, H., & Iwasa, Y. (2004). How should we define goodness?—reputation dynamics in indirect reciprocity. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 231(1), 107–120. doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2004.06.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Orquera, L., & Piana, E. (1999). La vida material y social de los Yámana. Buenos Aires: Eudeba.Google Scholar
  74. Orquera, L., & Piana, E. (2009). Sea nomads of the beagle channel in Southernmost South America: over 6000 years of coastal adaptation and stability. Journal of Island and Coastal Archaeology, 4(1), 61–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Orquera, L., Legoupil, D., & Piana, E. (2011). The litoral adaptation on the Southern end of South America. Quaternary International, 239(1–2), 61–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Politis, G. (2007). Nukak. Ethnoarchaeology of an Amazonian people. Walknut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.Google Scholar
  77. Premo, L. S. (2010). Equifinality and explanation: the role of agent-based modelling in positivist archaeology. In A. Costopoulos & M. Lake (Eds.), Simulating change: archaeology into the twenty-first century (pp. 28–37). Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.Google Scholar
  78. Roux, V. (2007). Ethnoarchaeology: a non-historical science of reference necessary for interpreting the past. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 14(2), 153–178. doi: 10.1007/s10816-007-9030-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Sigmund, K. (2007). Punish or perish? Retaliation and collaboration among humans. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 22(11), 593–600. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2007.06.012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Skyrms, B. (2004). The stag hunt and the evolution of social structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  81. Smith, E. A., & Bliege Bird, R. (2005). Costly signalling and cooperative behaviour. In H. Gintis, S. Bowles, R. Boyd, & E. Fehr (Eds.), Moral sentiments and material interests: the foundations of cooperation in economic life (pp. 115–148). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  82. Sugden, R. (2012). Altruistic punishment as an explanation of hunter–gatherer cooperation: how much has experimental economics achieved? Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 35(1), 40. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X11000902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Tarpy, D. R., Gilley, D. C., & Seeley, T. D. (2004). Levels of selection in a social insect: a review of conflict and cooperation during honey bee (Apis mellifera) queen replacement. Behavioural Ecology and Sociobiology, 55(6), 513–523. doi: 10.1007/s00265-003-0738-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Thorne, B. L. (1997). Evolution of eusociality in termites. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 28, 27–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Tomasello, M., Melis, A., Tennie, C., Wyman, E., & Herrmann, E. (2012). Two key steps in the evolution of human cooperation. The interdependence hypothesis. Current Anthropology, 53(6), 673–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Warneken, F., Hare, B., Melis, A. P., Hanus, D., & Tomasello, M. (2007). Spontaneous altruism by chimpanzees and young children. PLoS Biology, 5(7), e184. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0050184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. West, S. A., El Mouden, C., & Gardner, A. (2011). Sixteen common misconceptions about the evolution of cooperation in humans. Evolution and Human Behaviour, 32(4), 231–262. doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.08.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Wilensky, U. (1999). NetLogo. Evanston: Centre for Connected Learning and Computer-Based Modelling, Northwestern University.Google Scholar
  89. Wilson, E. O., & Hölldobler, B. (2005). Eusociality: origin and consequences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(38), 13367–13371. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0505858102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Wright, R. (2011). Nadie pierde: la Teoría de Juegos y la Lógica del Destino Humano. Barcelona: Tusquets.Google Scholar
  91. Zurro, D., Álvarez, M., Salvatelli, L., & Briz, I. (2010). Agregación y cooperación social en sociedades cazadoras-recolectoras-pescadoras: un experimento etnoarqueológico en Tierra del Fuego. Revista de Arqueología Americana, 28, 171–194.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ivan Briz i Godino
    • 1
    • 2
  • José Ignacio Santos
    • 3
  • José Manuel Galán
    • 3
  • Jorge Caro
    • 4
  • Myrian Álvarez
    • 5
  • Débora Zurro
    • 4
  1. 1.ICREA-IMF-CSIC, CASESBarcelonaSpain
  2. 2.Department of ArchaeologyUniversity of YorkYorkUK
  3. 3.INSISOCUniversidad de BurgosBurgosSpain
  4. 4.Dept. d’Arqueologia i Antropologia, CASESBarcelonaSpain
  5. 5.CONICET-CADICUshuaiaArgentina

Personalised recommendations