Search

Aim: Land ownership norms are well documented and play a central role in social–ecological systems. Yet only recently has the spatial and temporal distribution of land ownership been examined using biogeographical and evolutionary approaches. We incorporate biogeographical and evolutionary modelling to test associations between land ownership and environmental, subsistence and cultural contact predictors. Location: Africa. Taxon: Bantu and Bantoid ethnolinguistic groups (73 societies). Methods: Based on ethnographies for 73 societies, we coded land ownership norms as none, group, kin or individual. We paired these data with language phylogenies, and measured phylogenetic and geographical signal and modelled alternative evolutionary trajectories using maximum likelihood methods. We tested the influence of environmental, subsistence and cultural predictors on spatial variation in land ownership, using a multi‐model inference approach based on logistic regression. Results: Bantu land ownership norms likely evolved on a unilinear trajectory (i.e. societies progress or regress along a series of ownership types), but not one requiring consistent increase in exclusivity (i.e. restrictions towards ownership by smaller groups) as suggested by prior theory. Our biogeographical analyses suggest land ownership is more likely where neighbours also own land and resource productivity is predictable. Reliance on agriculture has relatively small effect sizes and low importance in the model. Main Conclusions: We find support for multiple evolutionary pathways. Lack of resolution may be due to localized horizontal transfer of norms consistent with the influence of neighbours we find from biogeographical analyses. We cannot rule out other untested mechanisms. Although long‐standing theories propose links between subsistence practices and land ownership, our results suggest subsistence plays only a modest role. Our results also support resource defensibility theory (i.e. land ownership is more likely where environmental productivity is predictable). Overall, we demonstrate the value of combining analytical approaches from evolution and biogeography to test hypotheses on the spatial and temporal variation of human cultural traits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Land ownership shapes natural resource management and social–ecological resilience, but the factors determining ownership norms in human societies remain unclear. Here we conduct a global empirical test of long‐standing theories from ecology, economics and anthropology regarding potential drivers of land ownership and territoriality. Prior theory suggests that resource defensibility, subsistence strategies, population pressure, political complexity and cultural transmission mechanisms may all influence land ownership. We applied multi‐model inference procedures based on logistic regression to cultural and environmental data from 102 societies, 71 with some form of land ownership and 31 with no land ownership. We found an increased probability of land ownership in mountainous environments, where patchy resources may be more cost effective to defend via ownership. We also uncovered support for the role of population pressure, with a greater probability of land ownership in societies living at higher population densities. Our results also show more land ownership when neighboring societies also practiced ownership. We found less support for variables associated with subsistence strategies and political complexity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Spatial patterns associated with language contact, language spread, and isolation have been included, albeit peripherally, in traditional theories of historical linguistics. The development of mapping and spatial analysis tools, combined with innovations in quantitative approaches to diachronic linguistics, has introduced a new era in linguistic geography. Geographic research in historical linguistics, however, is largely carried out in the separate traditions of various linguistic subfields. Many commonalities exist between the questions asked and the methods applied in each of these subfields, and increased interaction across dialectometry, phylogenetics, and areal linguistics has the potential to reinvigorate linguistic geography and accelerate progress on questions about geography and the spatial outcomes of language change and language expansion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]