This paper seeks to understand why hunter-gatherer settlements become less dense as their populations increase, as opposed to the tendency of sedentary settlements to become denser with increasing population. They propose that settlement density is dependent on mitigating proximity costs at low settlement sizes, and movement costs at larger settlement sizes, and that these proximity costs act strongly upon hunter-gatherer groups, as they do not have the social structures or material technologies to alleviate them, thereby creating less dense settlements. The authors construct a model based upon this theory, and then test it using a cross-cultural database of 1,760 hunter-gatherer camps from 112 different cultural groups. They find that hunter-gatherer groups become less dense as settlement size increases, but as movement costs become more important than proximity costs, the rate at which they become less dense diminishes. They also find that settlements begin to become denser when there is food security and proximity costs are mitigated, indicating that domestic food production is not necessarily requisite for settlement densification and that densification may have emerged in tandem with the advent of agriculture, as opposed to as a result of it.

This paper seeks to understand why hunter-gatherer settlements become less dense as their populations increase, as opposed to the tendency of sedentary settlements to become denser with increasing population. They propose that settlement density is dependent on mitigating proximity costs at low settlement sizes, and movement costs at larger settlement sizes, and that these proximity costs act strongly upon hunter-gatherer groups, as they do not have the social structures or material technologies to alleviate them, thereby creating less dense settlements. The authors construct a model based upon this theory, and then test it using a cross-cultural database of 1,760 hunter-gatherer camps from 112 different cultural groups. They find that hunter-gatherer groups become less dense as settlement size increases, but as movement costs become more important than proximity costs, the rate at which they become less dense diminishes. They also find that settlements begin to become denser when there is food security and proximity costs are mitigated, indicating that domestic food production is not necessarily requisite for settlement densification and that densification may have emerged in tandem with the advent of agriculture, as opposed to as a result of it.

Using a representative sample of 339 hunter-gatherer societies, researchers examine the relationship between hunter-gatherer use of space, size of population and supply of resources to see if they are similar to other organisms. By combining all factors into a single model, the authors claim to explain 86% of the variation in home range. Hunters have greater resource distribution than gatherers but both more so than aquatic foragers. Lastly, terrestrial foragers have more extensive home ranges than aquatic foragers.

Using a representative sample of 339 hunter-gatherer societies, researchers examine the relationship between hunter-gatherer use of space, size of population and supply of resources to see if they are similar to other organisms. By combining all factors into a single model, the authors claim to explain 86% of the variation in home range. Hunters have greater resource distribution than gatherers but both more so than aquatic foragers. Lastly, terrestrial foragers have more extensive home ranges than aquatic foragers.

Using a representative sample of 339 hunter-gatherer societies, researchers examine the relationship between hunter-gatherer use of space, size of population and supply of resources to see if they are similar to other organisms. By combining all factors into a single model, the authors claim to explain 86% of the variation in home range. Hunters have greater resource distribution than gatherers but both more so than aquatic foragers. Lastly, terrestrial foragers have more extensive home ranges than aquatic foragers.

Using a representative sample of 339 hunter-gatherer societies, researchers examine the relationship between hunter-gatherer use of space, size of population and supply of resources to see if they are similar to other organisms. By combining all factors into a single model, the authors claim to explain 86% of the variation in home range. Hunters have greater resource distribution than gatherers but both more so than aquatic foragers. Lastly, terrestrial foragers have more extensive home ranges than aquatic foragers.

Using a representative sample of 339 hunter-gatherer societies, researchers examine the relationship between hunter-gatherer use of space, size of population and supply of resources to see if they are similar to other organisms. By combining all factors into a single model, the authors claim to explain 86% of the variation in home range. Hunters have greater resource distribution than gatherers but both more so than aquatic foragers. Lastly, terrestrial foragers have more extensive home ranges than aquatic foragers.

Using a representative sample of 339 hunter-gatherer societies, researchers examine the relationship between hunter-gatherer use of space, size of population and supply of resources to see if they are similar to other organisms. By combining all factors into a single model, the authors claim to explain 86% of the variation in home range. Hunters have greater resource distribution than gatherers but both more so than aquatic foragers. Lastly, terrestrial foragers have more extensive home ranges than aquatic foragers.

This study examines the relationship between population pressure and socioeconomic complexity in a cross-cultural sample of hunter-gatherer groups. The author suggests a causal component to the positive correlations found, arguing that increasing population pressure on food resources requires increasing storage dependence, which in turn drives sedentism and other indicators of socioeconomic complexity.

This paper builds off previous research into the effect of population size and resource risk on complexity of subsistence technology by investigating the relationship between these independent variables and total number of material items and techniques used by various western North American hunter-gatherer groups. This tally of total technological complexity is found to be insignificantly related to population size or residential mobility; however, there is a significant correlation in the expected direction between technological complexity and one measure of resource risk (mean annual temperature during driest month). Tying this finding to previous analyses of subsistence technologies, the authors theorize that environmental risk is a pervasive driver of technological ingenuity and cultural evolution.