Abstract
A long-standing debate on the dynamics of population growth in human history has become polarized between a Malthusian stance and a Boserupian one. The former tends to view population growth as limited by carrying capacity, dependent on environment and technology, whereas the latter sees population growth itself as a major inducement to social, economic and technological developments. In this paper the authors experiment with approaching this debate by using recent developments in evolutionary theory. According to these, evolutionary principles, as expounded by Charles Darwin and subsequent evolutionary scientists, apply not only to biological evolution but also to social or cultural evolution. Here, the role of genes is taken over by culture and, since culture is much more pliable than our DNA, evolution speeds up. As the only organisms on Earth whose evolution relies as heavily on culture as on genes, humans have become extremely adaptable. Their hyper-adaptability suggest that humans, through their cultural evolution, have managed increasingly to adapt to their own growing population, thus succeeding in accommodating ever-growing numbers. This hypothesis fits the Boserupian approach to population very well but less so the Malthusian one, perhaps indicating a gradual shift from a Malthusian regime to a Boserupian one in human history. The hypothesis is discussed and examined through four case studies: The beginning of farming around Gobekli Tepe in southeast Turkey, the productive farming systems of Tiwanaku in South America, the population crisis of late medieval and early modern Iceland, and the ‘collapse’ of Rapa Nui (Easter Island).
Highlights
In other words: more culture makes large complex societies more adaptable than small simple ones and, they should stand a better chance of accommodating population growth
This has profound implications because it leads our species towards exponential population growth
In the following four case studies we aim to demonstrate how a Boserupian or cultural evolutionary approach can better fit the evidence than a strictly Malthusian one
Summary
Our adaptation to the environment is no longer only genetic and cultural. A few other species show some signs of culture it is only humans that have evolved culture to such an extent that it has at least equalled and, to some extent, replaced genes as the dominant adaptive mechanism. Since culture is far more flexible and copied than genes, the result is a greatly enhanced adaptability for our species (Wilson 2007). Almost alone among the species of the earth, humans have managed, over the past tens of millennia, to steadily increase their numbers, taking over more and more of the Earth’s biosphere. In this article we shall be looking at this question from an evolutionary perspective and utilizing recent developments in evolutionary theory that considers culture as an evolutionary phenomenon, analogous to genes
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: Cliodynamics: The Journal of Quantitative History and Cultural Evolution
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.