Skip to content

Does kin selection theory help to explain support networks among farmers in South-Central Ethiopia?

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Standard

Does kin selection theory help to explain support networks among farmers in South-Central Ethiopia? / Clech, Lucie; Hazel, Ashley; Gibson, Mhairi.

In: Human Nature: An Interdisciplinary Biosocial Perspective, 18.02.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Harvard

Clech, L, Hazel, A & Gibson, M 2019, 'Does kin selection theory help to explain support networks among farmers in South-Central Ethiopia?' Human Nature: An Interdisciplinary Biosocial Perspective.

APA

Clech, L., Hazel, A., & Gibson, M. (Accepted/In press). Does kin selection theory help to explain support networks among farmers in South-Central Ethiopia? Human Nature: An Interdisciplinary Biosocial Perspective.

Vancouver

Clech L, Hazel A, Gibson M. Does kin selection theory help to explain support networks among farmers in South-Central Ethiopia? Human Nature: An Interdisciplinary Biosocial Perspective. 2019 Feb 18.

Author

Clech, Lucie ; Hazel, Ashley ; Gibson, Mhairi. / Does kin selection theory help to explain support networks among farmers in South-Central Ethiopia?. In: Human Nature: An Interdisciplinary Biosocial Perspective. 2019.

Bibtex

@article{e068767f6d6f416881c0ba7f6074b185,
title = "Does kin selection theory help to explain support networks among farmers in South-Central Ethiopia?",
abstract = "Social support networks play a key role in human livelihood security, especially in vulnerable communities. Here we explore how evolutionary ideas of kin selection and intra-household resource competition can explain individual variation in daily-support network size and composition in a South-Central Ethiopian agricultural community. We consider both domestic and agricultural help across two generations with different large-wealth transfer norms that yield different contexts for sibling competition. For farmers who inherited land rights from family, first-borns were more likely to report daily support from parents and to have larger non-parental kin networks (n=176). Compared with other farmers, first-borns were also more likely to reciprocate their parents’ support, and to help non-parental kin without reciprocity.For farmers who received land rights from the government (n=150), middle-born farmers reported more non-parental kin in their support networks compared with other farmers; non-reciprocal interactions were particularly common in both directions. This suggests a diversification of adult support network to non-parental kin, possibly in response to a long-term parental investment disadvantage of being middle-born sons. In all instances (with or without land inheritance), last-born farmers were the most disadvantaged in terms of kin support.Overall, we found that non-reciprocal interactions among farmers follow predictions of kin selection, and were more common for kin versus non-kin, and for close kin versus distant kin. Direct reciprocity explained a substantial part of the support received from kin, suggesting the importance of the combined effects of kin selection and reciprocity for investment from kin.",
author = "Lucie Clech and Ashley Hazel and Mhairi Gibson",
year = "2019",
month = "2",
day = "18",
language = "English",
journal = "Human Nature: An Interdisciplinary Biosocial Perspective",
issn = "1045-6767",
publisher = "Springer, New York, NY",

}

RIS - suitable for import to EndNote

TY - JOUR

T1 - Does kin selection theory help to explain support networks among farmers in South-Central Ethiopia?

AU - Clech, Lucie

AU - Hazel, Ashley

AU - Gibson, Mhairi

PY - 2019/2/18

Y1 - 2019/2/18

N2 - Social support networks play a key role in human livelihood security, especially in vulnerable communities. Here we explore how evolutionary ideas of kin selection and intra-household resource competition can explain individual variation in daily-support network size and composition in a South-Central Ethiopian agricultural community. We consider both domestic and agricultural help across two generations with different large-wealth transfer norms that yield different contexts for sibling competition. For farmers who inherited land rights from family, first-borns were more likely to report daily support from parents and to have larger non-parental kin networks (n=176). Compared with other farmers, first-borns were also more likely to reciprocate their parents’ support, and to help non-parental kin without reciprocity.For farmers who received land rights from the government (n=150), middle-born farmers reported more non-parental kin in their support networks compared with other farmers; non-reciprocal interactions were particularly common in both directions. This suggests a diversification of adult support network to non-parental kin, possibly in response to a long-term parental investment disadvantage of being middle-born sons. In all instances (with or without land inheritance), last-born farmers were the most disadvantaged in terms of kin support.Overall, we found that non-reciprocal interactions among farmers follow predictions of kin selection, and were more common for kin versus non-kin, and for close kin versus distant kin. Direct reciprocity explained a substantial part of the support received from kin, suggesting the importance of the combined effects of kin selection and reciprocity for investment from kin.

AB - Social support networks play a key role in human livelihood security, especially in vulnerable communities. Here we explore how evolutionary ideas of kin selection and intra-household resource competition can explain individual variation in daily-support network size and composition in a South-Central Ethiopian agricultural community. We consider both domestic and agricultural help across two generations with different large-wealth transfer norms that yield different contexts for sibling competition. For farmers who inherited land rights from family, first-borns were more likely to report daily support from parents and to have larger non-parental kin networks (n=176). Compared with other farmers, first-borns were also more likely to reciprocate their parents’ support, and to help non-parental kin without reciprocity.For farmers who received land rights from the government (n=150), middle-born farmers reported more non-parental kin in their support networks compared with other farmers; non-reciprocal interactions were particularly common in both directions. This suggests a diversification of adult support network to non-parental kin, possibly in response to a long-term parental investment disadvantage of being middle-born sons. In all instances (with or without land inheritance), last-born farmers were the most disadvantaged in terms of kin support.Overall, we found that non-reciprocal interactions among farmers follow predictions of kin selection, and were more common for kin versus non-kin, and for close kin versus distant kin. Direct reciprocity explained a substantial part of the support received from kin, suggesting the importance of the combined effects of kin selection and reciprocity for investment from kin.

M3 - Article

JO - Human Nature: An Interdisciplinary Biosocial Perspective

T2 - Human Nature: An Interdisciplinary Biosocial Perspective

JF - Human Nature: An Interdisciplinary Biosocial Perspective

SN - 1045-6767

ER -