Contemporary Inuit Food Sharing: A Case Study from Akulivik, PQ. Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Kishigami 1 Introduction)Food sharing practices are most often observed among hunter-gatherers and small scale cultivators.Appendixes A and B of Sahlins' "On the Sociology of Primitive Exchange" (1965, 1972), for example, suggest that we consider this topic.Sharing is more frequently practiced during periods of food shortage than in periods when food is abundant.Furthermore, in times of extreme scarcity, sharing ceases to be practiced by these groups.These ethnographic facts strongly indicate that food sharing is an important strategy for individual survival when they lack sufficient food.This further implies that food sharing is an adaptive mechanism among such groups (cf.Langdon and Worl 1981;Gould 1982;Wiessner 1982;Cashdan 1985; Winterhalder 1986a Winterhalder , 1986b;; Smith 1988; Watanabe 1990;Levesque et al 2000).Moreover, anthropologists have also pointed out -that food sharing practices reproduce social solidarity (Kent 1993) and/or political and economic equality (Woodburn 1982(Woodburn , 1998) ) among the hunter-gatherers and small scale cultivators.In this paper, I will focus on several cases of contemporary food sharing among the Inuit of Akulivik, northern Quebec, Canada.Then, I will delineate some common features of food sharing and point out the social, economic and cultural significances of it to the Inuit.2 Contemporary Food Sharing in Akulivik, PQ, Canada Akulivik is a Nunavik village whose population was about 450 in 2003.Akulivik society is composed of about 7 large extended families2 whose elders share at least one ancestor in 4 ascending generations.Thus, almost of all the Akulivik Inuit are related by blood or by marriage.For the purposes of this paper, I will distinguish sharing practices that have existed before in the 1980s from those that developed because of the Nunavik Hunter Support Program that was instituted in the mid-80s (Kishigami 2000).I will call the former "informal (customary) food/game sharing" and the latter "formal food/game sharing".
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".