Rights to game and rights to cash among contemporary Australian hunter-gatherers

Abstract

Reports of land ownership, tool ownership and kill ownership in hunting and gathering societies have long been taken as evidence that there is private property in resources in these societies rather than collective access and ownership. Recently, however, it has been suggested that this view is in error. In the case of land, it is argued that what has been reported as ownership of resources is really a regulation of hunting practice to prevent competition and improve efficiency, and as such is simply part of the forces of production (Ingold 1980b). Correspondingly, where tools are concerned, ‘ownership’ is primarily a mechanism for identifying the killer of an animal, thus providing for an incentive to hunt-a necessity with an ethic of sharing because otherwise people would be sitting around waiting for other people to do the work, knowing they would be provisioned in the event of a kill. By identifying a killer who has the right to distribute the kill and consequently secure the prestige of having made it, ownership of tools motivates hunters to hunt (ibid.).