Quick summary of cultural ecology of the Kofyar homelandfrom G. D. Stone (1996) Settlement Ecology: The Social and Spatial Organization of Kofyar Agriculture. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
In both the hills and plains, cultivation was highly intensive. In most
villages, the infield surrounding each compound was put in intercropped
sorghum, early millet, and cowpeas each year; villages at the highest
elevations relied more on maize and late millet. The infields were fertilized
annually with compost from stall-fed goats (which was hoed into waffle gardens
to control infiltration and check erosion) and were carefully weeded.
Seedlings were often cultivated in nurseries and transplanted by hand. A wide
roster of secondary crops -- including maize, groundnuts (peanuts), bambara
nuts, cocoyam, sweet potato, dwarf millet, sesame, and various cucurbits --
was grown on terraces and outfields. The Kofyar also cultivated palm and
canarium trees for their oil, which was both consumed and sold in local
markets.
Although the infield was responsible for the lion's share of
agricultural produce, the Kofyar also cultivated three categories of
outfields. Plots cultivated on village perimeters or interstices were called
mar lang, and plots that were more distant (but usually within a half-
hour's walk) were called mar goon. Outfield plots were cultivated
extensively, usually with swidden methods and fallowing, but light fertilizers
such as ash were sometimes applied. The last category of outfield was migrant
farms (still usually within a day's walk) called mar wang, discussed in
chapter 5.
Many hillsides were terraced. Most terrace plots were outfields, but
some compounds were situated on slopes so steep that the infield (mar
koepang or futung) was entirely on terraces. Cultivation tactics on
such infrastructure can involve low labor investment and fallowing, which are
hallmarks of extensive farming. Yet in most cases where agricultural
infrastructure has been built, the cultivation regime is indeed intensive in
that labor is being substituted for land (see chapter 3). Labor inputs on
terrace plots were relatively low; they were only lightly fertilized, and
fallowing was responsible for restoring fertility. Yet the time cost to build
and maintain the terraces was quite high. In fact, when new lands opened up to
the Kofyar, it was the terrace plots that most farmers abandoned, and on the
steeper hills the unmaintained terraces began to disintegrate quickly.
The great majority of agricultural labor was mobilized within the
household for work on the infield. Netting characterizes the labor demands of
this agricultural regime as "small-scale but continuous" (Netting 1965) and
manageable by the relatively small labor pool of the homeland household.
Indeed, additional workers in the household offered little marginal utility
because production was limited more by land than by labor. The
characteristically small Kofyar household is therefore well adapted to the
labor demands of production, and the swollen households that were kept from
fissioning by land shortages in plains villages were disadvantaged (Stone et
al. 1984).
|