romikgosai/squad_modified huggingface dataset:
Anthropologists maintain that hunter/gatherers don't have permanent leaders; instead, the person taking the initiative at any one time depends on the task being performed. In addition to social and economic equality in hunter-gatherer societies, there is often, though not always, sexual parity as well. Hunter-gatherers are often grouped together based on kinship and band (or tribe) membership. Postmarital residence among hunter-gatherers tends to be matrilocal, at least initially. Young mothers can enjoy childcare support from their own mothers, who continue living nearby in the same camp. The systems of kinship and descent among human hunter-gatherers were relatively flexible, although there is evidence that early human kinship in general tended to be matrilineal.

Questions and answers:
['
Q: What permanent group representative do hunter-gatherers not have?
A: permanent leaders', '
Q: Initiative within the group depends upon what factor?
A: task being performed', '
Q: What group arrangement is usual in family authority?
A: matrilocal', '
Q: What is the kinship and decent system among hunter-gatherers?
A: matrilineal']
It is easy for Western-educated scholars to fall into the trap of viewing hunter-gatherer social and sexual arrangements in the light of Western values.[editorializing] One common arrangement is the sexual division of labour, with women doing most of the gathering, while men concentrate on big game hunting. It might be imagined that this arrangement oppresses women, keeping them in the domestic sphere. However, according to some observers, hunter-gatherer women would not understand this interpretation. Since childcare is collective, with every baby having multiple mothers and male carers, the domestic sphere is not atomised or privatised but an empowering place to be.[citation needed] In all hunter-gatherer societies, women appreciate the meat brought back to camp by men. An illustrative account is Megan Biesele's study of the southern African Ju/'hoan, 'Women Like Meat'. Recent archaeological research suggests that the sexual division of labor was the fundamental organisational innovation that gave Homo sapiens the edge over the Neanderthals, allowing our ancestors to migrate from Africa and spread across the globe.

Questions and answers:
['
Q: What value system do Western scholars tend to use in analyzing societies?
A: Western values', '
Q: Who does most of the gathering in a hunter-gatherer society?
A: women', '
Q: What group members are the big game hunters?
A: men', '
Q: What does the argument over women as gathers said to produce ?
A: arrangement oppresses women', '
Q: How is childcare viewed in a hunter-gatherer society?
A: childcare is collective']
To this day, most hunter-gatherers have a symbolically structured sexual division of labour. However, it is true that in a small minority of cases, women hunt the same kind of quarry as men, sometimes doing so alongside men. The best-known example are the Aeta people of the Philippines. According to one study, "About 85% of Philippine Aeta women hunt, and they hunt the same quarry as men. Aeta women hunt in groups and with dogs, and have a 31% success rate as opposed to 17% for men. Their rates are even better when they combine forces with men: mixed hunting groups have a full 41% success rate among the Aeta." Among the Ju'/hoansi people of Namibia, women help men track down quarry. Women in the Australian Martu also primarily hunt small animals like lizards to feed their children and maintain relations with other women.

Questions and answers:
['
Q: How is labor often divided in these groups?
A: sexual division', '
Q: What percentage of Aeta women hunt?
A: 85%', '
Q: What is the success rate of Aeta female hunters?
A: 31%', '
Q: What is the success rate for male Aeta hunters?
A: 17%']
At the 1966 "Man the Hunter" conference, anthropologists Richard Borshay Lee and Irven DeVore suggested that egalitarianism was one of several central characteristics of nomadic hunting and gathering societies because mobility requires minimization of material possessions throughout a population. Therefore, no surplus of resources can be accumulated by any single member. Other characteristics Lee and DeVore proposed were flux in territorial boundaries as well as in demographic composition.

Questions and answers:
['
Q: At what conference did Richard Borshay speak?
A: Man the Hunter', '
Q: When was the Man the Hunter conference?
A: 1966', '
Q: Why is there a lessening of material possessions in hunting and gathering groups?
A: mobility', '
Q: What can decreased material possessions produce in a hunter-gatherer society?
A: egalitarianism', '
Q: What other characteristic is variable for these groups?
A: territorial boundaries']
At the same conference, Marshall Sahlins presented a paper entitled, "Notes on the Original Affluent Society", in which he challenged the popular view of hunter-gatherers lives as "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short," as Thomas Hobbes had put it in 1651. According to Sahlins, ethnographic data indicated that hunter-gatherers worked far fewer hours and enjoyed more leisure than typical members of industrial society, and they still ate well. Their "affluence" came from the idea that they were satisfied with very little in the material sense. Later, in 1996, Ross Sackett performed two distinct meta-analyses to empirically test Sahlin's view. The first of these studies looked at 102 time-allocation studies, and the second one analyzed 207 energy-expenditure studies. Sackett found that adults in foraging and horticultural societies work, on average, about 6.5 hours a day, where as people in agricultural and industrial societies work on average 8.8 hours a day.

Questions and answers:
['
Q: Who called hunter-gathers the original affluent society?
A: Marshall Sahlins', '
Q: When did Ross Sackett study time and energy for hunter-gartherer groups?
A: 1996', '
Q: How long a day do people in other societies work?
A: 8.8 hours a day']
Mutual exchange and sharing of resources (i.e., meat gained from hunting) are important in the economic systems of hunter-gatherer societies. Therefore, these societies can be described as based on a "gift economy."

Questions and answers:
['
Q: What other characteristic of group behavior is needed in a hunter-gatherer society?
A: sharing', '
Q: What is the basis of a hunting an gathering economy?
A: gift economy']
Hunter-gatherer societies manifest significant variability, depending on climate zone/life zone, available technology and societal structure. Archaeologists examine hunter-gatherer tool kits to measure variability across different groups. Collard et al. (2005) found temperature to be the only statistically significant factor to impact hunter-gatherer tool kits. Using temperature as a proxy for risk, Collard et al.'s results suggest that environments with extreme temperatures pose a threat to hunter-gatherer systems significant enough to warrant increased variability of tools. These results support Torrence's (1989) theory that risk of failure is indeed the most important factor in determining the structure of hunter-gatherer toolkits.

Questions and answers:
['
Q: What is the only important factor in hunter-gatherer tool choices?
A: temperature', '
Q: What does climate produce in hunter-gatherer societies?
A: variability', '
Q: What is the threat that extreme temperature causes in environment?
A: significant', '
Q: What does temperature impact on tool kits?
A: increased variability of tools', "
Q: What is Torrence's 1989 theory about that ties into tool kit variability ?
A: risk of failure"]
One way to divide hunter-gatherer groups is by their return systems. James Woodburn uses the categories "immediate return" hunter-gatherers for egalitarian and "delayed return" for nonegalitarian. Immediate return foragers consume their food within a day or two after they procure it. Delayed return foragers store the surplus food (Kelly, 31).

Questions and answers:
['
Q: What  does the immediate return system mean?
A: egalitarian', '
Q: To what kind of group does the delayed return system belong?
A: nonegalitarian', '
Q: Which group eats their acquired food in a day or two?
A: immediate return']
Hunting-gathering was the common human mode of subsistence throughout the Paleolithic, but the observation of current-day hunters and gatherers does not necessarily reflect Paleolithic societies; the hunter-gatherer cultures examined today have had much contact with modern civilization and do not represent "pristine" conditions found in uncontacted peoples.

Questions and answers:
['
Q: How do modern hunters and gathers differ from early ones?
A: contact with modern civilization', '
Q: What type of conditions are not present in modern societies?
A: pristine', '
Q: Where do you find groups that represent pristine conditions?
A: in uncontacted peoples', '
Q: What do modern hunter-gatherers not reflect?
A: Paleolithic societies']
The transition from hunting and gathering to agriculture is not necessarily a one way process. It has been argued that hunting and gathering represents an adaptive strategy, which may still be exploited, if necessary, when environmental change causes extreme food stress for agriculturalists. In fact, it is sometimes difficult to draw a clear line between agricultural and hunter-gatherer societies, especially since the widespread adoption of agriculture and resulting cultural diffusion that has occurred in the last 10,000 years.[citation needed] This anthropological view has remained unchanged since the 1960s.[clarification needed][citation needed]

Questions and answers:
['
Q: What is hunting and gathering argued to be?
A: adaptive strategy', '
Q: What situation can cause food stresses that make hunting-gathering necessary?
A: environmental change', '
Q: What change from hunting and gathering to agriculture is not easy to mark?
A: transition', '
Q: Besides the use of agriculture, what other factor clouds the issue of the transition from hunting and gathering to agriculture?
A: cultural diffusion', '
Q: How long has this cultural diffusion been happening?
A: last 10,000 years']
In the early 1980s, a small but vocal segment of anthropologists and archaeologists attempted to demonstrate that contemporary groups usually identified as hunter-gatherers do not, in most cases, have a continuous history of hunting and gathering, and that in many cases their ancestors were agriculturalists and/or pastoralists[citation needed] who were pushed into marginal areas as a result of migrations, economic exploitation, and/or violent conflict (see, for example, the Kalahari Debate). The result of their effort has been the general acknowledgement that there has been complex interaction between hunter-gatherers and non-hunter-gatherers for millennia.[citation needed]

Questions and answers:
["
Q: If they're not purely hunter-gatherers, then what do they have a history of being?
A: agriculturalists", '
Q: What caused these one-time agriculturalists to become foragers??
A: pushed into marginal areas', '
Q: What kind of upset could force agriculturalists into being foragers?
A: migrations', '
Q: Besides economic troubles, what else could push a people into foraging?
A: violent conflict']
Some of the theorists who advocate this "revisionist" critique imply that, because the "pure hunter-gatherer" disappeared not long after colonial (or even agricultural) contact began, nothing meaningful can be learned about prehistoric hunter-gatherers from studies of modern ones (Kelly, 24-29; see Wilmsen)

Questions and answers:
['
Q: What can be learned from the study of modern hunter-gatherers?
A: nothing meaningful', '
Q: Who thinks that it is useless to study modern foragers since the real ones are gone?
A: theorists', '
Q: What type of hunter-gatherer has disappeared ?
A: pure hunter-gatherer']
Lee and Guenther have rejected most of the arguments put forward by Wilmsen. Doron Shultziner and others have argued that we can learn a lot about the life-styles of prehistoric hunter-gatherers from studies of contemporary hunter-gatherers—especially their impressive levels of egalitarianism.

Questions and answers:
["
Q: Who has rejected Wilmsen's arguments?
A: Lee and Guenther", '
Q: Whose lifestyle does Shultziner think we can learn about?
A: prehistoric hunter-gatherers', '
Q: What is it about prehistoric hunter-gatherers that impresses Shultziner?
A: egalitarianism', '
Q: Who has offered arguments that Lee and Guenther disliked?
A: Wilmsen']
Many hunter-gatherers consciously manipulate the landscape through cutting or burning undesirable plants while encouraging desirable ones, some even going to the extent of slash-and-burn to create habitat for game animals. These activities are on an entirely different scale to those associated with agriculture, but they are nevertheless domestication on some level. Today, almost all hunter-gatherers depend to some extent upon domesticated food sources either produced part-time or traded for products acquired in the wild.

Questions and answers:
['
Q: What do hunter-gathers intentionally manipulate?
A: the landscape', '
Q: How do they manage the landscape?
A: cutting or burning undesirable plants', '
Q: What technique do they use to make animal habitats?
A: slash-and-burn', '
Q: What is the manipulation of the landscape associated with?
A: agriculture', '
Q: What do modern hunter-gatherers depend on at least somewhat?
A: domesticated food']
Some agriculturalists also regularly hunt and gather (e.g., farming during the frost-free season and hunting during the winter). Still others in developed countries go hunting, primarily for leisure. In the Brazilian rainforest, those groups that recently did, or even continue to, rely on hunting and gathering techniques seem to have adopted this lifestyle, abandoning most agriculture, as a way to escape colonial control and as a result of the introduction of European diseases reducing their populations to levels where agriculture became difficult.[citation needed][dubious – discuss]

Questions and answers:
['
Q: What do some agriculturalists often do?
A: hunt and gather', '
Q: What do they sometimes do for entertainment?
A: go hunting', '
Q: Why would they leave agricultural lifestyle?
A: to escape colonial control', '
Q: Besides avoiding government controls, what other reason could they have?
A: agriculture became difficult']
There are nevertheless a number of contemporary hunter-gatherer peoples who, after contact with other societies, continue their ways of life with very little external influence. One such group is the Pila Nguru (Spinifex people) of Western Australia, whose habitat in the Great Victoria Desert has proved unsuitable for European agriculture (and even pastoralism).[citation needed] Another are the Sentinelese of the Andaman Islands in the Indian Ocean, who live on North Sentinel Island and to date have maintained their independent existence, repelling attempts to engage with and contact them.[citation needed]

Questions and answers:
['
Q: What is the name of the Spinifex people?
A: Pila Nguru', '
Q: Where do the Pila Nguru people live?
A: Western Australia', '
Q: Who refuses contact with outsiders on Sentinel Island?
A: Sentinelese', '
Q: Where are the Sentinelese and the Andaman Islands?
A: Indian Ocean']
Evidence suggests big-game hunter gatherers crossed the Bering Strait from Asia (Eurasia) into North America over a land bridge (Beringia), that existed between 47,000–14,000 years ago. Around 18,500-15,500 years ago, these hunter-gatherers are believed to have followed herds of now-extinct Pleistocene megafauna along ice-free corridors that stretched between the Laurentide and Cordilleran ice sheets. Another route proposed is that, either on foot or using primitive boats, they migrated down the Pacific coast to South America.

Questions and answers:
['
Q: These ancient hunter-gathers followed what path in pursuit of game?
A: ice-free corridors', '
Q: Between what ice sheets were the corridors located?
A: Laurentide and Cordilleran', '
Q: What other way could they have crossed on to this continent?
A: primitive boats']
Hunter-gatherers would eventually flourish all over the Americas, primarily based in the Great Plains of the United States and Canada, with offshoots as far east as the Gaspé Peninsula on the Atlantic coast, and as far south as Chile, Monte Verde.[citation needed] American hunter-gatherers were spread over a wide geographical area, thus there were regional variations in lifestyles. However, all the individual groups shared a common style of stone tool production, making knapping styles and progress identifiable. This early Paleo-Indian period lithic reduction tool adaptations have been found across the Americas, utilized by highly mobile bands consisting of approximately 25 to 50 members of an extended family.

Questions and answers:
['
Q: Where did the North American hunter-gathers mostly live?
A: Great Plains', '
Q: What basic trait do all hunter-gatherers share?
A: stone tool production', '
Q: What is it about the tool styles that is remarkable?
A: common style', '
Q: Where have early Paleo -Indian tools been found?
A: across the Americas', '
Q: How many members did the mobile tool-making hunters often have?
A: 25 to 50 members']
The Archaic period in the Americas saw a changing environment featuring a warmer more arid climate and the disappearance of the last megafauna. The majority of population groups at this time were still highly mobile hunter-gatherers; but now individual groups started to focus on resources available to them locally, thus with the passage of time there is a pattern of increasing regional generalization like, the Southwest, Arctic, Poverty, Dalton and Plano traditions. This regional adaptations would become the norm, with reliance less on hunting and gathering, with a more mixed economy of small game, fish, seasonally wild vegetables and harvested plant foods.

Questions and answers:
['
Q: What kind of climate occurred in the Americas?
A: warmer more arid', '
Q: What disappeared during the Archaic period?
A: megafauna', '
Q: What became the norm for the mobile bands?
A: regional adaptations', '
Q: What did they rely less and less on?
A: hunting and gathering', '
Q: What was there a pattern of in this period?
A: increasing regional generalization']
The United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), formerly the United Nations Fund for Population Activities, is a UN organization. The UNFPA says it "is the lead UN agency for delivering a world where every pregnancy is wanted, every childbirth is safe and every young person's potential is fulfilled."  Their work involves the improvement of reproductive health; including creation of national strategies and protocols, and providing supplies and services. The organization has recently been known for its worldwide campaign against obstetric fistula and female genital mutilation.

Questions and answers:
['
Q: What is the current name of the United Nations Fund for Population Activities?
A: United Nations Population Fund', "
Q: UNFPA's work concerns what general area?
A: reproductive health", "
Q: One of UNFPA's goals is to make all pregnancies what?
A: wanted", "
Q: Another of UNFPA's goals is to make all childbirths what?
A: safe", '
Q: What, in addition to its work against obstetric fistula, is UNFPA campaigning against?
A: female genital mutilation']
The UNFPA supports programs in more than 150 countries, territories and areas spread across four geographic regions: Arab States and Europe, Asia and the Pacific, Latin America and the Caribbean, and sub-Saharan Africa. Around three quarters of the staff work in the field. It is a member of the United Nations Development Group and part of its Executive Committee.

Questions and answers:
['
Q: In how many geographic regions does UNFPA operate?
A: four', "
Q: About what fraction of UNFPA's staff do field work?
A: three quarters", '
Q: UNFPA is part of what larger U.N. group?
A: United Nations Development Group', '
Q: UNFPA groups what area in the same geographic region as the Arab States?
A: Europe']
UNFPA began operations in 1969 as the United Nations Fund for Population Activities (the name was changed in 1987) under the administration of the United Nations Development Fund. In 1971 it was placed under the authority of the United Nations General Assembly.

Questions and answers:
['
Q: When did UNFPA begin its work?
A: 1969', "
Q: What was UNFPA's original name?
A: United Nations Fund for Population Activities", '
Q: When did the organization change its name?
A: 1987', '
Q: UNFPA was originally administered by what U.N. body?
A: United Nations Development Fund', '
Q: When was UNFPA moved to being under the authority of the United Nations General Assembly?
A: 1971']
In September 2015, the 193 member states of the United Nations unanimously adopted the Sustainable Development Goals, a set of 17 goals aiming to transform the world over the next 15 years. These goals are designed to eliminate poverty, discrimination, abuse and preventable deaths, address environmental destruction, and usher in an era of development for all people, everywhere.

Questions and answers:
['
Q: When did the U.N. vote to adopt the Sustainable Development Goals?
A: 2015', '
Q: How many countries adopted the Sustainable Development Goals?
A: 193', '
Q: How many Sustainable Development Goals are there?
A: 17', '
Q: The Sustainable Development Goals are intended to change the world over what time period?
A: 15 years']
The Sustainable Development Goals are ambitious, and they will require enormous efforts across countries, continents, industries and disciplines - but they are achievable. UNFPA is working with governments, partners and other UN agencies to directly tackle many of these goals - in particular Goal 3 on health, Goal 4 on education and Goal 5 on gender equality - and contributes in a variety of ways to achieving many of the rest.

Questions and answers:
['
Q: Are the Sustainable Development Goals considered ambitious or modest in scope?
A: ambitious', '
Q: The third of the goals concerns what?
A: health', '
Q: What does the fourth goal focus on improving?
A: education', '
Q: What is the topic of the fifth goal?
A: gender equality']
Executive Directors and Under-Secretaries General of the UN
2011–present Dr Babatunde Osotimehin (Nigeria)
2000–2010 Ms Thoraya Ahmed Obaid (Saudi Arabia)
1987–2000 Dr Nafis Sadik (Pakistan)
1969–87 Mr Rafael M. Salas (Philippines)

Questions and answers:
['
Q: Who was Executive Director or Under-Secretary General from 1969 to 1987?
A: Rafael M. Salas', '
Q: Dr Babatunde Osotimehin hailed from what country?
A: Nigeria', '
Q: Who was Executive Director or Under-Secretary General from 2000 to 2010?
A: Thoraya Ahmed Obaid', '
Q: Which doctor from Pakistan served until 2000?
A: Dr Nafis Sadik']
UNFPA is the world's largest multilateral source of funding for population and reproductive health programs. The Fund works with governments and non-governmental organizations in over 150 countries with the support of the international community, supporting programs that help women, men and young people:

Questions and answers:
['
Q: UNFPA is the largest worldwide funder of what type of programs?
A: population and reproductive health programs', '
Q: In how many countries does UNFPA operate?
A: 150', '
Q: In addition to working directly with governments, with whom does UNFPA work?
A: non-governmental organizations', "
Q: What supports UNFPA's work?
A: the international community", "
Q: The Fund's programs support women, men, and who else?
A: young people"]
According to UNFPA these elements promote the right of "reproductive health", that is physical, mental, and social health in matters related to reproduction and the reproductive system.

Questions and answers:
['
Q: UNFPA lists elements that promote what human right?
A: reproductive health', '
Q: These elements concern health related to reproduction and what else?
A: the reproductive system', '
Q: What is the third element?
A: social health']