In Betsy Baker’s work “From the Gulf of Mexico to the Beaufort Sea: Inuit Involvement in Offshore Oil and Gas Decisions in Alaska and the Western Canadian Arctic,” she explores incorporating indigenous people and their traditional knowledge into conversations and decisions about offshore oil and gas development. While the article is great at providing information about legal and policy developments in this subject, I do feel that we are missing an indigenous perspective on this. Many articles like this are written from the outside, assembling information as an outsider towards a finished project. However, for indigenous people this topic is directly impacting their livelihoods, and an article discussing incorporating indigenous perspectives should do just that, incorporate them into the conversation. I would have liked to see some statements from tribal councils or indigenous leaders on this topic. I also find it very interesting that this article is “evaluating” whether these peoples have “better tools for taking more meaningful part in these decisions.” I think that regardless of “tools,” any community directly affected by potential natural resource developments should be a part of the conversation.
ublic comment not being consultation was an important point made in this article. Public comment periods require a massive amount of administrative and research work from those who wish to participate. It’s the kind of work that one person could easily spend the equivalent of a full time job on, and for some projects, necessitates an advanced degree. I believe that many tribal entities in fact *do* hire a consultant to perform this task, or similar ones. This means, as the author said, the administrative burden is on the tribe and the labor may mean funding leaves the community. The state legislature’s 2011 failure to extend the Arctic Coastal Management Program (ACMP) seems like a direct reduction in indigenous involvement in offshore oil and gas decisions. Unlike the public comment periods which are kind of whatever, it forced entities pursuing development to get the state to make sure the oil company’s Exploration Plan complied with the ACMP. It’s not something referenced often (in my professional experience) and I am embarrassed to say I don’t know much about it.
I could not agree with you more. Though the AC has made (and I would like to think is continuing to make) indigenous peoples a focal point of environmental/ community issues, it is so clear to see a common theme of articles not incorporating indigenous perspectives while focusing on subjects that directly link to their livelihoods. While yes, public comment is a huge amount of additional work, that burden should fall to the companies exploiting an area- no to the tribe that resides there.