Dr

After completing Dr. Vaughan and Dr. Marino's ethnographies, I see many similarities regarding working with bureaucratic agencies between the people of Shishmaref and the Ha'ena community. One similarity I have found, which I briefly discussed in last week's discussion, was the notion that the people who belong to these communities feel and understand their connection with the environment around them. This is a concept difficult for someone from a western perspective to understand and arguably even more difficult for someone in a western bureaucratic position. I would argue this one of if not the biggest issue facing Shishmaref, the Ha'ena community, and other indigenous people across the globe.

Interestingly both groups are undergoing a very similar circumstance; the western world is encroaching on their existence. It's important to note the term "their" in this context includes the people as well as the living and non-living environment they are included in. To these people, the town of Shishmaref and the community of Ha'ena will not exist if the environment they belong to continues to be encroached upon. Despite this similarity, both groups are experiencing bureaucratic frameworks in different ways. I would argue the community of Ha'ena has been able to be more involved and impactful in these discussions. However, it is important to note they are not as excluded from bureaucrats as the people of Shishmaref. This leads me to believe geographic location plays an even more important role in working with these people than we initially thought. The people of Shishmaref not only have to worry about rising seas, but also the massive size of Alaska. This very easily can lead to exclusion from these discussions on a global scale, despite Shishmaref being a prime example and case study. Again, these ideas about geography and the environment you are apart of goes back to the overarching argument these groups have. They simply cannot relocate because without the land they identify with, it is as though the people and places do not exist.

When discussing the bureaucratic aspect of these discussions, I think those on the bureaucratic side have a lot to learn from these people. Dr. Vaughan brings up an outstanding point when she states, "visitors also have kuleana to care for the places they vacation - to treat places and their people with respect, to heed warnings and rules, to pick up marine debris along with shells, and to leave places better than they found them" (Vaughan, 173-174). This can even apply to those from a western perspective in their own communities. We all have a responsibility to care for our properties and the communities we reside in. Although the western perspective has a tendency to view humans as exclusive from nature, we still have our own forms of kuleana within this viewpoint. If this perspective could be shared in bureaucratic relations as a way to establish common ground and a foundation to grow knowledge and understanding, I feel the bureaucratic process would speed up as these proposals would already be understood in a way both sides understand.

Above all, it is still vitally important to remember that indigenous people have a priceless amount of knowledge about their environments. To exclude this and their perspective from bureaucratic discussions is a mistake.