Critical commentary of two articles on Indigenous Australian Essay

Critical commentary of two articles on Indigenous Australian - Essay ExampleThe article, therefore, makes a reasoned cause when it indicates that indigenous Australians must be credited for their role in conservation of the environment and the countrys cultural heritage.Talbots article is passing relevant to environment studies, since it proposes that conservation is best addressed from the roots. In this light, the author posits that Australias aboriginals would aid in these efforts, since their role in protecting and managing the environment is inherently linked to their traditional knowledge and responsibility, as custodians and protectors of the land they occupy. The article is also pertinent to the course, because it identifies some of the gaps that persist in Australias environment conservation efforts, as well as, potential mitigation measures.The article highlights several principle environmental, social and cultural issues. For example, it takes note of the fact that the re have been few processes for acknowledging and getting hold from Aboriginals, while developing global heritage nominations. As a result, majority of the indigenous Australians feel isolated and disregarded, in the environment and heritage conservation efforts (Talbot, 2012). The article emphasizes that national government must formulate national policies on conservation, while engaging indigenous persons in the formal discussions. In addition, this article stresses that research institutions, governmental and non-governmental organizations should value cultural and ecological knowledge systems of the indigenous people. Talbot has written the article from the perspective of a concerned Australia citizen, and as an Aboriginal advocating for his peoples intelligence in environmental conservation.The principal argument against the principal assertions of this article is that, the national government should independently make policies on environment and heritage preservation. The val idity of this argument is