332
ecological concepts. Since then, many pilot conservation programs among the
Comcaac were implemented, relying on these trained individuals—ranging from
trash collection to fostering the transmission of “Traditional Ecological Knowledge.”
The “Grupo Tortuguero Comcaac,” previously mentioned, represents the most stable and successful of all these efforts where every year, Comcaac youth conduct
surveys and tag resident sea turtles of various species and they also protect and carry
for the eggs until they hatch and return to the ocean. Many young Comcaac, including boys and girls, are heavily invested in this group, to the point that it constitutes
part of their identity.
As the Comcaac are incentivized by neoliberal conservation programs to learn
and care for species highly valued by conservationists, their youths’ relation to
“nature” balances precariously on uneasy grounds, where pressing economic necessities, foreign ecological epistemologies, and new ethical stances have had a destabilizing effect on the constituency of their selves. Individuals, aiming to make sense
of the often-contradictory forces that compose their quotidian subsistence, rely on
narratives like the one described in this article. Thus, as symbols, moral stances,
practices, and identities work in tandem across neoliberal landscapes, this article
has drawn attention to the crucial role that individualism plays in the articulation of
the antagonistic laminations of the self—and the concomitant moral tensions
between individuality and reciprocity that it negotiates.
The above point has profound implications for anyone conducting research
among the Comcaac—especially those that insist on treating them as a homogenous
“community.” There is an extraordinary variation in terms of how the Comcaac
approach the world—something evident to anyone who has ever conducted fieldwork among them. Yet, in books and articles Comcaac plurality is erased, clumped
together at best into conveniently cohesive narratives. These homogenizing narratives fail to represent the nuances, complexities, and contradictions that permeate
their daily life. In addition to being an epistemological oversimplification that blatantly erases the brutal process of Spanish and Mexican colonization that forced a
mobile, territorially subdivided and highly individualistic society into the sedentary
indigenous settlements they form today. The theoretical and practical consequences
that the colonial process exerted in the configuration of contemporary Comcaac life
are evident at any level of analysis—at least when we choose to pay attention to
it—the uneven distribution of knowledge, power, and wealth is a testament to it. In
this sense, a new academic understanding of what being Comcaac means nowadays
is needed; an attempt capable of recognizing the historical continuity of this tradition as well as the insurmountable losses and sociocultural (re)creations that coconstitute a definition of their current daily existence—their quotidian becoming.
Therefore, researchers working in the area face a true challenge for our theoretical and methodological attempts to document and explain their plurality. It is
through true transdisciplinary endeavors that further promote the integration of
knowledge systems that we will collaboratively co-produce knowledge (i.e.,
Johnson et al. 2016). Academics and other stakeholders working in the area need to
have equitable collaborations with Comcaac members, where participation takes
place throughout all the project’s stages. Furthermore, the publications should
provide information on how many persons shared a specific oral history and when
N. Martínez-Tagüeña and R. F. Rentería-Valencia
ecological concepts. Since then, many pilot conservation programs among the
Comcaac were implemented, relying on these trained individuals—ranging from
trash collection to fostering the transmission of “Traditional Ecological Knowledge.”
The “Grupo Tortuguero Comcaac,” previously mentioned, represents the most stable and successful of all these efforts where every year, Comcaac youth conduct
surveys and tag resident sea turtles of various species and they also protect and carry
for the eggs until they hatch and return to the ocean. Many young Comcaac, including boys and girls, are heavily invested in this group, to the point that it constitutes
part of their identity.
As the Comcaac are incentivized by neoliberal conservation programs to learn
and care for species highly valued by conservationists, their youths’ relation to
“nature” balances precariously on uneasy grounds, where pressing economic necessities, foreign ecological epistemologies, and new ethical stances have had a destabilizing effect on the constituency of their selves. Individuals, aiming to make sense
of the often-contradictory forces that compose their quotidian subsistence, rely on
narratives like the one described in this article. Thus, as symbols, moral stances,
practices, and identities work in tandem across neoliberal landscapes, this article
has drawn attention to the crucial role that individualism plays in the articulation of
the antagonistic laminations of the self—and the concomitant moral tensions
between individuality and reciprocity that it negotiates.
The above point has profound implications for anyone conducting research
among the Comcaac—especially those that insist on treating them as a homogenous
“community.” There is an extraordinary variation in terms of how the Comcaac
approach the world—something evident to anyone who has ever conducted fieldwork among them. Yet, in books and articles Comcaac plurality is erased, clumped
together at best into conveniently cohesive narratives. These homogenizing narratives fail to represent the nuances, complexities, and contradictions that permeate
their daily life. In addition to being an epistemological oversimplification that blatantly erases the brutal process of Spanish and Mexican colonization that forced a
mobile, territorially subdivided and highly individualistic society into the sedentary
indigenous settlements they form today. The theoretical and practical consequences
that the colonial process exerted in the configuration of contemporary Comcaac life
are evident at any level of analysis—at least when we choose to pay attention to
it—the uneven distribution of knowledge, power, and wealth is a testament to it. In
this sense, a new academic understanding of what being Comcaac means nowadays
is needed; an attempt capable of recognizing the historical continuity of this tradition as well as the insurmountable losses and sociocultural (re)creations that coconstitute a definition of their current daily existence—their quotidian becoming.
Therefore, researchers working in the area face a true challenge for our theoretical and methodological attempts to document and explain their plurality. It is
through true transdisciplinary endeavors that further promote the integration of
knowledge systems that we will collaboratively co-produce knowledge (i.e.,
Johnson et al. 2016). Academics and other stakeholders working in the area need to
have equitable collaborations with Comcaac members, where participation takes
place throughout all the project’s stages. Furthermore, the publications should
provide information on how many persons shared a specific oral history and when
N. Martínez-Tagüeña and R. F. Rentería-Valencia