Resources and publications

In 2002 and 2004 Karajarri had their native title rights and interests recognised to over 31,000 square kilometres of land in the West Kimberley, south of Broome. This is an area about half the size of Tasmania. Here there are pastoral stations, mining interests, coastal and desert lands, and the large Aboriginal community of Bidyadanga. Karajarri had one of the first native title determinations to be recognised in the Kimberley and had the first native title application in which applicants were represented exclusively by the Kimberley Land Council.

This paper discusses the purposes and form of the reports, their differentiation from the NNTT registration process, considerations anticipating litigation, confidentiality and potential conflicts of interest by the State as respondent.

Assessing research impact is a crucial element of AIATSIS’ aspirations to collaborate with Indigenous partners and create meaningful change within communities. However, the way in which impact is defined and assessed is unclear and there is currently no established methodology for assessing AIATSIS’ research. This annotated bibliography lists a selection of the literature on assessing the impact of research projects. It highlights the importance of research impact evaluation, approaches to incorporating Indigenous perspectives in evaluation, and which methods may be valuable in evaluating the impact of the research that AIATSIS carries out. This bibliography provides a step forward in developing a methodology for assessing research impact, leading to a better understanding of whether we are meeting the priorities of the Indigenous communities we work with and how our research can evolve to better support these priorities.

In the Native Title ‘hot tub’ outlines the history and development of expert conferencing and expert concurrent evidence in Australia, including in the Federal Court. These approaches to expert evidence are a major development of the last decade, greatly reducing the hearing time of Native Title proceedings and the costs to the parties involved. The authors explore how expert conferences and concurrent evidence can narrow the issues in the Native Title claims of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, discussing in particular their experiences in four recent cases.

An outline of some of the legal issues surrounding PBCs charging fees for service and what PBCs can and cannot charge fees for.

In recent decades, various forms of co-management of national parks and other protected areas1 by governments and Indigenous people have come to the fore. This has occurred as Indigenous peoples have progressively demanded greater access to and decisionmaking power over their traditional lands. The response of governments has also seen the aligning of a number of policy approaches that have contributed to an increase in attention to co-management. In the first instance, there has been a rapid rise in the number of protected areas in Australia since the 1960s, and this is continuing as the Commonwealth Government aims to increase the size of the Australian National Reserve System (NRS) by 25 per cent and Australia’s network of terrestrial protected areas to 125 million hectares by 2013 (Caring for Our Country 2013a).2 In addition, at least 16 per cent of Australia’s land area is now held by Indigenous peoples under a range of tenures, with much of this land being of high biodiversity value (Altman & Kerins 2012). As a mechanism for adding new protected areas to the NRS, the Commonwealth Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPaC) has an Indigenous Protected Area (IPA) program that supports traditional owners of lands or seas who voluntarily dedicate their lands as protected areas to promote biodiversity and cultural resource conservation. IPAs now form the second largest component of the National Reserve System, covering over 3 per cent of Australia and making up 23 per cent of the NRS (SEWPaC 2013b).

While Indigenous people make up just five percent of the global population, the areas they manage contain approximately 80 percent of the Earth’s biodiversity. 

In this context, there is an undeniably central role for Indigenous people to play in conservation management, but conversely, a significant risk that indigenous rights will be negatively impacted or undermined by conservation agendas. 

This panel will explore Indigenous experiences with conservation management, highlighting the opportunities and challenges faced by native title holders within this context.

This presentation discusses findings from AIATSIS research in the Indigenous Facilitation and Mediation Project, the Federal Court’s Solid Work you Mob are Doing dispute resolution case study project and more recent research.

Australian Indigenous land and sea managers have repeatedly called for an independent national Indigenous land and sea managers network. Such a network would link top down and bottom up information exchanges, promoting shared understandings of issues and opportunities. The network would provide government with a vehicle to both inform and learn from local Indigenous groups, including community rangers, on local, national and international matters of environmental significance. It also provides an opportunity for Indigenous managers to come together to develop positions on policy that affects land and sea management such as Working on Country and Indigenous Protected Areas.

The network would not do business on behalf of people or replicate existing local or regional networks or institutions, but would provide strategic support, coordinate communication and identify opportunities for group to group skills and knowledge exchange. The network aims to provide professional support through a coordinated learning environment that facilitates the identification of effective resources, research, technologies and tools for use by Indigenous land and sea managers within Australia. This workshop provides an opportunity for Land & Sea Managers to come together to discuss the purpose and scope of a national network, including governance, networking and membership.

This publication provides a summary of Registered Native Title Bodies Corporate (RNTBCs).

The Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies (AIATSIS) recommends that the Commonwealth recognise the changing roles of Native Title Representative Bodies and Service Providers (NTRB/SP) and the infrastructure and support they provide to the PBC sector while offering flexible policies and processes that allow for PBC autonomy and local decision-making.

More specifically, this brief responds to the following main points identified in the Terms of Reference (TOR):

1. Better engagement between PBCs and governments
2. More effective, transparent and coordinated funding for PBCs
3. Additional support for PBCs (other than providing direct funding)
4. Options for legislative and institutional role reform to support an effective and accountable native title system

This paper argues that weak links are being made between increasing opportunities for economic development (including private home ownership) and the need for Indigenous land tenure reform. The paper draws on a considerable body of background research and analysis, including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ collective views about Indigenous land tenure reform and their aspirations for protecting and not diminishing their hard-won gains through native title determinations and statutory land rights grants or acquisitions; the composition and location of the Indigenous estate and
the land titling revolution that has taken place over the past 50 years; the geographic spread of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander population around Australia and on the Indigenous estate; the origins of the Commonwealth’s Indigenous land tenure reforms from the Reeves Review of the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976 (Cth) in 1997 and its trajectory to June 2016; the current land dealing provisions (private sale, leasing and mortgaging) in the statutory Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander land rights schemes and the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) and how they facilitate or hinder economic development and/or private home ownership aspirations; and how the mainland states and the Northern Territory have (or have not) responded to the Commonwealth’s Indigenous land tenure reform agenda over the past decade.

The Prescribed Body Corporate (PBC) research snapshot series has been developed to share findings from the Native Title Research Unit’s (NTRU) investigation into the constitutions and financial reports of PBCs. This research forms part of the PBC Capability project which aims to develop a long-term national picture of the PBC sector.

This snapshot examines the distribution of wealth and growth of PBCs by size between the years 2010-11 and 2015-16 calculated in terms of net totals and growth rates in the areas of income, assets, equity and staff.

This report of the discussion, which considered current practice for the treatment of connection material and other documents collected in the claim process, forms part of the 2005 Native Title Conference.

On 3 and 4 April 2012, the Northern Territory Department of Natural Resources, Environment, The Arts and Sport (NRETAS) and the Native Title Research Unit (NTRU) at the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies (AIATSIS) convened a workshop of state, territory and Commonwealth government staff working in joint management and native title at the Alice Springs Desert Park. The workshop was titled Joint Management of Protected Areas in Australia: Native Title and Other Pathways towards a Community of Practice.

This report captures the workshop where government staff working in joint management shared information about their approach and identified practical issues in developing a community of practice.

Since 2016, AIATSIS has contributed to a number of reviews of the CATSI Act including the Technical Review of the CATSI Act (2017) and CATSI Review Phase 1 (2020). Throughout this report, the AIATSIS researchers refer to the AIATSIS submissions for both of these reviews.

The native title process has created valuable research resources assembled during the claim research. Although some of this material has come from other sources, the arrangement of the documents coupled with original field research gives a unique description of Indigenous societies and their connections with the land. Also, much of the field material is irreplaceable because the elders who gave the information may have passed away. This connection material is of great value, not only to claimants, but to the wider community because it offers a valuable contribution to Australian history, anthropology, sociology, land management and other disciplines.

In June and July 2014 the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies (AIATSIS) and the Australian Indigenous Governance Institute (AIGI) conducted a survey into gaps in Indigenous governance research and practical tools. The survey, entitled ‘A short survey: mapping Indigenous governance research and resources’, was distributed across a broad network of organisations, institutions and individuals working in the field of Indigenous governance (including select international organisations) in preparation for the Indigenous Governance Development Forum: Mapping Current and Future Research and Resource Needs, held on 29–30 July 2014 at AIATSIS in Canberra. Thirty-eight survey responses were received.

This document presents a preliminary list of specific research initiatives and practical tools identified through the survey. The list is a working document. It is by no means exhaustive, and the authors would be grateful to hear about other initiatives that should be included.

The Prescribed Body Corporate (PBC) research snapshot series has been developed to share findings from the Native Title Research Unit's (NTRU) investigation into the constitutions and financial reports of PBCs. This research forms part of the PBC Capability project which aims to develop a long-term national picture of the PBC sector.

This snapshot provides an overview of the NTRU's analysis of the publicly available financial data submitted to the Office of the Registrar of Indigenous Corporations (ORIC), and examines the financial growth and development of PBCs from the financial year 2010-11 to 2015-16.

This report shows the development of a user-friendly ‘first glance’ guide and template that will facilitate a broad assessment of an archive, particularly in the absence of the collection holder and provides the basis for discussions about deposits, returns and the legal status of particular documents.