Resources and publications

The Canadian Human Rights Commission (the Commission) created this toolkit to offer assistance to First Nations governments that want to address discrimination complaints in their communities using a community-based dispute resolution process.

This is a preliminary research report from the first year of fieldwork conducted by the Indigenous Community Governance Project (ICGP). The Project is exploring the nature of Indigenous community governance in diverse contexts and locations across Australia through a series of diverse case studies—to understand what works, what doesn’t work, and why. A comparative analysis of the Project’s case studies is revealing that governance and decision-making in Indigenous community governance is shaped by multiple historical, cultural and political relationships. Family and governance histories associated with particular communities and sets of regionally-linked communities are central features in community governance dynamics and arrangements. Strengthening Indigenous community governance requires negotiating appropriate contemporary relationships among the different Indigenous people within a region or community, and adapting or creating structures and processes to reflect important relationships. Several dimensions are being identified as being fundamental to building stronger, sustainable governance at the community and regional levels. These are the impact of the wider ‘governance environment’, cultural match and cultural geography, modes of leadership and representation, institutional capacity, organisational design and relationships, representation, decision-making processes, and human resource issues. Capacity development for governance needs to be considered within a systems framework and should be a process that actively strengthens Indigenous decision-making and control over their core institutions, goals and identity, and that enhances cultural match and legitimacy. The report concludes with some emerging issues and implications for policy makers and for Indigenous organisations and their leaders.

This comprehensive review of the CATSI Act, built on a series of reviews undertaken in recent years. Responding to feedback from stakeholders for comprehensive consideration of the ongoing role of the CATSI Act, this review would consider whether the CATSI Act is achieving its objects, particularly as a special measure under the Racial Discrimination Act 1975.

This report details the findings from the survey available on the National Indigenous Australians Agency website for phase one of the CATSI Act review.

This Closing the Gap report is an opportunity to reflect on a decade’s efforts under an ambitious framework aimed at improving outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians.

This workbook leads you through the process of developing a communications strategy step-by-step.

The Free Management Library provides free, easy-to-access, online articles to develop yourself, other individuals, groups and organizations (whether the organization is for-profit or nonprofit). Over the past 15 years, the Library has grown to be one of the world's largest well-organized collections of these types of articles and resources.

Prescribed Bodies Corporate (PBCs) can access funding through one or more of PM&C's four funding streams. If you are unsure which funding stream is appropriate to apply for you can seek advice from the Native Title Representative Body/Service Provider (NTRB/SP) in your region or your PM&C Regional Office on 1800 079 098.

This document provides useful advice about the different PM&C funing options for PBCs

This workbook provides you with practical step by step guide to how to apply for funding for all kind of projects your PBC wants to conduct.

This revised comprehensive review of AIATSIS sets the highest standards of ethics and support for human rights in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander research. While the principles in the 2012 edition are largely retained, they have been reorganised into a new framework and augmented to reflect emerging standards and developments.

Resource sheet no. 10 produced for the Closing the Gap Clearinghouse

AIATSIS completed three case studies in the joint management of conservation and Indigenous Protected Areas (IPAs) in partnership with the Australian Collaboration, the Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) and the Poola Foundation (Tom Kantor Fund), as part of the AIATSIS 'Success in Aboriginal Organisations' Project.

Within this project, Ms Toni Bauman completed a case study of Nitmiluk (Katherine Gorge) National Park. Mr Dermot Smyth carried out two case studies on the Dhimurru Indigenous Protected Area and the Booderee National Park in the ACT.

In 2017 the APONT Aboriginal Governance & Management Program facilitated a NT-wide forum for senior managers and board members of NT Aboriginal organisations, bringing them together to network and share stories to strengthen and build their capacity in management and governance. This report provides an overview of the presentations from this forum.

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.

Much of the attention paid to native title in Australia has focused on court proceedings and other legalities, but what does it actually mean to live with native title? This book presents the experiences of native title holders and the corporations they have established to look after their native title interests.

The influence of the renowned High Court Mabo case is such that there are already more than 100 Registered Native Title Bodies Corporate (RNTBCs) across Australia with responsibilities for about 18 per cent of the continent. RNTBCs operate in a profoundly intercultural context where ‘western’ and Indigenous laws are constantly interpreted and negotiated as part of a new suite of landholding and land management practices for contemporary Australia.

Through seven case studies from the Torres Strait, Far North Queensland, the Kimberley and Central Australia, Living with native title documents the experiences of RNTBCs, including those that are parties to large mining agreements. Each case study is accompanied by a short update written immediately prior to publication.

Living with native title is a product of the AIATSIS research project Prescribed Bodies Corporate: Research Action Partnerships.

NNI assists in building capable Native nations that can effectively pursue and ultimately realize their own political, economic, and community development objectives. NNI provides Native nations and other policy makers with accessible research and policy analysis of governance and development in Indian Country and with comprehensive, professional training and development programs designed to meet the needs of Indigenous leadership and management.

This Institute is based at the University of Arizona.

One of the key aspirations of native title holders is the ability to independently make decisions about and take care of country. This aspiration is often realised through collaborative management arrangements such as joint management. For many native title groups, joint management is often the only substantive land management outcome, yet there has been little research into either its planning process or its drivers.

Between October 2013 and December 2014, AIATSIS undertook case study research in partnership with Central Desert Native Title Services and the Wiluna native title holders — Martu people — to document their land management journey and the critical success factors that have contributed to positive outcomes in Matuwa (Lorna Glen) and Kurrara Kurrara (Earaheedy). This report describes the research and planning undertaken as a part of the partnership.

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).

This workbook provides useful tips on how to go about using social media to connect and inform PBC members.

Short factsheet about joint ventures.