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 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.

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.

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.

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

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.

This publication reports on the proceedings of a two-day national workshop on the use and security of cultural and other information accumulated through the native title claims process, which was held at the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies in Canberra on 16–17 March 2015. It provides an overview of the most significant factors affecting the capacity of native title organisations to manage, secure and provide appropriate access to their holdings of native title information.

Under the Native Title Act 1993, the Social Justice Commissioner is required to prepare a Native Title Report each year for federal Parliament. Through these reports the Commissioner gives a human rights perspective on native title issues and advocates for practical co-existence between Indigenous and non-Indigenous groups in using land.

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.

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.

In April-May 2005, the Native Title Research and Access Officer, Ms Grace Koch conducted a survey of NTRBs to find out about current storage practices and plans for the future of documents that have been either collected or generated by the native title process.

In June 2006, representatives from 13 NTRBs met in Canberra to discuss databases and the needs of their organisations for collection management practices. Through this report, a list of ideal fields of information was drawn up along with some guidelines for access of native title material. Several NTRBs have used the information from this workshop to design their own databases.

On the 14th May 2019 AIATSIS visited YMAC to discuss the process of returning native title materials from their perspective. This summary concerns the second field trip, to the RRKAC office for the receiving parties’ point of view. 

This report presents a summary of a two-day workshop on 14-15 May 2019 at the Yamatji Marlpa Aboriginal Corporation (YMAC) office in Perth.

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.