Resources and publications

The Centre for Native Title Anthropology is giving attention to the role of anthropologists in the post-determination phase. It investigates the methodology and learnings of the CLC community development unit in working with groups and communities in managing income streams from their lands for wider benefit is of considerable potential interest to anthropologists. It offers an illustrative example of the intense, collaborative engagement that is necessary at this intersection of Aboriginal and wider value systems, where monies gained from activities on Aboriginal lands are invested into broader community benefit. For these reasons, there is much to learn which is relevant to the governance of compensation funds held in trust by PBC and other entities (such as those established under mining agreements with Aboriginal groups). The podcast series also investigates the ethical and political issues they all face as anthropologists working with Aboriginal groups on social change in a framework of self-determination.

David Martin interviews Ian Sweeney, the Unit’s Manager, and four of the Project Officers, Dave Howard, Cecilia Tucker, Dianna Newham, and Carl O’Sullivan.

Traditional owners- native title claimants- native title holders- members of a prescribed body corporate. Who holds what native title rights? How can you exercise such rights? Post determination rights and interests are managed through a corporation governed by western laws and values. As is now well documented, this very structure required under the Native Title Act is often at odds with Indigenous decision making structures. This paper will begin to examine post determination issues surrounding the complex and layered network of native title ‘memberships’ and the parameters within which they must operate. There is often a fundamental misunderstanding as to how traditional rights and interests can be exercised and fully leveraged by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. In order to effectively manage native title greater clarity is required.

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.

The Two-way Governance Resource has been designed to support and promote two way learning and informed decision making (related to mainstream governance) in remote Aboriginal Communities in the Northern Territory.

Since the commencement of the Native Title Act, traditional owners have been asked to negotiate and make important decisions concerning their native title. While the Act allows for and even encourages the use of traditional decision making, this is required to be blended with modern Western notions of corporate governance and meeting procedures.

The recent decision of the Federal Court in McGlade has underlined some of the difficulties associated with the requirements of the Act for reaching decisions on important matters, and has raised questions about the proper roles of the registered native title claimants and the broader native title community. After native title has been determined, traditional owners must develop complex processes which accommodate longstanding cultural norms as well as the onerous requirements of the NTA and CATSI Act. If not handled maturely and sensitively, these processes can result in feelings of disempowerment and disengagement as well as causing or exacerbating intra-indigenous conflict. The paper will examine Court decisions which have highlighted problems with the cultural clashes which have resulted from the current system and also look at some innovative approaches which one PBC is developing in order to truly honour the cultural knowledge of the traditional owners.

For access to Castledine, Evans & James' paper on the topic follow this link.