Resources and publications
Title | Author /s | Summary | Date | Tag(s) | Type |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Pathways to the co-management of protected areas and native title in Australia | Toni Bauman, Chris Haynes, Gabrielle Lauder | 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). |
AIATSIS, IPA (Indigenous Protected Areas), Joint Management | Article / paper | |
PBCs Working in Two Worlds | Aurora | The first document sets out some background information about what a lawyer is and their duty to you as a client. The second document outlines some questions that you may like to ask a lawyer when you are seeking advice on native title matters. |
Governance, Government, Indigenous knowledge, Indigenous law, Legal, PBCs (Prescribed Body / Bodies Corporate) | Website | |
Principles for engagement in projects concerning Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples | Tandee Wang and TranTran | AIATSIS is at the forefront of community-led research and projects, and collaborates with numerous Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander partners across the country. In this guide, we outline foundational principles for meaningfully engaging with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. The guide is written for non-Indigenous policymakers who have none or limited experience working with Indigenous peoples. It is a starting point for further learning and capability building. |
Indigenous knowledge, Partnerships, Research | Fact sheet | |
Solid work you mob are doing: Case Studies in Indigenous Dispute Resolution and Conflict Management in Australia | National Alternative Dispute Resolution Advisory Council, AIATSIS, Community Justice Centres, Legal Aid, Northern Territory Government, State Government Victoria | The Indigenous Dispute Resolution and Conflict Management Case Study Project aims to provide evidence-based research and resources to support the development of more effective approaches to managing conflict involving Indigenous Australians. The objective of the Project is to deliver recognition and support for the solid work that is being carried out and to enable current practices to be refined and extended. Its conclusions are intended to support, consolidate and build on Indigenous knowledge and experience. They are not intended as a substitute for that knowledge and experience. |
Dispute management, Indigenous law, Legal | Report | |
Strengthening partnerships for people and country | Cissy Gore-Birch, Dr Beau Austin | Indigenous land and sea management in Australia is an example of how partnerships between Traditional Owners, governments, industry and NGOs can produce positive outcomes for both people and Country. There are now over 700 Indigenous people employed as Indigenous rangers across Australia. These jobs are producing positive environmental, social, cultural and economic outcomes. However, it is acknowledged that for continued growth increased effort is required in two primary areas:
Bush Heritage Australia is partnering with Traditional Owners, the CSIRO and Charles Darwin University to collaboratively design mechanisms for strengthening partnerships by empowering Traditional Owners to better articulate knowledges-practices-beliefs that underpin their success. Increased awareness of this ‘logic’ will assist the development of multiple knowledge-based mechanisms for monitoring, evaluating and reporting outcomes to investors. These mechanisms will strengthen existing partnerships, open pathways for diversified investments, and realise conservation goals through the effective management of Country as complex social-cultural-environmental systems. |
ILUA (Indigenous Land Use Agreement), Partnerships | Presentation | |
Top tips for assessing joint ventures | Forum for Directors of Indigenous Organisations | Short factsheet about joint ventures. |
Agreements, Joint Management | Information Sheet | |
Wearing two hats: The conflicting governance roles of native title corporations and community/shire councils in remote Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities | Dr Tran Tran, Clair Stacey | Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community governance can be greatly impacted by the nature of the land tenure held or managed by the community. The fragmented system of national and state regimes which provide grants or titles of land to Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander people has enabled a governance landscape where there are often overlapping rights to land. This creates a situation where relationships within an Indigenous community – and even within a traditional owner group – are competing for power and control. This is most notable with respect to how different community organisations compete for community funding, the durability of culturally appropriate governance structures and the taking of natural resources. The ability of an Indigenous community to resolve potential conflicts, created by the recognition of native title and adapt to the post-determination landscape also impacts upon a communities’ ability to respond to external pressures such as land use planning, water management and government initiated tenure reform processes. Often these conflicts appear between Registered Native Title Bodies Corporate and community or local shire councils – who have historically played the role of land manager and program administrator. This paper looks at the role of cultural governance in supporting the recognition of Indigenous landholdings and the reasons that Indigenous landholdings, in their current form, have failed to be effective in adequately mobilising economic, social and cultural resources to achieve social, cultural, environmental and health benefits in remote Indigenous communities in Western Australia and Queensland. |
Governance, ILUA (Indigenous Land Use Agreement), Joint Management, Legal, Native Title Act, PBCs (Prescribed Body / Bodies Corporate) | Article / paper |