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 | |
PBC decision-making, certification and fees for service | National Indigenous Australians Agency | This Discussion Paper explains how native title decisions and decisions to make a compensation application are to be made by Prescribed Bodies Corporate (PBCs) and explains the decision-making processes available to PBCs and common law holders. It also includes information on when PBCs can charge fees for their services. |
Decision making, Fee for service | Report | |
PBC decision-making, certification and fees for service discussion paper | CATSI Act, Compensation, Decision making, Exemptible rules, Fee for service, ILUA (Indigenous Land Use Agreement), Legal, Members, Native Title Act, Native title holder, PBC Regulations, PBCs (Prescribed Body / Bodies Corporate), Rule book | Fact sheet | |||
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 | |
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 | |
Taungurung Decision-Making Guide | Toni Bauman, Belinda Burbidge, Chris Marshall | Taungurung Land and Waters Council and AIATSIS collaboratively produced a decision-making guide for Taungurung people to use in governance. The guide contains practical information on:
The guide is of practical use for Taungurung Land and Waters Council in governance, assisting communication and engagement, inducting new board members, and managing disagreements about procedures and policies. It will also be of interest to other Indigenous corporations that are working on their own decision-making structures, processes and models, particularly native title Prescribed Bodies Corporate (PBCs) and other traditional owner corporations. |
AIATSIS, Board, CEO, Chairperson, Decision making, Directors, Dispute management, Governance, Members, PBCs (Prescribed Body / Bodies Corporate) | Guide | |
The Satisfaction Triangle | Aurora | Outlines the 'satisfaction triangle'- a model for decision-making. |
Decision making, Meetings | Information Sheet | |
The two-way governance resources | Ninti One | 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. |
Community, Decision making, Governance | Presentation | |
Top tips for assessing joint ventures | Forum for Directors of Indigenous Organisations | Short factsheet about joint ventures. |
Agreements, Joint Management | Information Sheet | |
Traditional decision making in native title - finding a pathway through the cultural, legal and administrative maze | Mr Graham Castledine, Mr Royce Evans, Elaine James | 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. |
Decision making, PBCs (Prescribed Body / Bodies Corporate) | Presentation | |
Voices of Our Success (executive overview) Sharing stories and analysis from the 2014 Indigenous Governance Awards | Australian Indigenous Governance Institute, Reconciliation Australia | The Indigenous Governance Awards celebrate success in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations nationwide. The awards provide a fantastic opportunity to gain insight into current innovation, practices and understanding of Indigenous governance. An analysis of the top ranked 2014 applicants’ governance solutions are presented in Voices of Our Success: Sharing stories and analysis from the 2014 Indigenous Governance Awards published by the Australian Indigenous Governance Institute and Reconciliation Australia. Here we share an overview of key findings. |
Decision making, Governance, PBCs (Prescribed Body / Bodies Corporate) | Report | |
Voices of Our Success (full report) Sharing the stories and analysis from the 2014 Indigenous Governance Awards | Australian Indigenous Governance Institute, Reconciliation Australia | The Indigenous Governance Awards celebrate success in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations nationwide. The awards provide a fantastic opportunity to gain insight into current innovation, practices and understanding of Indigenous governance. An analysis of the top ranked 2014 applicants’ governance solutions are presented in Voices of Our Success: Sharing stories and analysis from the 2014 Indigenous Governance Awards published by the Australian Indigenous Governance Institute and Reconciliation Australia. |
Decision making, Dispute management, Governance, Leadership | Report | |
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 |