Resources and publications

The Productivity Commission’s inquiry into regulation of the Australian marine fisheries and aquaculture sectors sought to identify opportunities to improve fisheries regulations without compromising fishery policy and environmental objectives. The terms of reference included the extent to which fisheries management regimes align with and protect the interests of the wider community, including Indigenous fishing interests, and the extent to which fisheries management regimes support greater participation of Indigenous Australians, incentivise Indigenous communities to manage their fisheries, and incorporate traditional management practices.

The AIATSIS submission responds to the Commission’s draft findings, providing advice on recognising Indigenous customary fishing as a sector in its own right, and recommending that Indigenous peoples are made active partners in the regulation and management of marine fisheries, rather than just being consulted.

The submission notes that while any changes to the regulation of these sectors must be consistent with native title rights, customary fishing as a recognised sector should not be confined to Indigenous groups which have recognised native title. New regulatory definitions of customary fishing also do not necessarily need to exclude commercial fishing activities.

Management of fisheries must be done in partnership with Indigenous peoples, and requires greater understanding of the diverse benefits that customary fishing brings to Indigenous communities, the historical processes which have led to the exclusion of Indigenous fishers, and the capacity of Indigenous land and sea management organisations to play a direct role in fisheries management with appropriate support.

The submission also recommends greater regulatory support for increasing Indigenous participation in the commercial fishing sector, as a means of creating sustainable livelihoods for many Indigenous communities.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander models of community and regional governance are based on networks of interconnected layers of leaders, groups of people, and land-ownership rights and interests. They are arranged in different ways, depending on what suits the particular community or organisation. 

This supplementary paper provides an overview of the Australian laws that are currently used to recognise and protect Indigenous Knowledge.

This paper provides a snapshot of international instruments that Australia is a member to or is involved with across intellectual property, environment, human rights, cultural heritage and trade, shedding light on the discussions around Indigenous Knowledge protection and management. 

Native title materials created in the process of native title, land claim and cultural heritage work include individual statements, expert reports, genealogies, field notes and other materials. This paper addresses some of the legal issues arising in relation to the transfer of research material from NTRB/SPs to RNTBCs.

Information sheet about decision-making for PBCs.

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.

The Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage report measures the wellbeing of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians.

This comprehensive report card measures where things have improved (or not) against 52 indicators across a range of areas including governance, leadership and culture, early childhood, education, health, home and safe and supportive communities, and includes case studies on things that work to improve outcomes.

The report is produced in consultation with all Australian governments and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians.

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.

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.

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. 

The Australian Indigenous Leadership Centre (AILC) aims to foster and nurture a new era of Indigenous leadership by:

• Helping to Close the Gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians by providing Indigenous leadership training and support
• Developing a network of graduates across Australia to provide support and further opportunities to learn and develop leadership skills
• Researching the primary enablers of effective leadership in an Indigenous context
• Promoting the value of Indigenous leadership nationally.

As Australia’s only national provider of accredited Indigenous leadership education programs, the AILC has transformed the lives of more than 2000 graduates since it was established in 2001.

This publication is intended for Indigenous communities and organisations, and aimed at promulgating successful management initiatives that could be adopted by other organisations working in similar fields. Indigenous communities can use this handbook as a practical source of ideas and an inspiration for adoption and adaptation.

Information is organised in this handbook as a tour through a typical organisation, starting at the front door and moving through the different areas or rooms. Readers can go directly to their main area of interest, such as the accounts department, read straight through or browse. The plans do not represent any particular organisation. At the end of the book, there are brief snapshots of the participating organisations. There is no ‘one-size-fits-all’ solution to any issue. In fact, many organisations have found different solutions to the same problems. The road to success is always under construction.

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 paper comments on some of the trends in Indigenous native title representation that have continued after the High Court's Ward decision.

This paper discusses the purposes and form of the reports, their differentiation from the NNTT registration process, considerations anticipating litigation, confidentiality and potential conflicts of interest by the State as respondent.

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.