Resources and publications

The National Indigenous Languages Survey (NILS) Report 2005 provides a summary and analysis of the results from a survey of Indigenous languages vitality status and resources that was carried out in 2004. 

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.

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.

This document provides a brief listing of resources for preservation and information on Indigenous studies.

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 Community Governance Project (ICGP) is an Australian Research Council Linkage Project between the Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research (CAEPR) at the Australian National University, and Reconciliation Australia (RA). The Project is exploring the nature of Indigenous community governance in diverse contexts and locations across Australia through a series of case studies—to understand what works, what doesn’t work, and why.

This document presents some key messages emerging from a summary of the comparative analysis of the Project’s 11 current Indigenous case studies, after the first phase of a longer study.

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.

The Indigenous Facilitation and Mediation Project (‘IFaMP’ or ‘the Project’), located in the Native Title Research Unit at the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies, commenced in July 2003 and completed its third and final year in June 2006. The Project supported best practice approaches to Indigenous decision-making and conflict management, particularly in relation to the Native Title Act 1993, which emphasises agreement-making through non-adversarial approaches, such as mediation, facilitation and negotiation. This final report of the AIATSIS Indigenous Facilitation and Mediation Project provides a detailed discussion of the project, its findings and best practice approaches.

This plan is to explain cultural relationship of the Aboriginal Traditional Owners of the Wellesley Islands region of the southern Gulf of Carpentaria and obligations to the Sea Country, and to outline their ideas and commitments for its sustainable use and management.

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.

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.

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.

This is the second research report by the Indigenous Community Governance Project (ICGP). The ICGP is exploring the nature of Indigenous community governance in Australia - to understand what works, what doesn’t work, and why. The first report, based on 2005 fieldwork, was published as CAEPR Working Paper No. 31/2006.

This report brings together findings from the fieldwork conducted during 2006, based on evidence drawn from case studies of Indigenous governance in action within differing community, geographical, cultural and political settings across the nation.

What processes are available to help Aboriginal people resolve their conflicts internally? What are the most common challenges implementing such a process? This report examines three dispute resolution processes and the differences between Indigenous and Western practices.

The Yanyuwa people of the south-west Gulf of Carpentaria, have developed the Yanyuwa Sea Country Plan to explain the relationship between Yanyuwa people and our Sea Country; explain Yanyuwa people's concerns about current and future management of our Sea Country; set out objectives, strategies and actions to address Yanyuwa concerns and aspirations about sea country management; and propose options for working with government agencies, industry and other stakeholders to achieve our objectives, strategies and actions. 

AIATSIS completed three case studies in the joint management of conservation and Indigenous Protected Areas (IPAs) in partnership with the Australian Collaboration, the Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) and the Poola Foundation (Tom Kantor Fund), as part of the AIATSIS 'Success in Aboriginal Organisations' Project.

Within this project, Ms Toni Bauman completed a case study of Nitmiluk (Katherine Gorge) National Park. Mr Dermot Smyth carried out two case studies on the Dhimurru Indigenous Protected Area and the Booderee National Park in the ACT.

This paper discusses how the governance potential of PBCs is challenged by the PBC governance context.

AIATSIS embarked on a research and resource project to develop greater understanding of the Prescribed Bodies Corporate (PBC) environment, native title holder aspirations and to bring together resources and develop networks that may be of benefit to them. The first of a series of workshops was held by the Native Title Research Unit in Canberra on 5-6 December 2006. The workshop was attended by Native Title Representative Bodies who have been or will be involved in the design and establishment of PBCs following a determination of native title. Participants also included government representatives from the Department of Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs and Attorney General’s Department who gave presentations on the proposed changes to PBCs as a part of the Australian Government’s broader native title reforms.

This report is based on the major issues, themes and discussions that arose during the workshop. In particular, it focuses on measures to improve the effectiveness of PBCs and coincides with the Government’s recognition of the need for resources and support for PBCs to adequately carry out their functions.

The papers in this collection reflect on the various social effects of native title. In particular, the authors consider the ways in which the implementation of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cwlth), and the native title process for which this Act legislates, allow for the recognition and translation of Aboriginal law and custom, and facilitate particular kinds of coexistence between Aboriginal title holders and other Australians.

This paper gives a brief description of what type of documentation is needed for a native title claim, what happens to the materials both during and after the claim process and how the research creates a valuable community asset. Finally, there is consideration of various options for the management of the historical material to give greater access and control to the indigenous communities in NSW.