Seminar streaming audio and podcasts: Beginning in 2006, and at the discretion of presenters, some CAEPR seminars are made available through this page as streaming audio and MP3 podcasts, together with appropriate handout materials. Links will be found beneath the seminar abstract. Certain types of seminar presentation, including works in progress and thesis reports, may not be appropriate for podcast. The discussion following a presentation is not recorded.
Occasional Seminars & Lectures
ANU Public Lecture Series 2006
The Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research (CAEPR) presents:
Why Indigenous Policy needs to be based on Evidence
and not Hyperbole
Dr Boyd Hunter, Fellow, CAEPR
To be followed by the launch of CAEPR Research Monograph No 26 by Professor Larissa Brehrendt, University of Technology, Sydney, titled Assessing the evidence on Indigenous socioeconomic outcomes: A focus on the 2002 NATSISS, edited by Dr Boyd Hunter.
Thursday 3 August 2006, 5:30pm
Lecture Theatre 3, Manning Clark Centre, Union Court, ANU[Map]
The recent public debate on Indigenous issues has been provoked by ahistorical accounts of the extent to which policies have improved the lives of Indigenous Australians since the start of the modern policy era in 1972. The quality of historical data is questionable, meaning that people need to understand the reliability of estimates for educated public and policy discourse. Dr Boyd Hunter will outline the need for a considered engagement between politicians, their bureaucracy and the academic sector so that all parties can appreciate the complex underlying causes of Indigenous disadvantage. His lecture will draw together recent research to begin the debate that he argues is crucial: What can and can't the evidence tell us about the most effective policy instruments to address Indigenous disadvantage for the 21st Century?
Dr Boyd Hunter is a Fellow at the Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research where he specialises in labour market analysis, racial discrimination, social economics, crime and justice statistics, neighbourhood inequality, poverty research. He was a Ronald Henderson Fellow and a Visiting Fellow at the New Zealand Treasury in Wellington. In 2003, he held an Australian Census Analytic Program Fellow that resulted in the ABS monograph, Indigenous People in the Contemporary Australian Labour Market.
Professor Larissa Behrendt
is Professor of Law and
Director of Research at the Jumbunna Indigenous House of Learning
at University of Technology Sydney and also Director of Ngiya,
the National Institute of Indigenous Law, Policy and Practice.
She has a Doctorate of Laws from Harvard University, and is
admitted to the ACT Supreme Court as a Barrister-of-Law. Her
book Achieving Social Justice: Indigenous Rights and Australia's
Future was published by The Federation Press.
The views expressed in this lecture are those of the presenter and do not necessarily represent the views of ANU.
March 31
A Murray Darling Basin Ministerial Council's Indigenous Action Plan—"Indigenous Rights versus Practical Outcomes"
—Monica Morgan,
Researcher with the Yorta Yorta Nation Aboriginal Corporation
Abstract:
Monica will speak to the Murray Darling Basin Commission's
failure to deliver on the Indigenous Act Plan for Indigenous
Peoples to the Murray Darling Basin Ministerial Council. With
a clear directive by the MDBMC, both herself and Liz McNiven,
(MDBC Indigenous Policy Officer, 2003-06) were employed to
oversee and develop the Indigenous Action Plan. During the process
they held a series of workshops on country with over 26 Indigenous
traditional owner groups within the Murray Darling Basin, developed
research in partnerships with academics and institutions, including
CAEPR and AIATSIS (culminating in a Basin Wide Gathering held
in June 2004 in Canberra), and facilitated a Natural Resource
Management interagency working group between the States of Qld,
NSW, Victoria, SA and ACT.
A final draft was presented by Liz McNiven in January 2006. It is this draft which is now undergoing a bureaucratic death by the changing political face of the MDBC. Monica will discuss the issues of continued water extraction, land clearing and pending climate change and the effects these will have on the Indigenous populations of the MDB—particularly the rural and remote areas of North Western NSW and Qld. The result is likely to be patterns of migration into more eastern and southern parts of the Murray Darling Basin, with significant impacts on already overstretched and under-resourced Indigenous services, particularly housing. Monica will discuss the different options available for planning now, instead of later, given that current policy is to shift Indigenous peoples to regional centres. She will also ask 'What impact does this have on Indigenous Nations' rights to their culture and identity based on a direct relationship to their traditional lands and waters?".
Profile:
Monica Morgan is a Yorta Yorta woman who was a key spokeswoman for her people
during the Yorta Yorta Native Title Application, and Coordinator
for the Yorta Yorta Nation Aboriginal Corporation from 1994
to 2002, including honorary facilitator for the Murray Lower
Darling Rivers Indigenous Nations from 1998 to 2002, and Manager
of the Basin Communities including Indigenous Partnerships Programs
for the MDBC during 2003 to 2005.
Please note: This seminar is available in Streaming Audio format. Press the play button to begin.
The program for this seminar series is also available as a PDF document. Full seminar abstracts will be progressively added to this page.
Seminar Topics—Series 2, 2006
August 23
Implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity—A case of access and benefit sharing from genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge in the Eastern Himalayas
—Krishna Prasad Oli, Regional Coordinator, ABS-EH, International Center for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD), Nepal
Abstract: Two schools of thought have emerged in the Eastern Himalayan region in regards to the governance of biological resources. The first is complete government control over biodiversity by the State, where the rights of Indigenous and local peoples are effectively removed. This is in direct contrast to the second or 'populist' school of thought, which advocates that rights in biodiversity are to be vested in the community. In the Eastern Himalayas, ownership of biological resources is characterized by the excessive use of power by the State under the domain of public interest and common good. Historically the laws that govern the ownership, access to and use of biological resources in the region have been validated by the principle of eminent domain (the power to take private property for public use by the State). These sovereign rights over natural resources has been the guiding factor in enacting most legislation relating to biological resources in the region. Thus Indigenous and local communities have been deprived rights over land and other resources, and as such their livelihoods and their knowledge base are under extreme threat.
This presentation will focus on the importance of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge, and the policy and legal arrangements for access and benefit sharing in the Eastern Himalayan region. It will evaluate the key elements of access and benefit-sharing which are addressed in these policy and legal instruments. The presentation will also examine the key challenges facing the access and benefit-sharing regime at both the international and local levels, and discuss how researchers can work in collaboration with local and Indigenous peoples to address these challenges.
August 30
The biodiversity value of the Indigenous estate and paying for environmental services: Win/win or lose/lose?
—Jon Altman, Director, CAEPR
Abstract: Recent CAEPR research indicates that land rights and native title laws have resulted in the Indigenous estate growing to an estimated 1.5 million sq kms or 20 per cent of the Australian continent, twice the size of the conservation estate. Further mapping work overlaying the Indigenous estate on Land and Water Australia natural resource atlas maps indicates that it constitutes some of the most environmentally intact parts of the continent. The Indigenous estate is dotted with over 1,200 small Indigenous communities.
This seminar explores the possibilities for further integrating parts of the Indigenous estate with the conservation estate as is currently occurs under the Indigenous Protected Areas program. Such integration is essential to maximize biodiversity values in Australia, especially given future climate uncertainty. However, it will require serious policy consideration of how to mobilize and remunerate Indigenous stakeholders for provision of environmental services. The articulations between Indigenous affairs and environmental policy frameworks are explored and an argument is made for far better correlations between the two to simultaneously address Indigenous socioeconomic disadvantage and national policy goals of biodiversity conservation. To do so will be a win/win; to ignore this possibility will be an opportunity foregone, characterised as lose/lose.
Please note: This seminar is available in both Streaming Audio and MP3 formats.
Streaming Audio
Press the play button below to begin Streaming Audio of the seminar.
H.K. Fry's 1913 concerns with health in the Tiwi Islands: Lessons for present day policy makers?
—Eric Venbrux, Radbond University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Abstract: In 1913 medical officer H.K. Fry was sent by the Government to Melville and Bathurst Islands to investigate an epidemic. Fry found that about 200 people, from an estimated total of 650 to 700 Islanders, had died as a result of the disease in just two months. During his six weeks of travels on the islands, Fry not only collected mortality statistics but also sought to establish the nature of the disease. His instructors believed measles to be the most likely candidate, but the medical practitioner was convinced that this could not have been the case.
A reconstruction of the events on the basis of Fry's field notes and other sources shows that the deaths were probably caused by poisoning rather than measles or, as Fry believed, magic. But in the cosmological war that waged in the islands it was necessary for Tiwi to appropriate the powers of white people and counter-act the magic of mainland Aborigines, as perceived or experienced, by creating the new dreaming and cult of Jamparipari. Thus far, the aftermath of these deaths have not been related to the pacification of the islands, although several scholars have noted that at that point in time the islands opened up to the world: a watershed in Tiwi history. Considering the cause of the 'epidemic' and its ramifications, questions can also be raised with regard to the governmental and local politics of health, particularly concerning the role of Tiwi agency in an intercultural space.
September 13
Literacy, culture and power: Reflections on the neoconservative assault on Indigenous education
—Jerry Schwab, Fellow, CAEPR
Abstract: In a series of papers published by conservative 'think tanks' over the past two years, a number of authors have called for major reforms in Indigenous education, particularly in remote areas. These papers are often extremely critical of teachers and education departments, and have received so much positive attention by media and government that many education practitioners feel they are under siege. This seminar has two parts. In the first I will identify and explore some of the main themes in these papers and provide a critical assessment of the key assumptions on which they are built. In the second, I will focus on what is cited in many of these papers as clear evidence of the failure of 'the education system'—low levels of literacy among Indigenous children and young people—and consider what the data on literacy show and what they don't show. The seminar will conclude with suggestions for alternative ways to proceed in enhancing literacy in Indigenous communities.
September 20
Indigenous peoples and indicators of well-being: UN perspectives on global frameworks
—John Taylor, Deputy Director and Senior Fellow, CAEPR
Abstract: In March 2006, the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues hosted a workshop on Indigenous Peoples and Indicators of Well-Being. This workshop was the first in a series to be held in various world regions to canvass appropriate recommendations for the establishment of a core set of global and regional indicators that could then be used by governments, intergovernmental organisations and the UN system when designing and monitoring programs that directly affect Indigenous peoples. Of particular interest is the degree to which the Millennium Development Goals, targets and indicators adequately represent Indigenous interests.
This presentation reports on the findings of this workshop and considers the position of current Australian Indigenous social indicator frameworks within this international context. It discusses aspects of representations of Indigenous culture in formal reporting frameworks, and observes that the development of indicators in cross-cultural settings will always involve a degree of reductionism and a process of translation. The Programme of Action announced for the UN's Second International Decade on the World's Indigenous Peoples sets out a framework of key objectives for achievements during the decade, and implications for measures of well-being are considered from an Australian perspective.
Please note: This seminar is available in both Streaming Audio and MP3 formats.
Streaming Audio
Press the play button below to begin Streaming Audio of the seminar.
Regionalised governance processes in the Northern Territory: The West Central Arnhem Regional Authority
—Diane Smith, Fellow, CAEPR
Abstract: Today, many Indigenous groups and communities around the country are exploring options for regionalised forms of governance. But the structures and processes of Indigenous self-determination have long been moulded by non-Indigenous reform agenda and policy frameworks. In the gap left by the abolition of ATSIC and its regional councils, governments are focusing their policy attention on how to facilitate other forms of regionally-based representation and partnerships.
Against this backdrop, many issues remain open to debate: What constitutes a 'region' for Indigenous governance purposes? How is 'region' being linked to 'community' and 'localism'? What principles and institutions are guiding Indigenous initiatives? What challenges are being encountered? What forms of regionalised governance are being developed? And finally, are the substantial changes to the architecture of in Indigenous Affairs currently being implemented by governments, enabling or disabling Indigenous efforts?
This seminar is a preliminary exploration of these issues by reference to an initiative in West Central Arnhem Land where a group of Indigenous leaders are working with their local organisations and alongside community development officers (CDOs) from the Department of Local Government, Housing and Sport (DLGHS) to establish a regional authority under the Local Government Act of the Northern Territory.
Please note: This seminar is available in both Streaming Audio and MP3 formats.
Streaming Audio
Press the play button below to begin Streaming Audio of the seminar.
The limits to accountability within Indigenous community-based organisations: Reflections on fieldwork in the West Kimberley
—Kathryn Thorburn, PhD Scholar, CAEPR
Abstract: 'Accountability' it would seem is a catch-phrase of our times; it is now expected across the organizational spectrum, from government agencies to corporations to non-government organisations.
Drawing from doctoral fieldwork carried out with two Indigenous community-based organisations associated with Fitzroy Crossing in the West Kimberley, this seminar will inquire into how some of the concepts behind accountability translate into day-to-day governance practice. In doing so, it will identify elements of the 'politics', management and indeed structure of such organisations that can make a simple application of the concept of accountability highly problematic.
While acknowledging that external accountability requirements to various government funders is having significant impacts on internal efficacy, the main focus for the seminar will be the dynamics between such organisations and their constituents. In particular, it will consider how the material status of constituents, in combination with the unstable basis of peoples' political identity, can make the establishment of agreed upon principles and priorities elusive. And that in the absence of such agreed-to fundamentals to which those in positions of power can be held to account, the parameters of accountability in these contexts will continue to be fluid and contested.
Please note: This seminar is available in both Streaming Audio and MP3 formats.
Streaming Audio
Press the play button below to begin Streaming Audio of the seminar.
Power to the People? Government Partnerships with Indigenous Australians in the New Arrangements in Indigenous Affairs
—Janet Hunt, Fellow, CAEPR
Abstract: The 'new arrangements' in Australian Indigenous Affairs appear to strongly reflect 'new governance' thinking. There is an emphasis on joined-up government approaches and new sorts of partnerships with Indigenous communities at local levels, with a view to strengthening their capacity and overcoming the marked social and economic disadvantage facing Indigenous citizens in Australia. This approach was intended to enable local Indigenous people to 'shape their own futures'.
This paper will consider the extent to which the new arrangements, as implemented to date, really reflect new governance approaches. In particular it will explore the nature of the partnerships which are being developed among governments, as well as between governments and Indigenous communities. The paper will highlight some challenges emerging for governments and communities in light of experience to date, and illustrate how one Indigenous community is addressing them. It will also reflect on these Australian experiences within a wider context of partnership experience overseas.
Please note: This seminar is available in both Streaming Audio and MP3 formats.
Streaming Audio
Press the play button below to begin Streaming Audio of the seminar.
Risk Factors for Polydrug Use in a Native American Population
—Steve Kunitz, Department of Community and Preventive Medicine, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, New York
Abstract: The Diagnostic Interview Schedule was
used in 1993-5 to collect information on the use of alcohol
and other substances from 1,086 Navajo Indians living on or
near their reservation in the southwestern U.S.A. Historically,
alcohol has been the most frequently abused substance, and still
is. However, major economic and demographic changes over the
past 50 years have increased exposure to other substances, and
use of multiple substances has become more frequent. In the
changed context of life on and near the Navajo Reservation,
some risk factors for polysubstance use are new (e.g. declining
age of first use of alcohol), whereas others, especially sexual
abuse of women, have been present historically and have increased
susceptibility to the use of newly available substances.
Biographical Note: Stephen J. Kunitz, M.D.,
Ph.D. is Professor in the Department of Community and Preventive
Medicine, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry,
Rochester, New York. He is currently visiting Australia under
the Fulbright Senior Specialist Program. Stephen's research
has focused on the use of alcohol among Native Americans and
others in the American Southwest, and medical and population
history. His most recent books, all published by Oxford University
Press, are Disease and Social Diversity: The Impact of Europeans
on the Health of Non-Europeans (1994), Drinking, Conduct
Disorder, and Social Change: Navajo Experiences (2000),
and The Health of Populations: General Theories and Particular
Realities (2006).
October 25
Arguing for a treaty between Indigenous and settler Australians: Beginning a better relationship (A thesis proposal)
—Katarina Ferro, PhD Scholar, CAEPR
Abstract:
The paper deals with Indigenous rights in Australia, drawing on the treaty debate in Australia as well as the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. It will discuss the arguments for a treaty between Indigenous Australians and the federal government since the 1980s, look into treaties in international law and discuss the latest developments in Indigenous rights (the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples), arguing for a legally binding framework for Australia.
November 01
The making of contemporary Aboriginal learning and literacy: Ngaanyatjarra engagement with changing western practices
—Inge Kral, PhD Scholar, CAEPR
Abstract: This seminar will draw together the conclusions of doctoral fieldwork and research for an ethnography of literacy conducted in the Ngaanyatjarra region of the Western Desert. An anthropological perspective on literacy is used to open the way to seeing how people actually use literacy in a spectrum of contexts outside of pedagogical parameters. Although the last out of the desert (the first wave came out in the 1930s and the last in the 1960s), the Ngaanyatjarra encountered an unusual sequence of relatively benign post-contact experiences that laid the foundation for the contemporary literacy environment. The nature of the contact experience is considered in relation to the manner in which Ngaanyatjarra people have taken on Western practices, habits and values inclusive of literacy and how they have been transmitted and transformed across the generations. This seminar situates literacy as social practice that cannot be removed from social, cultural, historical and political contexts of use. It is an attempt to shift the stance away from the current frame that locks remote Aboriginal people into a history of failed policies by exploring a countervailing position that seeks to understand the present position and how the scope for future possibilities can be widened.
November 08
Dealing with distance: Mobility, sociality and governance in Central Cape York Peninsula
—Benjamin Smith, Research Fellow, CAEPR
Abstract: In central Cape York Peninsula, mobility and governance are deeply interconnected. At the threshold of colonization indigenous 'governance structures', closely tied to the local web of kinship, provided the foundation for Aboriginal population mobility. Whilst these 'traditional' mobility patterns were profoundly affected by settler colonization, the colonial period saw the development of new forms of population mobility themselves deeply connected to introduced forms of governance. These indigenous and introduced forms of governance together provided the foundation for the forms of 'post-colonial' population mobility—in particular those linked with the region's outstation movement—that developed in the late 1980s and early 1990s.
Drawing both on materials from a forthcoming book and on current research, this seminar will examine the ongoing interconnection of mobility, sociality and governance in central Cape York Peninsula. In particular the seminar will examine the ways in which a regional Aboriginal Corporation has played a key role in shaping regional patterns of population mobility. Arguing that it is necessary to understand the formal structure of this Corporation as merely one aspect of a broader social field, I suggest that a local Aboriginal emphasis on interpersonal relationships sheds interesting light on governance in the central Peninsula.
November 15
Dealing with transformation and change: Examples of innovative approaches by Aboriginal organisations
—Julie Finlayson, Researcher, Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies
Abstract: This seminar arises from an Australian Collaboration project to examine nationally ingredients of successful Indigenous organisations. It follows a pilot study published in 2004. Both research stages are hosted by AIATSIS.
The objectives of the current project are to assess the extent generic organisational principles contribute to success across a diverse selection of Indigenous organisations.
Public perceptions of Aboriginal organisations paint them as incompetent, dysfunctional service providers; a view often widely accepted by government in the face of compliance and conformance failures and leading to direct intervention. This takes various forms from focused training, higher reporting and accountability requirements, and adoption of market strategies (contract instead of grant funding, contestability, performance reviews).
In this seminar I draw on an emerging theme from field work research; the imperative for Aboriginal organisations to manage change in policy and operating environments. An important preliminary finding is that an organisation's capacity to adapt and work effectively with change is linked to government's capacity to recognise, work with, and reward creativity. The paper explores this connection.
Please note: This seminar is available in both Streaming Audio and MP3 formats.
Streaming Audio
Press the play button below to begin Streaming Audio of the seminar.
Arguing about Indigenous affairs: Sectoralism, ideology and time as limits to a whole-of-government approach
—Will Sanders, Fellow, CAEPR
Abstract: In the last few years there has been much promotion of a whole-of-government approach to Australian Indigenous affairs. Yet in 2006 there has been a major outbreak of argument about Indigenous affairs among Australian politicians and other public figures. In this paper I want to argue that the exchanges of 2006 suggest some limits to a whole-of-government approach. The first limit is sectoralism; that public policy is inevitably made in a large number of distinct subject areas involving largely discrete networks, or communities, of participants. Sectors are not entirely cut off from central government attention, indeed they often compete with each other for both government resources and attention. However sectors also have internal dynamics which resist and limit whole-of-government direction. A second limit is ideology, often constructed negatively in the recent Indigenous affairs arguments as a struggle between a resurgent assimilationism and a naive and more recently discredited socialist collectivism. I want to construct the ideological dimension of recent Indigenous affairs argument more positively, as a respectable difference of perspective between egalitarian universalism and liberal multi-culturalism. When ideologies are portrayed in more positive terms it becomes easier to understand why public figures still argue about Indigenous affairs, despite their professed commitment to a more consensual whole-of-government approach. The third limit to a whole-of-government approach which I wish to explore is time. In particular I want to think about the impact of new and old players in Indigenous affairs in time scales ranging from perhaps one to thirty years. I will argue that participants operating in different time scales operate in different ways and impart a quite different flavour to Indigenous affairs, once again limiting the development of a consensual whole-of-government approach. I will argue, in summary, that sectoralism, ideology and time, together represent a very substantial set of limits to a whole-of-government approach to Indigenous affairs. Argument about Australian Indigenous affairs is likely to continue into the indefinite future, even if not quite at the level of intensity of 2006.
November 29
Accommodating difference? : A socio-political history of a fringe camp in a Northern Territory town
—Sarah Holcombe, Research Fellow, CAEPR
Abstract: By exploring the socio-political history of a fringe camp in a remote Northern Territory town, the colonial structures that reinforce separation and marginality are revealed. That this town is surrounded by Aboriginal freehold land and serviced by a predominantly Aboriginal Council speaks of the complex interleaving of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal interests. These interests have been formed through the violent history of the pastoral frontier in this region and the influences of the Lutheran church. Yet, there is also agency in the choice of creek campers to live on the fringes of the town. Indeed, some have been doing for as long as they can recall and actively state that they have no desire to live in a formal house in a structured suburb such as exists in the township across the highway. Balancing a universal human rights perspective (that considers 'conditioned satisfaction', for instance) with that of a culturally and locally informed agency is a key challenge articulated in this paper.
December 06
When solutions become the problem: The conditions of practice for administrative innovation in discrete Indigenous settlements
—Mark Moran, Manager Research, Centre for Appropriate Technology, Alice Springs
After thirty years of implementation of self-determination policy, there is considerable disagreement and disarray over its merits. The study discussed in this seminar examined the transactions that occurred in the practice through two of the main instruments of self-determination policy: participatory planning and self-governance. Twenty decision-making forums were analysed over a ten year period, at a large discrete Indigenous settlement in Queensland. Six success factors were found to be necessary but not sufficient conditions for innovative practice: (1) local participation, (2) external technical expertise, (3) skilled negotiation, (4) institutional capacity, (5) presence of a focal driver, and (6) jurisdictional devolution.
All of the examples of successful innovation involved productive social relationships developing locally between leaders and trusted outside employees. The complexity of the problems faced and their solutions were only revealed through practice, one step at a time. Ironically, one of the greatest obstacles limiting local capacity of leaders was the quantity of administration involved in managing their 'self-determination'. An accepted role of leaders and employees was to manipulate the system to create the institutional space to permit the subjects of self-determination to make their own representations. The analysis suggested that the quest for solutions to the 'problem', and administrative apparatus that ensue, has come to impede their actual practice. More emphasis is required on finding a better balance between policy and practice, towards which the six success factors are proposed.
Please note: This seminar is available in both Streaming Audio and MP3 formats.
Streaming Audio
Press the play button below to begin Streaming Audio of the seminar.
The program for this seminar series is also available as a PDF document.
Seminar Topics—Series 1, 2006
March 15
Views from the top of the 'quiet revolution': Secretarial perspectives on the new arrangements in Indigenous affairs
—Bill Gray, Centre Associate, CAEPR and Will Sanders, Fellow, CAEPR
Abstract:
In February 2005, Minister Amanda Vanstone addressed the National Press Club on the new arrangements in Indigenous affairs. She identified these new arrangements as a 'quiet revolution in Indigenous affairs'. Within the context of the new arrangements, the Australian Public Service is undergoing some major changes in the way in which it seeks to develop and implement policy in relation to Indigenous affairs. In her address to the National Press Club, the Minister said 'Back here in Canberra, the mainstream agencies are not only charged with, but fully engaged in providing better outcomes for Indigenous Australians. It's not the old mainstreaming where separate departments may have fallen into a silo mentality. Through the Secretaries Group, which meets monthly, some of our best public servants are turning their minds to the issue.'
Between October 2005 and January 2006, Bill Gray and Will Sanders interviewed the members of the Secretaries Group on Indigenous Affairs, including the Secretary of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, Dr Peter Shergold, and canvassed with them their personal views as to the way in which the new arrangements were being implemented and the impact such arrangements were having on their own portfolio responsibilities. Issues such as the operations of the Secretaries Group, the Ministerial Taskforce on Indigenous Affairs, mainstreaming, the whole-of-government approach, Shared Responsibility Agreements, the role of the Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination (OIPC), Indigenous Coordination Centres (ICCs), COAG trial sites, flexible funding of Indigenous programs and accountability were discussed.
The seminar will provide an opportunity for participants to be given a rare insight into the current thinking on these issues of the most senior Commonwealth public servants charged with the development and implementation of Indigenous policy.
Please note: This seminar is available in Streaming Audio format. Press the play button to begin.
March 22
The prospects for cultural change in Aboriginal alcohol misuse: Demographic and geographic influences
—Maggie Brady, Fellow, CAEPR
Abstract:
Over the next few decades, patterns of use and the meanings attached to the uses of beverage alcohol by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people will be subject to multifaceted influences. Some of these appear initially to be unrelated to the use of alcohol and other drugs, such as changes in demography, family structure and population mobility. Other factors will have a more direct impact, such as changes in alcohol availability, the increasing availability of other drugs, the evolution of communities into towns, and improvements in socioeconomic status. Underlying the impact of these broader developments however, will be less quantifiable matters such as social attitudes, new social and cultural influences on behaviour, and greater psychological distance from the patterns, restrictions and humiliations of the past.
March 29
Can engagement in forest industries improve the social and economic circumstances of Indigenous Australians?
—Sue Feary, PhD Scholar, School of Resources, Environment and Society, ANU
Abstract:
Debates on the sustainable use of forests have broadened the focus of forest management to include non-wood and non-economic values and this has allowed Aboriginal voices to be heard over the last decade or so. Several rounds of consultation associated with forest debates have shown that Aboriginal interests in forestry are not confined to protecting cultural values and participating in decision making. Although these are still very important, the ability to derive economic benefits from forests is a significant driver of change in some Aboriginal communities.
My PhD research is situated in the paradigms of delivering social justice to Indigenous people and of the connections between resource use and Aboriginal history and culture. It was prompted by the Commonwealth Government's decision to develop a National Indigenous Forestry Strategy (NIFS) aimed at increasing the involvement of Aboriginal people in forest industries. I argue that forestry has some advantages over other resource extraction industries in that engagement of Aboriginal people with forestry can have many expressions, depending on a range of factors that have informed and been explored through my fieldwork. Preliminary analysis of qualitative data from interviews and participant observation suggests that for NIFS to be effective in addressing social and economic disadvantage it must cater for a wide spectrum of forestry-Indigenous people interactions by encouraging flexible, bottom-up approaches.
April 5
The view from the ground: Preliminary findings from a comparative analysis of Indigenous community governance experience
—Janet Hunt, Fellow, CAEPR
Abstract:
This seminar will present some early findings from the Indigenous Community Governance Project (ICGP), an ARC-supported Linkage Project between CAEPR and Reconciliation Australia. The aims of the ICGP are to investigate the processes, structures, institutions, leadership, powers, capabilities, and cultural foundations of Indigenous community governance across rural, remote, and urban settings. The project is applied, and seeks to understand the effectiveness of different forms of governance and their consequences for Indigenous policy, service delivery, self-determination, and socioeconomic development.
This seminar will highlight some of the key findings emerging from a comparative analysis, undertaken by Janet Hunt and Diane Smith, of the 11 current Indigenous community case studies after the first year of intensive fieldwork. The seminar will provide an opportunity for discussion of these emerging findings to inform future research.
Please note: This seminar is available in Streaming Audio format. Press the play button to begin.
Aboriginal involvement in the regional arrangements for natural resource management in north Queensland - The Wet Tropics Aboriginal Cultural and Natural Resource Management Plan
—Libby Larsen, Research Assistant, CAEPR
Abstract:
The Australian Government, in partnership with the States and Territories, has facilitated the establishment of 57 natural resource management (NRM) regions and Regional Bodies across the country. These bodies are responsible for the strategic implementation of the extension of the Natural Heritage Trust (NHT) at the regional scale. Priorities for funding are identified in the NRM Plans and Investment Strategies developed by the Regional Bodies.
The development of the Wet Tropics Aboriginal Cultural and Natural Resource Management Plan (Aboriginal Plan) was a unique approach to the engagement of Indigenous people in the development of a regional NRM Plan in Australia. Having had no involvement in the development of the previous NRM Plan for the Wet Tropics Region of North Queensland, and unhappy with the proposed level of engagement in the development of a new NRM Plan, Indigenous people of the region, supported by several key individuals, made a collective decision to develop their own Cultural and Natural Resource Management Plan.
April 19
In search of an outstations policy for Indigenous Australia under the new administrative arrangements
—Jon Altman, Director, CAEPR and Libby Larsen, Research Assistant, CAEPR
Abstract:
Outstations (or homelands) are small remote Indigenous communities, generally with populations under 100 and invariably located on the Indigenous-owned estate. Under the new administrative arrangements in Indigenous affairs, Commonwealth responsibility for outstation policy and support for Outstation Resource Agencies (ORAs) has been transferred from ATSIC to the Department of Family, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs. A 1998 National Review of Outstation Resource Agencies (in which Jon Altman was engaged) appears to be the last attempt to grapple with the need for a policy framework to provide support for the estimated 1000 outstation communities mainly located in very remote parts of Australia. The review also found that the CDEP scheme was a crucially important source of support both for outstation residents and ORAs; this scheme is now administered by the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations.
The issue of an outstations policy was belatedly and provocatively raised by the former Minister for Indigenous Affairs, Senator Amanda Vanstone in a lecture 'Beyond Conspicuous Compassion' delivered at the ANU in December 2005. Subsequently, the issue of outstation viability has gained much coverage in the print media, with the issue of outstation viability often being conflated with land rights, native title and economic possibilities in remote regions.
This seminar provides a historical perspective on the development of outstations since the 1970s with a special focus on the absence of State and Territory engagement with outstation development and policy formulation. It then examines some of the current debates about the cost-benefits, sustainability, viability and future of outstation communities and offers some evidence-based perspectives for policy-making consideration.
April 26
The COAG Trial in Shepparton: Is COAG preventing Indigenous community contributions to sustainable solutions?
—Paul Briggs, Chairman, Rumbalara Football and Netball Club Shepparton and Tony Cutcliffe, Director, The Eureka Project Pty Ltd
Abstract:
Shepparton is one of the nine COAG Indigenous trial sites, chosen because of the high level of effective and successful community development displayed by the local Indigenous community. Rather than supporting and growing the community's success, the COAG process has largely bypassed the intellectual property of the local community and failed to recognise the core issues which affect the local population. Significant community resources have been injected into the process in good faith; however, the construction of the trial has seen the majority of power retained by the government agencies, with the majority of the risk being carried by the Indigenous community. Shepparton's Indigenous leaders remain optimistic however, and are actively seeking to extract productivity from the process by developing a more substantial basis for mutual accountability and authority.
May 3
Softwares of colonialism: Contradictions of accountability in whole-of-government policy for Indigenous affairs
—Patrick Sullivan, Visiting Research Fellow, Indigenous Regional Organisation and Governance, AIATSIS
Abstract:
Dean Neu has identified contemporary financial techniques as one of the 'softwares of colonialism' (in Prasad (ed) 2003). Strathern (2000) has criticised audit cultures and Power (1997) has analysed the 'audit society'. Accountability is a significant trope of public management in general. Australian Indigenous people continue to be subject to multiple regimes of accountability even while current whole-of-government policy attempts to streamline the delivery of development programs. The implementation of whole-of-government policy brings to the fore discrepancies in accountability requirements. Encouraging cross-departmental, inter-agency, and cross-jurisdictional collaboration inevitably blurs the boundaries of responsibility and makes it difficult to assess performance. In response to a question on notice about the transaction costs of one of the COAG whole-of-government trials DIMIA responded that 'a set of specific performance indicators (such as those used to evaluate traditional government programs) is not appropriate for measuring the Trial's effectiveness' preferring instead 'qualitative' measures (supplementary Budget Estimates Hearing 1/11/2005). This paper interrogates how government may address the tension between the conflicting needs of flexibility and accountability. It questions the imbalance between Indigenous multiple reporting and government streamlining, including inequities in administrative costs. It addresses the need for engagement of the Indigenous community sector in pursuit of cost efficiency and analyses the political impediments to this. It asks, where is the sharing in the shared responsibility regime?
May 10
Why the 'new direction' in Federal Indigenous policy is as likely to fail as the old directions
—David Martin, Fellow, CAEPR
Abstract:
Set against the background of the 'new direction' in Commonwealth Indigenous affairs policy, this seminar will focus in on what are paradoxically the forgotten elements in the equation—
Indigenous people themselves. Much of the support for the new policies is predicated on the implicit assumption that Indigenous people naturally desire the lifestyle and values which correlate with economic integration, or that if they don't, a carrot and stick approach can be used to achieve it. However, the evidence shows that while many Indigenous people do indeed seek to take advantage of better economic opportunities, and while cultural change is a feature of all societies, Indigenous and otherwise, there is a widespread resistance amongst Indigenous people to what they see as attempts to assimilate them into the dominant society. Furthermore, this commitment by many to values and practices which are antithetical to integration, in conjunction with particular demographic and other features of Indigenous societies and the inevitable lag in even the best of circumstances between policy implementation and resultant social change, mean that the scale of the perceived problems will arguably outrun the capacity-and the willingness-of the state to address them.
This seminar will argue that the unavoidable question that will continue to confront the nation is the extent to which diversity can and should be supported by the state, not only where it may offend mainstream middle-class sensibilities, but also where it demonstrably results in the perpetuation of socioeconomic disadvantage. It will argue that on both pragmatic and ethical grounds, relative socioeconomic disadvantage has to be accepted as an appropriate policy outcome where it reflects choices that Indigenous people themselves are making about such matters as region of residence and issues of culture and lifestyle. However, this will require difficult political, analytical and ethical judgments to be made about the relative implication in the reproduction of disadvantage of factors specifically associated with Indigenous 'culture' on the one hand, and on the other those which may be properly understood as being associated with dysfunction or with exclusion and discrimination.
Please Note: An edited transcript and a Streaming Audio recording from this seminar are now available.
This seminar is available in Streaming Audio format. Press the play button to begin.
May 17
Leaving the bush? Indigenous people and the mobility transition
—John Taylor, Deputy Director, CAEPR
Abstract:
Against standard theories of mobility transition, Indigenous populations in Australia are anomalous for their relative lack of conformity to the notion of inexorable drift to urbanisation in a post-industrial nation. This paper presents the facts of this situation and considers the extent to which migration has and might lead to geographic redistribution of the Indigenous population.
May 24
Cross-cultural regionalism and post-ATSIC geographies
—Bill Arthur, Visiting Fellow, CAEPR, Nicholas Biddle, doctoral student, CAEPR, and Boyd Hunter, Fellow, CAEPR
Abstract:
During the life of ATSIC the Regional Council areas became a de facto national Indigenous geography for Federal, State and Territory Governments, influencing the allocation and monitoring of funds and programs, and the organisation and analysis of official data. The administration and design of Indigenous policy continue to have a regional focus, though the legitimacy of the regions adopted is uncertain. This seminar will consider some of the history of Indigenous cross-cultural regionalism in Australia and issues surrounding the production of contemporary, policy-relevant regions and data.
Please Note: A background paper, Powerpoint handout and Streaming Audio recording from this seminar are now available.
Presentation handout—derived from the seminar's Powerpoint presentation. [11 pages, 376K PDF file]
The seminar is available in Streaming Audio format. Press the play button to begin.
May 31
Embedded political theory: Shifting state constructions of the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Lands of South Australia
—Deirdre Tedmanson, PhD Scholar, CAEPR
Abstract:
On 19 March 1981, the Pitjantjatjara Land Rights Act 1981,
framed by the Dunstan Labor Government in the late 70s, was
passed by the South Australian Parliament under the Tonkin Liberal
Government. The legislation recognised the determination of
Anangu (Pitjantjatjara and Yankunytjatjara communities) to control
the management, use and development of their traditional lands.
The Act was heralded with great enthusiasm, by Indigenous and
non-Indigenous communities across Australia and overseas, as
a bipartisan landmark in the achievement of self determination.
On 16th March 2004, the Rann Labor Government's Deputy Premier
Foley announced: 'Self-governance in the Anangu Pitjantjatjara
lands has failed'. A raft of significant amendments to the PLR
Act followed in 2004 and 2005 with broad bipartisan support,
but amidst divided opinions and heated debates within and between
Anangu, other Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities alike.
Using a political theory framework and focusing on the work
of Will Kymlicka, this seminar will examine what changed and
why.
Seminar Mailing List
If you wish to receive e-mail notification of CAEPR seminar series, please subscribe to the CAEPR Seminar Mailing List. Simply follow the link and complete the online form. You will receive an e-mail confirming your subscription, and e-mail notification of each CAEPR seminar series.
Click here to view Seminar presentation slides (PDF)
Press the play button below to begin Streaming Audio of the seminar.
