Search results

The socio‐cultural factors underlying contemporary Aboriginal settlement and mobility patterns are invisible to the categorisations that underpin both demographic modelling and policy that relies on that modelling. Taking the Yolngu people of north east Arnhem Land as a case study, this paper elaborates an anchored network model consisting of three tiers—an ontologically prior ancestral geography, with its associated contemporary settlements, to which kin‐based networks are anchored by nodal individuals. While the content of each tier may vary across the continent, this model can potentially be applied wherever Aboriginal Australians continue to live in kin‐based social universes. It is argued that constructing a 'recognition space' between conventional demographic categories and Aboriginal categorisations of their socio‐spatial universes would lead to more informed policy‐making on the part of government. Such policies would take account of the aspirations of Aboriginal people rather than imposing upon them the state's aspirations for them.

The current policy debate about the future of small Indigenous homelands communities in remote Australia is being framed in terms of a narrow economic definition of 'viability', with little attention to factors such as the social characteristics of such communities and the health, well‐being, and aspirations of those who choose to live there. The debate is taking place in the absence of comparative socio‐demographic data on these communities as opposed to other kinds of settlements in remote Australia. This paper argues for a broader conceptualisation of viability. It outlines some reasons why governments might consider helping homelands communities to become more economically self‐sufficient rather than starving them of support so that their inhabitants increasingly face a 'choice' between a marginalized and impoverished existence on the homelands and recentralisation in larger settlements. The argument is based on an analysis of ethnographic data from north‐east Arnhem Land that demonstrate the social cohesiveness and functionality of homelands communities as compared to larger hub settlements.

ABSTRACTIn this article, we set up a dialogue between two theoretical frameworks for understanding the developing relationships between indigenous Australians and the encapsulating Australian society. We argue that the concept of "the intercultural" de‐emphasizes the agency of Aboriginal people and the durability of their social relations and value orientations. We develop the concept of relative autonomy in apposition. Our primary focus is on the Yolngu people of eastern Arnhem Land and on the impact that recent Australian government policy—in particular the Northern Territory "Intervention"—has had on the relatively autonomous trajectory of their society. The view from relative autonomy enables an understanding of the history of Yolngu interaction with outsiders and Yolngu responses to government policy. We argue that unless relative autonomy is understood and taken into account, governments will fail to develop policies that engage Yolngu in the process of regional development.