Suchergebnisse

This paper identifies two periods of punctuated change in the content and style of Australian Indigenous policy in the last fifty years. It also identifies a third period in which attention to Indigenous policy was heightened through the nationalisation of land issues already well‐established on the agendas of sub‐national jurisdictions. The paper relates all three periods to the changing federal institutions of Australian Indigenous policy, with the Commonwealth slowly exploring its post‐1967 role as a national government in Indigenous affairs. In later sections, the paper identifies some more conceptual bases of changing policy agendas, through ideas of the competing principles of equality, choice and guardianship and the generational moral dynamics of Indigenous affairs.

AbstractOne of the few things that everyone can agree on with respect to Australian Indigenous policy is that repeated government experiments aimed at improving Indigenous well‐being in Australia and particularly in remote Australia have failed. Outcomes remain poor and are, if anything, deteriorating in a number of areas. Critics have characterised the history of Indigenous policy as a series of failed policy experiments. The latest experiment in the quest to improve outcomes involves attempts to move away from the usual rational‐technical approaches, toward participatory approaches or "partnerships". However, governments are struggling to implement these innovations. Self‐evidently, the Closing the Gap policy is grounded in deficit discourse. This paper examines how this discourse works within the existing Indigenous policy world to create possibly irreconcilable tensions with attempts to introduce participatory approaches. It does this using Logics of Critical Explanation, an interpretive method which allows us to understand how policy actors work within an existing policy world to either replace or augment their norms, values and ideologies to work in the new ways that are asked of them, or to resist innovation and revert to the status quo.

Abstract
This paper distills arguments by Indigenous public intellectual Noel Pearson in support of an "uplift" agenda for remote Australian Aboriginal communities suffering corrosive disadvantage and intergenerational dysfunction. Pearson draws on Amartya Sen while prioritizing personal responsibility, and attempts a synthesis of liberalism, social democracy, and capabilities building. The present paper also draws on Martha Nussbaum's and Rutger Claassen's capabilities approaches, with points of resonance and/or agreement with Pearson's arguments highlighted. Under a charitable reading, Pearson's position is defensible against prevailing criticisms, including the criticism that his responsibility emphasis leads him to misunderstand and misapply Sen's capabilities theory, and that his policies are illiberally perfectionist and paternalistic, ultimately assimilationist, and in breach of Kant's humanity principle.

Indigenous Australians constitute approximately 2.4% of the Australian population & suffer from disadvantage across a range of social, economic, & health indicators compared to other Australians, including exposure to racism across all domains of contemporary Australian society. However, there has been relatively little research conducted on anti-racism in relation to Indigenous Australians. This article begins with an overview of theoretical issues pertinent to the empirical study & public policy of anti-racism. Empirical findings, from social psychology, on effective approaches to anti-racism at the cognitive, individual, interpersonal, & societal level as well as for the targets of racism are detailed with a particular focus on Indigenous Australians. Recommendations for improving & expanding institutional & legal policies to implement these approaches in relation to education & child-rearing, public service, law enforcement & media, as well as monitoring racism & promoting anti-racism in civil society, are then presented. To conclude, strategies for engendering political will to combat racism in the current neoliberal capitalist climate are explored. References. Adapted from the source document.

Indigenous Australians constitute approximately 2.4% of the Australian population and suffer from disadvantage across a range of social, economic, and health indicators compared to other Australians, including exposure to racism across all domains of contemporary Australian society. However, there has been relatively little research conducted on anti‐racism in relation to Indigenous Australians. This article begins with an overview of theoretical issues pertinent to the empirical study and public policy of anti‐racism. Empirical findings, from social psychology, on effective approaches to anti‐racism at the cognitive, individual, interpersonal, and societal level as well as for the targets of racism are detailed with a particular focus on Indigenous Australians. Recommendations for improving and expanding institutional and legal policies to implement these approaches in relation to education and child‐rearing, public service, law enforcement and media, as well as monitoring racism and promoting anti‐racism in civil society, are then presented. To conclude, strategies for engendering political will to combat racism in the current neoliberal capitalist climate are explored.

There is growing concern surrounding the retraction of disability social provisioning measures across the western world, with state fiscal policy trends foregrounding austerity as a central principle of welfare provisioning. This is occurring within many of the nation-states that have ratified and legislated rights enshrined by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). This article undertakes a critical analysis of disability income retraction in Australia since the early 2000s and examines these changes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians living with disability by focusing on Article 20 of the CRPD, the right to personal mobility, a core right for people with disabilities and Indigenous peoples. Beyond economic inequality, the article illustrates that the various administrative processes attached to welfare retraction have implications for the realisation of mobility practices that are critical for individual cultural identity and wellbeing. Disability austerity has resulted in a new form of Indigenous containment, fixing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with disabilities in a cyclical motion of poverty management.

AbstractThis article analyzes media-related policy-making practices in the bureaucratic realm of Indigenous affairs in Australia. It considers the implications of an increasingly media-oriented bureaucracy for particular social policies in the light of recent mediatization theory. A qualitative study explored how bureaucrats working in Indigenous affairs articulated their understanding of the news media's role in policy development. The article identifies and describes five dimensions of mediatized bureaucratic practice – expertise, monitoring, anticipating, reacting and strategizing – and concludes that mediatized practices have permeated the very fabric of the policy-making process. It finds evidence of an increasingly intimate relationship between the logics and agendas of mainstream news media and bureaucrats working on complex and politically controversial policies. In Australia, mediatized policy-making practices contributed to both the intractability of Indigenous affairs policy and the introduction of radical policy solutions to address apparent policy failure. These findings add to the body of empirical research exploring the mediatization of policy-making and its implications for politically sensitive fields.

This article examines the dearth of any representative Indigenous role in national Indigenous affairs policy‐making and suggests a remedy. After making the case for a specific Indigenous place in national policy‐making, the article considers the reasons for the failure of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC), the body that filled this brief for a decade and a half. The article then considers three possible ways of ensuring an Indigenous role in the policy‐making process: a replacement for ATSIC with specific policy powers; set seats for Indigenous representatives in federal parliament; and the creation of a new elected body whose role would be to review Indigenous affairs legislation. The article concludes that the latter proposal in particular is worth trialling as it would ensure a significant Indigenous voice in national policy‐making while learning from the mistakes that led to ATSIC's demise.

It is acknowledged that health outcomes for Australian Indigenous peoples are lower than those of non-Indigenous Australians. Research suggests negative media in relation to Indigenous Australians perpetuates racist stereotypes among the wider population and impacts on the health of Indigenous Australians. This study examined the media portrayal of Indigenous Australian public health issues in selected media over a twelve month period and found that, overwhelmingly, the articles were negative in their portrayal of Indigenous health. A total of 74 percent of the coverage of Australian Indigenous related articles were negative, 15 percent were positive, and 11 percent were neutral. The most common negative subject descriptors related to alcohol, child abuse, petrol sniffing, violence, suicide, deaths in custody, and crime.