Suchergebnisse

Unemployment amongst Indigenous Australians is one part of a bleak and worrying picture of economic and social divide in this country. Since the early 1970s the Australian Government has increasingly invested in policies to address Indigenous disadvantage in employment and other areas. Terms such as 'stakeholder engagement' and 'participation' have become part of the government lexicon in addressing Indigenous disadvantage. In light of the nominal importance placed on stakeholder engagement, it is important to question what the concept means in practice -that is, what mechanisms exist for incorporating stakeholders in policy development. More specifically, this report investigates how stakeholders can be involved in employment policy development. CDEP The CDEP program has dual roles of providing employment and welfare services to Indigenous people. It has become .an integral part of many local economies, particularly in remote communities. The scheme is also an important mechanism for stakeholder engagement. It enhances the potential for regional perspectives to inform economic development and employment decision-making. The Rudd Government is currently phasing out the CDEP scheme. This decision is partly based on the scheme's failure to function as a job-readiness program in communities where local economies are small and jobs are very scarce. The removal of CDEP in these remote regions will force many people onto unemployment benefits. It may also jeopardise key representative Indigenous organisations in remote communities. Recommendation 1: limited exceptions should be made to the removal of CDEP, specifically in those communities without an established economy. Regional agreements In the last two decades, the Canadian Government has begun to negotiate regional agreements with Indigenous people occupying the land. These agreements involve an exchange of property interests on the part of Indigenous people for greater control in economic development and environmental planning processes. Increasing Indigenous people's capacity to regulate land use has promoted the growth of Indigenous enterprise. It has also led to employment agreements between corporations and Indigenous people. Recommendation 2: the use of negotiated regional agreements should be considered as a means of giving Indigenous Australians greater control of their land for economic development and employment initiatives. Regional representation The newly-formed National Congress of Australia's First Peoples (NCAFP) is an important step to improving Indigenous stakeholder engagement mechanisms. This body differs from the previous Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission model in two key respects. It does not have a policy-implementation role and it does not establish regional representative branches. The experience of Canada's core Aboriginal representative body, the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) demonstrated that regional viewpoints can be overlooked in a national representative body. Without a regional planning strategy developed by Indigenous stakeholders, there is a risk that government policy will override the views and interests of regional stakeholders. Recommendation 3: a pilot regional representative authority should be established. This would be a public authority that would liaise with the NCAFP. The authority would be responsible for developing a regional economic development plan.

This paper begins with a historical analysis of both the rhetoric and the institutions of Australian Indigenous affairs since self-determination was first adopted as Commonwealth government policy in late 1972. It then moves on to conceive of these institutional developments, following Rowse, as the emergence of an Indigenous organisational sector. This terminology is, the paper argues, very useful both in tying together diverse institutional developments and in progressing debates about issues of representation and the role therein of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC) and other Indigenous organisations. The language of the Indigenous sector does, however, also have its limitations. It portrays Indigenous interests as comparable with those of other groups who enjoy a corporatist-style relationship with government, such as industry bodies and trade unions. The ultimate strength of Indigenous peoples' political claims lies, however, in their being seen as quite different from those other interests; as being those of 'peoples' or 'nations' who pre-existed the encompassing society and who still, to some extent, form separate communities and political entities within that society. The latter half of the paper introduces the idea, following the example of Canada, of Indigenous peoples' organisations and their processes of representation as constituting an Indigenous order of Australian government. It is argued that this is perhaps the only philosophically coherent and historically realistic approach to future Indigenous affairs policy. It is also argued that this rethought approach has a number of clear policy implications, both practical and more theoretical. One practical implication is that calls for more ongoing guaranteed financing of Indigenous peoples' organisations should be seen as more reasonable and less exceptional. Another is that accountability processes and representation issues should be seen as matters for consideration within the Indigenous order, as well as being issues between Indigenous peoples' organisations and State or Territory and Commonwealth governments. A more theoretical policy implication is that calls for a treaty from Indigenous Australians should be treated as both well-founded and appropriate. The paper concludes by reiterating that both 'self-determination' and 'an Indigenous order of Australian government' are indeed appropriate key terms for Australian Indigenous affairs policy in the twenty-first century. With the demise of European imperialism, Australia's Indigenous minorities deserve a path to decolonisation as much as do Indigenous majorities elsewhere.

My thesis examines whether dialogue is useful for negotiating Indigenous rights and solving intercultural conflict over Indigenous claims for recognition within Australia. As a social and political practice, dialogue has been put forward as a method for identifying and solving difficult problems and for promoting processes of understanding and accommodation. Dialogue in a genuine form has never been attempted with Indigenous people in Australia. Australian constitutionalism is unable to resolve Indigenous claims for recognition because there is no practice of dialogue in Indigenous policy. A key barrier in that regard is the underlying colonial assumptions about Indigenous people and their cultures which have accumulated in various ways over the course of history. I examine where these assumptions about Indigenous people originate and demonstrate how they have become barriers to dialogue between Indigenous people and governments. I investigate historical and contemporary episodes where Indigenous people have challenged those assumptions through their claims for recognition. Indigenous people have attempted to engage in dialogue with governments over their claims for recognition but these attempts have largely been rejected on the basis of those assumptions. There is potential for dialogue in Australia however genuine dialogue between Indigenous people and the Australian state is impossible under a colonial relationship. A genuine dialogue must first repudiate colonial and contemporary assumptions and attitudes about Indigenous people. It must also deconstruct the existing colonial relationship between Indigenous people and government.

The end of the very long-standing Community Development Employment Projects (CDEP) scheme in 2015 marked a critical juncture in Australian Indigenous policy history. For more than 30 years, CDEP had been among the biggest and most influential programs in the Indigenous affairs portfolio, employing many thousands of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. More recently, it had also become a focus of intense political contestation that culminated in its ultimate demise. This book examines the consequences of its closure for Indigenous people, communities and organisations. The end of CDEP is first situated in its broader historical and political context: the debates over notions of 'self-determination' versus 'mainstreaming' and the enduring influence of concerns about 'passive welfare' and 'mutual obligation'. In this way, the focus on CDEP highlights more general trends in Indigenous policymaking, and questions whether the dominant government approach is on the right track. Each chapter takes a different disciplinary approach to this question, variously focusing on the consequences of change for community and economic development, individual work habits and employment outcomes, and institutional capacity within the Indigenous sector. Across the case studies examined, the chapters suggest that the end of CDEP has heralded the emergence of a greater reliance on welfare rather than the increased employment outcomes the government had anticipated. Concluding that CDEP was 'better than welfare' in many ways, the book offers encouragement to policymakers to ensure that future reforms generate livelihood options for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians that are, in turn, better than CDEP.

This review provides detailed information on the extent of diabetes, and its complications and comorbidities among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, including: incidence and prevalence data; hospitalisations; mortality and burden of disease. This review discusses the issues of prevention and management of diabetes, and provides information on relevant programs, services, policies and strategies that address the health issue of diabetes among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. This review concludes by discussing possible future directions for combatting the growing epidemic of diabetes in Australia. The review focuses primarily on type 2 diabetes among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people but also refers to type 1 diabetes and gestational diabetes where relevant. It provides general information on the historical, social and cultural context of diabetes, and the behavioural and biomedical factors that contribute to diabetes among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. This review draws mostly on journal publications, government reports, national data collections and national surveys, the majority of which can be accessed through the HealthInfoNet's Australian Indigenous HealthBibliography.

This overview has been prepared by the Australian Indigenous HealthInfoNet as a part of our efforts to contribute to improvements in Australian Indigenous health by making relevant, high quality knowledge and information easily accessible to policy makers, health service providers, program managers, clinicians, researchers and the general community. Research for the overview involved the collection, collation, and analysis of a wide range of relevant information, including both published and unpublished material. Sources included government reports, articles in journals and other periodicals, books and book chapters, and reports from specific studies and projects. The overview draws on information from the main administrative data collections (such as the birth and death registration systems and the hospital inpatient collections) and national surveys. Information from these sources has been published mainly in government reports, particularly those produced by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) and the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). Importantly, the overview draws also on a wide variety of other information sources, including registers for specific diseases and other conditions, regional and local surveys, and numerous epidemiological and other studies examining particular diseases, conditions, and health determinants. Information from these sources is disseminated mainly through journals and similar periodicals, or in special reports (such as the annual reports of the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry (ANZDATA)). A number of sections include the results of our own analyses of data obtained from a variety of sources. For example, detailed information about mortality for a number of conditions was derived from information obtained from the AIHW Mortality Database. Similarly, estimates of the age-adjusted incidence of end-stage renal disease were made using notification data provided by ANZDATA. The initial sections provide information about the Indigenous population and various measures of population health status. Most sections about specific health conditions comprise an introduction about the condition and evidence of the current burden of the condition among Indigenous people.

This research is part of a larger 3-year project that investigates how a socially and culturally inclusive policy approach could improve community safety in a remote Indigenous community in the Northern Territory. In this article, we attempt to address the questions – how is community safety defined and conceptualized in Australian policy, and how does this compare to how it is viewed in the case study community? Our goal is to challenge and build on Australian policy concepts, specifically relating to community safety and crime prevention, in remote areas where there is a large proportion of Indigenous people. Findings reveal that: (1) the definition and conceptualization of community safety differs between the case study community and current Australian Government strategies and (2) current government strategies to reducing crime and improving safety do not adequately address the range of problems experienced in this case study. To address this gap, Australian policies and services need to embrace a strength-based approach to addressing the complexity of behavioural and neighbourhood problems holistically.

This article considers how changing media practices of minority groups and political and media elites impact on democratic participation in national debates. Taking as its case study the state-sponsored campaign to formally recognise Indigenous people in the Australian constitution, the article examines the interrelationships between political media and Indigenous participatory media—both of which we argue are undergoing seismic transformation. Discussion of constitutional reform has tended to focus on debates occurring in forums of influence such as party politics and news media that privilege the voices of only a few high-profile Indigenous media 'stars'. Debate has progressed on the assumption that constitutional change needs to be settled by political elites and then explained and 'sold' to Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. Our research on the mediatisation of policymaking has found that in an increasingly media-saturated environment, political leaders and their policy bureaucrats attend to a narrow range of highly publicised voices. But the rapidly changing media environment has disrupted the media-driven Recognise campaign. Vigorous public discussion is increasingly taking place outside the mainstream institutions of media and politics, while social media campaigns emerge in rapid response to government decisions. Drawing on a long tradition in citizens' media scholarship we argue that the vibrant, diverse and growing Indigenous media sphere in Australia has increased the accessibility of Indigenous voices challenging the scope and substance of the recognition debate. The article concludes on a cautionary note by considering some tensions in the promise of the changing media for Indigenous participation in the national policy conversation.

The enactment of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 by the Howard Government represented an acceleration in the pace of industrial relations reform. Amid these significant and widespread legislative developments, little attention was paid to the plight of groups traditionally disadvantaged in the labour market-including Indigenous people. The Australian Workplace Industrial Relations Survey (AWIRS) 1995 is the first publicly released data set that permits analysts to directly examine the industrial relations environment in firms that employ Indigenous Australians. Information from the AWIRS employee survey and AWIRS Employee Relations Managers survey are used in the analysis.

The enactment of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 by the Howard Government represented an acceleration in the pace of industrial relations reform. Amid these significant and widespread legislative developments, little attention was paid to the plight of groups traditionally disadvantaged in the labour market-including Indigenous people. The Australian Workplace Industrial Relations Survey (AWIRS) 1995 is the first publicly released data set that permits analysts to directly examine the industrial relations environment in firms that employ Indigenous Australians. Information from the AWIRS employee survey and AWIRS Employee Relations Managers survey are used in the analysis.

At a time when Indigenous political movements in Australia insist that settler authorities reckon with powerful claims for treaty, recognition of sovereignty and Indigenous political representation, one is inevitably drawn to consider possibilities for political change. How can decolonisation be more than metaphor in a settlercolonial situation? What are the horizons of justice? These questions are central to Tim Rowse's Indigenous and Other Australians since 1901, which, in surveying and reflecting on the past 118 years of Australian settler-colonial policy thinking and practice, historicises the narrowing confines within which emancipation might be imagined or actualised.

Impetus for attempting to delineate 'real' private sector employment derived from concerns regarding the shortcomings of data on this issue identified by the review of the Aboriginal Employment Development Policy (AEDP). In seeking to address these concerns, private sector employment is defined here as consisting of activities that do not depend primarily on government funding for their existence. Using census data, two methods are employed to estimate change in the number of Indigenous people employed in this redefined private sector in 1986 and 1991. The first, a residual approach, uses a mix of census statistics and administrative data sets. The second is based on judicious scrutiny of detailed industry tables from the census cross-classified by private sector employment. Revised statistical limits of Indigenous employment in the private sector are produced with intercensal growth substantially deflated. This paper considers the determinants of employment income for Indigenous Australians compared with non-Indigenous Australians. Ordinary Least Square (OLS) regression techniques are applied to 1991 Census data to consider the question: does the lower income of these Indigenous people reflect differences in their factor endowments (like education) rewarded in the labour market, or are they rewarded differently for the same set of endowments than are non-Indigenous Australians. The results show that the main source of lower incomes for Indigenous Australians was their smaller endowment of human capital characteristics. The paper concludes with a discussion of the policy implications of these results.

This overview has been prepared by the Australian Indigenous HealthInfoNet as a part of our efforts to contribute to improvements in Australian Indigenous health by making relevant, high quality knowledge and information easily accessible to policy makers, health service providers, program managers, clinicians, researchers and the general community. The main purpose of the overview is to provide a comprehensive summary of the most recent indicators of the health of Indigenous people. Research for the overview involved the collection, collation, and analysis of a wide range of relevant information, including both published and unpublished material. Sources included government reports, articles in journals and other periodicals, books and book chapters, and reports from specific studies and projects. The overview draws on information from the main administrative data collections (such as the birth and death registration systems and the hospital inpatient collections) and national surveys. Information from these sources has been published mainly in government reports, particularly those produced by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) and the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). Importantly, the overview draws also on a wide variety of other information sources, including registers for specific diseases and other conditions, regional and local surveys, and numerous epidemiological and other studies examining particular diseases, conditions, and health determinants. Information from these sources is disseminated mainly through journals and similar periodicals, or in special reports (such as the annual reports of the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry (ANZDATA)). A number of sections include the results of our own analyses of data obtained from a variety of sources. For example, estimates of the age-adjusted incidence of end-stage renal disease were made using notification data published by ANZDATA. Similarly, information about a number of communicable diseases was derived from data published by the National Centre for HIV Epidemiology and Clinical Research. The initial sections provide information about the Indigenous population and various measures of population health status. Most sections about specific health conditions comprise an introduction about the condition and evidence of the current burden of the condition among Indigenous people.

This overview has been prepared by the Australian Indigenous HealthInfoNet as a part of our efforts to contribute to 'closing the gap' in health between Indigenous people and other Australians by making relevant, high quality knowledge and information easily accessible to policy makers, health service providers, program managers, clinicians, researchers and the general community. Research for the overview involves the collection, collation, and analysis of a wide range of relevant information, including both published and unpublished material. Sources include government reports, particularly those produced by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) and the Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision (SCRGSP). Very important additions to the regular ABS and AIHW publications are four series of special reports that bring together key information about Indigenous disadvantages in health and related areas. A number of sections include the results of our own analyses of data obtained from a variety of sources. For example, estimates of the age-adjusted incidence of end-stage renal disease were made using notification data provided by ANZDATA. Similarly, information about a number of communicable diseases was derived from data published by the Kirby Institute. The initial sections provide information about the context of Indigenous health, Indigenous population, and various measures of population health status. Most sections about specific health conditions comprise an introduction about the condition and evidence of the current burden of the condition among Indigenous people.

This paper synthesises the lessons learnt and challenges encountered when applying Indigenous and non-Indigenous knowledge and methods in natural and cultural resource management (NCRM) in northern and central Australia. We primarily draw on the papers within this special issue of Ecological Management & Restoration, which originated largely from the Indigenous land management symposium at the 2010 Ecological Society of Australia conference. Many of the papers and therefore this article discuss practical experiences that offer insight for enhanced on-ground cross-cultural NCRM and can inform broader thinking and theoretical critiques. A wider literature is also drawn upon to substantiate the points and broaden the scope of the synthesis. Four key themes for consideration in collaborative cross-cultural NCRM are discussed. They are as follows: 1. The differences in environmental philosophy between Indigenous and non-Indigenous cultures which profoundly shape perceptions of environmental management; 2. Cross-cultural awareness of Indigenous and non-Indigenous knowledge and methods; 3. The mechanics of two-way approaches to ecological research and managing country (NCRM as perceived by Indigenous people) and 4. Operational challenges for Indigenous NCRM organisations. To conclude, we point out five broad principles for managing country using Indigenous and non-Indigenous knowledge: (i) Recognise the validity of both Indigenous and non-Indigenous environmental philosophies; (ii) Create more opportunities for improved cross-cultural understanding, respect and collaborations; (iii) Involve Indigenous people and their knowledge and interests at all stages of the Indigenous NCRM project or research (including planning, design, implementation, communication and evaluation); (iv) Ensure that time and continuity of effort and resources are available (to undertake participatory processes and for trust-building and innovation) and (v) Establish high-level political support through legal and policy frameworks to maintain continuity of government commitment to Indigenous NCRM.