Remote Australia Online

Tourism is commonly promoted as a tool for economic diversification in peripheral regions that have traditionally relied on exporting natural resources (the ‘staples’). However, developing tourism in these regions has often proven immensely difficult. Part of the reason for this is that tourism seems to require different institutional arrangements to those common in traditional staples economies. This paper analyses the case of the Flinders Ranges in South Australia to examine how the conflicting institutional requirements of tourism and staples industries impacted on the capacity of the regional economic system to innovate and diversify its staples-based economy to include tourism. The paper further documents how conflicts in the diversification process have been mitigated. The research concludes that harnessing tourism for successful economic diversification in peripheral regions requires fundamental changes to previous ways of operating, including new approaches to business creation, capacity building, education and knowledge exchange, networking and public–private interactions.

The lands held by Aboriginal people are mostly located in the Australian desert, aside from pastoral country purchased under the Indigenous Land Corporation, they are among the least amenable to agricultural production. Social expectations regarding land use are undergoing a multifunctional transition with a move away from a focus on production, to increased amenity and conservation uses. This change means that Aboriginal people with cultural connections to country enjoy an absolute advantage in managing country through their application of land care involving Indigenous ecological knowledge. An integrated multidisciplinary economic welfare approach, based on data from northern Australia and the central Australian desert, is used to demonstrate the role Aboriginal people can play in caring for country. Such engagement can be to the advantage of Aboriginal people through a multiplicity of private and public good benefits, such as improving Aboriginal health, maintaining biodiversity, and the mitigation of climate change impacts through possible greenhouse gas biosequestration and the reduction of dust storms – which are an important vector of disease.

Remote Australia constitutes ~75% of the continent and is a dry, often harsh environment in which to live; consequently less than 3% of Australia’s population reside there but it is also where a substantial proportion of Australia’s export wealth is derived. It is therefore important that attention is paid to ensuring that remote locations in Australia are liveable and that innovative strategies are pursued to attract and retain a productive workforce in these places. Attracting and retaining skilled and professional staff is a problem not limited to remote, or even rural and regional locations in Australia. There is strong evidence to suggest that it is increasingly a global problem and organisations throughout the world are seeking innovative strategies to attract and develop new talent and developing other strategies to retain that talent. This paper examines population and labour mobility trends in remote Australia and the issues that have been influential on rates of staff attraction and retention, most particularly adequate housing, services and infrastructure. The second half of the paper examines a variety of recommendations and strategies developed by the public and private sectors to more effectively attract and retain skilled and professional staff to remote locations. This paper does not claim to be a rigorous analysis of all remote areas of Australia nor a comprehensive study of attraction and retention strategies. Rather, it aims to highlight the complexity, depth and interconnectedness of the issues for communities, public and private sectors and how they apply in remote locations in Australia.

Natural environments around the world shape their human residents, whose land management practices in turn shape their natural environments. The trial-and-error process of learning how to live within a human-environment system is costly for lands and for people. However, groups who have lived in the same type of place over long periods of time have often developed similar practices. For 20 years, sustainable livelihood frameworks have been used to identify those effective practices and to make them clear to others. I developed the Sustainable Rangeland Framework (SRF) by comparing scientific reports, pastoral management plans, Aboriginal experiences and government programs to identify how very different rangeland landholders could work together to benefit our human-environment system. The SRF focuses on ways to build valuable assets. I found that all groups described six similar categories of assets: landscape, biodiversity, flexibility, skill, information and networks. Land managers use their assets to develop strategies that increase sustainability and reduce vulnerability to risk. The SRF helps land managers visualise how each decision balances productivity and vulnerability in the context of ecological, economic and social variability. I provide a set of six measures for groups to evaluate the effectiveness of their strategies in building stronger assets. Because the SRF clarifies the learning process and highlights the benefits of collaboration, rangeland groups can use this model to work together to develop more secure lives in our increasingly unpredictable environment.

Employment is generally considered as essential for improving individual and social livelihoods and wellbeing in Australia. Typically, employment rates are low among Aboriginal people living in remote regions of Australia. Often this is attributed to a lack of mainstream labour markets. However, Aboriginal employment participation is low even in remote places where there are employment opportunities, creating a seemingly paradoxical situation of lots of job vacancies and lots of unemployed locals. Social networks are one of the factors that contribute to this phenomenon, and that can potentially help to address it. We applied social network and social capital theory in research in the Anmatjere region of central Australia. Our findings indicate that Aboriginal people have strong and dense bonding networks but sparse bridging and linking networks. While the existence of such ties is supported by research and observation elsewhere in remote Australia, the implications for employment have not been considered from the perspective of social network theory. Dense bonding networks reinforce, and are reinforced by, Aboriginal norms of sharing and reciprocity. These underpin the Aboriginal moral economy but can have negative influence on motivation to engage with mainstream employment opportunities that are driven by workplace and market norms. Brokers who can bridge and link Aboriginal individuals and their dense social networks to potential employers are essential for Aboriginal people to be able to obtain trusted information on jobs and have entrée to employment opportunities. Brokers also foster new norms that mediate the conflicting values and expectations held by potential Aboriginal employees and employers, who are generally not Aboriginal people. Social network theory suggests that bridging and linking provides advantage to the broker. However, stress and burnout are readily suffered by the people who broker networks with divergent values in cross-cultural settings. To improve employment outcomes and expand livelihood options for Aboriginal people in remote Australia, it is essential to recognise, support and recruit brokers.

This special issue builds on the significant body of work that the Desert Knowledge Cooperative Research Centre (DKCRC) generated during its life between September 2003 and June 2010 (see for instance, Stafford Smith 2008a; Davies and Holcombe 2009; McGregor and Edwards 2010; Seemann 2010; and the significant number of outputs on the legacy website DKCRC (2011). The research presented in this special issue builds on that reported in a previous special issue of this Journal (Stafford Smith 2008a) which focused on the building of a ‘science of desert living’.A key paper in that issue (Stafford Smith 2008b) outlined the ‘desert syndrome’ which identified a set of causally-linked factors that characterise remote Australia. The papers in this special issue use the concept of a ‘desert syndrome’ developed in that paper (Fig. 1) to show how research can identify livelihood opportunities that come from recognising these drivers. This Special Issue brings together a snapshot of the work on market-based and non-market based enterprises in desert Australia. The examples presented here are tourism, bush food harvesting and sale, and livelihoods based on public sector funding such as land management. Supporting these topics are contextual studies that seek to understand the social cultural and employment settings that are so different in desert Australia across all sectors. Obvious by omission is the compilation of the work by the DKCRC on pastoralism and small business characteristics which has been published elsewhere (e.g. Rola- Rubzen et al. 2011a, 2011b; Walsh 2009a, Walsh 2009b, Walsh 2009c, Walsh 2009d, Walsh 2009e, Walsh 2009f, Walsh 2009g, Walsh 2009h, Walsh 2009i, Walsh 2009j, Walsh 2009k, Walsh 2009l, Walsh 2009m)

Critiques of governance arrangements for natural resource management in Australia have expanded rapidly in recent years. Meanwhile, arguments have strengthened internationally that drylands share characteristics that justify a specific ‘drylands syndrome’ understanding of their management. These issues converge in the drylands of the Murray–Darling Basin (MDB). We explore in this paper the insights that this convergence offers for designing governance arrangements for the natural resources of the MDB. We argue that the characteristics of the MDB drylands justify transformation of these arrangements to those of adaptive governance; and more specifically that this model of governance should be founded on the related concepts of polycentricity and subsidiarity. We explain how three aspects of polycentric governance contribute to the robustness of social-ecological systems and identify the particular relevance of each to the MDB drylands. Even so, transformation to polycentric governance would face formidable obstacles from vested interests and mental models that have adapted to the status quo. Acknowledging the reality that hurdling such obstacles requires strategic preparation to exploit windows of opportunity, we propose several pragmatic steps to be followed in strategically pre-adapting the MDB drylands for this transformation. Although transforming to adaptive governance is not without risk, we argue that the risks of inaction for the MDB drylands are greater.

Typically, a big resource company provides its local region with water, roads, railways, airfields and infrastructure, which it needs for its operations, but also shares with the local community. It often provides educational, sporting and healthcare facilities, not only to keep its own employees trained, healthy and happy – but also to build relationships with the local community among whom it operates. This has long been the situation in the larger mining or extractive industry centres like Broken Hill, Port Pirie, Kalgoorlie and my home town, Wollongong. Now it is becoming increasingly common in the areas where neighbouring communities are much smaller and often with a predominantly Aboriginal population.

The aim of this paper is to report on the current situation and future prospects for feral camels in Australia. The paper is divided into three parts. In the first, we address recent research findings concerning the growth of the feral camel population, and recognition of the significant damage the animals are causing to natural, cultural and physical environments. Given that an increasing feral camel population has, and will, lead to increasing impacts, in the second part of the paper we consider how this situation can be addressed. In presenting current options for the management of feral camels and their impacts we take into account varying cultural attitudes to the presence, control and commercial use of the animals. In the third part, we draw on a systems approach to explore possible alternate futures for feral camels in Australia within the context of different management scenarios. In doing so, we consider ethical questions concerning the right balance between control and commercial activity. Firstly, however, we briefly discuss the introduction of the camel to Australia and the release of the animal into the wild once it was no longer required for use as a beast of burden.

Many intertwined factors contribute to sustainability in the desert settlements of Birdsville and Bedourie. Taking one factor, the commitment to, and achievement of, full employment for all local residents, this paper draws data from a larger research project into desert settlement sustainability to unpack the components that have interplayed through history and into the present to make that local goal achievable. Current sustainability in these two settlements can be seen as an effect of astute and entrepreneurial adaptation of contemporary opportunities, both external such as policy and internal such as local resources. Yet, the capabilities underpinning such adaptations and the aspirations that drive them have a local history that exists in complex relationship to broader socio-political developments. The ways in which these settlements have resolved past conflicts, addressed past challenges and invested in certain directions over others can all be seen as contributing factors in present sustainability (and associated vulnerabilities). The analysis of this paper suggests that whilst changes in national and state level policy can be swift and impose short timeframes for producing outcomes, the achievement of sustainable settlement outcomes depends on social dynamics and path dependencies that have developed slowly, over time in the particular geographical locale. Settlements inevitably build upon, rather than act outside of, their own legacies, and this is too rarely apprehended in the process of external policy intervention in settlements. The case study of this paper suggests that, as best case scenario, external policy is one component to be employed in what is essentially a local creative process, and it is this creative process that, if tapped, produces sustainability.

Despite its economic benefits, mining can also negatively impact on local communities and the environment. Fundamental problems associated with gender discrepancy and power negotiation can marginalise women and traditional owners of the land where mining operates. The Leonora Western Australian case study reveals a desert mining settlement where population numbers are declining in a period of mining boom. It has become ‘a men’s town’ where fly-in/fly-out mining operations flourish offering limited opportunities to women and the local younger generation. A gender analysis based on ecofeminism and feminist political economy reveals the urgent need for the mining industry to transform itself in order to meet sustainability imperatives.

Market-based instruments (MBIs) are essentially policy instruments that use price or other economic variables to provide incentives for solving a particular issue. In this case, the issue is the management of large feral herbivores (LFH); specifically feral camels, feral donkeys and feral horses. The aim of this project was to deliver the most cost-effective removal mechanism to achieve desired reductions in LFH densities in strategically defined and selected regions, with the focus primarily directed towards feral camels. With financial support from the Australian Government’s Caring for Our Country program, the MBI approach was tested in Western Australia (WA) as part of a larger cross-jurisdictional assessment of MBIs. In WA, government agencies and land managers have become increasingly concerned about the impacts of LFHs in the rangelands. These animals have had a serious and expanding impact on biodiversity, culturally-valued heritage sites and pastoral infrastructure, requiring increased control efforts to curb their destructive effects. A targeted number of LFH were identified to be removed in a strategically selected area of pastoral land (in the Wiluna Shire of WA) to counteract any anticipated level of natural recruitment of LFH through breeding. A competitive tender (i.e. a MBI) requested suitably qualified professionals to provide and implement a strategy to undertake a short-term LFH control, whilst also aiming to foster in the region economic and social outcomes such as employment, infrastructure development and community engagement. No specific control mechanisms were prescribed in the tender documents. However methods proposed and used did need to meet acceptable animal welfare standards and be acceptable to the WA Department of Agriculture and Food. Some methods of control, such as aerial shooting, were not permitted because of the need to use government shooters for such operations. The competitive tender process was besieged with issues and roadblocks. Examples of the kinds of issued encountered included land tenure matters and access to lands, willingness of landholders to be involved, unforseen weather events and the natural variability in LFH densities. Obstacles like these caused changes in the terms of tender (e.g. revising down target number of LFHs) and progress of the contract. Even the revised LFH removal target was unable to be met, 181 feral camels, 2 feral donkeys and 304 feral horses were removed from the landscape. In summary, the MBI approach tested in WA (i.e. a competitive tender approach to removing LFH from the landscape using techniques other than aerial control) was ineffective, costly, controversial, and did not offer a viable means of feral camel management. However, significant lessons and knowledge were gained by going through the process (e.g. landholder expectations, Aboriginal engagement, contract processes, legislation issues, animal welfare, dealing with unforseen risks etc.), which will subsequently guide future management activities. Given the generic term of MBIs there may be other mechanisms worth exploring such as carbon markets or declared species groups, but the competitive tender approach to animal removal cannot be recommended in WA.

Determining the distribution and abundance of pest species is required for planning, directing and evaluating their control. This is particularly true for feral camels, which occur at relatively low densities in remote areas, and so control programs incur high travel costs. The broad-scale pattern of distribution of feral camels is known from infrequent aerial surveys that cover only part of the camel’s range. Estimates of abundance have therefore required extrapolation over both time and space (Saalfeld and Edwards 2010). A further problem is that the low density of camels combined with the low sampling intensity of surveys leads to imprecise estimates of density at a relatively fine scale (e.g. < 10,000 km), leading to potentially misleading distribution patterns that may result in misdirected management effort. Distribution patterns may be better represented with a spatial model that links aspects of the environment with probability of occupancy by camels and, ideally, density. Features of the environment attractive to camels can also be identified A resource selection function was fitted to data from a 2001 survey in the southern Northern Territory (McLeod and Pople 2010). This involved two steps. First, habitat suitability was modelled using habitat covariates for ~500 locations of camel groups and an equal number of ‘pseudo-absence’ locations selected randomly along transect lines where camels were not observed. Second, the relationship between density and habitat was modelled using a generalised additive model, conditional on camels being present. Habitat covariates included aspects of climate, distance to water sources, roads and human population centres, and the topography and broad vegetation class in 1 km and 5 km buffers around each location. The most parsimonious model identified a handful of high density ‘hotspots’. However, the model is static. If, as expected, camel population size continues to increase, the pattern of distribution may also change. A comparison of historic and future surveys can address this. Rainfall may also alter the pattern of distribution, as the high mobility of camels is well known. Rainfall or the normalised difference vegetation index could therefore be a useful predictor More recent survey data across all states containing feral camels now allows a more complete assessment of their habitat associations. Surveys are still spatially incomplete. A habitat model may best estimate the full distribution and indicate the Australia-wide population size.

Decisions about pest species management are often confounded by uncertainty about the location and density of the species, different values held by stakeholders and conflicting objectives. Decision frameworks can help remove much of the subjectiveness around pest management by exploring the uncertainties and risks associated with alternative management strategies. The inputs thought to be essential for improving the management of camels and optimising control strategies are generally based on evidence about camel density, impact and accessibility. This requires weighting intelligence gathered about camel behaviour (movement, distribution and abundance) and environmental data (rainfall, waterpoints and land systems). After considering landholder preferences, the utility of different control strategies for a known density of camels is then dictated by cost-efficiency. This will depend on the type of harvest or culling operation. Moreover, the cost of gathering intelligence versus uncertainty associated with the information also needs to be considered in any decision framework. We describe the development of a Bayesian Belief Network (BBN) decision support tool that organises evidence and decisions into nodes, by building conditional probability relationships between each node. The conditional probabilities are learnt from empirical data and prediction models. By coupling the BBN to a spatially-explicit stochastic simulation model, we demonstrate how it can be used to help find an optimal control strategies for each of a range of different scenarios.

The Desert Knowledge Cooperative Research Centre (DKCRC) report “Managing the impacts of feral camels in Australia: a new way of doing business” was released in 2008. This report clarified the distribution, abundance and population dynamics of feral camels, evaluated stakeholder perceptions of feral camels, assessed feral camel impacts, reviewed the options available for managing these impacts and outlined a management framework for feral camels in Australia. Feral camels were found to occur in Western Australia, South Australia, the Northern Territory and Queensland and to occupy an area 3.3 million km in size. Forty three percent of camels were found to be on Aboriginal land. The overall population was estimated to be 953,000 camels and modelling indicated that the number of camels was doubling about every nine years. There was a general appreciation by Aboriginal people that camels damage natural and cultural resources and affect Aboriginal customary use of country. Most Aboriginal people viewed feral camels as a potential resource but acknowledged that camels needed to be controlled. There was a general lack of support for culling which was seen as wasteful. Pastoral and conservation managers recognised the impacts that camels are having on the natural environment and on pastoral production and accepted that efforts were needed to manage these impacts. Both groups favoured culling and commercial use to manage camel impacts. Feral camels cost more than $10M in direct economic impacts (including infrastructure damage, competition with livestock and feral camel management costs) each year. Costs to the natural environment and the cultural values of Aboriginal people are significant but difficult to quantify in dollar terms. These costs dwarf any positive economic benefits that camels currently provide ($0.6M pa). Feral camels are also an important emitter of greenhouse gases. Aerial culling was considered to be the most cost-effective and humane way of reducing the density of camels over the large expanses that need to be managed. Ground-based culling has application only in particular situations. Camels may be commercially harvested over relatively large areas for meat, the establishment of domestic herds or for live export, but it is difficult to harvest all camels and not all camels are of commercial quality. Fencing to protect vulnerable assets from camels is expensive and has application only at the local scale. Being a long-lived species with a low reproductive rate, camels are an unsuitable candidate for fertility control. The DKCRC report recommends that feral camels be managed to a long-term target density of 0.1–0.2 camels/km at property to regional scales in order to mitigate broad-scale negative impacts. The DKCRC project also recommended a national approach to managing the impacts of feral camels and defined four management zones with management prescriptions for each zone. The DKCRC research was the catalyst for the Australian Feral Camel Management Project and the National Feral Camel Action Plan. The two are coupled- the former delivering immediate management actions to reduce camel impacts while the latter provides guidance on managing feral camels and their impacts now and into the future.

The Australian Camel Industry Association was established in 2009. The Association was established to represent the diverse needs of industry members and provide credible information for the commercial use of camels as a pastoral animal in Australia. The dromedary camel is the oldest pastoral animal in recorded history – its use dates back six thousand years. Camels are revered in the Middle East and North African nations, they symbolise wealth, the sustainability of life in harsh arid climates and the rich enduring culture of those regions. Camels were introduced for their climate suitability, which is the very reason why they have prevailed in the arid rangelands areas of Central Australia. Like most introduced species in Australia they are classified as feral and remain unchecked in their traverse of a continent where state jurisdictions and classifications dictate their value and management. Two models exist which highlight the camels’ value as a pastoral animal in Australia. In Queensland camels are classified under the 1915 Stock Act. Feral camels traverse the far western border regions in relatively low numbers and managed camels are widely grazed under strict biosecurity protocols. Camels in Queensland contribute to land management outcomes through weed control and increased cattle weight through the transfer of a gut bacterium from camels to cattle when co-grazed. In the APY Lands in South Australia, Indigenous communities have been provided with employment opportunities and industry in the supply of feral camels to the emerging halal and domestic camel meat markets. The transference of Islamic people into western culture has created a demand for international exports of a cultural meat. The food security issues that will arise as we head towards 2030 will dictate the need for a wide variety of protein sources that do not fit into the fiercely contended traditional European models of pastoral enterprise in Australia.

The Australian Feral Camel Management Project (AFCMP) is one of the largest and most diverse nationwide collaborations ever to be targeted at an established pest species in Australia. The project is working with a large number of partners and stakeholders to mitigate the impact of feral camels on desert ecosystems, the pastoral industry, remote Aboriginal communities and public safety. It has a solid information base through the foundational work of the Desert Knowledge CRC (DKCRC Report 47, available at www.feralcamels.com.au) which guided the overarching project objective to reduce the feral camel density to <0.1 animals per square kilometre at priority biodiversity areas. Since a four-year agreement between Ninti One Ltd and the Australian Government’s Caring for Our Country program was signed in February 2010, the AFCMP has made substantial progress based on an early realisation of the need for comprehensive collaboration processes due to the diverse range of land tenures (Aboriginal, conservation estate, pastoral and Crown) across which feral camels roam and the diverse stakeholder interests, including commercial use. Under the guidance of a representative Steering Committee, project partners are working effectively together to develop and implement agreed approaches to manage an established pest animal at priority sites across different land tenures and all state/territory boundaries within the feral camel’s huge range (three million square kilometres) for the first time. A comprehensive evaluation plan has been developed to assess the biophysical, socio-economic and governance performance of the project, including: the extent of engagement with landholders and other stakeholders; capacity building for long-term camel removal; and collaboration with other monitoring processes to assess the impacts of feral camels. The AFCMP is engaging with two themes that were highlighted at the 2010 50th Ecological Society of Australia conference: the need to develop workable solutions to biodiversity issues based on informed stakeholder preferences and learning by doing; and combining Aboriginal and Western ecological knowledge for land management solutions.

Carbon credits for feral camel removal has considerable potential to facilitate commercial use of feral camels, and associated remote community capacity building opportunities, in areas where the economics are currently marginal. In areas where commercial use is not viable, even with income from credits, the credits could facilitate feral camel culling to reduce feral camel impacts to biodiversity, cultural assets, infrastructure and human safety.

Kalgoorlie-Boulder is located in the Goldfields-Esperance region of Western Australia approximately, 600 km east of Perth. It is Australia’s largest outback city (City of Kalgoorlie-Boulder 2009) and occupies an area of 95 576 km2 (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2009). ## The name Kalgoorlie comes from the Aboriginal word ‘kulgooluh’ (or ‘karlkurla’), meaning ‘silky pear’ (an edible fruit common to the region). Gold was discovered in the area by Paddy Hannan, Daniel Shea and Tom Flanagan in 1893, and today Kalgoorlie-Boulder is considered Australia’s gold capital (City of Kalgoorlie-Boulder 2009). ## The City of Kalgoorlie-Boulder local government area was created on 1 February 1989 with the amalgamation of the Shire of Boulder and the Town of Kalgoorlie (Wikipedia 2009). It covers two state government electorates: that of Eyre (including Boulder), and the seat of Kalgoorlie. The federal seat of Kalgoorlie is one of Australia’s largest electorates (City of Kalgoorlie-Boulder 2009). ## The monthly temperature for Kalgoorlie-Boulder ranges from 50 C to 33.60 C (Figure 1), with a mean annual maximum temperature of 25.20 C and mean annual minimum temperature of 11.6 0 C. Its mean monthly rainfall ranges from 14 mm to 31.2 mm (Figure 2), with annual rainfall of 265.2 mm (Bureau of Meteorology 2009).

Western Australia has always been city-centric and currently more than 75% of the State’s population live in the capital city, Perth (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2008a). For those living in the non-metropolitan areas, the majority live in the lower half of the State (see Fig 1). The more remote regions of the Pilbara and Kimberley in the far north have, until the last decade, represented only about a tenth of the State’s population. However, since 2001, the Australian mining and energy sector has experienced sustained growth and despite the Global Financial Crisis (GFC), resource exploration and mine expansions have continued, spurred along with strong demand from Japan, China and India. As a consequence of the strong demand for labour and high wages, the Western Australian population has been the fastest growing in the country (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2009a) putting considerable pressure on housing demand both in Perth and throughout rural, regional and remote areas of Western Australia (Western Australian Planning Commission 2010).

The recent sustained expansion of export-oriented mineral extraction projects in Australia has been accompanied by socio-economic, governance and environmental trends frequently identified in the literature as markers of a "curse" that afflicts resource dependent national economies. Such trends are highly spatialized. Goodman and Worth (2008) for example draw attention to processes of deindustrialisation associated with a strengthening dollar and redistribution of high paid jobs, that have exacerbated disparities between the mineral resource rich states of Western Australia and Queensland and the New South Wales manufacturing-based economy. Simultaneously, studies in remote, sparsely populated, mining localities reveal similar intra-regional disparities between indigenous populations, the service sector and elite mining enclaves in terms of access to housing, jobs, services and key infrastructure. This paper is concerned with elucidating the impacts of new and expanding mining operations within two established agrarian regions which are also richly endowed with mineral wealth. It draws on grounded research conducted through the CSIRO Regions in Transition project which closely examines several communities experiencing growth due to mining in localities which hitherto have been dominated by agriculture. The transition to a new industry base brings with it considerable costs and benefits associated with new population cohorts, work opportunities and regional development. Although the notion of "resources curse" offers a useful framing device, following Norman Long s(1996) observation that the global is always experienced and acted on locally, we argue that understanding complex site specific layers and networks of meaning, experience and structure through which the impacts of new mining are mediated is crucial to effective policy formulation and more equitable distribution of economic and social benefits. Through our research conducted in entirely different parts of Australia, we examine whether the issues identified are in fact evidence of the resource curse or rather impacts occurring at the regional level that are driven by intersecting/ overlapping extra-regional, and often more powerful, influences. We also consider whether better informed and more prescient planning could avoid regional level growth problems, and thus devise strategies for other communities and regions which would assist in avoiding some of the adverse consequences experienced in the case study sites examined and the broader economy and society affected by industry change and growth.

An exploratory approach via a single case study is used in this thesis to better understand two embedded units of analysis: the first unit of analysis explores Adnyamathanha resources management and decision-making protocols, and the second unit of analysis explores the Environmental Impact Assessment for Beverley Uranium Mine. ‘Adnyamathanha’ literally translates into English as ‘name for the people of the rock country’ and is associated with several sub-groups of Indigenous peoples from the northern Flinders Ranges region of South Australia. These sub-groups include Kuyani and Adnya-Kuyani, Biladapa, Warlpi, and Yadliawada and all are inextricably linked through complex relationships between people, land, kinship and language. This thesis involves a critical examination of the various levels of participation by Adnyamathanha in the decision-making processes surrounding the commercial licensing at Beverley Mine. It clarifies issues and raises new questions about the interface between players involved in land use through a qualitative and participatory research methodology and set of methods used to explore the topic. Theoretical understandings are linked to Indigenous heritage and resources management to highlight the cultural values of past, present and future relationships between Indigenous peoples and customary lands. Deconstruction of the geographical landscape offers an insight to the spaces and places necessary for an equitable assessment of commercial, social and environmental land values. In this study the trajectory of cultural heritage protection and resources management is examined as part of the key legislated processes that relates to heritage security and sustainability in Adnyamathanha country. Native Title was a focal point of engagement within the Beverley case and is therefore central to many of the discussion points throughout this thesis. An examination of the extent to which mining proponents and governments are responsible for impact assessments goes hand in hand with this discussion regarding participation by Aboriginal players in land use. Examination of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in the Beverley case reveals that government and industry processes facilitated mining and devalued Adnyamathanha cultural heritage and site protection. I argue that the ideology behind ‘impact assessment’ and land use procedures within Australia remains dominated by a colonial framework committed to prioritising commercial perceptions of what is valuable based on national and global businessrelated interests. This ideology fails to accommodate Indigenous cultural heritage values and denies Indigenous peoples’ human rights. Findings reveal a disturbing scenario of inequitable engagement that unequivocally favoured miners’ rights and brutally disempowered Adnyamathanha, a pattern consistent with global trends. The significance of this thesis lies in the validation of a culturally diverse range of understandings of land resources, especially the meanings of Adnyamathanha identity and Indigenous connectivity to the environment. Cultural heritage protection is explicitly linked to Indigenous governance and Indigenous engagement through prioritisation of Indigenous needs and values. This thesis identifies how capacity building and self-determination can improve governance and engagement strategies to galvanise and strengthen future outcomes for Adnyamathanha and other Indigenous players dealing with exploration and mining. Improving impact assessment participation using culturally appropriate protocols is one part of this multi-faceted solution.

This study maps the participation of desert Indigenous people in the Australian vocational education and training (VET) sector and in non-formal adult and community education (ACE) learning programs, and analyses the contexts in which learning occurs across the desert. • There is evidence of significant fluctuation and some decline occurring in the participation of desert Indigenous people in VET. Outcomes in terms of completions and qualifications are poor. • VET participation is not providing desert Indigenous people with pathways from learning to work, or into higher-level education. Indigenous labour force participation rates have declined substantially across remote areas of Australia since 2002, despite the relatively high participation rates of desert Indigenous people in VET. • There is a significant misalignment between the content and delivery models of VET and the prior skills, educational demands and aspirations of desert Indigenous people. VET programs struggle to adapt to and address the types of learning needs that arise as a result of language and cultural differences and the different ways work is constructed and occurs across the desert. • Distinct cultural, demographic and geographic landscapes define Australia’s desert regions. These contexts require a combination of educational investments and supports, and real engagement with the types of livelihoods and economies emerging in desert regions.

Over the past three decades, protected area management has moved away from a strict preservation to a more socially orientated management ethos. This change is based on ideals such as biodiversity conservation, Indigenous and community participation, and sustainable development and use. These changes are increasingly being reflected through the World Conservation Union’s (IUCN) definition of protected area governance regimes, which attempt to reconcile conservation and development agendas between partners. Recent analysis shows that this is not easily achieved, even in more socially orientated regimes of co-management and Indigenous and Community Conserved Areas (ICCAs). In this dissertation I address why equity between conservation and development agendas of Indigenous peoples and partnering agencies are hard to achieve. The overall aim is to contribute useful insights into where management practice can be enhanced to attain a better balance. This study takes place within an Australian desert context. Aboriginal landowners, in conjunction with the Federal Government’s Indigenous Protected Area (IPA) program, manage a large amount of land through the national protected area system in desert Australia. The IPA program is considered a leading example of ICCA governance with Aboriginal values and objectives incorporated alongside those of the state. The Northern Tanami IPA, based in the Tanami Desert in the Northern Territory and managed from the largely Warlpiri populated community of Lajamanu, is the case study through which I investigate how local management and partnering agency agendas are being achieved. This evaluation takes place in the early life of the IPA in an attempt to better understand and improve management resilience into the future. I do this by examining the management intent and practice of key partners: Warlpiri people from Lajamanu; the Central Land Council (CLC); and the Federal Government Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA). The results of this research show that for Warlpiri people, country within the IPA needs to be managed in accordance with the values of cultural tradition, identity, well-being and spiritual connection. Management is multi-purpose, where the land and its resources are used and managed in numerous ways to provide a suite of social, cultural, environmental and economic outcomes. In contrast, agency staff interests in management relate principally to improvements in the ecological condition of the IPA, with some focus on the social and cultural outcomes from management. Such differing interests have constrained the achievement of management agendas within the Northern Tanami IPA. This is because partnership creation has not given enough attention to knowledge sharing, negotiation and investment in planning, decision-making and implementation over time. This has resulted in inequitable power relationships and imbalanced management accountability between Warlpiri people and partnering agencies. Through this research I aimed to study how to improve IPA management so as to reduce such gaps between intent and practice. I outline four practical ways in which management interventions need to progress. First, there needs to be increased investment at the institutional level in policy and program funding and support. This is required to continue the decolonisation of government ideals about Aboriginal notions and interests in managing country. Second, the Northern Tanami IPA needs to be viewed as a multi-scaled, co-managed system with a process of adaptive management at its core; there are multiple stakeholders, who have differing interests that need to be managed through a cycle of planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation. Third, I outline the importance of enhanced cross-cultural management. Collaborations and partnerships need to be developed and sustained over time through knowledge sharing and negotiations if equity is to be achieved. Finally, it is crucial that management continues to be developed at the local level so that Warlpiri control and autonomy comes to the fore. This is vital for the continued process of Aboriginal self-determination through protected area management. Overall this research shows the value of investing in and supporting the development of partnerships in multi-scaled management regimes for sustained management efficacy where Aboriginal people and agencies work together. This is needed so that the costs and benefits of protected area management practice are fairly distributed amongst partners and management resilience is built into the future. Within Australia, this is particularly critical as the investment in protected areas owned and managed by Aboriginal people continues to grow.

The Desert Knowledge Cooperative Research Centre (DKCRC) commenced its operations on 1 July 2003 and closed on 30 June 2010. These two dates frame a remarkable and intensive seven-year period of research, training, capacity building, research application and community engagement in Australia’s desert regions. In that short period of time a diverse array of organisations and individuals set out on a course of dramatic change: change in the way research is framed in the desert; change in the way communities are engaged in research; change in the way organisations collaborate; and change in the way that the outcomes of research are applied on a day-to-day level in the real lives of desert people. This Exit Report outlines the impact of those changes and describes how the DKCRC’s outcomes matched the goals that its signatories laid out in their agreement with the Australian Government in 2003. Outcome areas were articulated in the Commonwealth Agreement and came under three program areas. To achieve these outcomes the activity of the DKCRC was organised into three program areas: – Desert Enterprises, with a principal outcome of sustainable livelihoods for desert people based on natural resource management and service enterprise opportunities that are environmentally and socially appropriate. – Desert Systems, with two main outcomes: to develop sustainable desert settlements that support the presence of desert people as a result of improved and efficient governance and access to services; and thriving desert regional economies that are based on desert competitive advantages, bringing together Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal communities, government and industry. – Desert Solutions, with three main outcomes: to ensure that graduates are more aware of desert issues and more prepared to come and work in desert Australia; to develop links between local knowledge and Western science, leading to better integration and understanding of the value of different knowledge; and consolidation and integration of information about desert Australia. Within these program areas a coalition of business groups, universities, Aboriginal organisations, research bodies and residents of desert settlements undertook and applied research. The following short list illustrates the breadth of our achievements. – Our Research Report on Population and Mobility in Town Camps provided the first correct assessment of the numbers of people living in Alice Springs Town Camps and their mobility patterns. The study ultimately resulted in an Australian Government allocation of $120 million for new housing, water and sewage works; Aboriginal researchers who were trained to collect and analyse data on the project obtained more work on the 2006 Australian Census and in other ways. – Our Desert Fire project produced Australia’s first large-scale investigation into the scale, frequency and impact of wildfires on infrastructure, productivity and biodiversity. The project won the Northern Territory Government’s Desert Knowledge Innovation Award. – Our work on remote settlement water management led the Australian Government to make recommendations to the National Water Commission and project outcomes became part of the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines produced by the National Health and Medical Research Council. – Groundbreaking research provided a firm evidence base that helping to retain Aboriginal people ‘on country’ not only leads to healthier, happier people but also placed a dollar value on reduced healthcare costs. – Our work with Aboriginal wild-food harvesters, growers and processors led to a more robust supply chain and more jobs, enterprises and skills for people living on country and in remote areas. – Our work on technologies to increase the productivity of desert pastoral enterprises saw the development of a remote livestock management system which is now being commercialised. – Our research into feral camels led directly to the Australian Government’s decision to back a $38 million feral camel population reduction project, which among other things will employ and train Aboriginal people. – To date our research has resulted in the publication of 59 research reports, 61 working papers, 287 conference papers and 102 journal papers, of which 30 are in ISI-ranked journals. There are more publications in the pipeline.1 – Our international collaboration saw the uptake of the Australian desert knowledge model in South Africa through the initiation of the Karoo Development Foundation. This summary illustrates the breadth and depth of the DKCRC’s work in Australia’s deserts, all at a time of immense change and upheaval. Our period of operation spanned several events that had significant impacts on Australia’s desert communities, not least of these being: – the enormous growth in international demand for commodities and mineral resources, and the shortage of skilled professionals to service that demand – the global financial crisis that threatened those markets and many desert livelihoods – a period of extended drought that, in parts of the inland, was the worst in many decades – governance issues such as the Australian Government’s Northern Territory Emergency Response, the dissolution of one core partner (ATSIC) within our first year of operation, and the Northern Territory Government’s introduction of a shire system. DKCRC adapted to these possibly damaging impacts because flexibility, response to extreme variation, and turning a challenge into an opportunity is what desert people do. This CRC can look back proudly on its ability to negotiate and implement change during times of change. Importantly, the DKCRC did not just carry out and apply research during its lifetime. Through its partners and through capacity-building exercises with people in remote settlements the DKCRC has ensured that its research will continue to contribute to Australia’s desert future for years to come.