Remote Australia Online

This chapter is an introduction to Part IV of the book on Negotiating Management. It provides a good overview of this topic before the other chapters are presented. Most of the other chapters in this part VI of the book are listed separately in endnote libraries. This chapter has sections on the following: (1) Different people, different perspectives (2) Intra-Aboriginal negotiations (3) Respect and understanding (4) Resources for negotiating (5) Negotiating with country (6) Negotiating science (7) understanding people's negotiating positions (8) research to support negotiation.

The chapter presents a perspective on Aboriginal ownership of national parks in NSW. It uses Jervis Bay as a case study to examine some of the issues that have arisen during the negotiation process and gives suggestions of how they may be resolved.

This chapter serves as an overview of the whole book, under the following headings: (1) Listening and communicating - provides an overview of chapters from the book. (2) Resources for working on country : this is an excellent overview section in the chapter. It provides discussion of the previous chapters relating to the imbalance between indigenous and non-indigenous land ownership that has concentrated almost all of the most economically productive lands and resources in non-indigenous ownership. Indigenous socio-economic disadvantage and the social dysfunction that accompanies it, is closely linked to indigenous people's continuing frustration at not being able to work on country. It is mentioned that the best prospect for sustainable futures for indigenous-owned lands is for governments to focus on supporting indigenous people to maintain strong cultural ties to the land, through stewardship payments to indigenous people and organisations who are implementing indigenous approaches to working on country. (3) Sharing Experiences - provides an overview of chapters from the book.

An essential policy issue for the Community Development Employment Projects (CDEP) scheme is to project the likely future demand for places. This paper revisits previous estimates of such demand with the aim of adjusting these to account for subsequent increases in CDEP employment and to incorporate recent estimates of the effect of indigenous people who are discouraged from seeking work. While changes in the size and structure of the population remain the key factors underlying future demand for CDEP, the revision of the Indigenous labour market dynamics in this article provides new benchmarks for future estimates of general employment needs of Indigenous Australians.

Indigenous Australians in the Community Development Employment Projects (CDEP) scheme have been working for welfare payments since 1977. One of the objectives of the scheme is to assist Indigenous Australians develop work skills which lead to 'mainstream' employment. This paper uses a case study of a CDEP scheme in Port Augusts, a regional centre in South Australia, to analyse the success sof the scheme as a stepping stone to unsubsidised employment in regional centres and urban areas. The research demonstrates that the scheme can be a steppng stone to 'mainstream' emplolyment for participants wishing to make this move. It also provides an environment that allows them to balance cultural and family commitments with the demands of employment. The factors underpinning the movement to 'mainstream' emplolyment are identified. It is concluded with some of the policy issues arising from the research.

Given their ongoing economic disadvantage, many Indigenous families are long-term dependents on social security income support. Their well-being continues to be a critical challenge for government and Indigenous organisations. This paper presents an anlaysis of quantitative and qualitative data from the first year of a longitudinal survey conducted in two Indigenous communities. A range of factors are identified which influence the effectiveness and appropriateness of delivery of income transfers to Indigenous families. Survey data on the extent of 'welfare dependence' being experienced by Indigenous families are analysed, and the nature of household economies described. The interaction between the CDEP scheme (a work-for-the-dole scheme) and the welfare economies operating within Indigenous households is discusssed. In the context of the Federal Government's Welfare Reform Agenda, the paper outlines recommendations for fine-tuning policy and service delivery to address the economic and culturally-based realities facing Indigenous families.

Indigenous people are more likely to be discouraged from looking for work than other Australians. Data from the 1994 National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Survey are used to analyse the factors that lead many indigenous people who want to work, to not seek work and hence remain outside the labour force. This article confirms the importance of labour supply factors (including family, cultural and social environmental factors) but also emphasises the interaction between the supply and demand side of the labour market. An important finding is that indigenous people want to work as much as other Australians. This means that policies aimed at increasing the demand for their services are crucial. Two examples of the latter are education and regional development policies. The article also argues that a broader definintion of the discouraged worker should be considered for all Australians.

This paper focuses on Indigenous communities in remote Australia who participate in the Community Development Employment Projects (CDEP) scheme, a form of work-for-the-dole that was first established in 1977 and is now administered by the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission. At the time of the 1996 census there were 265 CDEPs Australia-wide and about 31,000 participants. The analysis here focuses on the 70 per cent of these CDEPs that are located in remote regions. Initially a census-based assessment is provided of the economic impacts of the scheme. This indicates that the scheme has discernible economic and employment benefits. Next, an attempt is made to reconcile the mutual obligation nature of the scheme with the emerging reform of social policy (also based on principles of mutual obligation) currently being implemented that is based on recommendations made by the McClure Committee and endorsed in the writings of influential Indigenous spokesperson Noel Pearson. The article ends by outlining how, in this reformist policy context, the CDEP scheme could itself be modified to provide a more effective framework for Indigenous economic development in remote regions and makes brief comment on lessons from the CDEP scheme for the wider Australian community.

The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commercial Development Corporation represents the most recent in a line of government programs aimed at increasing levels of Indigenous self-management and economic self-sufficiency by involving Indigenous people in businesses. However, the Corporation appears to mark a change from earlier programs inasmuch as it is required to operate along strictly commercial lines and it utilises the strategy of creating joint ventures between Indigenous and non-Indigenous business people. This paper outlines the history of Indigenous enterprise programs over the last 20 years, the formation of the Corporation and its present operations. The paper argues that the Corporation's legislation implies that it will create Indigenous entrepreneurs and business managers, and some of the issues within the concept of Indigenous entrepreneurship in Australia are discussed. However, the paper concludes that the Corporation's commercial activities are constrained in part by its pursuit of some social goals and, in summary, calls for a methodology that can illustrate the costs of having mixed social and economic goals and which can show whether the Corporation is indeed creating entrepreneurs as a means of increasing levels of Indigenous self-management and economic self-sufficiency.

This booklet is one outcome of the Aboriginal Rural Resources Initiative (ARRI) Project Evaluation Study undertaken by BRS for ATSIC. It describes the case-study evaluation methodology: its scope, methods of data collection, evaluation and review.

In 1997, the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs commenced an Inquiry into Indigenous Business. However, after a Commonwealth election held late in 1998, the government decided not to continue the Inquiry and its investigations have not been published. This paper summarises some of the evidence given to the Inquiry to see if this increases our understanding of Indigenous businesses. The evidence provides additional information on issues about which we are already aware. For example, there appears to be a continuing desire to clarify social and commercial goals within Indigenous businesses. There is also some interest in establishing businesses that are owned by individuals and families rather than just communities, and in the strategy of joint venturing. A number of access issues were also raised during the Inquiry such as the ability to raise capital from inalienable land and some of the limits of the existing government structures. However, most of the data supplied to the inquiry were from bureaucracies and much of it related to their programs rather than to the enterprises themselves. Very few submissions were from Indigenous people in business and the data tell us almost nothing about such issues as their aims, their problems, or the size of their ventures (for example, the number of employees or turnover). Despite the fact that other data indicate the majority of self-employed Indigenous people are in major urban centres (capital cities), the Inquiry collected no data from these areas. Also absent were submissions from any of the mainstream banks. Therefore, the majority of the evidence to the Inquiry does not add a great deal to our knowledge about the nature of Indigenous businesses nor does it introduce many new issues or insights. However, evidence to the Inquiry did raise the possibility of increasing access for Indigenous people through micro-credit and credit union arrangements and one submission proposed that aspiring business people could be mentored through the facility of business incubators. These proposals may warrant further investigation. The Inquiry has revealed that other data may be available that has not yet been analysed. For example, the Western Australian Department of Commerce and Industry has indicated that it has records on some 1,000 Indigenous businesses. Both this Department and the Aboriginal and the Torres Strait Islander Commission have suggested that some of the business people with whom they have contact may be willing to be interviewed. It would seem worthwhile exploring these new data sources in the future.

Running a business, or otherwise being self-employed, is one avenue for economic advancement for Indigenous people. However, employing oneself or others is a complex process with many potential pitfalls. In an increasingly competitive marketplace, where globalisation and instantaneous information processing have increased the mobility of consumers and producers alike, Indigenous businesses have to be increasingly sophisticated to compete. Not only do they need to manage financial risk, but also fluctuating markets require a truly ëworldlyí outlook with adequate access to collateral and social networks. In this context it is not surprising that the Indigenous population continues to have a very low rate of business formation. This paper provides a profile of the Indigenous self-employed in Australia using data from the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Survey and recent censuses. It uses this profile to discuss issues raised in the international literature on race, ethnicity and self-employment.

This book examines the history of indigenous peoples' citizenship status and asks: is it possible for indigenous Australians to be members of a common society on equal terms with others? Leading commentators from a range of disciplines examine historical conceptions of indigenous civil rights, consider issues arising from struggles for equality and raise possibilities for multicultural citizenship. Contributions include: (a) Tim Rowse on self-determination (b) Bain Attwood & Andrew Markus on the 1967 referendum (c) David Trigger on resource development (d) Peter Read on whether Aboriginal and white Australians can belong (e) Garth Nettheim on the international law context and (f) Henry Reynolds on sovereignty Editors= Peterson, N. is a reader in anthropology at the ANU. Sanders, W. is a research fellow at the Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research at ANU For most of Australia's colonial history Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islanders have been denied full membership of Australian society. This book examines the history of indigenous peoples' citizenship status and asks, 'It is possible for indigenous Australians to be members of a common society on equal terms with others?' Leading commentators from a range of disciplines examine historical conceptions of indigenous civil rights, consider issues arising from recent struggles for equality and consider possibilities for multicultural citizenship that recognise difference. This book makes a crucial intervention in current debates by providing the context for understanding struggles over distinctive indigenous rights. Contents Nineteenth century bureaucratic constructions of indigenous identities in New South Wales / Marilyn Wood From nomadism to citizenship : A P Elkin and Aboriginal advancement / Geoffrey Gray Indigenous citizenship and self-determination : the problem of shared responsibilities / Tim Rowse Welfare colonialism and citizenship : politics, economics and agency / Nicolas Peterson Representation matters : the 1967 referendum and citizenship / Bain Attwood and Andrew Markus Citizenship and the community development employment projects scheme : equal rights, difference and appropriateness / Will Sanders Citizenship and indigenous responses to mining in the Gulf country / David Trigger Whose citizens? whose country? / Peter Read Citizenship and legitimacy in post-colonial Australia / Richard Mulgan International law context / Garth Nettheim Sovereignty / Henry Reynolds.

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.

Aboriginal land management in Central Australia is not a recent phenomenon. When we discuss these concerns today we are addressing degradation consequences relating to industrial activities such as pastoralism, mining or tourism. Over the past 22 years Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory have had to examine more closely past land use practices and indeed how they relate to problems associated with degradation given that they have regained significant tracts of land. Much of the traditional land now owned by Aboriginal people comprises former pastoral leases, and in many cases the pastoral activities have been maintained. More importantly over this period Aboriginal people have diversified into partnerships with mining and tourism, thus adding another dimension to pressures on the landscape. This new responsibility has come about through the introduction of the Aboriginal Land Rights (NT) Act (1976). This Act has taken Aboriginal people the full cycle, that is, Aboriginal people went from extensive land holders, pre-European contact, to the landless after contact and back again as a result of the establishment of the Act. The introduction of the Act, at last, gave Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory an avenue to negotiate ownership of their respective country. Aboriginal people though have constantly and strongly argued that the land has always been theirs and consequently became the victims of the legal system to justify those claims. The result of this success brought with it the need to expose intimate knowledge and disclosure of sacred wisdom. Where Aborigines could successfully win the right to lands, time, technology and economics had, in many regions of the Northern Territory, caught up with them. Indeed, Aboriginal people have never found this change repugnant nor did they mind operating on equitable terms. The land rights process was then set to test the mettle of the Federal, Territory and Local governments. The Act would also test the ability of the broader community to act in accordance with judgements that would follow, given that considerable opposition already existed stemming from what could only be termed retrospectively as traditional enemies. Initial opposition came from the "... Northern Territory Legislative Assembly, the Finke River Mission, the mining companies and the pastoralists" (9). While well established bodies had infrastructure already in place to take up the issues for pursuing legalities, the Act also allowed for the implementation of such representative bodies as the Northern, Tiwi and Central Land Councils. Their central responsibilities have been to ensure the complex tasks such as representing Aboriginal traditional owners in preparing claims, negotiating with stakeholders, identifying and consulting with traditional claimants, mediating concerns pertaining to land use between Aboriginal groups, and "... administration of Aboriginal land. This includes the granting of permits for entry on to Aboriginal land" (9). Other issues that have come in to play are "... mining, sacred sites, roads, cattle, fencing, incorporation of Aboriginal groups, brands, bushfire control, soil conservation, feral animals, stock disease, distribution of royalties (9) and, for the most part, management of all lands acquired through the process of the Act. In some cases partnerships have been successfully formed with stakeholders such as the Australian National Parks and Wildlife Service, at places like Uluru where both the CLC and the Pitjantjatjara Council have majority representation on the Board of Directors.

There are a number of important ways in which economic independence for Indigenous Australians can be enhanced and the economic development of their communities promoted. An important avenue will lie in the establishment of small business enterprises. The Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody made valuable proposals about the means by which government policies and programs might be structured to maximise the opportunities for improving the economic situation of Indigenous people. This included the identification of a number of small business sectors seen to be important in promoting Indigenous economic development. Many of these proposals have remained dormant. Within this context an initial requirement is for a better understanding of the main determinants of Indigenous labour force behavious at the local level. A main purpose of this paper therefore, is to investigate, using Population Census Data, the Indigenous labour force outcomes of a number of small, relatively remote regions within the Northern Territory.

To summarise, looking back over the last 20 years, the major achievements of the CDEP scheme would have to include, in no order of priority: its undiminished popularity; its sheer survival; its ability to create a mechanism to facilitate productive activity in many contexts; and its ability (and potential) to supplement low cash incomes that would otherwise hit a very low welfare ceiling, especially in remote, relatively underdeveloped, regions. Its limitations include the lack of tangible and convincing evidence of success, be it in income supplementation, employment-creation, community development or enterprise-creation; the absence of well-defined exit options; and continuing administrative problems, especially in maintaining accurate schedules of participants. The survival of the CDEP scheme probably depends, at least in part, on a concerted government effort to resolve a number of marginal eligibility problems that are examined by the author of the next article. It might depend also on the relative performance of the mainstream work-for-the-dole scheme as a benchmark that might highlight the efficiency or inefficiency of the CDEP scheme. There seems little doubt to me that the scheme is here to stay; I am just left to ponder whether I will be back here in 20 years to provide a 40-year perspective on this most enigmatic scheme.

The Community Development Employment Projects (CDEP) scheme is a program where participants forego social security entitlements and work for rough equivalents of these entitlements. The scheme has expanded rapidly over the past decade and now operates in 250 Indigenous communities. While the scheme has multiple objectives, it is arguably primarily a labour market program. While there is a growing body of research about the scheme, key research and policy questions about the labour market effects of the scheme on participating communities, in contrast to other communities, have never been asked. This paper represents the first attempt to compare labour market outcomes at a sample of CDEP and non-CDEP communities in the Northern Territory. This exercise is undertaken with community profile data (on Indigenous people only) from the 1991 Census: ten CDEP and nine nearby non-CDEP communities are compared. Five variables – labour force status, industry structure, occupational status, sector of employment and income status – are analysed. The paper's results are potentially of considerable policy significance. While official employment levels at CDEP communities are predictably higher than at non-CDEP communities, these levels exceed the direct effect of scheme participation. However, income status at CDEP communities is a little lower than at non-CDEP communities, a puzzling outcome given the options to earn additional income when participating in the scheme. Another puzzling outcome, counter to the views of some researchers, is that there is little statistical evidence of the scheme being used as a substitution funding regime. It is recommended that results are treated with caution given the regional focus of this exploratory analysis.

This paper updates an earlier article explaining the development of the Community Development Employment Projects (CDEP) scheme over the years since its inception in the mid 1970s. It does so under three headings: governmental and bureaucratic politics; Aboriginal community politics; and persistent unemployment. The paper recognises that while the CDEP scheme has expanded rapidly in recent years, reviews of it have frequently identified deep-seated unresolved issues. The paper attempts to explain this apparent paradox by identifying different types of policy analysis focusing on internal program issues and external forces and constituencies. It is the latter, not the former, which are seen as having been important in determining the expansion of the CDEP scheme.

Australian social policy is characterised by a program and institutional divide between welfare income and work income. ATSIC's CDEP scheme sits astride this divide and has done so for 20 years. This position astride the welfare/work divide has been a source of both opportunities and problems for the CDEP scheme. Opportunities relate to different players, or stakeholders, operating at different levels with the scheme. For ATSIC (and the DAA before it) the CDEP scheme has offered the opportunity of a budget item which is directly offset against social security expenditure. For participating organisations, the CDEP scheme has offered the opportunity of a grant which is notionally linked to a legislative entitlement and hence less discretionary than many other grants. For individual participants, the CDEP scheme has offered the opportunity of not having to comply with two-weekly social security procedures in order to maintain eligibility and the ability to earn larger amounts of additional income without loosing eligibility. The CDEP scheme has also allowed flexible workplace practices to be developed incorporating Indigenous values and social practices. Problems with and criticisms of the CDEP scheme over the years, have included undermining award wage employment, substitution for the funding responsibilities of other government programs, the creation of secondary labour market conditions and a bias towards Indigenous men rather than women. Although these problems and criticisms have, to some extent, been addressed, new versions of problems and criticism tend in time to arise and persist. This is related to the CDEP scheme's position astride the welfare/ work divide. Here the focus is on allegations of racial discrimination in comparison to NSA/YTA recipients, which have arisen in recent years. These allegations have considerable prima facie credibility and this too relates to the position of the CDEP scheme astride the welfare/work divide. Frequently the DSS and other government organisations treat CDEP participants not as NSA/YTA recipients, but as low income earners. Where this is to the disadvantage of CDEP participants, because of the links between CDEP and NSA/YTA in CDEP guidelines, allegations of racial discrimination can legitimately be made. The paper also notes that there is one instance in which DSS does treat CDEP participants as the equivalent of NSA/YTA recipients. The final section of the paper suggests that the basic lesson from the CDEP scheme is that a government program can survive astride the welfare/work divide, but that it is likely to be beset by fairly considerable ongoing problems as well as opportunities. It suggests that the Howard Government's work-for-the-dole scheme will face similar problems and criticisms about how participants ought to be treated, though not allegations of racial discrimination. These problems and criticisms will differ slightly from those encountered by the CDEP scheme because the work-for-the-dole scheme participants are being placed more on the welfare side of the welfare/work divide. It also suggests that, in the longer term, interaction between the two schemes may be a two way phenomenon, with the work-for-the-dole scheme possibly having more effects on the CDEP scheme than vice versa.

This paper is the most recent in a series of case studies investigating the socioeconomic and policy features characteristic of urban Community Development Employment Projects (CDEP) schemes. Yarnteen Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders Corporation is located in Newcastle and has developed a successful enterprise in tandem with the CDEP scheme's more usual employment objectives. The paper describes the innovative employment projects established under Yarnteen's CDEP scheme and the development of its bulk warehousing enterprise. Two main questions are investigated: firstly, what are the identifiable factors involved in Yarnteen's success and, secondly, are there any obstacles impeding that continued success? The factors underwriting success are compared with those described in other urban case studies in order to delineate those critical to local economic outcomes. Finally, the implications for future urban CDEP policy directions and enterprise development are canvassed.

This reference was cited from: http://www.clc.org.au/land_use/rural/serv05.htm

Little is known about the self-managed and controlled Aboriginal Organisations in Central Australia. In fact, until recently, outside the Northern Territory many Australians had no idea that these organisations existed. Yet they have been described as 'among the most influential, important and innovative Aboriginal Organisations in Australia''. To date there has been little research on how Aboriginal cultural traditions impact on the way Aboriginal controlled organisations are managed in modem Australia, nor on those who manage them. Representations of Aboriginal organisations in the popular Australian media rarely move beyond the superficial view, depicting Aboriginal organisations as all the same, and frequently in a negative light. Very little attention is paid to the reality of those who manage these organisations, nor of the value of the essential services they provide. Both of these are something which this paper sets out to address. This paper presents a profile of the Aboriginal and Non Aboriginal managers in the Combined Aboriginal Organisations of Central Australia. It was developed as part of a research project conducted in 1990 and 1995, designed to establish the training needs of the managers of these organisations. The results were translated into a curriculum for an Associate Diploma in Business (Aboriginal Organisations Management) and a Certificate in Vocational Studies, now accredited by the national training authority in Australia and offered to employees in these and other organisations in Alice Springs, Tennant Creek and other remote communities by the Institute for Aboriginal Development (IAD). Follow-up research was conducted in 1995 as part of the process of course re-accreditation and decision-making on future directions.

historical reference

There is a tendency to view the CDEP scheme as unsuccessful when measured in predominantly economic terms, and in particular against its ability to reduce welfare dependence by reducing unemployment. However it can be suggested that the scheme is quite successful in non-economic terms, as it appears to increase Indigenous political autonomy. By introducing the concepts of negative and positive autonomy, this paper proposes that it is legitimate to consider the scheme as relatively successful in terms of its political outcomes, even if it does little to reduce welfare dependence.