1. The evidence on engaging with Indigenous communities and improving community governance

2. Seminar agenda TimeAgenda 9.30 Introduction and welcome—Mr Russell Taylor Welcome to Country from Aunty Agnes Shea 9.40 Engaging with Indigenous Australia—exploring effective engagement with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities Dr Janet Hunt, Australian National University 10.10 Morning tea 10.25 Improving Indigenous community governance through strengthening Indigenous and government organisational capacity Dr Roxanne Bainbridge, James Cook University 11.55 Panel question and answer session 11.25 Seminar closes

3. Engaging with Indigenous Australia – Exploring effective engagement with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities Dr Janet Hunt Fellow, Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research Research School of Social Sciences Australian National University

4. What evidence did I look for? Literature in Australia – especially around regional engagement (16 studies from 12 diverse regions) And in sectors: health, natural resource management, early childhood With NGOs and companies, not only governments Indigenous engagement in other settler countries (Canada, USA, New Zealand) Engagement with marginalised people and placed–based approaches

5. What is ‘engagement’? ‘Engagement’ is a sustained relationship between groups of people working towards shared goals There is a spectrum of engagement – from low to high

6. The spectrum of engagement Aboriginal community: Has control – defines problem, goals & means Has delegated decisions Plans jointly Advises Is consulted Receives information

7. Factors in engagement History, culture and language Indigenous ‘communities’ Scale of engagement – multilayered? Governance & capacity Engaging with organisations Purpose Timeframes & media

8. Policy Context National policy National mechanisms Guidelines Recent Commonwealth approaches States & Territories Remote Australia Native Title and land rights

9. UN Declaration on Rights of Indigenous Peoples Article 18: Indigenous peoples have the right to participate in decision making in matters which would affect their rights, through representatives chosen by themselves in accordance with their own procedures, as well as to maintain and develop their own Indigenous decision making institutions. Article 19: States shall consult and cooperate in good faith with the Indigenous peoples concerned through their own representative institutions in order to obtain their free, prior and informed consent before adopting and implementing legislative or administrative measures that may affect them (UN General Assembly 2007:8).

10. Australia: Regional studies COAG trials (one in each jurisdiction - 7) Murdi Paaki Regional Assembly (5 studies) Ngaanyatjarra Regional Partnership (Sullivan) Noongar – 3 approaches (Barcham) Fitzroy Futures Forum (ATSI SJC) Lockhart River Qld (Hagan) Groote Eylandt & Bickerton Island RPA (Tempo)

11. What worked Leadership Resources Participatory processes Governance & capacity building

12. Leadership High-level government engagement; clear, adaptable policy framework for WOG, place-based approach. Regionally based senior people with decision making authority & high-level negotiation skills; staff building trust and respectful relationships. Leadership across all levels, governments and communities. People on the ground willing to try new approaches and make things work; ‘one size doesn’t fit all’ communities.

13. Resources Partnership processes themselves resourced: staff to manage the engagement & follow up decisions made Resources available to build partner capacities & to undertake the programs jointly agreed. Having flexible funds for all these purposes contributes to success.

14. Participatory Processes Communities were setting the agenda Planning started from community level upwards to regions. There was identification of Aboriginal strengths, assets and positives; leadership being developed ‘Less monitoring and more mentoring’ (Hagan 2009:27) Clarity about processes and effective communication. Clarity and agreement about desired outcomes and indicators, and well ‑ developed plans to achieve them long time frames: people ‘work at their pace and in their spaces’ (Hagan 2009:25); ‘change is chaotic and emergent’ (Hagan 2009:31) not a linear process.

15. Governance & capacity building Built on existing Indigenous governance structures, mechanisms and processes wherever possible Support and capacity building for communities and community representatives for engagement with governments Ongoing governance development; processes and structures designed by Aboriginal people - viewed by them as legitimate. Cultural legitimacy and government funding for regional governance body for engagement.

16. Groote Eylandt RPA Ministerial support Community driven partnership ALC – strategic approach Community $ and leverage, plus other funds Collaboration & trust Vision & high level leadership Effective implementation

17. Groote Eylandt RPA Needs more integrated plans and pooled funding Better alignment across govts More streamlined & collaborative processes at local level

18. Replicable? Key success factors Equality between partners & authority to proceed Community needs, aspirations the driving force Objectives, priorities shared by all parties Detailed planning & negotiation from outset Principles of operation - touchstone for partnership operations Adequate resourcing & long time frame Responsive & efficient management

19. What didn’t work Government arrangements Communities’ capacities Relationships

20. Government arrangements Different jurisdictions and departments with differences never resolved. High-level government goals not adequately translated into specific plans and actions Organisational cultures discouraged flexibility and risk taking Insufficient focus on relationship building. No streamlined, flexible funding.

21. Communities’capacities Communities with weaker capacity to engage with government, or cynical about the ability of governments to change; little government support for community learning/capacity building. Community-level governance problems impeded their leaders’ ability to engage effectively with governments.

22. Relationships Insufficient participation, sense of shared ownership by Indigenous people in decision-making No genuinely shared objectives, performance indicators or benchmarks, or data for M & E Government agencies weren’t clear about roles and responsibilities in the partnership arrangements Government limitations not made clear to Indigenous partners from the outset

23. What works: sectoral findings Long term relationships based on trust Working within a framework of Aboriginal-driven decision making Power inequalities are addressed – strong mutual accountabilities Culturally competent staff Shared responsibility and accountability for shared objectives

24. What didn’t work? Example from Coastal zone decision-making (Rockloff & Lockie 2006) -Aboriginal people’s lack of financial & technical resources -Inequity re participation in meetings unpaid -Aboriginal people expected to attend bureaucratic meetings, with set agendas, & discuss issues through a ‘western’ lens -Little confidence that listened to & knowledge respected -Govt agencies & others failed to acknowledge considerable diversity among Aboriginal people (3 distinct cultural groups with own languages, customs, aspirations etc.)

25. Solutions? Indigenous people agenda-setting Capacity building – support (financial & other) for Aboriginal involvement; modification of processes & structures Cultural awareness training for government Ensuring Aboriginal specific views are respected, recorded; investing in relationships and communication based on equality, openness, & respect for each other’s values Supporting the development of Aboriginal governance structures (starts to challenge the power inequalities)

26. What works: Relationships Responding to Indigenous history, cultures and social dynamics Valuing skills and knowledge of community organisations and Indigenous people Clarity about purpose and relevant scale for engagement Engagement needs to relate to Indigenous concepts of wellbeing (not just COAG targets)

27. What works: Relationships Long-term relationships of trust, respect and honesty Accessible, ongoing communication and information Effective governance and capacity - Indigenous & among governments Appropriate timeframes

28. What works: Participatory processes Indigenous agency & decision-making from the outset an Indigenous-driven process with government as facilitator/enabler builds on existing community governance structures and Indigenous strengths and assets an empowering process - small achievements towards mutually agreed longer term goals

29. What works: Participatory Processes Recognition of power inequalities - sincere attempts to share power, through agreements Transparency of decision making processes and agreed conflict resolution mechanisms Strong mutual accountability relationships in agreements A high degree of clarity about desired outcomes, indicators Clearly defined roles and responsibilities in agreements and partnerships, some continuity of personnel Parties engage in joint planning of monitoring and evaluation to meet rights and needs of each.

30. What works: Governance & leadership Effective and legitimate Indigenous governance arrangements Strong and strategic Indigenous leadership Indigenous leadership resourced & supported for engagement Very high level leadership, flexibility, and secure, adequate resources within governments Honesty about resource (or other) limitations; set achievable goals Culturally competent staff able to build trusting relationships.

31. What works: Governance & leadership Investment in strengthening the governance of both Indigenous and government partners for effective partnership working Building on existing community organisations and governance structures Governments have capacity to respond to Indigenous priorities with pooled and flexible funding arrangements.

32. Improving Indigenous community governance through strengthening Indigenous and government organisational capacity Roxanne Bainbridge

33. Four Points The importance of evaluation research; Capacity strengthening two-ways – that is strengthening the capacity of both Indigenous organisations and governments – really about exploring some practical ways of working together; Governance operates at multiple levels which are interrelated ; AND The importance of strengthening soft capacities alongside hard capacities.

34. The importance of evaluation research Poor evidence-base Good at describing problems, and what needs to happen - few evaluations Messages: -a balance of descriptive research; measurement research (are things getting better); and intervention research (evaluation) -account for rigorous evaluations in conducting their business -systematic literature reviews - cost-efficient way of bridging the evidence gap POINT 1

35. Background 1970s - national policies > empowerment of community-level organisations 1990s - the term “community capacity building” emerged 1996 – Australian policy arena > concern for reducing welfare-dependency, fostering local participation and decision-making, and trialing new approaches to partnerships and coordination across government Intercultural phenomenon Balance - operational autonomy, political support, performance and accountability

36. Capacity strengthening two-ways through partnerships Governance: “the evolving processes, relationships, institutions and structures by which a group of people, community or society organize themselves collectively to achieve the things that matter to them (Hunt et al., 2008) Strengthening decision-making and control over their organisations and building on people’s personal and collective contributions, and shared commitment to a an organisation’s chosen governance processes, goals and identity (Hunt & Smith, 2006) Challenges - lack of agreed understandings Government to work through partnerships to enable governance processes > communities to be better supported to improve their own situations POINT 2

37. Partnership Strategies Participatory Action Research Processes (PAR) Oriented toward action - cyclic process that diagnose the situation; act to improve it; measure or evaluate the effectiveness of action; reflect on learnings; and plan next steps how are we going – what’s happening; -what is working, -what is not; -are we getting our fair share resources relative to need; -who is benefiting; who is missing out; what can be done to reach those people; and -how can we improve our situation. POINT 2

38. A Framework for Transdisciplinary Teamwork (Whiteside, Tsey & Cadet-James, 2011) DomainEmpowerment Attributes Societal Acknowledge the challenges of history and the social environment Work with community strengths, for example, any form of social support Enable local control and involvement Seek to facilitate community development or change Individual/ client Promote autonomy and individual responsibility Acknowledge and build on people’s existing strengths Encourage personal and skill development Respect people’s religious and spiritual beliefs (these can be a source of strength) Team Clarify team values Ensure workers have well-defined roles Facilitate cross-cultural understanding Provide forums for reflective practice Be aware of and deal with power differences between workers Have some separate reflective spaces/support for Indigenous workers Organisational Employ local people and build capacity Be transparent and listen to workers Ensure client needs are primary Ensure fair and safe conditions for workers Promote training and professional development Address organisational conflict as it arises Adapt to change Adopt evidence-based approach as to what works through research partnerships POINT 2

39. http://mapsof.net/map/australia-states-blank#.UfWuzKxmyrM Strengthening soft capacities alongside hard capacities Capacity Strengthening: Accessing opportunities and processes to enhance an organisation’s abilities to perform specific functions, solve problems, and set and achieve goals; that is, to get things done (Hunt & Smith, 2006). Hard capacities - resources, technical skills, functions, structures, equipment Soft capacities - values, morale, engagement, motivation, incentives and staff wellbeing Social and emotional empowerment Point 3

40. FAMILY WELLBEING PROGRAM TAFESA Sites TANGENTYERE/BATCHELOR Sites ERP Sites TAFE SA Adelaide JCU Cairns BATCHELOR/ TANGENTYERE Alice Springs Port Hedland Sydney Brisbane Rockhampton Horn IslandThursday Island Coober Pedy Pitjatjanjara Lands Doomadgee Normanton Townsville Berri Ceduna Melbourne Point 3

41. Take Home Messages Importance of evidence - we are so good at describing extent of the problems, and what needs to happen, but there are so few evaluations of what actually works. The need for two-way capacity enhancement - for government to work through partnership and for communities to be better supported to improve their own social and emotional wellbeing because of the wider benefits for education, employment, child safety. Governance works at different levels which are interrelated. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander empowerment and social and emotional wellbeing as critically important to capacity strengthening, but poorly supported.

42. THANK YOU TO THE CLOSING THE GAP CLEARINGHOUSE Prof Komla Tsey Dr Janya McCalmanMs Cath Brown