The Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies

1. The Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies The Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies Native Title Conference, 2011 Brisbane Evaluating management or joint management? Toni Bauman 2nd June 2011

2. case studies moulded by local histories, legal frameworks, environments, locations, resources, personalities and capacities different kinds of successes, greater or lesser effectiveness across the many aspects of managing protected areas nevertheless, critical success factors that can assist further development in policy and practice in this area (eg governance of all parties). (Smyth and Bauman 2007) Success

3. Is joint management successful if all feral animals are eradicated but the process did not involve traditional owners? Evaluating joint management as the business of engagement, partnership and relationship? Evaluating the relationships between framework arrangements and engagement processes and relationships Evaluating joint management or management? What’s an outcome?

4. Free, prior and informed consent Realisation of native title rights and interests Relationships between the partners are positive and productive Decision-making processes are fair, transparent and inclusive? The process built capacity to take responsibility. Enhanced relationships, mutual respect and community cohesion Sample indicators of engagement process evaluation

5. Reasons for participation? Did parties participate voluntarily? How was this established? The right to say ‘no’ was respected How were parties prepared? How did parties understand information and issues? What didn’t they understand? How did the process help parties understand – what techniques were used? How did the process incorporate expertise beyond the community (eg, anthropologists, lawyers, counselors, tradesman etc?) What kinds of community education processes were put in place? Did the process incorporate feedback loops? Long term fine grained ethnographic research including establishment of partnership:Evaluating free, prior and informed consent

6. How did staff get their message across? Were the right people involved? Who was missing? Who did/didn’t get a chance to speak? Are you happy with an outcome? Why or why not? If representatives were used, was there enough time to allow them to consult with those they represent? How were power imbalances accounted for and negotiated? How would you prefer things to be done? Would someone else have been better to manage the process: If so, who and why? And benefits and disadvantages. Was there any conflict of interest? Evaluating free, prior and informed consent (Cont’d)

7. Evaluation approaches: joint management and native title • Miriuwung-Gajerrong Cultural Planning Framework for co-management – Evaluation of the negotiation and delivery of the MGCPF against best-practice standards – ‘enabling mechanism’ (Ros Hill, CSIRO 2010:78) • Charles Darwin University (Natasha Stacey and ArturaIretza and others): a set of 12 common indicators around 4 main criteria NT Framework Act

8. A national community of effective joint management practice What would this look like?

9. What helps joint management arrangements? Practices? Services? Policies? What harms joint management arrangements? Practices? Services? Policies? What can we all do better? What can be done to build effective practice and better outcomes in joint management nationally? What future workshops might AIATSIS co-ordinate? Group discussion questions

10. Contact Details Native Title Research Unit Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies Acton Peninsula, next to the National Museum. PO Box 553,Canberra ACT, 2601. Tel +61 2 6246 1195; Fax +61 26249 7714 e-mail: Toni.Bauman@aiatsis.gov.au web: www.aiatsis.gov.au (Native Title Research Unit: Indigenous Facilitation and Mediation Project)