• This research learns from the experiences and expectations of First Nations peoples in urban policy, examines the capacity and readiness of non-Indigenous practitioners to respond, and critically considers the responsibility of urban policy to First Nations Country, culture and community. [...] This is because urban policy is orientated to the organisation of space and spatial relations through, for example, the arrangement of the built environment and the relations of people to each other via the system of property. [...] The digital recordings of yarns, transcripts and draft text are also the intellectual property of Wurundjeri and Dharug participants respectively, and at the close of this project were returned in digital form to their owners and the files deleted from the project team repository. [...] 430 Voicing First Nations Country, culture and community in urban policy 20 First Nations experiences and expectations of urban policy 2.2 Perspectives and experiences of First Nations urban practitioners We talked with First Nations urban practitioners in NSW, Victoria and Aotearoa New Zealand about their experiences working within the fields of urban policy and development decision-making. [...] 430 Voicing First Nations Country, culture and community in urban policy 21 First Nations experiences and expectations of urban policy One Australian participant gave an example about the importance of listening to and actioning what Elders say to governments and developers: There was an example of an engagement project done in the eastern part of the city, and one of the Elders asked for somethin.
- Pages
- 113
- Published in
- Australia
Table of Contents
- List of tables 5
- Acronyms and abbreviations used in this report 6
- Executive summary 8
- 1. Introduction 14
- 1.1 Why this research was conducted 15
- 1.2 Centring Country and sovereignty as the conceptual frame of the research 16
- 1.3 Research methods 19
- 1.3.1 Indigenous-informed methodology and design 19
- 1.3.2 Research activities 20
- 1.3.3 Analysis and writing approach 23
- 2. First Nations experiences and expectations of urban policy 25
- 2.1 Existing research on First Nations engagement with urban policy 26
- 2.2 Perspectives and experiences of First Nations urban practitioners 28
- 2.2.1 Respecting cultural protocols 28
- 2.2.2 External pressures experienced by Traditional Custodians 29
- 2.2.3 Tensions created by colonial recognition frameworks 31
- 2.2.4 Conflicting philosophies between caring for Country and urban development priorities 33
- 2.2.5 Practices to achieve better outcomes 35
- 2.3 Wurundjeri Woi-Wurrung experiences and expectations 38
- 2.3.1 ‘We’re still here’: why urban policy matters to Wurundjeri Woi-Wurrung Traditional Custodians 39
- 2.3.2 Governance arrangements that support the voice of custodians 41
- 2.3.3 Barriers and frustrations 43
- 2.3.4 Treaty 44
- 2.3.5 The Nangenala project 44
- 2.4 Dharug experiences and expectations of urban policy 47
- 2.4.1 Why urban policy matters to Dharug Traditional Custodians 47
- 2.4.2 Barriers and frustrations 48
- 2.4.3 Load on community 50
- 2.4.4 (Not) following cultural protocol 51
- 2.4.5 Levers for change 52
- 2.5 Policy implications 54
- 3. Settler policy impacting First Nations Country, culture and community 56
- 3.1 Existing research on the impact of policy on First Nations Country, community and culture 57
- 3.2 Policy recognition of First Nations rights and self-determination 58
- 3.2.1 International instruments for recognition 58
- 3.2.2 Recognition in Australia 60
- 3.2.3 Victoria: Advancement of Treaty 62
- 3.2.4 NSW: OCHRE and local decision-making 63
- 3.3 Settler policy and recognition of the land relationship 63
- 3.3.1 Native Title 64
- 3.3.2 Statutory Land Rights v Native Title in NSW 65
- 3.3.3 Victoria’s Traditional Owner Settlement Act 66
- 3.4 Urban policy contact zones 67
- 3.4.1 Urban policy impacting Wurundjeri Woi-Wurrung Country in Victoria 68
- 3.4.2 Urban policy impacting Dharug Country in NSW 70
- 3.5 Policy attention to First Nations knowledges and cultural heritage 74
- 3.5.1 Protecting Indigenous intellectual and cultural property 74
- 3.5.2 Indigenous data sovereignty and governance 75
- 3.6 Urban policy and First Nations disadvantage 75
- 3.6.1 Closing the Gap: national 75
- 3.6.2 Closing the Gap: NSW 76
- 3.6.3 Closing the Gap: Victoria 76
- 3.7 Policy implications 77
- 4. Capacity within urban policy domains and professions 78
- 4.1 Existing research on capacity and the role of non-Indigenous practitioners 79
- 4.2 Methods for centring First Nations experiences in the yarn with non-Indigenous practitioners 81
- 4.3 Perceptions of role as an intermediary translator 82
- 4.4 Substantive and material changes in practice 84
- 4.4.1 Unlearning practices 85
- 4.4.2 Materially supporting self-determination 86
- 4.4.3 Intergenerational thinking 87
- 4.4.4 Seeing and countering the burden of engagement 88
- 4.4.5 What practitioners didn’t say 89
- 4.5 Policy implications 89
- 5. Policy implications 91
- 5.1 Contributions of this research 91
- 5.1.1 What are the experiences and expectations of First Nations people regarding urban policy? 92
- 5.1.2 What is the capacity and readiness of the urban policy professions in Australia to partner with First Nations as sovereign people exercising co-existing governance? 93
- 5.1.3 How can urban policy appropriately and respectfully reflect, learn from, and embed First Nations perspectives and knowledges on Country, community and culture? 95
- 5.2 Final remarks 97
- References 98
- Appendix 1: Miro board responses from non-Indigenous practitioners in NSW and Victoria 109
- Table 1: Policy documents analysed 22
- Table 2: Historic timeline of national-level Indigenous advisory bodies 1970s to 2020s 60
- Table A1: Non-Indigenous practitioner Miro Board responses 109
