Howitt (2009) claims that state control over mineral and energy resources and developer-Indigenous relations constitute the 'active erasure' of Indigenous knowledge and governance. The cultures and interests of Indigenous players are diverse and at times conflicting during Indigenous-mining interface, and collective bargaining has been shown to substantially weaken these positions, especially in regard to those Indigenous players primarily concerned with the protection of localised heritage. This paper explores a case study from a remote region of South Australia to document this erasure and its implications and to advocate decolonisation of the regulatory interfaces between mining and Indigenous peoples in resource, environmental and heritage governance. It adopts an Indigenous standpoint for research and argues the need for academic research to accept responsibility for some weaknesses in existing systems. The experiences of Adnyamathanha people are used to support an argument that Indigenous empowerment through informed decision-making and a decolonising engagement strategy are yet to be fully realised as key components of an effective interface between Indigenous and commercial players.

No abstract

This paper evaluates the method Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA) from the perspectives of Indigenous methodologies and Indigenous standpoint, in order to identify some strengths and limitations of using S-LCA in Indigenous contexts. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is used to measure environmental impacts connected with all stages of the life cycle of a commercial product, process, or service. S-LCA is a methodology designed to include the social aspects of sustainability in the LCA methodology. S-LCA emphasizes stakeholder involvement and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) S-LCA guidelines (2020) lists Indigenous communities as possible stakeholders. With a focus on Indigenous communities in the Arctic region we also include comparative aspects from Australia to generate new conceptualizations and understandings. The paper concludes that S-LCA has the potential to facilitate opposing worldviews and with some further developments can be a valuable methodology for Indigenous contexts.

No abstract

No abstract