Co‐design with aboriginal and torres strait islander communities: A journey

Abstract

Aim This paper explores the principles of co‐design with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities by reflecting on the literature, learning from experiences of allied health professionals, and considering how co‐design can be applied in rural and remote allied health practice. Context This paper has been authored by a working group from Services for Rural and Remote Allied Health (SARRAH). SARRAH is a member‐based allied health organisation, working to improve health outcomes for rural and remote Australians. SARRAH has been representing and supporting allied health professionals in rural and remote Australia for over 20 years, with a member base that includes students, practitioners, programme managers, policy makers and academics. As a non‐Indigenous organisation, SARRAH works in partnership and receives guidance from the peak organisation, Indigenous Allied Health Australia (IAHA). Approach Over a period of 3 months, a group of eleven SARRAH members and staff came together to review available literature, seek member perspectives and share their experiences and understandings of co‐design. Working group discussions were grounded in the knowledge and experiences shared by two Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander group members. Conclusion This paper proposes that successful co‐design with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities places legitimate value on different knowledge systems, is built on strong and trusting relationships, promotes inclusive involvement and requires authentic partnerships. Using these principles, SARRAH will engage with members and stakeholders to influence meaningful change in allied health practice in rural and remote Australia.

Yarning together: toward targeted, co‐designed parenting programs for Aboriginal Australians

“…Parenting programs should adopt a co‐design approach, the optimal method for designing and undertaking research in Aboriginal communities; if applied correctly, it is a deeply collaborative approach. Co‐designed programs are more likely to respond to the needs of the communities involved and therefore more likely to engage Aboriginal families and to lead to positive outcomes 8‐10 . The benefits of ensuring Aboriginal governance and leadership in research and programs are clear 11 …”

Everyday people and co‐design in rural health research: On writing about positionality and experiences

“…A key part of such an activity would be to provide guidance on writing in a scholarly way that is outside of the conventional AIMRDC format that is designed for reporting of research outputs only. The articles in this collection consisted of commentaries, 13,14,[18][19][20][21] original research [9][10][11][15][16][17]22,23 and quality improvement reports. 12,24 The article by Barker et al 16 contains a video of a recently passed Aboriginal women who consented for the video to be shared as a supporting information.…”

“…The key theme from these articles is non‐Indigenous researchers allying with First Nations communities to ensure that cultural values are infused into the research. Of note is the study that produced ‘the first research project to develop a co‐design practice model in the context of a rurally located Aboriginal well‐being Program.’ 9 The authors of this article provide some idea of their positionality, as do many articles where the focus is First Nations peoples 10–16 …”

“…As is the case for positionality, writing about the process and experiences of co‐design is a new development, as noted by Urquhart et al 9 on writing about the seldom explored experiences of co‐design and the unwritten ways of knowledge sharing. In regard to experiences, it was converted into principles for teamwork and intercultural collaboration (Wall et al 12 ; Tamwoy et al 14 ); noted as crucial in the extensive collation of information and flow‐on effects (Black et al 11 ); described as ‘experiential learning’ that is nonlinear and dependent on cultural context and co‐design in navigating between science and mātauranga (knowledge) in Māori research (Rolleston et al 13 ); in writing about the first time to be asked about their experiences (Collins et al 10 ); and when detailing participants' perspectives (Binder et al 17 ). All the articles represent a body of work that should inform the development of writing guidelines about the experiences of the processes of co‐design.…”

“…9 The authors of this article provide some idea of their positionality, as do many articles where the focus is First Nations peoples. [10][11][12][13][14][15][16] We wonder, should positionality be a component of all rural health research articles, and what should be considered in positionality statements?…”