Recognizing the contribution of Indigenous Protected Areas to marine protected area management in Australia

Gould, Jackie; Smyth, Dermot; Rassip, Whitney; Rist, Phil; Oxenham, Katie

doi:10.1007/s40152-020-00212-z

Cited by 12 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Progress has also been made towards integrating cultural management with other policies such as Australia's Ocean Policy 1998, as well as supporting Indigenous people to develop their own management goals through Healthy Country Planning (as part of Conservation Action Planning) 12 , the Ocean Discovery and Restoration Program 13 and associated government grant schemes 14 , as well as the Indigenous Protected Areas (IPAs) designation Rist et al, 2019;Gould et al, 2021). The latter is part of a positive shift towards the more-proactive Indigenous-led planning, research, governance and management (e.g., Mayala Inninalang Aboriginal Corporation, 2019), as opposed to more-reactive Indigenous-engagement initiatives led by government and non-government agencies, mining/exploration companies, researchers amongst others (see also .…”

Section: The Way Ahead -Ecosystem-based and Community-led Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

‘Out of sight, out of mind’ - towards a greater acknowledgment of submerged prehistoric resources in Australian science-policy as part of a common heritage

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is growing awareness of the need for greater acknowledgement of underwater prehistoric cultural resources as part of management and regulation of the seabed around many maritime countries, especially those with large indigenous populations and history such as Australia. Prehistoric cultural places and landscapes inundated by Post-glacial sea-level rise on Australia’s continental shelf remain largely out-of-sight and out-of-mind, hence awareness and hence legal protection of this resource is lacking. There is a clear need for greater integration of archaeology and cultural heritage management within the marine sciences as well as a greater awareness of this resource as part of a common heritage more generally. This paper explores some of the dichotomies between Western and Indigenous cultures in valuing and managing the seabed. We argue that in developing science-policy, an attempt at least needs to be made to bridge both the gap between the nature and culture perspectives, and the jurisdictional divide between land and sea. Part of the answer lies in a convergence of Indigenous knowledge with Western science approaches, focused around our understanding of physical processes impacting past and present coastal landscapes and on the seabed itself. We explore several case studies from northern and Western Australia that are trying to do this, and which are helping to provide a greater appreciation of the inundated landscapes of the inner shelf as part of a common heritage.

show abstract

Section: The Way Ahead -Ecosystem-based and Community-led Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Australian state and territories (capitalized), regions (large text), names of Indigenous groups (italics), locations (bold) mentioned in text are also included. For a more comprehensive map and list of current and proposed IPAs, seeGould et al (2021), their Figure2.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Out of sight, out of mind’ - towards a greater acknowledgment of submerged prehistoric resources in Australian science-policy as part of a common heritage

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, there has been sustained resourcing of community-based and pan-regional island care and management across Torres Strait as an international transboundary region (Torres Strait Regional Authority 2016). Further, there is increasing government recognition of the importance of Sea Country (coastal and marine areas including islands) and its care and protection by Sea Country custodians, with multi-year investment of public funds into Sea Country within Indigenous Protected Areas and other Sea Country collaborations (Rist et al 2019;Larson et al 2020;Gould et al 2021;State of Queensland 2021).…”

Section: Sound Return On Investmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

How do we drive a renaissance for national island conservation in Australia?

Ball

Moro

Bock³

et al. 2022

Pacific Conserv. Biol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Australia’s approach to managing and conserving its offshore islands as important national assets warrants urgent review. There is a growing realisation that the current trajectory of loss of natural heritage on islands must be reversed, particularly in an era of increasing climate change. We propose a role description and an organisational model for a national Australian Islands Alliance that champions conservation action, prioritises investments aligned to risks, and that connects partners at a strategic national level. A national alliance offers important opportunity to assess threats and report on condition. Four key foundations underpin a national alliance dedicated to championing island care and expert management: (1) management informed by evidence; (2) sound return on investment; (3) national coordination in partnership with States and Territories; and (4) community participation inclusive of Aboriginal peoples’ and Torres Strait Islanders’ custodial rights and interests. The message from experiences shared across Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific region is that traditional island custodians and stakeholders are vital partners to restoration efforts. These shared learnings collectively demonstrate the time is now for Australia to move forward with a respectful and unified direction to progress successful and sustainable island conservation and restoration.

show abstract

“…In Australia, IPCAs now encompass just under half of that country's conservation estate (Gould et al 2021;Zurba et al 2019). As Gould et al (2021) observe, the rise of IPCAs "means the interwoven nature of TOs ' [Traditional Owners; i.e., Indigenous peoples] naturalcultural values can be duly respected, as are kinship and ceremonial relationships which underpin proper decision-making and the relationships between people and Country" (5). Indigenous guardian programs are operating in Australia as well, where the government is spending $102 million from 2021 to 2028 to support guardians (Reed et al 2020).…”

Section: Indigenous Peoples and Protected Areasmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While such efforts are not without their criticisms and shortcomings (Fache 2014;Reed et al 2020;, recent articles by Indigenous co-authors indicate support within Indigenous communities for IPCAs and guardian programs (Gould et al 2021;. IPCAs and guardian programs are direct threats to the settler-colonial "dream…of Indigenous pacification, containment, and demobilization" (Simpson 2014, 142).…”

Section: Indigenous Peoples and Protected Areasmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Can Urban Parks Support Urban Indigenous Peoples? Exploratory Cases from Saskatoon and Portland

Finegan

2021

aps

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In Anglo settler states, parks and Indigenous peoples interact in myriad ways, given the tight connection between Indigenous peoples and land and that parks are manifestations of settler control of land and heritage. Current park–Indigenous research is limited by a focus on rural locales, despite that more than half of Indigenous peoples live in urban areas. This exploratory paper draws connections between literature rooted in urban Indigenous studies and park management. I argue the literature’s current emphasis on rural locales neglects to consider how urban parks, might contribute to reconciliation if they affirmatively support urban Indigenous identities and cultural activities. I use two mini case studies—the Meewasin Valley Authority (Saskatoon, Saskatchewan) and Fort Vancouver National Historic Site (Portland, Oregon)—to highlight some of the ways in which urban parks can support urban Indigenous peoples’ responses to persistent urban settler-colonialism.

show abstract

Recognizing the contribution of Indigenous Protected Areas to marine protected area management in Australia

Cited by 12 publications

References 27 publications

‘Out of sight, out of mind’ - towards a greater acknowledgment of submerged prehistoric resources in Australian science-policy as part of a common heritage

‘Out of sight, out of mind’ - towards a greater acknowledgment of submerged prehistoric resources in Australian science-policy as part of a common heritage

How do we drive a renaissance for national island conservation in Australia?

How Can Urban Parks Support Urban Indigenous Peoples? Exploratory Cases from Saskatoon and Portland

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About