Investment in programs that help Indigenous people undertake work maintaining the environmental health of their country has benefits for the environment as well as the physical, mental and cultural health of the Indigenous people involved. For health these findings have direct implications for some national health policies, service provision to homelands, health promotion and Indigenous health research. There are also direct implications for environmental investment in northern Australia and the design and regulation of markets in resource entitlements. Indirectly the findings should be important for economic, employment and education policies as well as those promoting social harmony. Given the range of benefits there is a strong argument for cross-agency investment in working on country by Indigenous people.
This essay describes the surreality of Aboriginal housing in Australia, where images reroute remedial concern from the literal conditions toward a pathologization of the indigenous householder. Using governmental data against governmental interpretation, the essay shows how a pragmatic issue of substandard original construction, undersupervised repairs, poor to nonexistent maintenance, and rapid shifts in policy attention is hidden to reinsert householders as the main culprits of substandard living conditions in many Aboriginal communities. A dirty literalism that sees the surreal in the everyday is required to unpack the means and the methods through which such maneuvers are made.
This article questions the foundational binary 'anarchy-bureaucracy' and the multiple articulations at play in the state's refraction of anarchic qualities onto Indigenous Australians. Launching from the Northern Territory Emergency Response of June 2007, in which the Australian government assumed direct control of 73 Aboriginal communities in the north of Australia, it asks why bureaucracy is considered the antonym of anarchy and not its synonym. In mobilizing accounts of anarchic Aboriginal depravity to authorize an ongoing bureau-professional presence in Indigenous worlds, links to other matters of interest, such as the state's dependence on mining revenues, let alone any account of the affective dimension of policy life, were removed from view. Reconsideration of the anarchy-state binary offers a lens to explore the emotional compulsions that are suppressed in the work of upholding the myth of a rational state and how this suppression further authorizes ongoing (anarchic) interventions into Indigenous worlds.
Australia is currently canine rabies free; however, the spread of rabies in eastern Indonesia poses an increasing risk to northern Australia. Domestic dogs are numerous in East Arnhem Land (EAL) and the Northern Peninsular Area (NPA), usually unrestrained and living in close relationships with humans. The response to any rabies outbreak on Australian territory will focus on dog vaccination, controlling dog movements and depopulation. A One Health approach to zoonotic disease control should seek to co-promote human and animal health, whilst also seeking to accommodate the preferences of affected communities. We report on 5 collaborative workshops and 28 semi-structured interviews conducted between January 2017 and June 2018 with: (i) EAL and NPA community members; (ii) Indigenous Rangers in EAL and NPA; and (iii) residents of Cairns, the local regional centre. Storyboard methodologies were used to work with participants and explore what rabies response measures they thought were justified or unacceptable, why they held these views, and what other steps they believed needed to be taken. Key findings include that the capacity of the NPA and EAL communities to contribute/adapt to a biosecurity response is limited by structural disadvantage including poor infrastructure (such as lockable premises and intact fences) and appropriate information, dominant cultural norms and food security concerns. Dogs and dingoes can have great cultural and social importance; key interventions might be accommodated within cultural beliefs and long-standing norms of dog management if sufficient effort is made to adapt interventions to local contexts and community preferences. Adopting such a 'strengths-based' approach mandates that the communities at greatest risk need help to prepare for and develop strategies to manage a biosecurity response to a rabies incursion. This would include listening to individual and community concerns and attending to the educational and infrastructural needs for supporting different groups to respond appropriately.
This paper contributes to recent debates about whether urban policy discourses are transferable and what is at stake in their translation. It draws on discussion of Darwin (Northwest Territory, Australia), a tropical savanna location that the local government wants to promote as a 'creative city', without quite knowing what this might require. We discuss relevant debates on research knowledge construction, the creative city and the path-dependent character of neoliberal governmental objectives. We then turn to the geographical, demographic and cultural characteristics that make Darwin a challenging and distinct context for translation of global theories of creative city rejuvenation. As well as arguing a case for more nuanced, locationally specific, analysis of the capacity of places to embrace travelling policy discourses, we suggest ways in which creative city research can be refreshed through engaging with literatures on (post)colonial urban politics and intersections with policy initiatives other than those targeted at 'creative industries' per se. We systematically outline the particular challenges that tropical cities in remote locations provide to accepted wisdom about creativity-led urban planning.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.