Closing the Gap and the Sustainable Development Goals: listening to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people

Schultz, Rosalie

doi:10.1111/1753-6405.12958

Cited by 19 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In doing so, it reinforces a deficit‐based approach whereby children need to be “saved” from their parents who harm them and increase associated economic costs to society (Keddell, 2018). Deficit‐based understandings are especially dire for First Nations people who, when compared with “norms” of non‐First Nations people, can legitimise ongoing colonising practices and reinforce negative stereotypes (Schultz, 2019). As such, there is a need to reconsider the language of policies and guidelines relating to child abuse and neglect to ensure a holistic focus on individuals and communities in the context of broader social determinants of health.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safeguarding without stigmatising: Language of responses to child abuse in high‐ and upper‐middle‐ income countries

Lines

Grant

Kakyo

et al. 2022

Aust J Social Issues

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Child abuse and neglect is an increasing international social issue. Specific challenges include the overrepresentation of disadvantaged and marginalised populations, including First Nations communities.This document review explored how responses to child abuse and neglect are conceptualised in international policy and professional guidelines to identify the language that shapes strategies to address child abuse and neglect. In doing so, this review aimed to identify which approaches may be applicable to the Australian context to underpin population-wide strategies to address child abuse and neglect and provide a shared language for professionals working with children.Twenty-two policies and professional guidelines from 13 high and upper-middle income countries were analysed inductively supported by NVivo software. Key findings showed that many policies and professional guidelines included blame, labelling and stigmatising language which may further marginalise children and families. One approach that minimised stigmatising language was safeguarding as practiced in the United Kingdom and Ireland. Safeguarding may be applicable to contexts like Australia to underpin inclusive approaches and provide a shared vision and language | 585 LINES Et aL.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safeguarding without stigmatising: Language of responses to child abuse in high‐ and upper‐middle‐ income countries

Lines

Grant

Kakyo

et al. 2022

Aust J Social Issues

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Firstly, what must be problematized is the very notion of data, the assumption that not only are numbers neutral (Schultz, 2020), but so are the criterion used to determine what data are relevant and appropriate how they are applied and interpreted. The underlying assumption here is that an objective, positivist, western view of data and the evidence they generate, will produce an accurate picture of what is being measured, and in doing so, identify 'common sense' strategies to produce statistical equality (Patrick & Moodie, 2018, p. 179).…”

Section: Data-driven Solutionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rhetoric vs reality: The disconnect between policy and practice for teachers implementing Aboriginal education in their schools

Burgess

Lowe²

2022

EPAA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In Australia, pervasive deficit representations and positioning of Aboriginal peoples continue to impact on teachers’ capacity to meaningfully embed Aboriginal curriculum and pedagogies into their teaching. This sits within a policy context driven by standardization, competition and market forces focused on closing the gap between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal student outcomes to address the statistical dissonance caused by Aboriginal underachievement. Our analysis is informed by Bacchi’s (2009) ‘What’s the ‘problem’ represented to be?’ analytical tool. We reveal discourses that position Aboriginal peoples as the ‘problem’ and the effects of these on teacher practice. Using the 2019 Alice Springs (Mparntwe) Education Declaration, which represents a national partisan vision of Australian education, we demonstrate how discourses of community engagement, Reconciliation and data-driven solutions continue to position Aboriginal peoples as incapable, and government as savior. This flags the silencing of Aboriginal peoples’ key concerns of racism, social justice, truth-telling, sovereignty, and treaty, all of which are central to the ongoing fight for voice, reparative justice and recognition. Until these concerns are heard and accounted for in policies, the gap will remain, teachers will continue to struggle to meaningfully engage with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander policies and curriculum content and consequently fail Aboriginal aspirations.

show abstract

“…educational outcomes and other forms of social inequality), rather than land justice. The framework uses goals represented by sets of statistical targets to drive policy and behaviour change (Schultz 2020). The latest Closing the Gap policy commitments to improve access to and control over both land and water represent recognition by all Australian governments of the 'cultural' determinants of Indigenous health and wellbeing, whereby Indigenous water rights contribute to 'cultural well being' (CATSIPO and Australian Governments 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Benchmarking Indigenous water holdings in the Murray-Darling Basin: a crucial step towards developing water rights targets for Australia

Hartwig

Markham

Jackson

2021

Australasian Journal of Water Resources

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Australia's ability to address Indigenous claims for water rights and to advance both national Indigenous and water policy is hampered by a lack of information on Indigenous water entitlements and the communities that hold them. This paper contributes to the policy agenda of increasing Indigenous water rights by developing a method that quantifies and enables spatially explicit comparison of Indigenous-held water within and across Murray-Darling Basin jurisdictions. We construct baselines for (i) Indigenous population (ii) Indigenous holdings of surface water entitlements, and (iii) Indigenous holdings of groundwater entitlements across water management units in the Basin. We estimate that Indigenous surface water holdings constitute no more than 0.17% of the equivalent permitted take across the entire Basin. Groundwater entitlements held by Indigenous entities constitute 0.02% of all available groundwater. The approximate market value of these water entitlements is A$19.2 million in 2015-16 terms, which equates to 0.12% of the total $16.5 billion market value. In contrast, 5.3% of the Murray-Darling Basin population is Indigenous, a proportion that is rapidly increasing. The production of estimates of this type, and Indigenous control of the data needed to generate them, are first steps in a reparations process that can contribute towards Indigenous water justice.

show abstract

Closing the Gap and the Sustainable Development Goals: listening to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people

Cited by 19 publications

References 12 publications

Safeguarding without stigmatising: Language of responses to child abuse in high‐ and upper‐middle‐ income countries

Safeguarding without stigmatising: Language of responses to child abuse in high‐ and upper‐middle‐ income countries

Rhetoric vs reality: The disconnect between policy and practice for teachers implementing Aboriginal education in their schools

Benchmarking Indigenous water holdings in the Murray-Darling Basin: a crucial step towards developing water rights targets for Australia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About