Synthesis of Australian cross‐cultural ecology featuring a decade of annual Indigenous ecological knowledge symposia at the Ecological Society of Australia conferences

Abstract

Indigenous Australians are Australia's first ecologists and stewards of land, sea and freshwater Country. Indigenous biocultural knowledge, as coded in story, song, art, dance and other cultural practices, has accumulated and been refined through thousands of generations of Indigenous tribal groups who have distinct cultural responsibilities for their ancestral estates. European colonisation of Australia had and is still having severe impacts on Indigenous cultural practice, knowledge, people and Country. In contemporary ecology and environmental management, re-recognition of the unique values of Indigenous biocultural knowledge and practice is occurring and increasingly being deployed alongside Western approaches in what has been described as cross-cultural, two-way or right-way work. This article describes the development of cross-cultural ecology and environmental approaches in Australia. We then provide an overview of 10 years of conference presentations associated with the annual Indigenous Ecological Knowledge symposiums of the Ecological Society of Australia (ESA). From 2010 to 2020, 173 people participated in the symposia from around Australia and Aotearoa (New Zealand), of which 62% were Indigenous Australians and 3% Maori. Most participants were from Indigenous Ranger groups followed by University staff, with a roughly even split of men and women. A total of 100 presentations were given and a word frequency analysis of the presentation titles revealed the dominant words (themes) were: Indigenous, management, Country, fire, working, knowledge and cultural. The increasing Indigenous participation in the ESA conferences was coincident with increasing Indigenous-led projects across Australia, although we recognise that much more work needs to be done to increase Indigenous participation and control in Australian ecology and environmental management to move from cross-cultural to Indigenousled approaches.

Place in legal geography: Agency and application in agriculture research

“…Elinor Ostrom’s approach, by comparison, in appreciating interlinked social‐ecological systems, has recognised the value of geography and scaled, localised and place‐sensitive and place‐based participatory regulation and collective governance (Ostrom, 1990; see also Hooykaas, 2021). That similar and more sophisticated governance models have been practiced by First Nations for millennia needs far greater recognition, particularly given the historic and ongoing deployment of private property to effect unlawful and violent dispossession (Ens & Turpin, 2022; Howitt, 2020; Kepkiewicz & Dale, 2019; Latulippe, 2021; Raven et al, 2021; Robinson, Drozdzewski, & Kaewmahanin Enright, 2021; Robinson, Raven, et al, 2021; Weir, 2021; Wooltorton et al, 2022).…”

“…It is widely argued that policy feasibility and efficacy is raised by the incorporation of local knowledge of places, termed “vernacular” by Bartel (2014; see also Adams, 2004; Chapin et al, 2010; Fazey et al, 2010: Howitt & Suchet‐Pearson, 2006; Matallo Junior, 2021; Ostrom, 2007; Parsons, 2004; Sanderson, 2006; Simpson et al, 2015; Scott, 1998; Vanclay, 2004; Wagner, 2007). Although conflation is to be avoided, there are notable parallels with traditional ecological knowledge, customary law, and Indigenous knowledge, and knowledge co‐production, as there are between relational‐materialism and Indigenous ontologies and worldviews (see Ayre & Mackenzie, 2012; Baker, 1992; Berkes et al, 2000; Ens & Turpin, 2022; Hill et al, 2021; Robinson, Gellie, et al, 2021; Todd, 2016; Wooltorton et al, 2022).…”

Recognizing culturally significant species and Indigenous‐led management is key to meeting international biodiversity obligations

“…In Australia, over many years of building mutually beneficial partnerships with Indigenous groups, key lessons have been conveyed about the devolution of power to Indigenous peoples, including prioritizing mutual benefits and reciprocity; ensuring plenty of time for relationship, knowledge sharing and project development; maintenance of Indigenous Intellectual Property; Indigenous empowerment; two-way capacity building; transparency and ethical project governance (Ens & Turpin, 2022). For Indigenous peoples, it's time governments and conservationists consistently put these learnings into practice.…”

“…While the solution for the recognition and comanagement of CSE may be achievable, the challenge moving forward will be for governments and alike that operate under an entrenched patriarchal western paradigm, to support and empower Indigenous peoples and their governance structures (Ens & Turpin, 2022). While we have outlined a starting point for the Australian setting, the final legislation, policy, and metrics for the protection and management of CSE must be Indigenous‐led in collaboration with an extensive range of Indigenous Australians.…”

Monitoring and evaluation of Indigenous Land and Sea Management: An Indigenous‐led approach in the Arafura Swamp, northern Australia

“…There are calls to further shift towards Indigenous‐led and decolonising approaches to M&E that recognise the importance of Indigenous knowledge and governance systems for successful ILSM (Woodward et al . 2020; Ens & Turpin 2022).…”