Advertisement

An Indigenous ‘Right Way’ Environmental, Social and Cultural Core-Benefits Verification Standard

  • Lisa McMurrayEmail author
  • Rowan Foley
  • Carl O’Sullivan
Chapter
Part of the World Sustainability Series book series (WSUSE)

Abstract

There is a lot of pressure on Indigenous people to conform, to think and act like Europeans. There is an unspoken belief that it would be much easier for all concerned to simply use European models and accepted western ways of doing things. Developing a new standard for the cultural, social and environmental core benefits of carbon projects that uses the Indigenous-to-Indigenous way of working has not been easy. It has involved a lot of thinking, reflection and discussion with many wonderful Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people. It also involved more formal consultation and peer review processes as well as presentations at industry forums and community meetings. Ultimately, we do not see a role for non-Aboriginal people in leading this process nor are we ‘massaging’ a western monitoring and evaluation (M&E) model into an Aboriginal context. We can’t tweak existing standards whose soul is fundamentally different. There is, however, a support role for non-Aboriginal people which affords for a generosity of spirit to not dominate or dismiss Indigenous ways of working. The concept of Indigenous people working with Indigenous people using Indigenous expertise to verify core-benefits has been seen by some as an inferior process, a bit soft perhaps, lacking rigour even. The idea that Indigenous people have something to offer challenges the dominate neo-colonial concepts of dependence and is a form of environmental racism that needs to be called out. We are holding fast in our belief that in order to be part of the solution and to recognise Indigenous people’s expertise we cannot build the capacity of NGOs, government agencies and M&E specialists. We are fully aware this approach can be disarming because it requires ‘white experts’ to move aside. There are many intelligent Indigenous people with expertise that did not receive a formal education. On a personal level I have drawn inspiration for this work through my mother, a strong spiritual Badtjala (Butchulla) woman. As a child she was one of the ‘dump house mob’ spending four years of her childhood growing up on a rubbish dump, left school by grade 7, lost all her teeth by 16 years and started work as a domestic servant. Despite all these difficulties she raised four children all going to University, negotiated the first hand back of land on K’gari (Fraser Island) from the infamously conservative Joh Bjelke-Petersen Queensland Government and was instrumental in launching our successful Native Title claim. I have also drawn inspiration from Oodgeroo Noonuccal, Vincent Lingiari, Tony Tjamawa and Eddie Mabo. All of whom challenged the status quo for the benefit of Indigenous people. I would like to thank the Aboriginal Carbon Foundation team and Caritas Australia for their ideas, dedication and patience. I would also like to thank the Queensland Government for funding this innovative work.

Keywords

Indigenous Carbon farming Core-benefits Verification Self-determination 

References

  1. ACFID Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Working Group (2015) Effective development practice with aboriginal and torres strait islander communities. Practice Note, Australian Council for International Development (ACFID), CanberraGoogle Scholar
  2. Altman JC (2007) Alleviating poverty in remote indigenous australia: the role of the hybrid economy. Dev Bull 72:47–51. Development Studies Network, Australian National University (ANU), CanberraGoogle Scholar
  3. Burgess CP, Johnston FH, Berry HL, McDonnell J, Yibarbuk D, Gunabarra C, Mileran A, Bailie RS (2009) Healthy country, healthy people: the relationship between Indigenous health status and “caring for country”. Med J Aust 190:567–572. Australasian Medical Publishing Company, SydneyGoogle Scholar
  4. Chapeskie A (1999) Northern Homelands. Linking Culture and, Northern FrontierGoogle Scholar
  5. Coady International Institute (2012) Compendium of tools for assets based community driven development. Unpublished training manual, St Francis Xavier University, Nova ScotiaGoogle Scholar
  6. Cochran et al (2008) Indigenous ways of knowing: implications for participatory research and community. Am J Public Health, 98(1). American Public Health Association (APHA), WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  7. Country Needs People (2015) Working for our country, a review of the economic and social benefits of Indigenous land and sea management. Pew Charitable trust and synergies economic consulting. Department for the Prime Minister and Cabinet. CanberraGoogle Scholar
  8. Country Needs People (2017) Protecting nature for all of us, environmental benefits of Australia’s Indigenous Protected Areas and Indigenous rangers. Pew Charitable Trusts. Department for the Prime Minister and Cabinet, CanberraGoogle Scholar
  9. Hunt J (2005) Capacity development in the international development context: implications for indigenous Australia. Discussion paper no. 278/2005. Centre for aboriginal economic policy research, Australian National University (ANU), CanberraGoogle Scholar
  10. Kawakami AJ, Aton K, Cram F, Lai MK, Porima L (2007) Improving the practise of evaluation through Indigenous values and methods, decolonizing evaluation practise—returning the gaze from Hawai’i and Aotearoa. In: Brandon P, Smith N (eds) Fundamental issues in evaluation. Guilford Press. New York pp 219–242Google Scholar
  11. Kimberley Land Council (2016) Indigenous savanna carbon industry core-benefits discussion paper. Unpublished. Kimberley Land Council, BroomeGoogle Scholar
  12. Marmot M (2011) Social determinants and the health of Indigenous Australians. Med J Australia. 194(10): 512–513. Australasian Medical Publishing Company, SydneyGoogle Scholar
  13. Moran M (2016) Serious whitefella stuff—when solutions became the problem n indigenous affairs. Melbourne University Press, VictoriaGoogle Scholar
  14. Price M, McCoy B, Mafi S (2012) Progressing the dialogue about a framework for Aboriginal evaluations: sharing methods and key learnings. Eval J Australas 12(1):32–37. Australasian Evaluation Society, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  15. Ryan R, Wilczynski A, Watkins S, Rose J (2012) Assessment of the social outcomes of the working on country program. Final report. Urbis. Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, CanberraGoogle Scholar
  16. Tarsilla M (2010) Inclusiveness and social justice in evaluation: can the transformative agenda really alter the status Quo. J Multi Eval 6(14). Simon Fraser University, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  17. Tuhiwai Smith L (1999) Decolonizing methodologies: research and indigenous peoples. Zed Books, LondonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Aboriginal CarbonMarrickvilleAustralia
  2. 2.Aboriginal Carbon FundAlice SpringsAustralia
  3. 3.Carl O’SullivanGosfordAustralia

Personalised recommendations