1. Social and cultural values: Indigenous interests in water governance
Dr Sue Jackson
Principal Research Fellow
Australian Rivers Institute
Australian Rivers Institute

2. Aim
Describe the emerging models and mechanisms for including indigenous interests in water governance:
Indigenous entitlements
Representative consultative groups
Indigenous input to planning, EFAs
Native title agreements (esp. mining)
Indigenous water policy group
Can these approaches help build resilient communities and ecosystems?
Australian Rivers Institute

3. Indigenous perspectives
Excluded until this century, customary systems of water governance ignored
Diverse and interdependent indigenous interests, not fully recognised
Indigenous advocacy – rights orientation, calls for
greater equity in distribution, inc. resource rights
Indigenous control of water e.g. ‘cultural flows’
more effective participation in management, inclusion of IK
restoration of environmental systems
A governance agenda - to influence law, policy, planning as well as research and renegotiate r/s
Australian Rivers Institute

4. Indigenous access to water: Geography matters
Two very different contexts reflecting differences in climate, entitlements, water cultures, histories of development
Northern Australia – tropical, ‘under-developed’, significant and relatively powerful indigenous sector strongly attached to intact, unregulated rivers
Southern – water scarcity, intense competition, lack of legal recognition of rights, smaller more marginalised populations, attenuated connections
Affects claims and perceived legitimacy – makes you think about water and power
Tropical river systems contain approx 70% of nation’s water resources but less than 2% of this is currently diverted.
Australian Rivers Institute

5. Indigenous Water Policy Group
Many regard the NWI as an important foundation, but a narrow one
Indigenous input was minimal and awareness low
NAILSMA set up the Indigenous Water Policy Group
Members drawn from northern Land Councils, government agencies are connected
Shared interests across north
Australian Rivers Institute

6. Model in capacity building, exchange, dialogue
One of Policy group’s roles:
Oversee development of research program to address issues arising from NWI
Research team brought in extra expertise
Identified research gaps – e.g. customary management, economic requirements, legal frameworks
Promoted cooperation
And built capacity in agencies
Australian Rivers Institute

7. Very successful model of policy entrepreneurialism
Significant policy innovation - SIRs
Tindal (Katherine) WAP introduced a limit on water extraction
No Indigenous land within WCD, Native title pending
Initially no allocations for Indigenous commercial use
Strategic Indigenous Reserve was established
Calculated at 2% of consumptive water, equiv. to claim area
Precedent for other NT WAPs (25%)
But, new government is opposed
Australian Rivers Institute

8. (CEO NAILSMA, IWPG)
‘The development of the Strategic Indigenous Reserve would include a focus on capacity building to support productive use of water, and, more fundamentally, increase Indigenous participation in water planning and land and water management more broadly'…
Australian Rivers Institute

9. Prospects for resilient communities and ecosystems
Indigenous presence shows resilience
IWPG demonstrates quality of Indigenous contributions to water governance
Resilience scholars consider that local ecological knowledge constitutes a key analytical domain for SES research
Australian Rivers Institute

10. Resilience con’t But, how social change is conceived is a limitation
How well does it address normative issues –
resilience of what and for whom? does the resilience of some livelihoods result in the vulnerability of others? (Cote and Nightingale 2012)?
‘who governs, whose systems framings count, and whose sustainability gets prioritized’ (Smith and Stirling, 2010: 1)
Focus is on institutions (getting the rules right) vs attention to politics and culture
Move from attending to institutional configurations alone, and towards the processes and relations that support these structures
power and competing value systems are not external to, but rather integral to the development and functioning of SES.
It over-emphasises the role of physical hazards and underestimates the part played by political economic factors in vulnerability.
Resilience thinking problematically assumes that social and ecological system dynamics are essentially similar (Cotes and Nightingale)
who defines what states/thresholds are desirable, and for whom
Australian Rivers Institute

11. Resilience con’t
Look at principles from the standpoint of differently placed/situated groups with different norms, values etc
Understand historical context and cultural differences
Flexibility could mean ‘anything goes’
Attitudes to risk – open to review and change requires trust & that your needs are understood
Australian Rivers Institute

12. Resilience con’t Deal with contested values overcome inequality
Avoid narrowly framed models of social and environmental priorities – are all options on the table?
e.g. re-allocation to indigenous groups
Buy-back funds/trusts
Water for Indigenous env. ‘assets’
Australian Rivers Institute