Jurisdiction Legislation Australian Capital Territory The Aboriginal Land Grant (Jervis Bay Territory) Act 1986 (Cth) vested land in the Jervis Bay area to the Wreck Bay Aboriginal Community Council. New South Wales Under the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983 (NSW), Aboriginal Land Councils can claim certain Crown land on behalf of Indigenous people. Northern Territory The Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976 (Cth) set up a comprehensive scheme for claiming Aboriginal land. It created a process for the return of reserve land to inalienable Aboriginal freehold land, which is completely unique to the Northern Territory. Queensland Under the Aboriginal Land Act 1991 (Qld) and the Torres Strait Islander Land Act 1991 (Qld), land that has been reserved for Indigenous people could be transferred to them as trustees to hold the land for the benefit of all Indigenous people South Australia The Aboriginal Land Trusts Act 1996 (SA) created the Aboriginal Lands Trust and was the first major recognition of Aboriginal people’s land rights and interests. In 2013, the Aboriginal Land Rights trust was reformed and replaced by the Aboriginal Lands Trust Act 2013. The Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Land Rights Act (1981) (SA) and Maralinga Tjarutja Land Rights Act 1984 (SA), and subsequent amendments, are also significant pieces of land rights legislation recognising Aboriginal land right interests in the far north-west and central-west regions of South Australia. Act amendments are the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Land Rights (Suspension of Executive Board) Amendment Act 2017 and the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Land Rights (Miscellaneous) Amendment Act 2016. Tasmania The Aboriginal Lands Act 1995 (Tas) established the Aboriginal Land Council of Tasmania, which is responsible for holding Aboriginal land in perpetuity for all Aboriginal people in Tasmania and governing its management and use. Victoria After the declaration of the Traditional Owner Settlement Agreement Act 2010 (Vic), the Crown Land Reserves Act 1978 (Vic) was amended to provide for Aboriginal title over some Crown lands because of settlement agreements. Western Australia Part 4 of the Land Administration Act 1997 (WA) allows for Crown land to be set aside as a reserve for a particular purpose in the public interest, which includes for Aboriginal uses or conservation purposes. The Aboriginal Affairs Planning Authority Act 1972 (WA) resulted in the establishment of the Aboriginal Lands Trust, which is responsible for managing all the Aboriginal Land Trust reserves in Western Australia. For more information, go toNational and international frameworks that support caring for Country Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on Linkedin Share this link
Governance Number of protected areas Total size of protected areas (ha) Proportion of total protected area (%) Proportion of Australia (%) Average size of each protected area (ha) Community 75 66,678,669 43.90 8.67 889,049 Government 7,254 65,505,877 43.13 8.52 9,030 Joint 1,810 10,775,813 7.09 1.40 5,953 Private 4,253 8,921,111 5.87 1.16 2,098 Total 13,392 151,881,470 100.00 19.75 11,341 ha = hectare Source: DAWE (2020) For more information, go toNational and international frameworks that support caring for Country Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on Linkedin Share this link
Jurisdiction Legislation for shared governance as formal joint management Extent of Indigenous decision-making authority Indigenous tenure and leases Provisions for marine parks Native title, ILUAs Indigenous ranger groups with Indigenous organisations Indigenous-led and joint planning IPAs as a form of joint management of parks Commonwealth-governed lands Formal joint management in 3 parks Boards with Indigenous majority; ultimate authority of the Director of Parks Australia is under review Indigenous tenure, with 99-year leases to the government for management One of the joint-managed parks includes marine estate; no marine tenure No ILUAs exist over the 3 joint-managed parks Australian Government supports many ranger groups, including one in a joint-managed park Boards are developing joint management plans Australian Government supports numerous IPAs, several that overlap with marine parks, and 9 TUMRAs in the GBR ACT None An interim advisory board established in 2001 has been disbanded None n/a None None The Namadgi National Park Plan of Management 2007 was prepared with Traditional Owner advice None NSW Formal joint management in 5 parks Board with Indigenous majority Indigenous tenure, with 30-year leases to the government for management None ILUAs over parks establish an advisory committee NSW supports some groups (e.g. Darrunda Wajaarr and Githabul rangers) Committees advise on Aboriginal area plans (8 current) Several IPAs, but none overlapping with national parks or conservation reserves NT Formal joint management in 33 parks Board with a majority of Traditional Owners Indigenous tenure with leases except for 1 park, which does not lease to government 1 joint-managed park without marine tenure ILUAs bind parties to joint management since 2005 NT grants provided to existing ranger groups Jointly developed plans, except 3 parks where plan is developed by government Numerous IPAs but none overlap the NT parks Qld Formal joint management in 29 parks (28 in Cape York Peninsula) IMAs between government and Indigenous organisations for joint decision-making Indigenous title, no leases to government required 9 TUMRAs in the GBR accredited under legislation. No marine tenure ILUAs form part of the package for joint management Qld supports 24 ranger groups, with more in the pipeline Management plans are jointly prepared under the IMA Several IPAs declared over existing terrestrial and marine parks SA Formal joint management in 9 parks Boards replace the director of the National Parks and Wildlife Service South Australia as decision-maker 2 of the joint-managed parks have Indigenoustitle, most have Crown title None ILUAs with native title consent determinations over most of the joint-managed parks SA does not fund ranger groups (some Indigenous rangers are employed in the parks service) Plans are jointly developed by the boards and committees and reflect Traditional Owners’ culture and themes Several IPAs, but none overlap the SA parks and protected areas Tas None n/a Indigenous tenure on some lands that have become IPAs None None Tasmania does not fund ranger groups (some Indigenous rangers are employed in the parks service) Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area Management Plan commits to movement to joint management Several IPAs, but none overlap Tasmanian parks. Joint management between Indigenous people and a private company at Tebrakunna Vic Formal joint management in 26 parks Boards with a majority of Traditional Owners on them Indigenous title, no leases to government None Groups must withdraw from native title Victoria funds some projects of existing ranger groups Boards produce joint plan, most have an Indigenous-led Country plan first Several IPAs, one of which overlaps an existing conservation reserve (Budj Bim) WA Formal joint management in 28 existing and proposed parks (mainly in the Kimberley region) Joint decision-making through park council boards Diverse tenures, including several as Indigenous titles with leases to government Several joint-managed marine parks close to finalisation ILUAs form part of the package for joint management WA supports about 30 ranger groups Indigenous-led cultural planning as first step Numerous IPAs in WA but no overlap with the other parks and protected areas ACT = Australian Capital Territory; GBR = Great Barrier Reef; ILUA = Indigenous Land Use Agreement; IMA = Indigenous Management Agreement; IPA = Indigenous Protected Area; n/a =not applicable; NSW = New South Wales; NT = Northern Territory; Qld = Queensland; SA = South Australia; Tas = Tasmania; TUMRA = Traditional Use Marine Resource Agreement; Vic = Victoria; WA = Western Australia For more information, go toNational and international frameworks that support caring for Country Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on Linkedin Share this link
Example Ecosystem services model Outcomes Indigenous carbon abatement projects Carbon credits through voluntary agreements via the Emissions Reduction Fund Estimated value of $30 million Health and social benefits Restoring traditional burning practices Improved landscape heterogeneity Improved condition of mammals, birds and vegetation Rebuilding cultural identity Improved Indigenous wellbeing in northern Australia (Sangha et al. 2018) Warddeken – carbon abatement and biodiversity conservation Carbon credits to ConocoPhillips Kabulwarnamyo outstation, 14 balabbala (traditional shade shelters) Built school for children to return to living on Country. The Nawarddeken Academy registered as a school in 2018 SVA documented social, environmental, economic and cultural benefits. Value of outcomes is $55.4 million for financial years 2009–15, an ROI of $3.40 for every invested dollar (Robertson 2019) Northern Great Barrier Reef – Kalan Enterprises, Cape York Partnership, James Cook University and CSIRO Managing Country, wildlife and water systems via partnerships Fire management Water quality improvement in Cape York, which benefits the Great Barrier Reef Healthy people, healthy Country and healthy culture Income from ecosystem services Enhancing social benefits, such as employment, satisfaction, connection to Country for rangers, meaningful work (Barber et al. 2017, CSIRO 2021d) ‘Our dream is to bring our Country back to life like it was before, by being on Country to protect our sites and share our proud culture with the rest of the world’, Allan Creek (Snr), Kaantju Traditional Owner, Elder (Creek n.d.) SVA = Social Ventures Australia; ROI = return on investment For more information, go toCaring for Country Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on Linkedin Share this link
Demographic 2015–16 2016–17 2017–18 2018–19 2019–20 Indigenous employees 93% 95% 94% 94% 93% Gender split of employees n/a 36% women/64% men n/a 37% women/63% men 34% women/66% men IPA = Indigenous Protected Area; n/a = not available Source: NIAA (2021a) For more information, go toEnablers of caring for Country Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on Linkedin Share this link
Organisation Focus Cape York Land Council Native title representative body Native title services Capability building in post-determination phases Governance Central Land Council Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976 (Cth) Permits Mining agreements Traditional Owner native title rights Carry out obligations from agreements for mining and exploration Federation of Victorian Traditional Owners Corporation Peak body for Traditional Owners Legal rights under the Traditional Owner Settlement Act 2010 (Vic) Partners in government and industry decision-making about Country Building economic opportunities, such as the bushfoods project Policy and planning framework Indigenous Desert Alliance (IDA) 10 Deserts Project Advocacy for desert rangers; IDA Southern Desert Ranger Forum Species of the Desert Festival Ranger development Regional collaboration Kimberley Land Council Native title services for Kimberley Aboriginal peoples Heritage protection Agreement-making Post-determination services Ranger groups New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983 (NSW) Support for local Aboriginal Land Councils for claiming and managing Country Joint management arrangements assistance Advocacy Planning laws Community land and business plans Ngarrindjeri Regional Authority Indigenous water rights Nation building Northern Australian Indigenous Land and Sea Management Alliance Land and sea management Education and training Collaborative research projects; I-Tracker Project Culture-based economy Northern Land Council Permits under the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976 (Cth) Native title representative body Assist with land claims and negotiate on behalf of Traditional Owners Supervise and assist with land trusts Perform functions under laws such as the Aboriginal Sacred Sites Act 1989 (NT) and Territory Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act 1976 (NT) South West Aboriginal Land and Sea Council Native title representative body Claims and negotiations for Noongar people Settlement agreement Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre Community organisation – Aboriginal corporation Heritage and land management, language Negotiation of land returns Fishing rights and rangers For more information, go toEnablers of caring for Country Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on Linkedin Share this link
Outcome State Trend (1a) Indigenous people’s identities as cohesive communities of First Peoples and their associated connections to Australia’s land and seas are recognised and supported Very poor Very good: 0% Good: 0% Poor: 44% Very poor: 56% Improving/Unclear Improving: 33% Stable: 22% Deteriorating: 11% Unclear: 33% (1b) Indigenous people’s long and healthy lives support their caring for Country activities and obligations Very poor Very good: 10% Good: 10% Poor: 30% Very poor: 50% Improving Improving: 40% Stable: 20% Deteriorating: 20% Unclear: 20% (1c) Indigenous people’s cultures and languages are strong, supported and flourishing Poor Very good: 0% Good: 30% Poor: 60% Very poor: 10% Improving Improving: 50% Stable: 0% Deteriorating: 40% Unclear: 10% (2a) Areas of Australia’s land and seas covered by or subject to, Indigenous people’s legal rights or interests are increased Poor Very good: 0% Good: 40% Poor: 50% Very poor: 10% Improving Improving: 70% Stable: 0% Deteriorating: 20% Unclear: 10% (2b) Indigenous people maintain a distinctive cultural, spiritual, physical and economic relationship through sufficient access to their land and waters Very poor Very good: 0% Good: 0% Poor: 40% Very poor: 60% Improving Deteriorating Improving: 30% Stable: 20% Deteriorating: 30% Unclear: 20% (2c) The health of Australia’s lands and seas underpins the distinctive cultural, spiritual, physical and economic connections with First Peoples Very poor Very good: 0% Good: 20% Poor: 30% Very poor: 50% Deteriorating Improving: 10% Stable: 20% Deteriorating: 70% Unclear: 0% (3a) Legacies of colonisation that degrade Indigenous people’s capacity, equity and cultural safety for governance and management of Australia’s land and seas are reduced Very high impact: 80% High: 20% Low: 0% Very low: 0% Improving Improving: 40% Stable: 10% Deteriorating: 40% Unclear: 10% (3b) Pressures that degrade environmental assets of significance to Indigenous people are reduced Very high impact: 70% High: 30% Low: 0% Very low: 0% Deteriorating Improving: 10% Stable: 10% Deteriorating: 70% Unclear: 10% (3c) Environmental Pressures that degrade cultural and environmental knowledge and practices for caring for Country, and cross-generational transmission of these, are reduced Very high impact: 80% High: 20% Low: 0% Very low: 0% Deteriorating Improving: 10% Stable: 10% Deteriorating: 80% Unclear: 0% (3d) Socio-economic Pressures that degrade cultural and environmental knowledge and practices for caring for Country, and cross-generational transmission of these, are reduced Very high impact: 60% High: 40% Low: 0% Very low: 0% Deteriorating Improving: 20% Stable: 20% Deteriorating: 30% Unclear: 30% (4a) Appropriate use and cross-generational transfer of Indigenous knowledge and practices in caring for Country is increased Ineffective Very effective: 0% Effective: 0% Partially effective: 60% Ineffective: 40% Improving Improving: 70% Stable: 20% Deteriorating: 10% Unclear: 0% (4b) Indigenous protected areas are comprehensive, adequate, representative and appropriately managed Ineffective Very effective: 0% Effective: 10% Partially effective: 60% Ineffective: 30% Improving Improving: 30% Stable: 20% Deteriorating: 20% Unclear: 30% (4c) Indigenous people’s self-determined governance of Australia’s land and seas is recognised and supported Partially effective Very effective: 0% Effective: 0% Partially effective: 60% Ineffective: 40% Improving Improving: 40% Stable: 10% Deteriorating: 20% Unclear: 30% (4d) Indigenous people’s capacity to manage and use the resources of Australia’s land and seas is increased Partially effective Very effective: 0% Effective: 0% Partially effective: 70% Ineffective: 30% Improving Improving: 50% Stable: 20% Deteriorating: 20% Unclear: 10% (4e) Indigenous people’s distinctive relationships with and obligations for caring for Country are recognised and implemented in state, national and international legislation, regulations and policies Partially effective Very effective: 0% Effective: 0% Partially effective: 40% Ineffective: 60% Improving Improving: 40% Stable: 30% Deteriorating: 20% Unclear: 10% For more information, go toApproach Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on Linkedin Share this link
State, impact or effectiveness Confidence Trend Confidence General agreement with experts indicating only 2 similar categories: very good/very high/very effective and/or good/high/effective very poor/very low/ineffective and/or poor/low/partially effective High (well established) General agreement with >70% of experts indicating one of the 3 categories: improving stable deteriorating High (well established) Moderate level of agreement with >70% of experts indicating only 2 similar categories: very good/very high/very effective and/or good/high/effective very poor/very low/ineffective and/or poor/low/partially effective Medium (established) Moderate level of agreement with >70% of experts indicating: improving or stable deteriorating or stable Medium (established) Substantial level of disagreement with <70% of experts indicating 2 similar categories Low (unresolved) Substantial level of disagreement with <70% of experts indicating categories improving or stable deteriorating or stable or majority indicating unclear Low (unresolved) For more information, go toApproach Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on Linkedin Share this link