Search results

This research aims to examine the performativity of corporate reports as an example of an accounting inscription that can frame the relationship between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander entities and their stakeholders. The framing and overflow effects of these reports have been explored to consider whether they strengthen or undermine the reputation and capability of these community-controlled entities.

Aligned with actor–network theory and a decolonising research protocol, qualitative interviews were conducted with senior managers and directors of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander entities and their key stakeholders to explore their experiences of corporate reporting. Additional analysis of these organisations' annual reports was conducted to corroborate key reporting themes.

This research has identified a dual role for corporate reporting, simultaneously framing performance against an expectation of failure, but with the potential for accounting inscriptions to highlight positive contributions to cultural and community priorities. It also indicates the need for sector specifics within the reporting frameworks and adequate resourcing for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander entities to meet reporting obligations.

This research makes policy-based recommendations in terms of user-driven and culturally informed performance measures. It also highlights the importance of adequate funding for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander entities to carry out meaningful performance evaluations beyond the preparation of financial statements.

One of the few empirical studies to capture the performativity of accounting inscriptions from the perspective of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander entities. This sector has received minimal attention within the accounting discipline, despite significantly contributing to community well-being and cultural protection. There is emancipatory potential via policy frameworks that resonate with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultural beliefs and practices.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate success factors pertinent to the management of Indigenous businesses through the identification of points of intervention at the systemic and structural levels. Through this approach, the economic and social values that First Nations communities attach to intangible Indigenous cultural heritage (ICH) and Indigenous cultural intellectual property (ICIP) may be both recognised and realised as assets.

This paper adopts a multidisciplinary approach to address a global issue of economic and social significance to First Nation peoples, their businesses and the Australian Aboriginal communities. The authors adopt a First Nation epistemological standpoint that incorporates theoretical perspectives drawn from a diverse range of fields and theories (Preston, 2013), as well as advocate the use of Indigenist methodology for research with First Nation peoples as it is underpinned by critical race theory.

The authors argue conceptually that accounting, accountability and auditing consideration are required to fully identify what is impacting the successful management of Indigenous enterprises. Specifically, in relation to accounting, Elders should be included to assist in valuing the intangible ICH and ICIP assets. Furthermore, the authors emphasise the need to improve the financial and commercial literacy levels of Indigenous entrepreneurs.

The authors prescribe the use of tools for the accounting treatment of ICH and ICIP as intangible assets within an Australian regulatory environment and define an auditing process and accountability model incorporating cultural, social and environmental measures. A central tenet of this model relates to improving levels of personal and commercial financial literacy in the First Nation participants. Collectively, these factors promote informed participation and decision-making, and may promulgate more sustainable outcomes.

Integrated thinking requires all these factors to be considered in a holistic manner, such that a First Nation enterprise and the wider Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people can understand, and make decisions based on, the overall impact it has on all their stakeholders and generally on the society, the environment and the economy.

This paper contributes to Australia’s strategic research priorities of maximising social and economic participation in society and improving the health and well-being of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. The authors address the inability of current Western accounting standards, practices and models to suitably account for communally held and protocol-bound intangible Indigenous cultural heritage and Indigenous cultural intellectual property assets.

This chapter focusses on the research methodology of the completed project, drawing on what Martin (2008) described as ‘Indigenist’ research traditions or practices. The project drew upon tenets of critical race theory which developed over the life of a university teaching and learning project to support the praxis of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander, or Indigenous,1 pre-service teachers on their final internships prior to graduating.

The broader project was conceptualised and framed within our prioritisation of Indigenist standpoint and critical race theory. Our project was designed to amplify the perspectives and voices of Indigenous students in situations where White, hegemonic relations appeared to constrain their potential achievement on practicum in socially unjust and often racist ways. Research into the achievement and success of Indigenous education graduates in Australia is dominated by non-Indigenous reporting, framed in deficit language of Indigenous ‘underachievement’, ‘barriers’, ‘lack’, and ‘disengagement’, rather than from their experience of injustice in their professional preparation as teachers.

The research design troubled how researchers like us ‘come to know’ Indigenous achievement in the higher education sector through the pre-service teachers’ words, impelling us to listen to stories of discrimination, rather than to official accounts of how they ‘failed’ to measure up to teacher standards. The attention to detail in the multi-site, micro-level practices in teacher education and the ways these unfold in situ for Indigenous students would not be possible without the Indigenist research methodology developed in partnership with Indigenous research colleagues and student co-researchers.

This chapter then serves to remind educational researchers that research is a practice and has practice architectures with particular hegemonic arrangements which have not transpired to serve the interests of Indigenous peoples. Honouring Indigenist standpoint and employing critical race theory in research design thus means paying particular and careful attention to the work that research practices do, on, to, and with communities, not normative (colonial) crafting of the praxis research problem.

One’s standpoint and consequent research paradigm impacts how we conduct research, including study design, analyses interpretation and dissemination of results. In 2017, the authors began PhD, studying the potential barriers to aftercare treatment for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children aged under 16 who had sustained a burn injury in one of five major hospitals in Australia. The paper aims to discuss this issue.

As Aboriginal PhD students, the authors are conducting research using Aboriginal ontology as a framework, which is based on a holistic framework with interconnectedness, person-centred care and Aboriginal ways of knowing as the foundation. The framework has been shaped by the first author’s knowing, being and doing, and the authors’ worldview has informed and shaped the standpoint and the way the research has been developed and conducted.

It was important for the authors to have a connectedness to each aspect of the research and to each individual person that shared their story: this was paramount to the ways of being.

This connectedness stems from growing up on the authors’ country and learning from elders, from the connection to all entities living around, within and with the authors. The Indigenous research methodology was used throughout the study, including yarning and Dadirri, a way of deep listening and learning, as the basis for interviewing.

This paper aims to examine the nature and level of disclosures on engagement with Aboriginal communities by Australian mining companies.

Content analysis of annual and sustainability reports of Australian Stock Exchange listed companies was undertaken to address the central research aim of this paper. An Aboriginal engagement framework was developed based on the five dimensions suggested by Reconciliation Australia.

The findings of the study report an overall low level of disclosures on Aboriginal engagement by mining companies and reveal that corporate disclosures largely focus on Land and Native title agreements, Aboriginal employment and corporate investment in Aboriginal socio-economic development. The least reported issues include Aboriginal immersion experience, Aboriginal inclusion in leadership roles and commitment to the reconciliation process. The findings of the study suggest that although corporate engagement practices have started to recognise and incorporate marginalised stakeholder rights and issues, only a few companies have created necessary avenues to empower Aboriginal communities. Regarding the reconciliation process, the findings reveal that the companies are mostly reporting on only three out of the five dimensions of the framework.

This study provides a better understanding of the current state of Aboriginal engagement practices in the mining sector, in particular the issues and gaps in reporting Aboriginal engagement to align it with the national reconciliation process, which will be useful for policymakers and, possibly, standard setters to develop future Aboriginal engagement and disclosure policies.

In spite of the rapid development of corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure, disclosure of corporate impacts on Aboriginal people and reconciliation with Aboriginal communities has been given little attention in business CSR practice and previous CSR disclosure literature. This research fills this gap and investigates the increasing uptake of Aboriginal engagement disclosures by business corporations.

The Australian Government recognises an obligation to ensure that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders (Australia’s First Peoples) are included in the integration of genomics into the healthcare system. First Peoples inclusion in this area requires going beyond general principles for First Peoples health research. This extra need exists for historical reasons as well as the need to maintain connections between patients, participants and communities and between the bio-specimens and data contributing to the resources underpinning genomics. The National Centre for Indigenous Genomics (NCIG) at the Australian National University in Canberra, Australia, has developed a framework that addresses these requirements through its dedicated First Peoples governance and enduring community engagement processes relating to stored heritage materials, data management and culturally agreed terms for collection preservation and potential use into the future. This chapter incorporates a First Peoples perspective on the NCIG by describing the practical application of ‘doing the right thing’, proceeding at ‘the pace of trust’, obtaining informed consent as part of enduring relationships, acknowledging cultural perspectives, understanding diversity of views and cultural practices within and between communities and respecting the need for community ownership and self-determined mobilisation of First Peoples involvement with research. This culturally appropriate methodology has been developed in partnership with individuals, family groups and community leaders, who are directly involved in genomic research. It provides a model for First Peoples to play an invested and sustaining role in the future development of genome science and precision medicine.

The colonial history of Australia has been a struggle between Indigenous peoples and the colonisers over Country. This is often represented as a struggle over land – it's control and use. Yet, for Indigenous people, land was never simply an economic commodity to be exploited. It was and is ‘Country’ in a deeper sense of the word, a fundamental part of Indigenous cosmology and a necessary foundation to a person's and group's ontology or being in the world. Country, then, can be conceptualised as both a physical and metaphysical domain. Indeed, both domains are inseparably intertwined. The struggle over Country remains core to understanding the social and political place of Indigenous people within Aboriginal law and within the criminal law and institutions of the coloniser. Further, this ongoing struggle goes to the heart of understanding why Indigenous people start their discussions on reform and change within the criminal justice system with a demand for recognition, negotiation and respect for Indigenous self-determination and a demand to see Indigenous people as colonised peoples.

Traditional fire practices are explored so as to understand transformative relationships to Country and as an analogy for developments in Indigenous Health. Stories of fire encompass the resistance of Indigenous Australians to colonial dispossession. Stories of fire engage Indigenous communities with law and culture and from this with health. Transformative knowledges can be built upon re-kindling Indigenous land and law practices through fire practices. Building relationships with fire and burning practices corresponds with the developing sustainable health and cultural practices across Indigenous communities.