Participation to Partnerships: An Exploration of Reconciliation, Co-management and their Interconnection in the South Australian Context
Contemporary ecological and political crises – ranging from climate change and biodiversity loss to conflicts over territory and sovereignty – pose considerable challenges to human and more-than-human coexistence. These crises continue despite growing efforts to manage them, which is partially due to the fact that the former are deeply interconnected and the latter are not. This study explores the importance of integrating these efforts in the South Australian context. Specifically, it investigates (i) the contribution of the state’s reconciliation initiatives to human coexistence, (ii) the contribution of the state’s co-management program to human and more-than-human coexistence as well as (iii) the implications of their existing and potential interconnection. A theoretical framework that integrates elements of Indigenous methodologies and post-structuralism and an embedded case study design were employed for this investigation, with reconciliation and co-management representing the two subunits of analysis. On this basis, collaborations were established with groups and individuals involved in these fields, and data was collected using in-depth interviews, the observation of co-management meetings and the selection of relevant documents. Parallel thematic analyses were conducted to produce initial findings, which were further refined through feedback meetings with the groups and individuals involved in this study. These processes were guided by the principles of ethical and culturally safe research in Indigenous contexts and Lincoln and Guba’s criteria for qualitative research integrity. Regarding reconciliation, findings reveal a comparatively high dissatisfaction with official reconciliation initiatives among Aboriginal people, which is connected to a lack of genuine opportunities to shape their design and implementation. However, they also reveal that the unique circumstances and aspirations of different Aboriginal groups and individuals mean that some choose to make the most of imperfect initiatives, while others choose to reject them. In recognition of this complexity, this study recommends the redistribution of direct and discursive control over reconciliation initiatives to the right people in each context and outlines initial steps towards it. Regarding co-management, findings reveal that co-management strengthens the management that occurs on the ground, but cannot fully make up for resource restrictions and external pressures. They further reveal that collaboration is restricted to park management matters and does not extend to decisions about the terms and conditions of this collaboration, which affects the realisation and realisability of Aboriginal people’s aspirations disproportionately. Moving forward, this study recommends a transition from co-management of protected areas to co-design and co-administration of the broader framework under which it occurs. Regarding the interconnection of reconciliation and co-management, findings reveal instances of mutual reinforcement, where progress in the space of reconciliation has benefitted co-management and vice versa, but also missed opportunities. They further illustrate that integrating the two fields can not only help avoid mutual harm and maximise mutual reinforcement, but also drive their transformations by rendering existing limitations more visible. This study concludes that interconnected crises require equally interconnected solutions and clarifies that these must take the form of holistic situated solutions rather than one universal solution. To let them emerge, it calls for transitions from participation to partnerships on all scales.
community-based conservation; transitional justice; coexistence; Indigenous peoples; Australia; ontology
Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations