Papers by Michael Limerick
‘Looking after family ’ or ‘looking after community’? The role of a whole-of-
An index of community engagement toolkits, guides, manuals, templates and training courses assess... more An index of community engagement toolkits, guides, manuals, templates and training courses assessed for their suitability for rural-remote and Indigenous councils. Improved community engagement is one of the key priorities identified in ACELG’s Capacity Building Strategy for Rural-remote and Indigenous Local Government. Research by ACELG has identified that Rural-Remote and Indigenous councils want more practical support and assistance to build their skills and capacity for community engagement. ACELG has reviewed the availability of community engagement toolkits, guides, manuals, templates and training courses available to local government, and assessed their suitability for Rural-Remote and Indigenous councils. This page contains information and links for a wide range of community engagement resources that may be useful for Rural-Remote and Indigenous Councils.
Indigenous law bulletin, 2001
The research team thanks all of the participants who met with the team or provided valuable infor... more The research team thanks all of the participants who met with the team or provided valuable information for the research. The team also gratefully acknowledges the feedback of many stakeholders on the draft report.
In Australian Indigenous policy, the 1970s heralded the beginning of a shift from paternalistic p... more In Australian Indigenous policy, the 1970s heralded the beginning of a shift from paternalistic policies of assimilation and integration to an approach that sought to facilitate greater self-determination for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. New Indigenous representative and service delivery organizations emerged at the national level, culminating in the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC), and at the regional level. At the local level, administration of Indigenous populations by church missions and state government authorities gave way to new corporate models for Indigenous community governance, with structures ranging from small, incorporated associations to full-fledged local governments. A significant diversity of Indigenous governance models has evolved in the past three decades, the product of an enthusiasm for policy experimentation and the fragmented government involvement in Indigenous affairs that is characteristic of Australia’s federali...
This paper presents the findings of an investigation into models for the funding and delivery of ... more This paper presents the findings of an investigation into models for the funding and delivery of local government services in remote Indigenous communities in Australia. This research reviewed and analysed models and approaches in various jurisdictions across Australia and elsewhere to identify key principles and success factors underpinning leading practices and innovative solutions to current challenges in service delivery. A case study approach was used employing a combination of desktop research and telephone interviews with selected policymakers and practitioners, complemented by a review of current academic and policy literature on remote service delivery. Six case studies were chosen for in-depth investigation based on their potential to yield valuable information that could be used to design future funding and service delivery models. A set of guiding principles critical to the design of any model for funding and delivering local government services to remote Indigenous comm...
The Theory and Practice of Local Governance and …, 2008
Australian Journal of Public Administration, 2009
Thesis Chapters by Michael Limerick
Improving Aboriginal community governance is increasingly recognised as pivotal to closing the ga... more Improving Aboriginal community governance is increasingly recognised as pivotal to closing the gap in social and economic outcomes between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Australians. The past decade has seen a shift in Indigenous policy from a preoccupation with national governance structures and a broader human rights agenda to a focus on governments engaging directly with local Indigenous communities to address the specific manifestations of Indigenous disadvantage. In discrete Aboriginal settlements, community governments are central to this new strategy, both as advocates for community needs and as agencies for program and service delivery. Yet Aboriginal Councils have had a chequered history, leading to persistent misgivings about their capacity to achieve desired outcomes.
There is a dearth of empirical evidence about ‘what works and what doesn’t’ in the unique and challenging context of Aboriginal community governance. The current study was motivated by the desire to discover what is required for an Aboriginal Council to be successful in achieving the outcomes desired by its constituents. Specifically, what governance attributes contribute to successful Aboriginal community government performance? Moreover, the research sought to delve deeper, to seek answers to the more fundamental question concerning the contextual, historical or cultural factors that shape a particular Aboriginal community’s approach to governance, whether successful or unsuccessful. The research involved three case studies of Aboriginal Councils, in the far north Queensland communities of Yarrabah, Hope Vale and Lockhart River.
Unlike previous studies of Indigenous community governance, the research design included a detailed assessment of the level of performance achieved by each Council, revealing one high-performing Council and two Councils whose performance was generally poor. An assessment of performance covering each Council outcome area is essential in order to make valid causal inferences about the specific determinants of Council performance. The study adopted a holistic conception of performance, focusing on the extent to which the Councils were achieving the particular set of outcomes desired by their constituents. Such an approach recognises that different communities seek different outcomes from their community governments and that desired outcomes will include not only deliverables such as programs and services but also preferences about governance processes, which will reflect cultural values. The study’s focus on Council performance recognises that, regardless of underlying questions about the appropriateness of imported Western governance structures, in practice residents of Indigenous communities express strong expectations that their elected Councils will deliver services and programs that meet their needs and aspirations and improve their quality of life. Within the constraints of prevailing legislative and policy frameworks, Indigenous communities exhibit considerable pragmatism in their efforts to optimise opportunities for self-determination through developing their community governments.
The case study data canvassed a wide range of governance attributes, institutions and practices suggested by the literature as important to governmental performance, in both indigenous and other contexts. The analysis found that a particular configuration of ‘orthodox’ governance principles and practices was necessary for successful Aboriginal Council performance, comprising: a strategic orientation based on a shared vision, a clear separation of powers, institutionalising the rule of law, positive and strategic engagement with government, targeted community engagement and an effective and efficient administration featuring a commitment to sound financial management, a stable workforce and human resource management practices that value, support and develop staff. The research further identified the key contextual factors that had shaped the distinct approaches to governance in the three communities. These are significant in explaining why some Aboriginal Councils adopt the particular mix of governance attributes that are necessary to improve their performance, while others do not. Key contextual factors include: a resource base of education and skills within the community that matches the needs of the community government; a pool of community members who have had a significant degree of exposure to the outside world; strongly egalitarian political norms underpinning a ‘whole of community’ orientation to governance; and a commitment to overcoming the historical legacy of dependency through a willingness to take responsibility for community government outcomes. These findings provide an indication about the strategies that need to be pursued for Aboriginal community governments to effectively meet the needs and aspirations of their constituents and realise their promise as instruments of self-determination.
Uploads
Papers by Michael Limerick
Thesis Chapters by Michael Limerick
There is a dearth of empirical evidence about ‘what works and what doesn’t’ in the unique and challenging context of Aboriginal community governance. The current study was motivated by the desire to discover what is required for an Aboriginal Council to be successful in achieving the outcomes desired by its constituents. Specifically, what governance attributes contribute to successful Aboriginal community government performance? Moreover, the research sought to delve deeper, to seek answers to the more fundamental question concerning the contextual, historical or cultural factors that shape a particular Aboriginal community’s approach to governance, whether successful or unsuccessful. The research involved three case studies of Aboriginal Councils, in the far north Queensland communities of Yarrabah, Hope Vale and Lockhart River.
Unlike previous studies of Indigenous community governance, the research design included a detailed assessment of the level of performance achieved by each Council, revealing one high-performing Council and two Councils whose performance was generally poor. An assessment of performance covering each Council outcome area is essential in order to make valid causal inferences about the specific determinants of Council performance. The study adopted a holistic conception of performance, focusing on the extent to which the Councils were achieving the particular set of outcomes desired by their constituents. Such an approach recognises that different communities seek different outcomes from their community governments and that desired outcomes will include not only deliverables such as programs and services but also preferences about governance processes, which will reflect cultural values. The study’s focus on Council performance recognises that, regardless of underlying questions about the appropriateness of imported Western governance structures, in practice residents of Indigenous communities express strong expectations that their elected Councils will deliver services and programs that meet their needs and aspirations and improve their quality of life. Within the constraints of prevailing legislative and policy frameworks, Indigenous communities exhibit considerable pragmatism in their efforts to optimise opportunities for self-determination through developing their community governments.
The case study data canvassed a wide range of governance attributes, institutions and practices suggested by the literature as important to governmental performance, in both indigenous and other contexts. The analysis found that a particular configuration of ‘orthodox’ governance principles and practices was necessary for successful Aboriginal Council performance, comprising: a strategic orientation based on a shared vision, a clear separation of powers, institutionalising the rule of law, positive and strategic engagement with government, targeted community engagement and an effective and efficient administration featuring a commitment to sound financial management, a stable workforce and human resource management practices that value, support and develop staff. The research further identified the key contextual factors that had shaped the distinct approaches to governance in the three communities. These are significant in explaining why some Aboriginal Councils adopt the particular mix of governance attributes that are necessary to improve their performance, while others do not. Key contextual factors include: a resource base of education and skills within the community that matches the needs of the community government; a pool of community members who have had a significant degree of exposure to the outside world; strongly egalitarian political norms underpinning a ‘whole of community’ orientation to governance; and a commitment to overcoming the historical legacy of dependency through a willingness to take responsibility for community government outcomes. These findings provide an indication about the strategies that need to be pursued for Aboriginal community governments to effectively meet the needs and aspirations of their constituents and realise their promise as instruments of self-determination.
There is a dearth of empirical evidence about ‘what works and what doesn’t’ in the unique and challenging context of Aboriginal community governance. The current study was motivated by the desire to discover what is required for an Aboriginal Council to be successful in achieving the outcomes desired by its constituents. Specifically, what governance attributes contribute to successful Aboriginal community government performance? Moreover, the research sought to delve deeper, to seek answers to the more fundamental question concerning the contextual, historical or cultural factors that shape a particular Aboriginal community’s approach to governance, whether successful or unsuccessful. The research involved three case studies of Aboriginal Councils, in the far north Queensland communities of Yarrabah, Hope Vale and Lockhart River.
Unlike previous studies of Indigenous community governance, the research design included a detailed assessment of the level of performance achieved by each Council, revealing one high-performing Council and two Councils whose performance was generally poor. An assessment of performance covering each Council outcome area is essential in order to make valid causal inferences about the specific determinants of Council performance. The study adopted a holistic conception of performance, focusing on the extent to which the Councils were achieving the particular set of outcomes desired by their constituents. Such an approach recognises that different communities seek different outcomes from their community governments and that desired outcomes will include not only deliverables such as programs and services but also preferences about governance processes, which will reflect cultural values. The study’s focus on Council performance recognises that, regardless of underlying questions about the appropriateness of imported Western governance structures, in practice residents of Indigenous communities express strong expectations that their elected Councils will deliver services and programs that meet their needs and aspirations and improve their quality of life. Within the constraints of prevailing legislative and policy frameworks, Indigenous communities exhibit considerable pragmatism in their efforts to optimise opportunities for self-determination through developing their community governments.
The case study data canvassed a wide range of governance attributes, institutions and practices suggested by the literature as important to governmental performance, in both indigenous and other contexts. The analysis found that a particular configuration of ‘orthodox’ governance principles and practices was necessary for successful Aboriginal Council performance, comprising: a strategic orientation based on a shared vision, a clear separation of powers, institutionalising the rule of law, positive and strategic engagement with government, targeted community engagement and an effective and efficient administration featuring a commitment to sound financial management, a stable workforce and human resource management practices that value, support and develop staff. The research further identified the key contextual factors that had shaped the distinct approaches to governance in the three communities. These are significant in explaining why some Aboriginal Councils adopt the particular mix of governance attributes that are necessary to improve their performance, while others do not. Key contextual factors include: a resource base of education and skills within the community that matches the needs of the community government; a pool of community members who have had a significant degree of exposure to the outside world; strongly egalitarian political norms underpinning a ‘whole of community’ orientation to governance; and a commitment to overcoming the historical legacy of dependency through a willingness to take responsibility for community government outcomes. These findings provide an indication about the strategies that need to be pursued for Aboriginal community governments to effectively meet the needs and aspirations of their constituents and realise their promise as instruments of self-determination.