Conducting research with Indigenous people Indigenous ... - SSRN

Conducting Conducting research research with with Indigenous Indigenous people people and and communities communities Dr Judy Putt Dr Judyfor Putt Written the Indigenous Justice Clearinghouse Written for the Indigenous Justice Clearinghouse

Introduction Introduction Past critiques of the social sciences It is well known that Indigenous offenders Past critiques of on thethe social sciences focused primarily identity of the are overrepresented in the Australian focused primarily on the identity of the researcher and his or her(see relationship criminal justice system Anthony researcher and his or her relationship with the ‘subject’ person, 2013: 55-71). As Indigenous at December 2014, with the ‘subject’ Indigenous person, but over time more the Indigenous adult sophisticated imprisonment but over more sophisticated and was practical approaches haveof rate 12time times the general rate and practical approaches haveof emerged related to participantimprisonment (Australian Bureau emerged related 2015). to and participantfocused methodologies design. Statistics (ABS) Indigenous focused methodologies and design.as people are also overrepresented victims. example, people the available involving For Indigenous has involving Indigenous people has data aas2.3-3.7 timesbiased higher been indicate criticised inherently been criticised as inherently biased sexual assault victimisation and disempowering (Henryrate, et while al and disempowering (Henry et al the Indigenous victimisation 2004; Davey andhomicide Day 2008; Kidman 2004; Davey and Day 2008; Kidman rate Australia was 20.5 times 2007;in South Sherwood 2010). Recent 2007; Sherwood 2010). Recent higher (ABS 2014). responses that seek to improve all responses that seek to improve all forms of research practice involving forms of research practice involving Previous Indigenous Indigenous people in AustraliaJustice and Indigenous people in Australia and Clearinghouse (IJC) briefsfunding have internationally, include internationally, include funding examined the principles that apply when sentencing Indigenous offenders institutes, dedicated funding for institutes, dedicated funding for (Anthony and and the research operation Indigenous 2010) academics Indigenous academics and research of Indigenous sentencing courts networks, and ethical guidelines. networks, and ethical guidelines. (Marchetti 2009). These issues will Some of the most interesting and Some of the most interesting and not be revisited in detail, or although the substantial Indigenous-led informed substantial Indigenous-led or informed High Court’s decisions in Bugmy research that has emerged in the v research that has emerged in the The (2013) 571 and past Queen 20 years has 249 oftenCLR related to past 20 years has often related to Munda v Western Australia (2013) health, although such innovative health, such 249 CLRalthough 600 should be innovative noted. The approaches remain under-developed approaches remain under-developed abolition in 2012 ofdomain. the Northern in the criminological Today, in the criminological domain. Territory community courts and Murri Indigenous researchers argue theToday, focus Indigenous researchers argue the focus sentencing courts in Queensland (see should be on working with Indigenous should on working Indigenous Marchetti & hold Ransley 2014) is and also people be who the with knowledge people who hold the knowledge and relevant in this context.

This briefof highlights some current expertise their circumstances past expertise of circumstances past and present, and on positive change initiatives in their operation in Australian and present, and on positive change (Smithwhich 1999; courts seekSherwood to make the2010). court (Smith 1999; Sherwood 2010). process more responsive to the needs This brief provides an overview of ofinnovative Further ThisIndigenous brief provides an overview of and participants. exemplary research innovativeof and exemplary research sources support, example approaches and practicefor undertaken approaches and practice undertaken Aboriginal and victim support with and bylegal Indigenous communities with and by Indigenous communities services and tojudicial education, that is relevant crime and justice that is relevant to crime and research. A number of justice critical including judicial benchbooks, are research. A number ofincluding: critical questions guided this brief,paper then considered. The also questions guided this brief, including: examines language and What issues have around been the research communication. It is acknowledged What have been the research topics and methods undertaken in methods undertaken in that topics most and of inthe initiatives described Australia recent years on justice Australia in recent years on justice hereissues have not formallypeople? evaluated, andbeen Indigenous issues and Indigenous people? What constitutes good practice the (then) Standing Council on practice Lawand and What constitutes good in criminological research in criminological research and Justice (SCLJ 2013) as examples of evaluation? evaluation? ‘good practice’ or ‘promising practice’.1 What are some of the key What are some the key considerations whenof conducting considerations when conducting Court innovations research with Indigenous people research with Indigenous people and communities? and communities? Blagg (2008: 126) constitute has notedgood that What should What should constitute good ‘[t]hepractice much maligned system has and whatcourt are examples? practice and what are examples? What are the main practical more able to accommodate alternative What are the main with practical challenges associated such challenges associated with such strategies for dealing with offending practice? thanpractice? was assumed to be the case’. This The brief is divided into four sections, section presents a cross-jurisdictional The brief is research divided intopractice four sections, covering andto overview of court initiatives designed covering research practice and context, ethical frameworks and review assist Indigenous defendants, victims context, ethical frameworks and review processes, practical constraints and and witnesses. Theseconstraints initiatives were processes, and challenges, practical and promising practice. challenges, and promising practice. Where appropriate, examples are ofWhere courtfrom websites and supporting appropriate, examples are drawn other countries, most drawn from other countries, most materials, and their objectives include: notably New Zealand and Canada. notably New Zealand and Canada.

www.indigenousjustice.gov.au www.indigenousjustice.gov.au

Brief 15, January 2013 Brief 15, January 2013 addressing cultural and and linguistic Research practice Research practice and barriers; context context engaging Indigenous communities in criminal justice‘business’ processes; The research The research ‘business’

Research be broadly divided facilitating canaccess to support Research can isbeinvestigator-driven broadly divided into that which services; into and that that which which is is investigator-driven policy-driven, with and that which is policy-driven, ensuring the generating court process is with fair; the former proposals the former generating proposals through thesis work and academic and through thesis work and for academic interest that are submitted funding reducing Indigenous offenders’ interest that are submitted for funding whilst the latter arises primarily contact with the mainstream whilst the latter arises primarily through commissioned projectscourt and process.commissioned through and evaluations. Research projects institutions evaluations. Research institutions and funding bodies therefore play Specialist and fundingcourt bodies therefore play an important roleprocesses in supporting an important role in supporting researchsome and form setting Atlocally-driven the time of writing, of locally-driven research and setting national priorities for research that Indigenous sentencing court was national priorities for research that incorporates Indigenous perspectives operating in New South Wales (NSW), incorporates Indigenous perspectives or supports Indigenous or Victoria, Queensland, Southcontrol Australia, or supports Indigenous control or direction (Henry et al 2004). Western the Australian directionAustralia (Henry etand al 2004). Capital Territory evaluations see In terms of (for crime and justice In terms of 2009; crime and justice Aquilina et al. Borowski 2011; research, the main sources of research, the main sources of Cultural and funding Indigenous Research government and the kind of government funding and the kind of researchAustralia questions(CIRCA) that preoccupy Centre 2008; research questions that preoccupy policy makers means that much Fitzgerald 2008; Harris 2006; Morgan policy makers means that much of the research with Indigenous & Lewis 2010; see also SCLJ 2013). As of the research with Indigenous people reliesMurri on secondary noted above, sentencinganalysis courts people relies on secondary of administrative data and analysis national were abolished in Queensland in 2012, of administrative data and national surveys. Driven by governmental but a specialist Indigenous Sentencing surveys. Driven governmental agreements at theby national level, in List (ISL) now operates in 11 locations agreements the national level, in Australia, theatfocus is on monitoring across Queensland (Queensland Australia, the focus is on monitoring Indigenous over-representation in Department of Justice and AttorneyIndigenous in the criminal over-representation justice system and General (QDJAG) 2012b: 1). Although the criminal of justice system and evaluations programs and the ISL is ‘very similar’ to the Murri evaluations of programs initiatives that seek to ‘close and the initiatives that seek to ‘close the Court, it ‘provides additional support Standing Council on Law, Crime and Community Standing Council on Law and Justice Safety Law Committee and Justice

Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2611778

In d ig e n o u s

J u st i ce

C l ear i n g h o u se

placed in a cultural brokerage role. ethics approval in Australia (Graham and referrals program[s]’ and2010). ‘assists opportunity to complete Sherwood (2010) refers to programs tensions 2011; Kidmanto2007; Sherwood in addressing the underlying causes of to address their violent behaviour related to Indigenous researchers’ Considerable time may be required a ‘offenders responsibilities to their community todefendant’s plan and criminality’, develop a as partnership and the aim of making research a safe can referred to services as part of (Magistrates Court of Western Australia or becollaborative arrangement with bail Indigenous communities their undertaking, including drugoror (MCWA) 2014a). This initiative is people, whilst within a western organisations and to work obtainreadiness letters alcohol rehabilitation, currently beingworking evaluated (SCLJ 2013). academic environment. There is a of support from key representatives courses or enduing offending programs’ lack of documented perspectives from prior to submitting an application. For (C White, pers comm, 23 October Another West Australian initiative is community-based researchers, and example, Coram (2011) describes a the Aboriginal AlternativetheyDispute 2014). accounts of the strengths bring 12-month application process to obtain Resolution Service, which Canadian ‘aims to to the research process. approval from an ethics committee, for In addition, Remote Justice of reduce thehowever, incidence of Aboriginal research, suggests those a small scalethe study of a community the Peace (JP) (Magistrates Court) people’s involvement with theinvolved criminal who have been directly project involving young people. Program empowers Queensland’s justice certainly haveby more positive system providing anattitudes effective aboutculturally research appropriate than those who JP magistrates, most of whom are and formhadof their experiences, it is evident that there only heard about research in the Indigenous, to deal with offences dispute resolution’ (MCWA 2014b). are often gaps between the theory of community (Edwards et al 2008). against local laws and summary This service recognises that some of good research and practice (Blagg offences, as and wellDay as 2011; bail applications the issues affecting Aboriginal people 2011; Davey Sherwood and granting adjournments (QDJAG Dr Judy Putt include complex and sometimes 2010; Williams et al 2011). Despite the Academic research has certain Written the Indigenous Justice Clearinghouse 2012c; see alsothere Anthony 2014: best of for intentions, are inherent chronic intra-family values interand and practices thatfeuding are [1.5.980]). The program currently tensions between a commitment to and is another example of promising continually reinforced through the the principles of participatory operates in six areas, has trainedand and practice expertise of their circumstances past (SCLJ 2013). Introduction ethical in research andJPs, the and expectations and their present, and onreview positive change sworn over 200 has been role in peer of funding of funding agencies and academia. (Smith 1999; Sherwood 2010). assessments and acceptance of described as an example of promising Past critiques of the social sciences Community justice groups Strict adherence to ethical guidelines research products (Sherwood 2010). practice (SCLJ 2013). An independent focused primarilyprotocols on the identity the This brief provides anjustice overview of and research doesof not NSW has community groups In many circumstances, funding evaluation of the program found that researcher and his or her relationship innovative and exemplary research necessarily translate into day-to-day (CJGs) operating locations. These applications andin 20 research outputs stakeholders were ‘almost unanimous’ with ‘subject’ person, approaches and practice undertaken goodthe practice. NorIndigenous may there be the groups comprise of Aboriginal people in their the timeframe program, due with and by Indigenous communities funding, capacity and to but oversupport time for more sophisticated examining local crime and offending in part to its ‘potential to build capacity allow all parties to devote the energy that is relevant to crime justice and practical approaches have al 2004), although this isand changing problems and developing ways to and resources to follow through on the for Indigenous communities to own research. A number of critical with the NHMRC grant guidelines emerged related to participantaddress these issues. They including: work with ideal. questions guided this brief, solutions to offending within them’ for medical and health research focused methodologies and design. different parts of the criminal justice with Indigenous communities now (Allison et al. 2012: 25). A ‘great strength’ From a non-Indigenous perspective, What have been the research system to improve its effectiveness for requiring applicants to demonstrate of the program was that ‘JPs spoke the involving Indigenous people has topics and methods undertaken in Indigenous people (NSW Justice and community engagement, capacity same language and shared the same subject to change and negotiation over Australia in recent years oninitiative justice been criticised as inherently biased Attorney-General 2009). This cultural background ascontrol the people who time and the ceding of and issues and Indigenous people? and disempowering (Henry et real orientation before in thinking (Coram 2012; appeared them’ (2012: 27). 2004; Davey and Day 2008; Kidman andWhat to collaborators and partners – constitutes good practice promising practice (SCLJ 2013). Davey and Day 2008; Nicholls 2009). andinlonger term, to Indigenous people 2007; Sherwood 2010). Recent criminological research and Blagg (2011) states that researching some criticisms, including: concerns and social science is not always easy responses that domain seek toisimprove all The evaluation? Queensland CJGs Program in the Aboriginal easy with recruiting and retainingnever Indigenous to determine and to agree upon, let forms of research practice or straightforward, whether involving working What inareover some of the key operates 55 locations and JPs; the lack of clear or consistent alone deliver. Indigenous peopleurban in Australia with an Aboriginal group or and in a considerations when conducting criteria which Sherwood matters to(2010) refer to is estimated to support over 5,000 remote about community. research with internationally, include funding Challenges of Indigenous community-based offenders and people 3,000 JPs; the an lackIndigenous of legal assistance; the Indigenous (herself researcher) and communities? collaborative approaches include victims of crime each year (QDJAG found a common refrain funding amongst the theWhat agendashould for research, the power institutes, dedicated for see also constitute Anthony good 2014: option; andpeople disproportionately harsh 2012a; Aboriginal she talked with, differentials, and ownership and Indigenous academics and research practice and whatCJG are examples? [1.5.980]). Most members was that researchers did notcompared ‘listen’ sentencing outcomes, when identity of the research project, with networks, andtheethical guidelines. are Elders, Persons’, What are ‘Respected the to main and did not get story ‘right’. As she political dimensions the practical process with the Magistrates Courts. Some of the most interesting and associated such Traditional Owners and members of the underlines, being able to listen and andchallenges outcomes (Edwards etwith al 2008). substantial Indigenous-led or informed practice? hear is an active process that requires Indigenous community. CJGs encourage Other challenges may relate to the The Barndimalgu Court in Western openness that andacan be discomforting. research has emerged in court the scepticism and resistance from diversionary processes (including Australia is pre-sentencing The brief is divided into four sections, Another risk, according to Davey Indigenous gatekeepers (Davey past 20hears years family has often to the ISL) and ‘develop networks and with which andrelated domestic covering research practice and and Day (2008), is that of overDay 2008) and as Blagg (2011) points health, although such innovative government agenciesand to review ensure violence matters involving Aboriginal other context, frameworks out, theethical needs of non-Indigenous approaches remain under-developed that issues impacting on Indigenous people (Western Australian Department processes, reifying the construct of Indigenous researcherspractical may not constraints be a priorityand in in the criminological domain. Today, are addressed’ (QDJAG of Attorney-General (WADAG) and communities challenges, and promising practice. identity or reproducing stereotypes. Indigenous communities. Indigenous researchers argue theServices focus 2012a: They also examples make cultural Where 2). appropriate, are Department of Corrective For Indigenous researchers, there There from can toother be should on workingoffenders with Indigenous drawn countries,notions most the different Magistrates Court nd: 1). be It ‘provides with the submissions of accountability – to funding notably New Zealand andthe Canada. people who hold the knowledge and body, to the university and the 2

and identify andat promote be sometimes odds withsupporting the need programs that assist Magistrates in to be accountable and respectful of their decision-making. An evaluation Indigenous cultural priorities. Davey ofand thisDay program 2010) found (2008)(KPMG found this occurred data collection with strategic the nonit during was closely aligned –with Indigenousinitiatives researchers to government at theseeking state and ensure compassionate professional national level. It also had widespread distance whilst Indigenous colleagues support amongst Indigenous wanted to assist and counsel the community leaders, community-based men, mindful of the wellbeing of service providers, and justice system participants. Coram (2011) found that stakeholders. However, therecording quality she was criticised for not and effectiveness of the program ‘negative’ observations in were her research but sheconstrained argues she seen as severely bycould poor not retain the trust of thegovernance community program resourcing and if she did so. arrangements. In addition, the

Conducting research with Indigenous people and communities Evaluation challenges

Brief 15, January 2013 reliably estimated using the available Much of the research that Indigenous people have experienced relates to evaluations, and may be largely a weakness of the program. consultation process. As Williams et al Research practice and (2011) stress, the AIATSIS guidelines Procedural support for court on Indigenous research do not deal context participants

the particular challenges surrounding The research ‘business’ NSW runs theofAboriginal Service evaluations programsClient and initiatives Specialists Program in the local courts. Research can be broadly divided that involve Indigenous people. The program provides advice into that which is investigator-driven The common business model and for and that which is policy-driven, with support to Indigenous defendants and evaluations adopted by governments the former generating proposals is to to contract external or independent aims minimise breaches of court groups tothesis undertake the work with the through work and academic orders (Marchetti & Ransley 2014). interest that are submitted for funding determined the contracting party. whilst the by latter arises primarily Collaborative and participatory through commissioned projects and available to support any party to a court research methodologies do not lend evaluations.(applicants, Research respondents institutions proceeding themselves to bodies short timeframes. They and funding therefore play and defendants) in the Magistrates also note that they are relatively easy an important role in supporting Court of Victoria (MCV) (eg the Family locally-driven research and setting Violence Court Division)and (MCV 2014b). are limited resources, limited time national priorities for research that There are also Koori Community incorporates Indigenous perspectives the heart of true partnerships. or supports Indigenous control or Courts, who assistetKoori participants in direction (Henry al 2004). Research instruments the court process and liaise with Koori In terms (MCV of crime justice communities 2014a).and In addition, standard the research instruments research, main sources of the Koori Victims of Crime Assistance that require funding adaption ortheredesign government and kind of Tribunal (VOCAT) List operates within (Andersonquestions 2008). Survey questions research that preoccupy are asked slightlymeans differently in remote policy makers that much victims of crime (Courts and Tribunals and non-remote contexts in NATSISS of the research with Indigenous Victoria 2014). Blagg Another program (ABS 2010), (2008) refers people reliesand on secondary analysis to the development of aiscommunity managed by the VDHS the Koori of administrative data and national safety questionnaire that required Intensive Program, which surveys. Support Driven by governmental reformulating questions about safety works with young people to help them agreements at the national level, in and social problems. This initial comply withthe the focus conditions of their bail Australia, is on monitoring work was further built upon in a large orIndigenous deferred sentences (Department in scale survey over-representation of community safety ofthe Human Services Victoria (DHSV) criminal system and and wellbeing injustice remote communities 2014). evaluations of 2011). programs and (Shaw and d’Abbs initiatives that seek to ‘close the In certain contexts, due regard should

4

www.indigenousjustice.gov.au

Standing Council on

Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2611778Law and Justice

In d ig e n o u s ethics approval in Australia (Graham The South 2007; Australian Courts 2011; Kidman Sherwood 2010). Administration Authority (SACAA) Considerable time may be required (2014) 10 Aboriginal Justice to plan employs and develop a partnership or collaborative arrangement with Indigenous communities or organisations to are obtain letters the community.and AJOs permanently of support from key representatives prior to submitting an application. For Youth Court, as well as servicing example, Coram (2011) describes a 14 other application metropolitan, regional and 12-month process to obtain remote courts. approval from an ethics committee, for a small scale study of a community Western Australia has Aboriginal project involving young people. Court

J u st i ce

C l ear i n g h o u se

placed in a cultural brokerage role.

Social support court Sherwood (2010) for refers to tensions participants related to Indigenous researchers’ responsibilities to their community In Victoria, the Koori Youth Justice and the aim of making research a safe Program was developed in response to

people, whilst working within a western into Aboriginal Deaths There in Custody academic environment. is a lack of documented (RCIADIC) (DHSVperspectives 2014). from The community-based researchers, and program employs Koori youth justice accountstoofprovide the strengths bring workers access they for young to the research process. Canadian Aboriginal offenders to appropriate research, however, suggests those role models and culturally sensitive who have been directly involved support, and casework. The certainlyadvocacy have more positive attitudes program targets young people at risk about research than those who had eight courts. A 2011 evaluation found their experiences, it is evident that there ofonly offending, as wellresearch as offenders on heard about in the Aboriginal judicial are often gapsstakeholders, between the theory of community (Edwards al 2008). community-based and et custodial orders good research and practice (Blagg (Courts and Tribunals Victoria 2014). found themandhighly valuable (see 2011; Davey Day 2011; Sherwood The SCLJ (2013: 43) noted that a Dr Judy Putt In 2010; Williams et al 2011). Despite the SCLJ 2013). addition, the MCWA Academic review of thisresearch program inhas 2010certain ‘found Written for the Indigenous Justice Clearinghouse best of intentions, there are inherent website refers to the Aboriginal Visitors values and practices that are that overall the approach and types tensions between a commitment to Scheme, which provides support and continually reinforced through the ofexpertise interventions provided by the Koori the principles participatory and of their circumstances past counselling for ofAboriginal detainees Introduction ethical research and the expectations Youth Justice Program are in line with and present, and on positive change their role in peer review of funding and prisoners. of funding agencies and academia. promising practices’. (Smith 1999; Sherwood 2010). assessments and acceptance of Past critiques of the social sciences Strict adherence to ethical guidelines research products (Sherwood 2010). focused primarilyprotocols on the identity the In an Aboriginal This brief provides an overview of and Tasmania, research doesof court not In many circumstances, funding Further sources of research researcher and his or her relationship innovative and exemplary necessarily translate into day-to-day applications and research outputs with ‘subject’ person, support to Aboriginal child support approaches and practice undertaken goodthe practice. NorIndigenous mayadult thereand be the with and by Indigenous communities funding, and timeframe to but overofcapacity time sophisticated victims familymore violence (including allow all parties to devote the energy that isare relevant to crime justice There aalthough number of other sources and practical approaches have referral to appropriate counselling and al 2004), this isand changing and resources to follow through on the research. A number of critical support for Indigenous the NHMRC grant participants guidelines emerged related to them participantother services) and guide through ofwith ideal. questions guided this brief, including: and health researchis court system. The following the justice system during after inforthemedical focused methodologies and and design. with Indigenous communities now not a comprehensive list, but provides court (Victim Support From aappearances’ non-Indigenous perspective, What have been the research requiring applicants to demonstrate some examples that seek to respond Services 2014). involving Tasmania Indigenous people has topics and methods undertaken in community engagement, capacity subject to change and negotiation over Australia in recent years on justice been criticised as inherently biased time SCLJ and the(2013) cedingdescribed of control and redefendants, victims and/or witnesses. The issues and Indigenous people? and disempowering (Henrythe et NSW al orientation in thinking (Coram 2012; Aboriginal Client Service 2004; Davey and Day 2008;Specialists Kidman andWhat to collaborators – constitutes and goodpartners practice Davey and Day 2008; Nicholls 2009). there is at to least one Aboriginal Program, Koori VOCAT Koori First, andinlonger term, Indigenous people 2007; Sherwood 2010). List, Recent criminological research and Blagg (2011) states that researching Legal Service in easy each andevaluation? social science (ALS) is not always Intensive Support South responses that domain seek Program, toisimprove all in the Aboriginal never easy to determineThese and toagencies agree upon, let provide Australian AJOs practice and involving Western jurisdiction. forms of research or straightforward, whether working What are some of the key alone deliver. a range of services, including legal Australian ACLOs examples Indigenous peopleurban inasAustralia with an Aboriginal group or and in aof considerations when conducting and representation, prisoner promising practice, and the Koori advice remote community. Sherwood (2010) research with people internationally, include funding Challenges of Indigenous community-based support, community education and (herself an Indigenous researcher) and communities? collaborative approaches include found a common refrain amongst the liaison, research, law reform and theWhat agendashould for research, the power institutes, dedicated funding for constitute good Aboriginal people shepractice. talked with, differentials, and ownership and advocacy. For example, the Victorian examples of good Blagg Indigenous academics and research practice and what are examples? was that researchers did not ‘listen’ identity of the research project, with ALS works with Koori communities has described Indigenous justice/ networks, andtheethical guidelines. What are the to main practical and did not get story ‘right’. As she thethe process topolitical exploredimensions ways to make justice Some of the most interesting and associatedetwith such underlines, being able to listen and andchallenges outcomes (Edwards al 2008). more equitable for Indigenous lynchpin the process, bringing their system substantial Indigenous-led or informed practice? hear is anofactive process that requires Other challenges may relate to the and seeks change attitudes local knowledge of offenders and their people openness and can be discomforting. research that has emerged in the scepticism and toresistance from The brief is divided into four sections, within mainstream services, such families to the table’ (2008: 132; see Another risk, according to Davey Indigenous gatekeepers (Davey and past 20 years has often related to covering research practice and as the police and courts. The SCLJ and Day (2008), is that of overalso Daly & Marchetti 2012: 465). Day 2008) and as Blagg (2011) points health, although such innovative context, ethical frameworks review (2013) considered anandexample out, the needs of this non-Indigenous approaches remain under-developed processes, practical constraints reifying the construct of Indigenous researchers may not be a priority in of promising practice. In addition,and the in the criminological domain. Today, challenges, and promising practice. identity or reproducing stereotypes. Indigenous communities. National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Indigenous researchers argue the focus Where appropriate, examples are Islander (NATSILS) was For Indigenous researchers, there There Legal can Services be different should be on working with Indigenous drawn from other countries,notions most of accountability – to funding notably New Zealand andthe Canada. people who hold the knowledge and body, to the university and the 3

established as the national body be sometimes at odds withpeak the need forto ALS agencies in 2007 (NATSILS be accountable and respectful of 2014). Its key cultural functionspriorities. include: Davey Indigenous and Day (2008) found this occurred during data collection with the level nonadvocating at the –national Indigenous researchers seeking to for the rights of Indigenous people ensure compassionate professional within the justice system; distance whilst Indigenous colleagues wanted to assist and counsel the working to ensure Indigenous men, mindful of the wellbeing of peoples’ equitable access to justice; participants. Coram (2011) found that and was criticised for not recording she ‘negative’ observations in her ensuring but thatsheALS agencies are research argues she could adequately to not retain thefunded trust ofand theequipped community ifprovide she did high so. quality and culturally competent legal assistance services.

Conducting research with Indigenous people and communities Evaluation challenges

Brief 15, January 2013

Much of theJustice research Indigenous The NT Chief hasthat described ALS people have experienced relates to evaluations, and may be largely a to the administration of justice’ (Riley consultation process. As Williams et al 2012: 10). Research practice and (2011) stress, the AIATSIS guidelines on Indigenous research do not deal context Each state and territory also has a legal aid organisation, some of which the particular challenges surrounding The research ‘business’ evaluations of programs and initiatives Research can Indigenous be divided that involve people. Indigenous people. Forbroadly example, Legal into that which is investigator-driven The common business model for Aid Queensland (nd) has developed and that which is policy-driven, with evaluations adopted by governments a brochure entitled ‘Best practice the former external generating proposals is to contract or independent guidelines for lawyers providing legal groups tothesis undertake work with the through workthe and academic services to Aboriginal and Torres interest that are submitted for funding Strait Islander [ATSI] clients’. This determined the contracting party. whilst the by latter arises primarily sets out commissioned 10 guiding in Collaborative and principles participatory through projects and relation to such issues as: effective research methodologies do not lend evaluations. Research institutions themselves short They communication, the timeframes. central role of and fundingto bodies therefore play also note that they are relatively easy community in the role lives in of Indigenous an important supporting clients, and theresearch complexand causes of locally-driven setting are limitedpriorities resources, limited time national forand research Indigenous overrepresentation in that the incorporates criminal justiceIndigenous system as perspectives both victims the heart of true partnerships. or defendants. supports Indigenous control or and Legal Aid Queensland direction (Henry et al 2004). also provides free seminars for lawyers Research instruments onIn communication skills and and cultural terms of crime justice considerations when representing standard the research instruments research, main sources of that require adaption redesign Indigenous clients andand anorthe Indigenous government funding kind of (Anderson 2008). Survey questions legal information hotline. of these research questions thatAllpreoccupy are asked slightly differently in remote initiatives are seenmeans by the SCLJ (2013) policy makers that much and non-remote contexts in NATSISS the research with practice. Indigenous asofexamples of promising (ABS 2010), Blagg (2008) refers people reliesand on secondary analysis to the development of a community of administrative dataagencies and national Many public prosecution have safety questionnaire that required surveys. Driven by governmental a reformulating witness assistance scheme questions about (WAS) safety agreements at the national level, in and social problems. This initial Australia, the focus is on monitoring was further built upon a large towork Indigenous witnesses andinvictims. Indigenous in scale survey over-representation of community safety the criminal injustice system and and wellbeing remote communities the Director of Public Prosecutions evaluations of 2011). programs and (Shaw and d’Abbs initiatives that seek to ‘close the In certain contexts, due regard should

4

www.indigenousjustice.gov.au

Standing Council on Law and Justice

In d ig e n o u s

J u st i ce

C l ear i n g h o u se

placed in a cultural brokerage role. sentencing Indigenous Sherwood (2010) refers to offenders tensions at the biennial NJCAresearchers’ Sentencing related to Indigenous Conference; to their community responsibilities and the aim of making research a safe a seminar on mental health in Indigenous communities, which people, whilst working within a western academic There with is aa sought to environment. provide participants lack of documented perspectives from better understanding of Indigenous community-based researchers, and approaches to health and the need accounts of the strengths they bring to provide culturally appropriate and to the research process. Canadian holistic mental health services to research, however, suggests those Indigenous people in the involved criminal who have been directly justice system; and certainly have more positive attitudes about research than those who had their experiences, it is evident that there only heard about research in the victims. waybetween of example, the South are oftenBy gaps the theory of of a recent Victorian Sentencing community (Edwards et al 2008). Australian Commissioner for (Blagg Victims’ good research and practice Advisory Council report on Rights (2010)and hasDay prepared a document 2011; Davey 2011; Sherwood sentencing outcomes for Koori and Dr Judy Putt et alUp 2010; Williams 2011). theof called ‘Speaking as Despite a Victim Academic has certain non-Koori research adult offenders in the Written the Indigenous Justice Clearinghouse best of for intentions, there are inherent Crime’. Aimed at Aboriginal victims, it values practices are MCV, asand well as some of that the issues tensions between a on commitment presents information talking to to the continually reinforced through the around bail applications for Koori the principles participatory and expertise of their circumstances past police, the courtofand support services, Introduction offenders. ethical research and the expectations and their present, and onreview positive change role in peer of funding and is presented in both English and of funding agencies and academia. (Smith 1999; Sherwood assessments and acceptance of Past critiques of the social sciences The topic of the AIJA’s 2013 2010). annual Creole. Strict adherence to ethical guidelines research products (Sherwood 2010). focused primarilyprotocols on the identity the conference was ‘Current Issues This brief provides an overview of and research doesof not In many circumstances, funding researcher and his or her relationship In Delivering Indigenous Justice – innovative and exemplary research necessarily translate into day-to-day Judicial education applications and research outputs with ‘subject’ Challenges thepractice Courts’ (AIJA 2013). approachesforand undertaken goodthe practice. NorIndigenous may thereperson, be the with and by Indigenous communities funding, capacity and timeframe to but over time more sophisticated Session themes included: The National Judicial College of allow all parties toapproaches devote Commission the energy that is relevant to crime justice and practical have al 2004), although this isand changing Australia (NJCA), Judicial and resources to follow through on the research. A number of critical Indigenous courts grant in Australia and with the NHMRC guidelines emerged related to participantof NSW (JCNSW), Judicial College ideal. questions guided this brief, including: for medical and health research New Zealand; focused methodologies and design. of Victoria (JCV) and Australasian with Indigenous communities now From a non-Indigenous perspective, What have been the research Institute of Judicial Administration requiring demonstrateto the needapplicants for furtherto innovations involving Indigenous people has topics and methods undertaken in (AIJA) provide education for Australian community engagement, capacity assist both Indigenous courts and subjectcriticised to changeasand negotiation over Australia in recent years on justice been inherently biased mainstream in their work with time and the ceding of control and issues and courts Indigenous people? and disempowering (Henry et real national Indigenous Justice Committee, Indigenous people; orientation in thinking (Coram 2012; 2004; Davey and Day 2008;ofKidman andWhat to collaborators – constitutes and goodpartners practice chaired by the Justice Western Davey and DayChief 2008; Nicholls 2009). and longer term, to Indigenous people 2007; Sherwood 2010). decisions Recent in criminological research and Australia, which makes comparisons in sentence severity Blagg (2011) states that researching andevaluation? social science is not always easy responses that domain seek toisimprove all on theAboriginal allocation of funds to conduct in the never easy for Indigenous and non-Indigenous to determine and to agree upon, let forms of research practice involving professional development programs or straightforward, whether workingfor What are some of the key offenders; alone deliver. Indigenous peopleurban in Australia with an Aboriginal group or and in a considerations when conducting learning Indigenous remote community. Sherwood (2010) research with Indigenous people internationally, include funding Challenges ofabout community-based issues (NJCA 2014a). (herself an Indigenous researcher) communities and their needs; and and communities? collaborative approaches include found a common refrain amongst the theWhat agendashould for research, the power The following judicial education institutes, dedicated funding events for constitute good Aboriginal young people and justice. Aboriginal people for she2014 talked(JCNSW with, differentials, and ownership and were scheduled Indigenous academics and research practice and what are examples? was that researchers did not ‘listen’ identity of the research project, with 2014; JCV 2014): networks, andtheethical guidelines. What are thealso main and did not get story ‘right’. As she political dimensions to the practical process Some jurisdictions hold ongoing Some of the most interesting and challenges associated with such underlines, being able to listen and and outcomes (Edwards et al 2008). cultural awareness training for guided walks in Sydney and substantial Indigenous-led or informed practice? hear is an active process that requires Other challenges may relate to the openness that and can discomforting. research has be emerged in the scepticism anda two-day resistance from South Australia, course on The brief is divided into four sections, a better understanding of Aboriginal Another risk, according to Davey Indigenous gatekeepers (Davey and past 20 years has often related to Aboriginal cultural awareness issues covering research practice and and Dayalthough (2008), is that innovative of overconnections to place; Day 2008) and as Blagg (2011) points health, such iscontext, mandatory forframeworks allofnew staff, new andand review out, theethical needs non-Indigenous approaches remain under-developed processes, practical and a seminar on the impact of Bugmy magistrates delivered reifying the construct of Indigenous researchersalso mayattend. not constraints beItaispriority in in and the criminological domain.Aboriginal Today, challenges, and promising practice. on sentencing every three months by CAA Aboriginal identityMunda or reproducing stereotypes. Indigenous communities. Indigenous researchers the focuson staff Where appropriate, examplestoare offenders and aargue session (SACAA 2014). According the For Indigenous researchers, there There from can other be different should be on working with Indigenous drawn countries,notions most of accountability – to funding notably New Zealand andthe Canada. people who hold the knowledge and body, to the university and the 4 ethics approval in Australia (Graham (ODPP) website notes that each2010). region 2011; Kidman 2007; Sherwood Considerable time may be required Aboriginal witnesses, to plan andvictims developand a partnership or which iscollaborative another examplearrangement of promising with Indigenous communities or organisations and to obtain letters of support key representatives training andfrom experience in counselling prior to submitting an application. For to assist victims and witnesses and their example, Coram (2011) describes a families through the prosecution 12-monthgoing application process to obtain process’ (NSWODPP 2014). approval from an ethics committee, for a small scale study of a community There also a range victim support projectisinvolving youngofpeople. services, some of which acknowledge

SCLJ (2013: 11),atthe course be sometimes odds with‘has the been need delivered to over 500 CAA participants to be accountable and respectful of and regularly receives extremely Indigenous cultural priorities. Davey positive Accordingly, this and Dayfeedback’. (2008) found this occurred collection the nonisduring seen data as an example– with of promising Indigenous researchers to practice. There is also seeking a South ensure compassionate professional Australian NJCA Indigenous justice distance whilst Indigenous colleagues committee, which raises Aboriginal wanted to assist and counsel the cultural awareness among judicial men, mindful of the wellbeing of participants. Coram (2011) found that workshops and community visits she was criticised for not recording (SACAA 2014).observations in her ‘negative’ research but she argues she could Judicial benchbooks reference not retain the trust of are the community if she did so. The Aboriginal Benchbook for Western Evaluation Australian BriefCourts 15,challenges January 2013 Much of the research Indigenous 2002 and updated inthat 2008 (Fryerpeople have experienced relates to Smith 2008). There are also sections evaluations, and may be largely a onconsultation Indigenousprocess. issues As in Williams the Western et al Australian and the NSW Equality Before Research practice and (2011) stress, AIATSIS guidelines the benchbooks (WADAG on Law Indigenous research do not2009; deal context JCNSW 2006) and the Supreme Court particular (2005) challenges surrounding ofthe Queensland Equal Treatment The research ‘business’ evaluationsIn of programs Benchbook. addition, and the initiatives SolutionResearch can Indigenous be broadly people. divided that involve Focused Judging Benchbook (King into that which is investigator-driven The addresses common business for 2009) a range model of issues and that which is policy-driven, with evaluations adopted by governments relevant to Indigenous defendants. the former external generating proposals is to contract or independent groups to undertake the work with the through thesis work and Judge Stephen Norrish academic (2013) interest that are submitted for funding has noted the limitations of judicial determined the contracting party. whilst the by latter arises primarily education, in that it is voluntary in nature. Collaborative and participatory through commissioned projects and He suggested that all jurisdictions research methodologies do not lend evaluations. Research institutions should have compulsory components themselves short timeframes. and fundingto bodies therefore They play onan Indigenous part of easy both also note that issues they areas relatively important role in supporting orientation information locally-driven research (as and already setting are limited resources, and limited time occurs in South Australia) and annual national priorities for research that conferences, well as an Aboriginal incorporatesas Indigenous perspectives the heart ofIntrue partnerships. benchbook. addition, he control suggested or supports Indigenous or direction (Henry et al 2004). Research instruments Aboriginal people ‘should have access In terms of crime and justice tostandard a checklist of issues particular to the research instruments research, the main sources of jurisdiction thatadaption permit consideration that require government funding andortheredesign kind of ofresearch the context in which thepreoccupy individual (Anderson 2008). Survey questions questions that offender comes before the court’ (2013: are asked slightly differently in remote policy makers means that much and non-remote contexts in NATSISS 49). These suggestions are worthy of of the research with Indigenous (ABS 2010), and Blagg (2008) refers further consideration. people relies on secondary analysis to the development of a community of administrative data and national safety questionnaire that required surveys. Driven by governmental reformulating questions about safety agreements at the national level, in and social problems. This initial Australia, the focus is on monitoring work was further built upon in a large Indigenous in scale survey over-representation of community safety the criminal injustice and and wellbeing remote system communities evaluations of 2011). programs and (Shaw and d’Abbs initiatives that seek to ‘close the In certain contexts, due regard should

Conducting research with Indigenous people and communities

4

www.indigenousjustice.gov.au

Standing Council on Law and Justice

In d ig e n o u s ethics approval in Australia (Graham

Language andSherwood 2010). 2011; Kidman 2007; Considerable time may issues be required communication

J u st i ce

C l ear i n g h o u se

placed in a cultural brokerage role. interpreting issues refers in thetocontext Sherwood (2010) tensionsof evidentiary discourse and determining related to Indigenous researchers’ the need for an interpreter. responsibilities to their community and the aim of making research a safe It is vital that all relevant stakeholders whilstprocess working within a western inpeople, the court – police, court academic environment. There is a lack of documented from representatives for perspectives the prosecution community-based researchers, and and defence – are adequately accounts of the strengths they bring informed about these issues, in order to the research process. Canadian to minimise miscommunication and research, however, suggests those unjust outcomes cases involved involving who have been indirectly Indigenous defendants, victims and certainly have more positive attitudes other witnesses. about research than those who had only heard about research in the community (Edwards et al 2008). International initiatives

to plan and develop a partnership or collaborative arrangement The House of Representatives with Indigenous communities or Standing Committee on Aboriginal organisations and to obtain letters and Torresfrom Strait Islander Affairs of support key representatives (HRSCATSIA) (2011) recommended prior to submitting an application. For that a national Indigenous interpreter example, Coram (2011) describes a service established 2015. 12-month be application processby to obtain At present, services are for only approval fromsuch an ethics committee, available in some jurisdictions. The NT a small scale study of a community project involving young people. Aboriginal Interpreter Service is the most comprehensive, and provides a 24-hour service (NT Courts their experiences, it isMagistrates evident that there 2014). According to the Chief Justice are often gaps between the theory of of the research NT Supreme (Riley 2012: good and Court practice (Blagg 12-13), ‘[i]nterpreters are now used 2011; Davey and Day 2011; Sherwood New Zealand Dr Judy Putt as a matter of et course where language 2010; Williams al 2011). Despite the Academic research has certain Written for the Indigenous Justice Clearinghouse best of intentions, there are inherent The New Zealand court websites not values and practices that doare tensions between a commitment to Commonwealth Government is funding continually reinforced through the the principles of initiatives participatory and over $6 million in in 2014-15 expertise of their past Introduction court practices, butcircumstances there are currently ethical research and the expectations and present, and on positive change to improve the supply of Indigenous 13 their role in peer review of funding Rangatahi youth courts in operation; of funding agencies NT, and Queensland, academia. (Smith 1999; and Sherwood 2010). assessments acceptance of interpreters Past critiquesinofthe the social sciences Strict adherence to ethical guidelines research products (Sherwood 2010). South Australia and Western Australia. focused primarilyprotocols on the identity the 2008, based on the an Victorian Koori This brief provides overview of and research doesof not In many circumstances, funding In addition,and thehisCommonwealth and Children’s Court (Sharp 2013). These researcher or her relationship innovative and exemplary research necessarily translate into day-to-day applications and research outputs NT governments are exploring the courts operate within the existing with ‘subject’ approaches and practice undertaken goodthe practice. NorIndigenous may thereperson, be the feasibility, cost and delivery youth court but take place at with and by model, Indigenous communities funding, andservice timeframe to but overcapacity time more sophisticated issues involved using thethe NTenergy service allow all parties in toapproaches devote that is relevant to crime justice and practical have al 2004), although this isand changing as a platform for a national Indigenous and resources to follow through on the research. A number of critical with the NHMRC grant guidelines emerged related to participantinterpreter service (F Byers, pers protocols ideal. questions guided this brief, including: as part of the courtresearch process, for medical and health focused methodologies and design. comm, 27 August 2014). with Indigenous communities now including rituals, blessings, songs From a non-Indigenous perspective, What have been the research requiring applicants to demonstrate and food. The purpose of the court involving Indigenous people has topics and methods undertaken in The Queensland Equality Treatment community hearing is toengagement, monitor the capacity progress subject to change and negotiation over Australia in recent years on justice been criticised(Supreme as inherently biasedof benchbook Court of the young Family Group time and the ceding of control and issues andperson’s Indigenous people? and disempowering et real a Queensland 2005) (Henry includes Conference (FGC) plan; FGCs have orientation in thinking (Coram 2012; 2004; Davey and Day 2008; Kidman chapter on Indigenous language and and to collaborators and partners – constitutes practice beenWhat described as ‘the good lynchpin of the Davey and Day 2008; Nicholls 2009). andinlonger term, to Indigenous people 2007; Sherwoodwhich 2010). Recent criminological research and communication covers such Blagg (2011) states that researching New Zealand youth justice process’ andevaluation? social science is not always easy responses seek toisimprove all issues as that misinterpretation, in the Aboriginal domain neversilence, easy (Taumaunu 2014: evaluation by to determine and 7). to An agree upon, let forms of research practice gratuitous concurrence, leading the Ministry or straightforward, whether involving working What are some(2012) of the key of Justice indicated alone deliver. questions in people cross-examination and Indigenous in Australia and with an Aboriginal urban group or in the a considerations whenforconducting positive early outcomes offenders, remote community. Sherwood (2010) use of court interpreters. It alsofunding sets out communities research with Indigenous people internationally, include Challenges and of organisations. community-based The (herself an Indigenous researcher) and communities? collaborative approaches include guidelines for effective communication Principal Youth Court Judge has foundspeakers a common amongst the theWhat agendashould for research, the power with ofrefrain Aboriginal English, institutes, dedicated funding for constitute good‘a described Rangatahi courts as Aboriginal people she talked with, differentials, and ownership and such as the use of indirect questions Indigenous academics and research practice and what are examples? revolution within New Zealand’s youth was that researchers did not ‘listen’ identity of the research project, with networks, andtheethical guidelines. justice system’ 2013: 2), while What are (Becroft the to main and did not get story ‘right’. As she political dimensions the practical process ‘either/or’ questions. Similar issues are Sharp Some of the most interesting and (2013: 37) suggested the associated such underlines, being able to listen and andchallenges outcomes (Edwards etwith althat 2008). also examined in somethat of informed the other courts ‘are driving change by exposing substantial Indigenous-led or practice? hear is an active process requires Other challenges may relate to the judicial benchbooks discussed openness and can discomforting. research that has be emerged in above the scepticism and resistance from The brief is divided into four sections, (see Fryer-Smith 2008: Chapter 5; Another risk, according to Davey such as the under-representation Indigenous gatekeepers (Davey andof past 20 years has often related to covering research practice and JCNSW 2006: 2303-2313). The AIJA and Day (2008), is that of overDay 2008) and as Blagg (2011) points health, although such innovative context, ethical frameworks and reviewis out, the needs of non-Indigenous has also developed handbook entitled Court, which operates in Auckland, approaches remainaunder-developed processes, practical constraints and reifying the construct of Indigenous researchers may not be a in Indigenous Interpreting Issues on similar principles, priority but caters in the criminological domain. Today,for based challenges, and promising practice. identity or reproducing stereotypes. Indigenous communities. Courts (Cooke 2002),argue whichtheexplains for young offenders from a number of Indigenous researchers focus Where appropriate, examples are key concepts in researchers, Aboriginal English, For Indigenous there There from can other be different should be on working with Indigenous drawn countries,notions most of accountability – funding notably New Zealand to andthe Canada. people who hold the knowledge and body, to the university and the 5

Canada be sometimes at odds with the need accountable respectful of IntoR be v Gladue [1999]and 1 SCR 688, the Indigenous cultural priorities. Davey Supreme Court of Canada set out and Day (2008) found this occurred general principles that apply when during data collection – with the nonsentencing Aboriginal offenders, Indigenous researchers seeking to including that judges must consider the ensure compassionate professional unique systemic or background factors distance whilst Indigenous colleagues which may a part the in wanted to have assist played and counsel bringing the offender before the courts. men, mindful of the wellbeing of Inparticipants. response toCoram a perceived failurethat to (2011) found implement the principles out in she was criticised for notset recording ‘negative’ observations in were her Gladue, so-called ‘Gladue courts’ research but argues could established in she 2001, with she Aboriginal not retain theappointed trust of the to community caseworkers provide if she did reports to so. the court on the systemic and background issues affecting the Evaluation lives of Aboriginal offenders, together Brief 15,challenges January 2013 Muchavailable of the research that Indigenous with culturally relevant people have experienced relates to sentencing options (Hopkins 2012; evaluations, and& may be largely a see also Jeffries Stenning 2014). A consultation As Williams et al central part ofprocess. the courts’ operation is Research practice and (2011) stress, the AIATSIS the Gladue report, which is guidelines written by on Indigenous not deal context Aboriginal peopleresearch about andoAboriginal defendant’s cultural background and is the particular challenges surrounding The research ‘designed to give a ‘business’ Judge a full picture evaluations of programs and initiatives ofResearch the person dealing with’ canthey be are broadly divided that involve Indigenous people. (Sharp 2013: 13). into that which is investigator-driven The common business model for and that which is policy-driven, with evaluations adopted by governments A recent report released by the the former external generating proposals is to contract or independent Department of Justice Canada (April groups tothesis undertake work with the through workthe and academic & Magrinelli Orsi 2013) indicated that interest that are submitted for funding there were least 19 specialised determined by the contracting party. whilst the at latter arises primarily courts in operation, in outand of Collaborative and eight participatory through commissioned projects 11evaluations. jurisdictions. Judicial do training on research methodologies not lend Research institutions the decision in Gladue, the relevant themselves to short timeframes. They and funding bodies therefore play legislation and took also note thatcultural they areawareness relatively easy an important role in supporting place in about half the jurisdictions. locally-driven research and setting are limited resources, and limited time Seven jurisdictions provided training national priorities for research that incorporates Indigenous perspectives the heart counsel of true partnerships. and on the preparation or legal supports Indigenous control or ofdirection independent sentencing and pre(Henry et al 2004). Research instruments sentence reports involving Aboriginal In termsalthough of crime and justice offenders, participants were standard the research instruments research, main sources of divided on the utility of this training. that require funding adaption ortheredesign government and kind of In most jurisdictions, bail and parole (Andersonquestions 2008). Survey questions research thatofpreoccupy decision-making in respect Aboriginal are asked slightly differently in remote policy makers means that much defendants were contexts also informed by and non-remote in NATSISS of the research with Indigenous ‘Gladue type information’ (April & (ABS 2010), Blagg (2008) refers people reliesand on secondary analysis Magrinelli Orsi 2013: 1). To date, there to the development of a community of administrative data and national has been questionnaire no formal evaluation of these safety that required surveys. Driven by governmental reformulating questions courts (Jeffries & Stenningabout 2014).safety agreements at the national level, in and social problems. This initial Australia, the focus is on monitoring There werefurther also built community work was upon in ajustice large Indigenous over-representation in scale survey of community safety programs in operation in nine the criminal injustice system and and wellbeing remote communities jurisdictions, including court and evaluations of 2011). programs and (Shaw and d’Abbs initiatives that seek to ‘close the In certain contexts, due regard should

Conducting research with Indigenous people and communities

4

www.indigenousjustice.gov.au

Standing Council on Law and Justice

In d ig e n o u s

J u st i ce

C l ear i n g h o u se

placed in a cultural brokerage role. ethics approval in Australia (Graham As noted above, there is little Sherwood (2010) refers to evaluation tensions 2011; Kidman 2007; Sherwood 2010). information available in this context. related to Indigenous researchers’ Considerable time may be required This accordingly limits the strength key concern was around information responsibilities to their communityof to plan and develop a partnership the that can be made sharing and communication; indeed, andconclusions the aim of making research a safein or collaborative arrangement respect of ‘what works’ for Indigenous this described as ‘one of the or key with was Indigenous communities and witnesses. people, whilstvictims working within a western organisations and to obtain challenges of Aboriginal justice,letters [which] defendants, In addition, as Blagg (2008: 185)ishas academic environment. There a of support from key representatives undoubtedly affects the consistency noted, ‘[t]he road to justice reform in lack of documented perspectives from prior to submitting an application. For and effectiveness of the delivery of Aboriginal Australia is littered with the community-based researchers, and example, Coram (2011) describes a services for Aboriginal individuals wreckage one-offthey initiatives, accountsofofpromising the strengths bring 12-month application process to obtain who must make their way through the pilot projects and local strategies that to the research process. Canadian approval from an ethics committee, for system’ (April & Magrinelli Orsi 2013: have failed to be refunded, nurtured research, however, suggests those a small scale study of a community 24). Research should be undertaken to and by directly government’. The who maintained have been involved project involving young people. ensure that the same does not apply decision to abolish the Murri courts certainly have more positive attitudesin is clearly an example in the Australian context, and that Queensland about research than those who hadof (Moore 2012). Consistent their experiences, is evident that there Indigenous court itparticipants are able this only heard about researchfunding in theis therefore required to ensure adequate are often gaps between the theory of to appropriately draw on the support of community (Edwards et al 2008). ongoing support for all Indigenous good research and practice (Blagg relevant services. participants in the court process. 2011; Davey and Day 2011; Sherwood Dr Judy Putt et al 2011). Despite the Conclusion Further research is alsohas required 2010; Williams Academic research certainto Written the Indigenous Justice Clearinghouse better understand the operation and best of for intentions, there are inherent values and practices that are effectiveness of the initiatives described tensions between a commitment to continually reinforced through the inexpertise this paperofintheir termscircumstances of both processpast (eg, the principles of participatory and Introduction ethical research and the expectations and their present, and onreview positive change which variously seek to: role in peer of funding involvement on participant satisfaction) of funding agencies and academia. (Smith 1999; Sherwood 2010). assessments and acceptance of Past critiques of on thecourt social sciences provide advice processes outcome (eg, the impact of 2010). judicial Strict adherence to ethical guidelinesto and research products (Sherwood focused primarily on the identity of not the Indigenous defendants, witnesses, This brief on provides an overview of education conviction rates or and research protocols does In many circumstances, funding researcher and his or her relationship victims and their families; innovative and exemplary research necessarily translate into day-to-day sentencing outcomes). applications and research outputs with the ‘subject’ approaches and practice undertaken good practice. NorIndigenous may theretoperson, be the assist Indigenous people access Daly 8) have with and andProietti-Scifoni by Indigenous(2009: communities funding, and timeframe to but overcapacity time more sophisticated relevant services; observed: allow all parties to devote the energy that is relevant to crime and justice and practical approaches have al 2004), although this is changing liaise with torelevant agencies to and resources follow through on the research. A number of critical with the NHMRC grant guidelines emerged related to participantcoordinate service delivery; ideal. questions guided this brief, including: for medical and health research focused methodologies and design. innovative justicecommunities practice, can educate and provide advice to judicial with Indigenous now From a non-Indigenous perspective, What have been the research requiring applicants to demonstrate involving Indigenous people has and methods undertaken in defence counsel, police, corrections in topics re-offending or imprisonment. community engagement, capacity subject to change and negotiation over Australia in recent years on justice been criticised as inherently biased Other socio-economic policies are time and the ceding of control and issues in and Indigenous people? and disempowering (Henry et real in the criminal justice system; required education, health, and orientation in thinking (Coram 2012; 2004; Davey and Day 2008; Kidman and to collaborators and partners – What constitutes good practice economic development. However, assist sentencing Davey andwith Day Aboriginal 2008; Nicholls 2009). and longer term, to Indigenous people 2007; Sherwood 2010). Recent in criminological research and conventional criminal justice Blagg (2011) states that researching courts and conferences; and social can science is not always easy evaluation? responses that domain seek toisimprove all practices be improved by being in the Aboriginal never easy recruit, train and support Elders and to determine and to agree upon, let less harmful and more socially reforms of research practice or straightforward, whether involving working What are some of the key alone deliver. Respected Persons; integrative. Indigenous peopleurban in Australia with an Aboriginal group or and in a considerations when conducting remote community. Sherwood (2010)on deliver community education research with people internationally, include funding Challenges of Indigenous community-based (herself an Indigenous researcher) and communities? collaborative approaches include criminal justice and Indigenous issues; initiatives which may make the Australian found a common refrain funding amongst the theWhat agenda for research, the power institutes, dedicated for should constitute good assist people in the development, court system less harmful for Indigenous Aboriginal she talked with, differentials, and ownership and Indigenous academics and researchof practice and what are examples? evaluation and implementation was that researchers did not ‘listen’ defendants, victims andproject, witnesses. identity of the research with networks, andthe ethical guidelines. new and procedures relating What dimensions the that main practical and didpolicies not get story ‘right’. As she However, it are is critical measures political to the processof to Indigenous issues; and Some of the most interesting and associated with such underlines, being able to listen and this nature be developed inetpartnership andchallenges outcomes (Edwards al 2008). substantial Indigenous-led or informed practice? hear is an active process that requires Other challenges may relate to the maintain records of referrals and with members of the community they openness and can be discomforting. research that has emerged in the scepticism and resistance from services provided, as well as purport to represent. As Anthony (2013: The brief is divided into four sections, Another risk, statistical according to Davey Indigenous gatekeepers (Davey and past 20 years has often and related to 202) has noted, ‘empowering Indigenous preparing other covering research practice and and Day (2008), is that of overDay 2008) and as Blagg (2011) points communities in the justice process would health, reports.although such innovative context, frameworks and review out, their theethical needs of non-Indigenous fortify laws, restore their governance approaches remain under-developed processes, practical constraints The briefthe then considered Indigenous structures reifying construct of Indigenous researchers may not be a priorityand in and contribute to Indigenous in the criminological domain. Today, challenges, and promising practice. legal victim support services, healing’. identityand or reproducing stereotypes. Indigenous communities. Indigenous researchers focus Where appropriate, examples are judicial education, and argue issuesthe in relation For Indigenous researchers, there There from can other be different should be onand working with Indigenous drawn countries,notions most to language communication. of accountability – funding notably New Zealand to andthe Canada. people who hold the knowledge and body, to the university and the 6

References be sometimes at odds with the need to be accountable and respectful of cultural priorities. AllIndigenous websites were correct as at Davey and Day (2008) found this occurred September 2014 during data collection – with the nonIndigenous researchers seeking to ABS 2015. Corrective Services, ensure compassionate professional Australia, December 2014. Cat no. distance whilst Indigenous colleagues 4512.0. Canberra: ABS wanted to assist and counsel the men, mindful of the wellbeing of ABS 2014b. Recorded Crimefound – participants. Coram (2011) that Victims, Australia, 2013. she was criticised for Cat not no. recording 4510.0. Canberra: ABS ‘negative’ observations in her research but she argues she could not 2013. retain Current the trustissues of theincommunity AIJA delivering if she did so. Indigenous justice – Challenges for the courts. Conference program. http:// Evaluation challenges Brief 15, January 2013 www.aija.org.au/Ind Courts Conf 2013/ Much of the research that Indigenous Program.pdf people have experienced relates to evaluations, and may be largely a Allison F et al.process. 2012. Sentencing and consultation As Williams et al punishment in the Indigenous Justices Research practice and (2011) stress, the AIATSIS guidelines ofon theIndigenous Peace courts. Australian research do not deal context Indigenous Law Review. 16: 15-36 the particular challenges surrounding The research ‘business’ evaluations of programs and initiatives Anthony T 2010. Sentencing Research can Indigenous be Brief broadly divided that involve people. Indigenous offenders. no 7. into that which is investigator-driven The common business model for Sydney: IJC and that which is policy-driven, with evaluations adopted by governments the former external generating proposals is to contract or independent Anthony T 2013. Indigenous People, groups tothesis undertake work with the through workthe and academic Crime and Punishment. Abingdon: interest that are submitted for funding Routledge determined the contracting party. whilst the by latter arises primarily Collaborative and participatory through commissioned projects and Anthony T 2014. The Laws of research methodologies do not lend evaluations. Research institutions themselves to bodies shortand timeframes. They Australia: Aboriginal Torres Strait and funding therefore play also note that they are relatively easy Islanders. Sydney: Thomson Reuters an important role in supporting locally-driven research and setting are S limited resources, limited time April & Magrinelli Orsi M 2013. national priorities forand research that incorporates Indigenous perspectives Gladue practices in the provinces the heart of true partnerships. or territories. supports Ottawa: Indigenous control ofor and Department direction (Henry et al 2004). Justice Canada Research instruments

Conducting research with Indigenous people and communities

In terms of crime and justice Aquilina H et al. 2009. Evaluation of of standard research instruments research, the main sources the Aboriginal sentencing court of that require funding adaption government andortheredesign kind of Kalgoorlie. Shelby Consulting (AndersonPerth: 2008). Survey questions research questions that preoccupy are asked slightlymeans differently in remote policy makers that much and non-remote contexts in NATSISS Becroft A 2013. Editorial. Rangatahi of the research with Indigenous (ABS Newsletter. 2010), Blagg refers Courts 2-4 (2008) people reliesand on 3: secondary analysis to the development of a community of administrative data and national safety questionnaire that required Blagg H 2008. Crime,byAboriginality surveys. Driven governmental reformulating questions about safety agreements at the national level, in and the decolonisation of and social problems. justice. This initial Australia, the focus is on monitoring Sydney: Hawkins work was furtherPress built upon in a large Indigenous in scale survey over-representation of community safety the criminal injustice and and wellbeing remote system communities evaluations of 2011). programs and (Shaw and d’Abbs initiatives that seek to ‘close the In certain contexts, due regard should

4

www.indigenousjustice.gov.au

Standing Council on Law and Justice

In d ig e n o u s ethics approval in Australia (Graham Borowski A 2011. In Sherwood Courtroom2010). 2011; Kidman 2007; 7 The Children’s Koori at Considerable time may Court be required work: Findings from an a evaluation. to plan and develop partnership or collaborative arrangement International Journal of Offender with Indigenous communities or Therapy and Comparative organisations and to obtain letters Criminology. 55: 1110-1134 of support from key representatives prior to 2008. submitting an application. CIRCA Evaluation of circle For example, Coram (2011) describes a sentencing program: Report. Sydney: 12-month application process to obtain NSW Attorney General’s Department approval from an ethics committee, for a smallMscale of a community Cooke 2002.study Indigenous project involving young people. interpreting issues for courts.

J u st i ce

C l ear i n g h o u se

placed in a cultural brokerage role. Hopkins A 2012. Therefers relevance Sherwood (2010) to tensions ofrelated Aboriginality in sentencing: to Indigenous researchers’ ‘Sentencing a person for who they responsibilities to their community and the aim of making research are’. Australian Indigenous Law a safe Review. 16: 37-52 people, whilst working within a western academic environment. There- Time is a HRSCATSIA 2011. Doing Time lack of documented perspectives from For Doing: Indigenous Youth in the community-based researchers, and Criminal Justice System. Canberra: accounts of the strengths they bring HRSCATSIA to the research process. Canadian research, however, suggests those JCNSW 2014.been Education who have directly involved calendar 2014. http://njca.com. certainly have more positive attitudes about research than those who had au/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/ only heard about research in the JCEducationCalendar2014_as-at-3community (Edwards et al 2008). Feb_2.pdf

MCV 2014b. be sometimes at odds with the need program. http://www.magistratescourt. to be accountable and respectful of vic.gov.au/ jurisdictions/specialistIndigenous cultural priorities. Davey jurisdictions/court-support-services/ and Day (2008) found this occurred during data collection – with the nonIndigenous researchers seeking to ensure2014a. compassionate professional MCWA Geraldton Family distance whilst Indigenous colleagues Violence Court – Barndimalgu. http:// wanted to assist and counsel the men, mindful of the wellbeing of participants. Coram (2011) found that she was criticised for not recording MCWA 2014b. Indigenous services. ‘negative’ observations in her http://www.magistratescourt. research but she argues she could wa.gov.au/I/ indigenous_services. not retain the trust of the community aspx?uid=8135-2150-1466-1241 if she did so.

Conducting research with Indigenous people Melbourne: AIJA. their experiences, it is evident that there and communities Courts and Tribunals Victoria 2014.of are often gaps between the theory Koori and and Kooripractice programs. good Court research (Blagg http://www.courts.vic.gov.au/courts2011; Davey and Day 2011; Sherwood JCNSW 2006. Equality before the law. Dr Judy Putt et al 2011). Despite the tribunals/specialist-courts-and2010; Williams Academic research has certain Sydney: JCNSW Written for the Indigenous Justice Clearinghouse best of intentions, there are inherent initiatives/koori-court values and practices that are tensions between a commitment to continually reinforced through the JCV 2014. 2014 prospectus. http:// Daly K & Marchetti 2012. Innovative the principles of E participatory and expertise of their circumstances past Introduction www.judicialcollege.vic.edu.au/ ethical processes: research and the expectations justice Restorative justice, and their present, and onreview positive change role in peer of funding of funding justice, agencies and academia. Indigenous and therapeutic (Smith 1999; Sherwood 2010). assessments and acceptance of Past critiques of the social sciences Strict adherence to ethical guidelines Prospectus - Web Version.pdf jurisprudence. In M Marmo, W de research products (Sherwood 2010). focused primarilyprotocols on the identity of not the This brief provides an overview of and and research doesand In many circumstances, funding Lint D Palmer (eds) Crime researcher and his or her relationship innovative and exemplary research necessarily translate into day-to-day Jeffries S & Stenning P 2014. outputs applications and research Justice: A‘subject’ Guide toIndigenous Criminology. 4th with approachesAboriginal and practice undertaken goodthe practice. Nor may thereperson, be the Sentencing offenders: Law, ed. Sydney: Lawbook with and by Indigenous communities funding, and Co timeframe to but overcapacity time more sophisticated policy, and practice in three countries. allow all parties toapproaches devote the energy that is relevant to crime justice and al 2004), although this isand changing Daly Kpractical & Proietti-Scifoni G 2009.have Canadian Journal of Criminology and and resources to follow through on the research. A number of critical with theJustice. NHMRC grant guidelines emerged related to Nowra participantDefendants in the circle: Circle Criminal 56: 447-494 ideal. questions guided brief, including: for medical andthishealth research focusedthemethodologies and design. Court, presence and impact of with Indigenous communities now From a and non-Indigenous KingWhat M 2009. Solution-focused judging have been the research Elders, re-offending. perspective, Brisbane: requiring applicants to demonstrate involving Indigenous people has topics and methods undertaken in benchbook. AIJA capacity community Melbourne: engagement, subject to change and negotiation over Australia in recent years on justice been criticised as inherently biased time and the ceding of control and DHSV 2014. Koori youth justice issues and Indigenous KPMG 2010. Evaluation of people? the and disempowering (Henry et real orientation http://www.dhs.vic.gov. in thinking (Coram 2012; programs. Community Justice Group program: 2004; Davey and Day 2008; Kidman andWhat to collaborators – constitutes and goodpartners practice Davey and Day 2008; Nicholls 2009). au/about-the-department/plans,Final report. Brisbane: Queensland andinlonger term, to Indigenous people 2007; Sherwood 2010). Recent criminological research and Blagg (2011) states that researching programs-and-projects/programs/ andevaluation? social science is not easy Department of Justice andalways Attorneyresponses that domain seek toisimprove all in the Aboriginal never easy to determine and to agree upon, let General forms of research practice or straightforward, whether involving working What are some of the key alone deliver. programs Indigenous peopleurban in Australia with an Aboriginal group or and in a considerations when conducting Legal Aid Queensland nd. Best people remote community.include Sherwoodfunding (2010) research with internationally, Challenges of Indigenous community-based Fitzgerald J 2008. Does circle practice guidelines for lawyers (herself an Indigenous researcher) and communities? collaborative approaches include sentencing reducerefrain Aboriginal found a common amongst the providing legalforservices to Aboriginal theWhat agenda research, the power institutes, dedicated funding for should constitute good offending? Justice Bulletin Aboriginal Crime peopleand she talked with, differentials, and ownership and and Torres Strait Islander clients Indigenous academics and research practice and what are examples? no NSW Bureau was115. thatSydney: researchers did not of ‘listen’ identity of the research project, with http://www.legalaid.qld.gov.au/ networks, andtheethical guidelines. What dimensions are the to main and didStatistics not get story ‘right’. As she Crime and Research political the practical process services/Indigenous-Queenslanders/ Some of the most interesting and associatedetwith such underlines, being able to listen and andchallenges outcomes (Edwards al 2008). Documents/bpg-indigenous.pdf Fryer-Smith K 2008. Thethat Aboriginal substantial Indigenous-led or informed practice? hear is an active process requires Other challenges may relate to the openness that and can discomforting. benchbook for Western Australian research has be emerged in the scepticism and resistance from MCV 2014a. Koori community The brief is divided into four sections, Another risk, according to Davey Indigenous gatekeepers (Davey and courts. ed. Melbourne: AIJA to past 202nd years has often related http:// covering research practice and and Day (2008), is that of overDay 2008) and as Blagg (2011) points health, although such innovative context, frameworks and review www.magistratescourt.vic.gov.au/ Harris M 2006. A sentencing out, theethical needs of non-Indigenous approaches remain under-developed processes, jurisdictions/specialist-jurisdictions/ reifying the construct of ofIndigenous researcherspractical may not constraints be a priorityand in conversation: Evaluation the Koori in the criminological domain. Today, challenges, and promising practice. identity or reproducing stereotypes. Indigenous communities. court-support-services/kooriCourts Pilot Program. Melbourne: Indigenous researchers argue the focus Where appropriate, examples are Department of Justice For Indigenous researchers, there There from can other be different should be on working with Indigenous drawn countries,notions most of accountability – funding notably New Zealand to andthe Canada. people who hold the knowledge and body, to the university and the 7

Evaluation Marchetti E 2009. Indigenous Brief 15,challenges January 2013 Much of the research Indigenous sentencing courts. Briefthat no 5. Sydney: people have experienced relates to IJC evaluations, and may be largely a consultation Williams et al Marchetti E & process. Ransley As J 2014. Research practice and (2011) stress, the AIATSIS guidelines Applying the critical lens to judicial on Indigenous research do not deal context sentencing Indigenous offenders. Will the particular challenges surrounding The research ‘business’ anyone or anything do? University of evaluations of programs and initiatives NSW Law Journal. 37: 1-33 Research can be broadly divided that involve Indigenous people. into which business is investigator-driven The that common model for Morgan A & Louis E policy-driven, 2010. Evaluation and that which is with evaluations adopted by governments ofthe MurriorCourt: Final former external generating proposals isthe to Queensland contract independent groupsTechnical tothesis undertake work with the through work and academic Report. and the Background interest are submitted for funding Paper no that 39. Canberra: Australian determined by the contracting party. whilst latter arises primarily Institute ofthe Criminology Collaborative and participatory through commissioned projects and research methodologies do not lend evaluations. Research institutions Moore T 2012. Diversionary courts themselves to bodies short timeframes. They and funding therefore fall victim to funding cuts. Brisbaneplay also note that they are relatively easy an important role http://www. in supporting Times. 13 September. locally-driven research and setting brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/ are limitedpriorities resources, limited time national forand research that diversionary-courts-fall-victim-toincorporates Indigenous perspectives funding-cuts-20120912-25sj5.html the heart of true partnerships. or supports Indigenous control or direction (Henry et al 2004). Research NATSILS 2014.instruments What we do. http:// www.natsils.org.au In terms of crime and justice standard the research instruments research, main sources of thatZealand requireMinistry adaption ortheredesign New of Justice 2012. government funding and kind of (AndersonCourt: 2008). Survey questions Rangatahi Evaluation of the research questions that preoccupy are asked slightly differently in remote early outcomes of Te Kooti Rangatahi. policy makers means that much and non-remote contexts in NATSISS of the research with Indigenous http://www.justice.govt.nz/publications/ (ABS 2010), Blagg (2008) refers people reliesand on secondary analysis global-publications/r/rangatahi-courtto the development of a community of administrative data and national evaluation-of-the-early-outcomes-ofsafety questionnaire that required surveys. Driven by governmental te-kooti-rangatahi reformulating questions about safety agreements at the national level, in and social problems. This initial Australia, the focus is on monitoring NJCA Indigenous Justice work2014a. was further built upon in a large Indigenous over-representation in scale survey of community safety Committee. http://njca.com.au/about/ the criminal justice system and and wellbeing in remote communities indigenous-justice-committee/ evaluations of 2011). programs and (Shaw and d’Abbs initiatives that seek to ‘close the In certain contexts, due regard should

4

www.indigenousjustice.gov.au

Standing Council on Law and Justice

I n d ig e n o u s

Ju st i ce

C l ear i n g h o u se

placed in a cultural brokerage role. ethics approval Aboriginal communities in an urban C/3/%7B9C3FF400-3995-472B-B442Kidman J 2007. in Australia (Graham NJCA 2014b. Sentencing conference Riley T 2012.(2010) Aborigines court: Victims Support Services Tasmania Sherwood refersand to the tensions context: some practical 2011; Kidman 2007; Sherwood 2010). 789F892CFC36%7Dtbp039.pdf be sometimes at oddssuggestions with the need 2014: From theory to practice – The Northern Territory experience. 2014. Court and liaison support for the public health researchers. related to Indigenous researchers’ Considerable time may be required to be accountable and respectful of National Health and Medical Research Conference brochure. 8-9 Queensland University of Technology service. http://www.justice.tas.gov.au/ sciences research. TiheiCanberra, responsibilities to their community to plan and develop aOreore partnership Indigenous cultural priorities. Davey Council 2003. V and theofaim of Public makingLecture research a safe or collaborative arrangement February 2014 Faculty Law Series victims/court_support and Day (2008)33(1): found51-41 this occurred with Indigenous communities or duringGdata – with the nonShaw andcollection d’Abbs P 2011. 2012. http://www.supremecourt.nt.gov. Auckland. http://www.maramatanga. people, whilst workingRiley_CJ_QUT_ within a western organisations and to obtain letters Indigenous seeking to Norrish S 2013. Sentencing WADAG 2009.researchers Equality before the law . Canberra: au/media/documents/ academic environment. There is a of support from key representatives ensure compassionate professional Commonwealth of Australia. http:// Indigenous offenders. Paper benchbook. Perth: WADAG Speech_19042012.pdf Kidman.pdf lack of documented perspectives from Canberra: Department of Families, prior to submitting an application. For distance whilst Indigenous colleagues presented at the Judicial Conference Housing, Community Services and the community-based researchers, and example, (2011) describes a Kovach M Coram 2010. Conversational wanted to assist and counsel publications/attachments/e52.pdf Roper C 2006. A National Standard WADAG andAffairs Department of Corrective of Australia Colloquium, Sydney, Indigenous accounts of the strengths they bring 12-month to First obtain method in application Indigenousprocess research. men, mindful of the wellbeing of National Health Development and Medical Research for for Services nd. Geraldton Family and October to Professional the research process. Canadian approval 2013 from an ethics committee, for participants. Coram (2011) found that Sherwood J 2010. Council, the Australian Research Report Domestic Violence – Information for research, however, suggests those 5(1): 40-48 a small scale study of a community she was criticised for not recording Council and Universities Australia prepared for the NJCA NT Magistrates Courts 2014. N and the community. http://www.courts. who have been directly involved project involving young people. research. PhDobservations thesis, University ‘negative’ in of her Laycock A, Walker D, Harrison (NHMRC et al) 2007a. certainly have more positive attitudes Interpreter services. http://www.nt.gov. New South Wales research but she argues she could Brands J 2009. SACAA 2014. Aboriginal programs. about research than those who had not retain the trust of the community au/justice/ntmc/interpreter.shtml Smith L T 1999. of Research. Canberra: Australian their experiences, it is evident that there only heard about research in the http://www.courts.sa.gov.au/ if she did so. . Darwin: Cooperative Government. http://www.nhmrc. are often gaps between the theory of community (Edwards et al 2008). Community/Pages/AboriginalResearch Centre for Aboriginal Health. . Dunedin: NSW andand Attorney-General Cases good Justice research practice (Blagg Evaluation challenges http://www.lowitja.org.au/sites/default/ Programs.aspx University of15, Otago Press attachments/r39.pdf 2009. Aboriginal community justice Brief January 2013 2011; Davey and Day 2011; Sherwood Much of the research that Indigenous Social Policy Evaluation and Dr Judy Putt groups. http://lawlink.nsw.gov.au/ National Health and Medical 2010; Williams et al 2011). Despite the Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR Academic research hasResearch certain SCLJ 2013. National Indigenous Law people have experienced relates to Laycock A, the Walker D, Harrison N Clearinghouse Research Committee and Aotearoa Written Indigenous Justice Council, Australian Research Council best of for intentions, there are inherent lawlink/cpd/ll_cpd.nsf/vwFiles/ACJG_ 571 values and practices that are evaluations, and may be largely a and Justice Framework Good Practice and Brands J 2011. Researching New Zealand Evaluation Association and Australian Vice-Chancellors’ tensions between a commitment to continually reinforced through the consultation process. As Williams et al (SPEaR and ANZEA) 2007. Appendix. Canberra: Commonwealth Committee et al) 2007b. past the principles of participatory and expertise of(NHMRC their circumstances ACJG_facsheet_Jan10_WEBversion. Munda Western Australia 249 Introduction Research practice and (2011)vstress, the AIATSIS(2013) guidelines for researchers. Melbourne: Lowitja of Australia. http://www.ag.gov.au/ ethical research and the expectations and present, and on positive change their role in peer review of funding pdf CLR 600 Institute. http://www.lowitja.org.au/ . http://www.spear. on Indigenous research do not deal . Canberra: 2010). context LegalSystem/Legalaidprogrammes/ of funding agencies and academia. (Smith 1999; and Sherwood assessments acceptance of Past critiques of the social sciences govt.nz/documents/good-practice/ lowitja-publishing/L009 Commonwealth of Australia. http:// Strict adherence to ethical guidelines research products (Sherwood 2010). NSW ODPP 2014. Aboriginal victims the particular challenges surrounding focused primarily onAM, theInkamala identity the Lovell J, Armstrong This brief provides overview of and research protocols doesof not Sharp J 2013. Report an of the Justice The research ‘business’ In many circumstances, funding evaluations programsand and Research initiatives and witnesses. http://www.odpp.nsw. Social PolicyofEvaluation researcher and his or her relationship publications/attachments/e35.pdf M, Lechleitner A and Fisher S 2012. innovative and exemplary research necessarily translate into day-to-day James Muirhead Churchill Fellowship applications and research outputs Research can Indigenous be broadly divided that involve 1 Committee 2008. SPEaR Good gov.au/witness-assistance-service/ with ‘subject’ Initiatives categorised as ‘goodpeople. approaches and practice undertaken goodthe practice. NorIndigenous may thereperson, be the R 2009. Research and toNicholls investigate strategies for increasing into that which is investigator-driven The common business. http:// model for aboriginal-victims-and-witnesses withcultural and byintegrity Indigenous communities funding, and timeframe to have been fully evaluated but overcapacity time more sophisticated the of court processes practice’ and that which is policy-driven, with evaluations adopted by governments www.spear.govt.nz/good-practice/ at Ntaria. A report produced for the allow all parties toapproaches devote the energy that is relevant to crime justice methods. and found to be generating successful, proposals and practical have al Aboriginal 2004), although this isand changing for young people and their statement-purpose.html the former is to contract external or independent Australian Government by Ninti One and resources follow through on the 12(2):of 117-126 research. A Northern number critical QDJAG 2012a.toCommunity justice with the NHMRC grant guidelines ‘promising practice’ relates emerged participantfamilies in the Territory Youth while Limited, Alicerelated Springs. to http://www. groups undertake the work with the through thesis and academic Taylor Ntoand Puttwork J 2007. Adult sexual ideal. questions guided this brief, including: for medical and health research group program. http://www.courts. Orr M, Kenny P, Gorey IN, Mir A, to initiatives based on program focused methodologies and design. Justice System – USA, Canada, New nintione.com.au/resource/Ntaria_ interest that are submitted for funding violence in Indigenous and culturally with E,Indigenous communities now Cox Wilson J 2009. qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_ models that been evaluated or FaHCSIA_ProjectReportFinal.pdf determined by the contracting party. From a non-Indigenous perspective, Zealand. whilst thehave latter arises primarily and linguistically diverse communities What have been the research requiring applicants to demonstrate Collaborative and participatory rigorously researched and found to involving Indigenous people has in Australia. through commissioned projects and http://www.churchilltrust.com.au/media/ topics and methods undertaken in McCausland R and Vivian A 2009. community engagement, capacity justice-group-program-cjg.pdf research methodologies do not lend no.345. http://aic. subject to change and negotiation over be advantageous; partly evaluated evaluations. Research institutions Australia in recent years on justice been criticised as inherently biased fellows/2012_Sharp_Jared.pdf Alice Springs: Desert Knowledge gov.au/publications/current%20series/ themselves short timeframes. They time and the ceding of control issues and Indigenous people? and funding bodies therefore play programs withtosuccessful outcomes and disempowering (Henry and et real Cooperative Research Centre. http:// tandi/341-360/tandi345/view%20 also note that they are relatively easy orientation in thinking (Coram 2012; QDJAG 2012b. Indigenous sentencing an important role in supporting South Australian Commissioner for to date; and programs with consistent 2004; Davey and Day 2008; Kidman andWhat to collaborators – constitutes and goodpartners practice paper.html Davey andCommunity Day 2008; Nicholls Report. 2009). list. http://www.courts.qld.gov.au/__ locally-driven and setting Victims’ Rights 2010. Speaking up as a positive feedbackresearch from workers, andinlonger term, to Indigenous people 2007; Sherwood 2010). Recent criminological research and are limited resources, and limited Jumbunna House of Learning, Blagg (2011) states that researching Tuhiwai Smith L and Cram F 1997.time An national priorities for research Aboriginal-Knowledge-and-IPandevaluation? social science is not always easy victim of crime. http://www.voc.sa.gov. participants and other stakeholdersthat responses that domain seek toisimprove all Sydney: University of Technology. in the Aboriginal never easy incorporates Indigenous perspectives Protocol-Community-Guide.pdf fs-indigenous-sentencing-list-isl.pdf to determine and to agree upon, let au/Publications/Translations/Aboriginal/ over period of time (SCLJ forms of research practice http://www.jumbunna.uts.edu.au/pdfs/ or straightforward, whether involving working the aheart of true partnerships. . 2013: Report4). What are some of the key or supports Indigenous control or alone deliver. Pilkington J 2009. Aboriginal.asp Indigenous peopleurban in Australia commissioned by the NZ Crime with an Aboriginal group or and in a considerations when conducting direction (Henry et al 2004). QDJAG 2012c. Remote Justices of the ResearchUnit, instruments Prevention Auckland Uniservices remote community. Sherwood (2010) research with people internationally, Challenges of Indigenous community-based Morgan A and Louisinclude E 2010. funding Taumaunu H 2014. Rangatahi courts (herself an Indigenous researcher) and communities? collaborative approaches include In termsE, Guenther, of crimeJ and andArnott, justice Williams, http://www.courts.qld.gov.au/__data/ ofthe Aotearoa/New Zealand – An update. found a common refrain amongst the standard research instruments . Technical agenda for research, the power A 2011. Beyond informed consent: research, the main sources of institutes, dedicated funding for What should constitute good . Darwin: North Aboriginal people she talked with, and background paper series differentials, and ownership and how is it possible to ethically evaluate that require adaption or redesign government funding and the kind of Indigenous academics and research practiceAboriginal and whatJustice are examples? Australian Agency was39. that researchers did not ‘listen’ no. Canberra: Australian Indigenous programs? Paper to the identityForum, of the Auckland, research project, with (Andersonquestions 2008). Survey questions remote-jp-mag-court-program.pdf Judges March 2014 research that preoccupy networks, and ethical guidelines. What are the to main Pyett P, Waples-Crowe P and van and did not get the storyhttp:// ‘right’. As she Institute of Criminology. NARU Public Seminar Series, political dimensions the practical process are asked slightlymeans differently inDarwin, remote policy makers that much Some of the most interesting and associated such 23 November der Sterren A 2009. Engaging www.aic.gov.au/documents/9/ underlines, being able to listen and andchallenges outcomes (Edwards etwith alwith 2008). and non-remote contexts in NATSISS of the research with Indigenous substantial Indigenous-led or informed practice? hear is an active process that requires Other challenges may relate to the (ABS 2010), Blagg (2008) refers people reliesand on secondary analysis ISSN 1837-6223 (print) © 2015 Indigenous Justice Clearinghouse. 1837-6223 © 2013 Indigenous Clearinghouse.and resistance from openness and (print) can discomforting. research that has be emerged in theJusticescepticism to the development of a community of administrative data and national The brief is divided into four sections, Another risk,distribute, according to Davey Indigenous (Davey and You may display, download freelygatekeepers deal with this work for any purpose,safety providedquestionnaire that you attributethat the Indigenous required past 20copy, years has often related to and otherwise Drivento the bywork governmental covering research practice and Justice Clearinghouse as the owner. However, you must obtainand permission if you wish points to (a) chargesurveys. others for access (other safety than and Day (2008), is that of overDay 2008) as Blagg (2011) reformulating questions about health, although such innovative agreements at the national level, in at cost), (b) include the work in advertising or a product for sale, or (c) modify the and work.review context, ethical frameworks out, the needs of non-Indigenous and social problems. This initial approaches remain under-developed Australia, the focus is on monitoring processes, practical and reifying theeffort construct Indigenous While every has beenof made to ensure that this document is correct atconstraints the time of printing, researchers may not be a priority in the Indigenous work was Justice furtherClearinghouse, built upon in its a large in the and criminologicaldisclaim domain. Indigenous in challenges, and promising practice. agents any Today, and all liability to any person in respect of anything done or omitted done over-representation inof reliance or upon the identity or employees, reproducing stereotypes. Indigenous communities. scaleto be survey community safety Indigenous argue the focus while or any researchers part of this document. the criminal injustice and Where appropriate, examples are and wellbeing remote system communities For information Indigenous researchers, there There can be audiotape, different notions should be on working with Indigenous evaluations ofcontact programs and drawn other countries, mostor computer This can be provided in alternative formats suchfrom as braille, large print disk. Please the Indigenous (Shaw and d’Abbs 2011). of accountability – to the funding Justice by knowledge phone: (02) 8061 or New TTY: (02) 8688 7733 (for people who areinitiatives deaf or havethat a speech notably Zealand and Canada. seekimpairment) to ‘closeor the peopleClearinghouse who hold the and9319 (voice) In certain contexts, due regard should body, to the university and the email [email protected]. 8

Conducting research with Indigenous people and communities

4 8

www.indigenousjustice.gov.au

Standing Council on Law and Justice