TY - CHAP
T1 - ON THE IMPORTANCE OF RESPECTFUL ENGAGEMENT WITH AUSTRALIA’S ABORIGINAL AND TORRES STRAIT ISLANDER PEOPLES
AU - Wensing, Ed
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2025 selection and editorial matter, Bruce M. Smyth, Michael A. Martin, and Mandy Downing; individual chapters, the contributors.
PY - 2024
Y1 - 2024
N2 - Research with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples requires genuine and respectful engagement based on parity, mutual respect for difference and recognition of their rights to control, own, and manage their traditional knowledge, culture, and creativity. But what constitutes ‘genuine’ and ‘respectful’ engagement? Where should researchers begin? Can research be co-designed with First Peoples? How much time should be allocated to genuine and respectful engagement in research? How is genuine and respectful engagement best evidenced for the purposes of obtaining ethics approval? What constitutes ‘community voice’, and what to do if that voice comprises competing voices? This chapter explores these questions in the context of a study of land rights and native title in the Kimberley region of Western Australia. In this chapter, I argue there are several key ingredients to engagement and consultation in this sensitive space: Time; relationships (including handling multiple parties with discordant views) based on mutual respect and trust; and genuine engagement through both self-determination and free, prior, and ongoing informed consent. The chapter concludes with some key lessons from the field and guidance on what works and what to avoid.
AB - Research with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples requires genuine and respectful engagement based on parity, mutual respect for difference and recognition of their rights to control, own, and manage their traditional knowledge, culture, and creativity. But what constitutes ‘genuine’ and ‘respectful’ engagement? Where should researchers begin? Can research be co-designed with First Peoples? How much time should be allocated to genuine and respectful engagement in research? How is genuine and respectful engagement best evidenced for the purposes of obtaining ethics approval? What constitutes ‘community voice’, and what to do if that voice comprises competing voices? This chapter explores these questions in the context of a study of land rights and native title in the Kimberley region of Western Australia. In this chapter, I argue there are several key ingredients to engagement and consultation in this sensitive space: Time; relationships (including handling multiple parties with discordant views) based on mutual respect and trust; and genuine engagement through both self-determination and free, prior, and ongoing informed consent. The chapter concludes with some key lessons from the field and guidance on what works and what to avoid.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85210673279&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.4324/9781003319733-11
DO - 10.4324/9781003319733-11
M3 - Chapter
AN - SCOPUS:85210673279
SN - 9781003319733
SP - 97
EP - 110
BT - The Routledge Handbook of Human Research Ethics and Integrity in Australia
PB - Taylor and Francis
ER -