Aboriginal Waterways Assessment program

58 Aboriginal Waterways Assessment — Part C Literature review
Indigenous and local ‘expertise’
(Secretariat of the Convention on
Biological Diversity, 2004, p. 10–11).
Accordingly, the Water Act 2007 (Cth)
makes first mention, in reference to
Australian laws of ‘Aboriginal expertise’
with regard to water management. For
Aboriginal peoples, as much as this
recognition and inclusion is a matter
of justice and social equity, it is also
primary to the realisation of a healthier
people in a healthier Country (Hill &
Williams, 2009). Such an intention is
congruent with the goals of Australia’s
‘Closing the Gap’ strategy to redress
extreme socio-economic disadvantage
in Aboriginal population groups (Hunt,
2013; National Water Commission,
2014).
With regard to ‘how to know the
health of Country’, Tipa & Associates
(2012) determine that a Māori
perspective of a healthy river is one
that has all of the components of
landscape that are directly linked
to a river considered as ‘the river’.
These include the source and the
whole length of the river to the sea,
groundwater, wetlands, floodplains,
estuaries, and near-shore marine
ecosystems (p. 47).
Consistent with Australian literature
as illustrated in the Sovereign Nations’
responses to the draft Basin Plan, the
Basin’s Aboriginal Nations promote
a conceptualisation of ‘river’ that
includes land, water, biodiversity,
culture and people.
Māori understand river in terms of
its Indigenous peoples’ traditional
practices of gathering, harvesting and
sharing food throughout seasonal
change. The discussion includes
pre-colonisation and up to present
day practices, and how western
government policies and practices are
impacting on them.
Ulluwishewa et al (2008) conducted
a comparative study between Māori
and the Dusun in Brunei, exploring
different Indigenous knowledge
systems and found that despite
distance, there were strong similarities.
The authors identify ‘Indigenous
knowledge’ as being local and
being bound to the place where it
originated. Even though the study
groups had different histories of
colonialism, both were described as
‘ecosystem people’ who rely directly
on ecosystems to provide resources
for everyday needs.
This relationship includes a sacred
appreciation for the value of the
ecosystem in sustaining life — an
appreciation that is lost in less
direct relationships where resources
are regarded as ‘raw materials’ for
manufacturing and other processes.
Indigenous peoples who are still living
as ‘ecosystem people’ see themselves
as custodians of ecosystems with
sacred obligations because of this lifesustaining
understanding.
Both Māori and Dusun share three
kinds of heuristic knowledge, which
is drawn from direct observation and
interaction with the ecosystem and
also affords intuitive knowledge:
• a knowledge of spatial and
seasonal distribution of plant and
animal species
• a knowledge of sustainable
harvesting so as not to destroy the
regenerative balance capabilities of
a habitat
• a knowledge of habitat
maintenance to restore and keep
such a balance.
The authors note that loss of these
‘knowledges’ can lead to loss of
natural resources and create conflict.