This research examined the roles, challenges and opportunities for Indigenous land management in urban and peri-urban landscapes through a case study of Bunya Bunya Country Aboriginal Corporation (BBCAC) on the Sunshine Coast, Queensland, Australia. The study is distinct in that it documents the work of Kabi Kabi (Gubbi Gubbi) Traditional Owners, Australian South Sea Islanders, and historically-connected Aboriginal people in a setting that is peri-urban and urban in location and land use, and where native title has yet to be determined. This is in contrast to previous ILM research in Australia that tends to focus on rural or remote locations with large natural areas and protected lands. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews, participant observation (e.g. during monitoring activities) and analysis of secondary sources (e.g. organisational documents) between 2014 and 2015. The data shows that Indigenous land managers in urban and peri-urban landscapes work in a variety of roles, particularly when partnering with other land user groups to manage complex environmental issues. Significant challenges to their work include the effects of urban development and population growth/change, poor cross-cultural engagement with decision-makers, a growing gap for work opportunities between Aboriginal and non-Indigenous organisations, and barriers to appropriate, long-term funding and resources. There are several opportunities to overcome these challenges through existing programs such as the Indigenous Ranger Program, decolonised decision-making tools (i.e. “boundary objects”) and sustainable enterprises that draw on public, private, and customary economies (e.g. eco-cultural tourism). The research highlights the need for bottom-up, Indigenous-driven approaches to ILM on the Sunshine Coast to address land management issues in a way that delivers socio-economic and cultural co-benefits to local Aboriginal peoples.

1. INDIGENOUS LAND
MANAGEMENT IN URBAN AND
PERI-URBAN LANDSCAPES
Rachele Wilson (Honours candidate)
DrTristan Pearce (Supervisor), Dr Scott Lieske (Co-supervisor)

2. Traditional ILM
 Place-specific system of practices, developed over thousands of years
To manage resources (e.g. food, water, shelter)
To maintain connections to Country and respect local customs
WHAT IS INDIGENOUS LAND MANAGEMENT
ANDWHY IS IT IMPORTANT?
Introduction
Painting 'Aborigines using fire to hunt kangaroos’ by Joseph Lycett, c 1820, depicting fire-
stick farming in NSW
Ngadju / Marlpa peoples maintain
knowledge of ‘water trees’ in WA
There were over 250 Aboriginal language groups in Australia at
the time of European colonisation

3. Contemporary ILM
 Aboriginal andTorres Strait Islander peoples
working in: conservation, parks
management, natural resource
management (NRM)…
 Through over 700 Indigenous ILM groups in
Australia
 Using traditional andWestern methods
WHAT IS INDIGENOUS LAND MANAGEMENT
ANDWHY IS IT IMPORTANT?
Introduction
Yurung Dhaura Aboriginal Land Management team (ACT) are recognised
for their work in bush regeneration and cultural heritage management
Wunambal Gaambera Aboriginal Corporation (WA) are using new tools to
monitor turtles and dugongs on seacountry
Both traditional and contemporary ILM is
vital for human health and wellbeing,
economic development and ecological
sustainability

4.  ILM is over reported for
places where Aboriginal
peoples have rights over
their traditional lands
 Little is known about the
role of ILM in urban and
peri-urban areas (where
most of the population
resides)
ILM AND NATIVETITLE
Introduction
In2012, Indigenous peoples held land rights and native title determinations for 21% of Australia, and limited
responsibility for a further 39% through other registered native title claims . Source: Altman and Markham, 2013

5. Research aim
To examine the roles, challenges and opportunities for ILM in urban and peri-
urban landscapes through a case study of Bunya Bunya Country Aboriginal
Corporation (BBCAC) on the Sunshine Coast, Queensland, Australia.
Objectives
 To identify and describe the roles of Indigenous land managers working in
urban and peri-urban areas of the Sunshine Coast;
 To document opportunities and challenges for Indigenous land managers
working in urban and peri-urban areas of the Sunshine Coast; and
 To draw key lessons for improving ILM in urban and peri-urban areas on
the Sunshine Coast, Queensland and Australia.
RESEARCH AIM AND OBJECTIVES
Introduction

6. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN
Methods
Key stages of participatory research process enacted throughout the study (based on Pearce et al. 2009).
Descriptive case study design and participatory research approach

7. BACKGROUND AND STUDY AREA
Methods
 Kabi KabiTraditional
Owners, custodians, South
Sea Islanders and
historically-connected
Aboriginal people
 Sunshine Coast,
particularly Maroochy and
Mooloolah river
catchments
 Urban and peri-urban land
use

8.  Semi-structured interviews, focus group
discussions, participant observation, and
analysis of secondary sources
 Transcripts returned to participants for
“member checking”
 7 interviews / FGDs, 80 hours of
observations and field notes
DATA COLLECTION
Methods
Taking field notes during a cultural awareness tour (photo by Barry Alsop).
Observations while monitoring Water Mouse (Xeromys myoides) nests.
Sample characteristics for Bunya Bunya members and other key informants. Field work was conducted
with both groups, only BBCAC members were included in interviews and/or focus group discussions.

9.  Data integrated and analysed using thematic (latent content) analysis
 Classified as primary or secondary and coded to respective case nodes and in
vivo into categories under “roles”, “challenges” and “opportunities” themes
 Categories that did not appear across multiple and different sources of data
were eliminated
DATA ANALYSIS
Methods
Data were thematically analysed and grouped into categories in Nvivo software.

10. ROLES
Results
Land management roles performed by BBCAC and its members.
BBCAC members: volunteering (top left; photo by N Morwood); inducting trainees (top
right); monitoring habitat (bottom left); and propagating mangroves (bottom right).
 BBCAC plays an active role in the Sunshine Coast community and is involved in a
range of activities

11.  Members reported urban development and population growth/change,
financial barriers, governance, and cross-cultural awareness as challenges to
ILM
CHALLENGES
Results
Challenges for land management experienced by BBCAC and its members.
Member observes Jet Ski user (top left); unproductive oyster farm (top right); eroded
river bank (bottom left); damaged cultural heritage site (bottom right).

12.  Members are interested in opportunities to develop a more Indigenous-driven
approach to land management on Country and developing a more organised
eco-cultural tourism experience that is of benefit to localAboriginal peoples
OPPORTUNITIES
Results
Opportunities for land management suggested by BBCAC and its members.
“We could probably hand a bit
more of this work over to
some other Murri people who
want to learn about this, and
teach them up, so we can
empower ourselves and teach
young fellas in how they can
work the land too.” (Kerry)
“I would like to have our own cultural centre, a keeping place, where we can have a permanent display. Where
my brother can have his Gubbi Gubbi dance group. Like in Cairns, their cultural centre, I'd really like that here.
We could have an environmental section. We could have those bush tucker gardens. We could have those
workshops and audio recordings playing, all being active on Country.” (Bridgette)

13. MULTIPLE ROLES AND COLLABORATION FOR
COMPLEX MANAGEMENT ISSUES
 Roles respond to land
management issues typical of
urban and peri-urban landscapes
in addition to responsibilities as
Traditional Owners
 Multiple sources of threats require
collaboration and engagement
with other land users and
stakeholders
 Collaboration requires good cross-
cultural engagement and
adequate funding
Discussion
BBCAC operate in a catchment that is known to
have poor nutrient cycling due to increased
sediment loads. Collaboration with pastoralists
and farmers through the FarmFLOW project
aimed to reduce soil erosion and nutrient run-off
from these sources. But more is needed to
engage other land users. Source: Healthy
Waterways and Landcare

14.  Lack of stable, adequate and
appropriate funding is recognised
as a barrier to long-term
sustainability of ILM projects and
partnerships
 Majority of ILM groups are under-
resourced, and rely on several small
funding sources to cover project
costs
 A hybrid economy provides a
means for more stable, appropriate
funding
BARRIERSTO ADEQUATE, LONG-TERM
FUNDING AND RESOURCES
Discussion
Ideal model for hybrid economy. ILM is more productive and resilient in a hybrid economy where
funding sources cross sectors. Source: Altman 2009.

15.  ATSI peoples’ knowledge, values and
responsibilities to Country are often
marginalised from decision-making
processes
 As a “boundary object”, the “TO
Terms and Conditions” could to
reverse decision-making processes,
and enable a more Indigenous-driven
approach to engagement
 This could facilitate cross-cultural
awareness between groups and
place a greater onus on non-
Indigenous partners to meet
Aboriginal expectations of effective
engagement and associated financial
costs
BOUNDARY OBJECTS FOR CROSS-CULTURAL
ENGAGEMENT
Discussion
The “boundary object” developed and used by Girringun peoples (N Qld) to communicate
their knowledge and values in decision-making processes with other TO groups and non-
Indigenous agencies (Zurba and Berkes 2014).

16.  This research examined the roles, challenges and opportunities for ILM on the
Sunshine Coast
 Members fulfil a diverse set of roles through community engagement, ecological
restoration, cultural heritage conservation, and enterprise development
 Most pressing challenges stem from insufficient, short-term funding and resource
limitations (i.e. access to land and basic infrastructure, poor engagement)
 Opportunities to improve include drawing on public and private economies for a more
systematic yet localised approach to ILM
 Key to improving ILM on the Sunshine Coast and in general is the need for bottom-up,
Indigenous-driven approaches that deliver socio-economic and cultural co-benefits to
local Aboriginal peoples
CONCLUSIONS AND FURTHER RESEARCH
Conclusions and recommendations

17. Kerry Jones, Sean Fleischfresser,
Bridgette Davis, Genevieve Jones,
Loretta Algar, Anne Miller, Arnold Jones
and Helen Jones, DrTristan Pearce, Dr
Scott Lieske, Dr Jennifer Carter, key
informants and helpful persons of the
Kabi Kabi and Jinibara nations, the
University of the Sunshine Coast
(Faculty of Science, Health, Education
and Engineering) and theVice
Chancellor for scholarships, the
Sustainability Research Centre, Dr Maria
de Lourdes Melo Zurita, Dr Roy Sidle, Dr
Erin Smith, Dr Chris Jacobs, Dr Pedro
Fidelman, LukeVerstraten,Yolanda
Arkesteijn, Jo Nicholls, Bonnie Killip,
Elektra Grant, Michael Dan and Kelly
Chambers.
THANKYOU
Acknowledgements