The expression capacity strengthening is used for the analysis of the strength based perspective wherein the different individuals in the organization are having proper knowledge about the skills wherein there can be improvement in the growth of the individuals. This is the time wherein the individuals will properly learn proper engagement in different kinds of activities that will help in contributing towards the well being of the individuals as well as the prosperity.
The main aim of the report is to properly analyze the different requirements of Indigenous Australian to properly develop effective governance as this will help in driving the own development. The main purpose of the report is to understand the proper condition wherein the people of Australia are challenged in order to properly develop effective kind of governance in the respective state.
The structure of the report includes the concept of the capacity of the community building as this will help in improving the indigenous governance that has entered into the policy arena of Australia in the year 1996 with proper context of reducing the welfare dependency that is indigenous in nature along with fostering the participation that is local in nature for proper decision making. The new approaches that are trailing have to be included as well in the coordination as well as partnership across the government.
Concept of community capacity building
The concept of capacity building of the community is introduced in order to reduce the welfare dependency that is indigenous in nature. Proper strengthening of the capacity of the organizations in indigenous Australia is intercultural phenomenon that requires proper alteration between the indigenous individuals and commitment in the society that is wider in nature. For few decades, indigenous leaders are generally concerned regarding different number of representatives of the government who consults them regarding the entire development of the objectives in piece meal process (Jennings, Spurling and Askew 2014). This objective focuses on the requirements of the internal administration and they do not involve the effect as well as lack of the different efforts along with lack of well designed development.
There have been several attempts in order to properly improve the community governance that is indigenous in nature in Australia. This kind of objectives includes proper working with different managers of the organizations in Australia that are indigenous in nature. This is done in order to facilitate the greater jurisdiction over different matters that affect the people who are indigenous in nature by proper application of the flexible arrangements of funding as well as developing processes along with structures in proper accordance with the cultural systems as well as processes that are indigenous in nature. In order to gain and get proper balance between the political support, operational autonomy as well as accountability and performance has been critical in nature.
Concept of Indigenous Community Governance
The governance refers to the proper process of evolving relationships, institutions as well as structures wherein a group of individuals, community as well as the society properly categorize themselves in a collective manner as this will help in achieving things that matters to them. It helps in encompassing both the informal and formal structures along with different processes. In the setting of indigenous community of Australia, community governance appropriately involves into proper strengthening of the decision making process that are indigenous in nature. This has full control over the organizations along with the building proper skills of the individuals as well as collections that are collective as well as personal in nature. The indigenous decision making process helps in sharing proper commitment to the governance process of the organization as this will help in identifying the goals, processes as well and this is important in nature as well in improvement of the delivery of the service as well as raising proper prosperity and health of the indigenous communities in Australia.
There are fundamental challenges in the community governance that is indigenous in nature that includes lack of understandings that will be agreed in nature. There are different communities that are different from one another and the decision making is done:
- Proper identity and group membership wherein who will be self in their governance
- Who has the full authority in the group (Prince et al. 2013)
- Proper approved rules and set of laws as to make certain authority that has to be exercised properly and the individuals making decisions will be accountable in nature
- To understand the process of enforcing the decisions
- In order to understand the interests and rights with other individuals are negotiated
- Lastly to understand the arrangements that will be made and will be best in nature as this will help in achieving specific goals
Proper governance is crucial issue and this is defined with the values that are based on culture and codes that are normative in nature as this helps in understanding the right way to perform the right things. It is agreed that proper governance helps in comprising proper power, leadership and legitimacy along with accountability. On the other hand, meager governance is generally identified with factors that include favoritism, nepotism and public officials as well.
Programs related to Indigenous Governance Capacity-Strengthening
The strengthening programs of the capacity in Government
In the year 2004, the approach of the whole government in the indigenous development was properly recognized through policy coordination of indigenous office. The concept of the whole of the government helped in aiming in strengthening different capacity of the communities that are indigenous in nature and helps in negotiating with the governments as this will help in addressing the priorities of the local community along with capacity of the government to work in innovative (Karmel et al. 2014). This will help in making the capacity in a coordinated and flexible manner by properly addressing the fragmentation as well as lack of coordination of then programs of the government (Bodkin-Andrews and Carlson 2016). There has been a different opportunity that has been created by the high level representation of the government for the indigenous groups as this will help in tapping into skills as well as proper base of funding of the different administration departments in an easier way. The government of Australia properly implemented two reforms that are interrelated in nature that are COAG trials as well as Shared Responsibility Agreements.
SRAs need indigenous community by making proper certain commitments in achieving appropriate objective in return for the management committing diverse services and financial support. There were different attempts that has been made early in implementing capacity building through SRAs that has resulted in confusion as well as tensions about the proper meaning of the implementation of various efforts for the indigenous government as well as organizations and proper analysis is done regarding providing proper leadership for these initiatives (Brown et al. 2014). The systems that are non indigenous in nature tend to bound rather than enable the entire capacity of the indigenous institutions along with different communities. For proper and successful building of capacity there are different substantial changes that are required that involves:
- Proper assessment of the constraints that are real systematic in nature as this will help in strengthening the capacity that is indigenous in nature
- Proper development of the goals as well as approaches that are agreed in nature between the representatives those are justifiable indigenous in nature as well as the governments at different levels
- A proper shift in the entire power
The main motive of COAG trails intended to discover the different ways that are newly placed for the entire government in order to work efficiently and together along with other communities as this will help in addressing the different needs of the organization as well as the individuals in Australia who are indigenous in nature. A suitable outline review of the trails of COAG has found that the focus was different from one another and the implementation was different from one another as well. The key needs are as follows:
- A proper deferential interaction between the indigenous communities as well as the Australian government (Bennett-Levy et al. 2017)
- Proper focus on the solutions that are locally responsive and the responsibility that is shared (Buergelt et al. 2017)
- Proper and organized changes in the decision making as well as the coordination mechanisms for the practice of whole of government (Clifford, Doran and Tsey 2013)
- Proper training in all levels of community companies as well as government in analyzing the performance of the whole of government (Short 2016)
These are the different kinds of task that requires proper pattern shift as well as change that is systematic in nature (Gibson et al. 2015). There are different frameworks of the program that constrain the ability of the civil servants who are responsive locally in the financial and political management. The distant service providers perceive the program devolution that has increased red tape and the current funding situation was worse than before (Brusse et al. 2014). With the help of proper illustration of the tension between the independence as well as accountability along with the service providers from distant areas who easily deliver more twenty performances as well as financial reports per year, they are the ones who assert the funding arrangements that are flexible as well as long term in nature will help in improving the stability of the entire organization and this will help in increasing the effectiveness of the outcomes of the meeting programs.
Capacity intensification programs targeting aboriginal organizations
The capacity of strengthening of leadership is a long term process and the organizations that are indigenous in nature provide various important economic, social as well as cultural services in the communities (Sushames, Engelberg and Gebel 2017). The proper research that has been done through indigenous community Governance project helped in documenting the indigenous communities and organizations that are highly competent in nature as this will help in balancing the imperatives that are cultural in nature. This will help in practicing within the requirements of the programs of funding of the government as well as incorporation (Chapman, Smith and Martin 2014).
There are different other indigenous organizations that fail in low level of the literacy as well as the numeracy and the risk of the teaching programs under the proper guise of the building capacity are used as the substitute for the proper as well as sound kind of education from primary to the level of tertiary (Zwar et al. 2017). There are other challenges as well that includes violence that is lateral in nature such as gossip and jealousy. There has been a different program that has been developed in order to educate the directors as well as the managers of the aboriginal organizations as this will help them in understanding the statutory obligations as well as in order to strengthen the administrative skills (Stefanelli et al. 2017).
Consideration of conditions of challenges by Indigenous Australian in development of effective governance
There has been lack of proper programs of training in order to properly teach the different members of the board as to deal with the difficult issues in the business that can be related to legal issues as well. There were another issues as well that was related to the handling the stakeholders of the company (Thomas et al. 2014). The office of the registrar of the indigenous communities developed as well as provided proper range of the training programs that was related to corporate governance for different indigenous communities as well as for the governing boards or committees.
The different international studies of the different capacity strengthening initiatives helped in making successful leaders who have the following qualities:
- Properly persuade others with the positive energy even in difficult situations (Reilly et al. 2016)
- Properly think creatively as well as strategically about the development of the capacity as the proper way of improving the performance and making it better
- Proper usage of informal networks as well as contacts along with social standing as to properly safeguard the entire organization (Zorbas and Elston 2016)
- Proper adoption of the style of leadership as there is a growth in the entire organization
Proper legitimacy as well as power in the aboriginal settings comes out from traditional as well as informal with the enhancement of the capacity that generally evolves from experimentation or in the form of incremental or pragmatic process. The most essential component of the strengthening of the capacity is the development of proper leadership. In Australia, there is a proper substantiation that the aboriginal leaders are properly required to balance as well as negotiate the obligations in the mainstream along with the networks in the indigenous communities. According to (), he described the indigenous ethnically based doctrine that helps in providing internal mechanism for properly monitoring the structure of supremacy such as:
- Proper respect as well as involvement to familiar good in return for self-sufficiency
- Proper interconnections between the land, waterways as well as humans (Glover et al. 2015)
- The critical nature of the inter relationships of the humans replicate in the systems that are composite and there is impact of these systems have community control that is successful in nature
- Lastly, the ancestors as well as the spirit beings are the integral part of daily life
The leaders are properly connected with one another with the help of informal networks that are extensive in nature. The leaders who are more visible are the ones who able to exercise the proper authority with the help of different networks. On the other hand, the recognition of the indigenous networks those are informal in nature in Australia is barely understood by the ones who are outside it (Kapellas et al. 2014). There are different forms of the ability strengthening of the organizations wherein the capability of the supremacy is strengthened by the persons who are indigenous in nature and they create their own rules as well as strategy along with policies as this will help in scheming the mechanisms that are local in nature as to put in force different regulations and the leaders are held responsible as well. The key principles of designing good governance are as follows:
- Proper governance that is networked in nature that takes into account the requirements of the individuals (Slatyer et al. 2016)
- Proper cultural geographies of the governance
- Proper emphasis has to be given on the internal relationships as well as the connections that are shared in nature for proper determination of the self governance as well as representation
- Lastly, the shared responsibility is the basis of the distribution as well as clarification roles, powers as well as decision making in the different social networks and groups
Promising approaches in Indigenous Australia
There are different approaches that are promising in nature and these starts with a proper emphasis on the basis of the individuals who are performing in order to improve the aboriginal governance as well as their attempts in order to add proper value to the strengths as well as capacities that already exist in nature (Barney, Shannon and Nakata 2014). A proper range of the different models as well as approaches that are used has to be analyzed properly that includes participatory methodologies in order to generate proper learning. There are different measures to improve the governance with the help of imposing approach of one size fits all as this will help in addressing the aboriginal governance that are unlikely sustainable in nature.
Different Success Facilitators
There are different facilitators to success for strengthening the organizational capacity as this will help in improving the aboriginal community governance that are as follows:
- Proper commitment at the higher levels of the government that is in partnership with the National Congress of Australia’s individuals as well as other indigenous communities and organizations to create an approach that is long in nature along with flexible arrangements of funding
- Proper achievement of the partnership that is real in nature along with community ownership
- Proper understanding of the indigenous contexts that are complex in nature along with the service requirements as well as with the use of the steps in building confidence as well as trust
- Proper approaches that are tailored in nature that properly includes focus on the soft as well as hard capacities
Therefore, it can be inferred that the local and global evidence shows that will help in improving the indigenous health, quality of the life of the individuals as well as wellbeing of the individuals as well. The governance that is good and appropriate in nature is relevant for the COAG building blocks that are endorsed in nature in order to reduce the indigenous demerits such as early childhood, economic participation as well as leadership health as well.
Lastly, proper strengthening of the organizational capacity that is indigenous in nature is the concept that is context dependent. It has to be properly carried out within the development criteria that require proper collaboration as well as long term commitment as well. The strengthening of the capacity of the government as well as indigenous managers is beneficial in nature and this will help in improving the society governance that is aboriginal in nature. This will be done in a recurring procedure of development and this is the precursor for sustainable development.
Barney, K., Shannon, C. and Nakata, M., 2014. Introduction: Exploring the scope of the Australian Indigenous studies learning and teaching network. The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 43(1), pp.1-7.
Bennett-Levy, J., Singer, J., DuBois, S. and Hyde, K., 2017. Translating E-Mental Health Into Practice: What Are the Barriers and Enablers to E-Mental Health Implementation by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Professionals?. Journal of medical Internet research, 19(1).
Bodkin-Andrews, G. and Carlson, B., 2016. The legacy of racism and Indigenous Australian identity within education. Race Ethnicity and Education, 19(4), pp.784-807.
Brown, A., Carrington, M.J., McGrady, M., Lee, G., Zeitz, C., Krum, H., Rowley, K. and Stewart, S., 2014. Cardiometabolic risk and disease in Indigenous Australians: the heart of the heart study. International journal of cardiology, 171(3), pp.377-383.
Brusse, C., Gardner, K., McAullay, D. and Dowden, M., 2014. Social media and mobile apps for health promotion in Australian Indigenous populations: scoping review. Journal of medical Internet research, 16(12).
Buergelt, P.T., Maypilama, E.L., McPhee, J., Dhurrkay, G., Nirrpuranydji, S., Mänydjurrpuy, S., Wunungmurra, M., Skinner, T., Lowell, A. and Moss, S., 2017. Working Together with Remote Indigenous Communities to Facilitate Adapting to Using Energy Wisely: Barriers and Enablers. Energy Procedia, 121, pp.262-269.
Chapman, R., Smith, T. and Martin, C., 2014. Qualitative exploration of the perceived barriers and enablers to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people accessing healthcare through one Victorian Emergency Department. Contemporary nurse, 48(1), pp.48-58.
Clifford, A.C., Doran, C.M. and Tsey, K., 2013. A systematic review of suicide prevention interventions targeting indigenous peoples in Australia, United States, Canada and New Zealand. BMC public health, 13(1), p.463.
Gibson, O., Lisy, K., Davy, C., Aromataris, E., Kite, E., Lockwood, C., Riitano, D., McBride, K. and Brown, A., 2015. Enablers and barriers to the implementation of primary health care interventions for Indigenous people with chronic diseases: a systematic review. Implementation Science, 10(1), p.71.
Glover, M., Kira, A., Johnston, V., Walker, N., Thomas, D., Chang, A.B., Bullen, C., Segan, C.J. and Brown, N., 2015. A systematic review of barriers and facilitators to participation in randomized controlled trials by Indigenous people from New Zealand, Australia, Canada and the United States. Global health promotion, 22(1), pp.21-31.
Jennings, W., Spurling, G.K. and Askew, D.A., 2014. Yarning about health checks: barriers and enablers in an urban Aboriginal medical service. Australian journal of primary health, 20(2), pp.151-157.
Kapellas, K., Skilton, M.R., Maple?Brown, L.J., Do, L.G., Bartold, P.M., O'Dea, K., Brown, A., Celermajer, D.S. and Jamieson, L.M., 2014. Periodontal disease and dental caries among Indigenous Australians living in the Northern Territory, Australia. Australian dental journal, 59(1), pp.93-99.
Karmel, T., Misko, J., Blomberg, D., Bednarz, A. and Atkinson, G., 2014. Improving Labour Market Outcomes through Education and Training. Issues Paper No. 9. Produced for the Closing the Gap Clearinghouse. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.
Prince, M., Bryce, R., Albanese, E., Wimo, A., Ribeiro, W. and Ferri, C.P., 2013. The global prevalence of dementia: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Alzheimer's & Dementia, 9(1), pp.63-75.
Reilly, R., Evans, K., Gomersall, J., Gorham, G., Peters, M.D., Warren, S., O’Shea, R., Cass, A. and Brown, A., 2016. Effectiveness, cost effectiveness, acceptability and implementation barriers/enablers of chronic kidney disease management programs for Indigenous people in Australia, New Zealand and Canada: a systematic review of mixed evidence. BMC health services research, 16(1), p.119.
Short, D., 2016. Reconciliation and colonial power: Indigenous rights in Australia. Routledge.
Slatyer, S., Cramer, J., Pugh, J.D. and Twigg, D.E., 2016. Barriers and enablers to retention of Aboriginal Diploma of Nursing students in Western Australia: An exploratory descriptive study. Nurse education today, 42, pp.17-22.
Stefanelli, R.D., Castleden, H., Harper, S.L., Martin, D., Cunsolo, A. and Hart, C., 2017. Experiences with integrative Indigenous and Western knowledge in water research and management: a systematic realist review of literature from Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the United States. Environmental Reviews, 25(3), pp.323-333.
Sushames, A., Engelberg, T. and Gebel, K., 2017. Perceived barriers and enablers to participation in a community-tailored physical activity program with Indigenous Australians in a regional and rural setting: a qualitative study. International Journal for Equity in Health, 16(1), p.172.
Thomas, S.L., Zhao, Y., Guthridge, S.L. and Wakerman, J., 2014. The cost-effectiveness of primary care for Indigenous Australians with diabetes living in remote Northern Territory communities. The Medical journal of Australia, 200(11), pp.658-662.
Zorbas, H. and Elston, J., 2016. Sharing the challenge of cancer control for Indigenous Australians: a national agenda. European journal of cancer care, 25(2), pp.222-224.
Zwar, N., Harris, M., Griffiths, R., Roland, M., Dennis, S., Powell Davies, G. and Hasan, I., 2017. A systematic review of chronic disease management.