Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorDaly, Kathleen
dc.contributor.authorGreen, Deirdreen_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-01-23T02:28:21Z
dc.date.available2018-01-23T02:28:21Z
dc.date.issued2009en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.25904/1912/14
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/366272
dc.description.abstractThis research aims to draw attention to the way government and Indigenous groups engage in community settings and explores the potential of this sphere of political activity as a source of innovation and reform. Indigenous people have many good ideas about managing crime and justice in their communities, but what happens to those ideas when they are presented to an agency of the criminal justice system? To investigate the fate of Indigenous ideas and how they might be progressed through western bureaucracies, I conducted four case studies – two in New Zealand and two in the Australian state of Queensland – that represent examples of what occurs when government and Indigenous groups come together to develop a local crime and justice project. This thesis presents an empirical record of the events in each case, a comparative analysis of what occurred and my hypothesis of what might be likely to occur in other similar cases. I found that Indigenous leaders responded to government projects by challenging the government’s intentions, venting their anger, hijacking the agenda and contesting the projects’ assumptions. My analysis of the policy background to the cases shows that although governments currently favour community ‘capacity building’ strategies, these policies mistakenly assume that Indigenous communities are capacity deficient. Indigenous leaders tend to interpret policies that encourage devolved decision-making arrangements as government support for self-determination, and ‘whole of government’ strategies continue to disappoint because the public sector is unable to coordinate its resources. Instead, successful local projects often depend on the accidental convergence of a good idea, a committed and enthusiastic leadership, some degree of political will and sufficient resources. To maximise these opportunities for reform, bureaucrats need to feel comfortable in the ‘community space’, to learn to operate within the Indigenous domain and be willing to put Indigenous ideas into practice. The thesis concludes that Indigenous communities are highly capable of developing reform projects and effective forms of governance on Indigenous terms, but government actors are often unsure of how to utilise the expertise of Indigenous people. Effective Indigenous leaders are experts in the history, conditions and aspirations of their communities. They are also experts in the practice of consensus decision-making, can mobilise community support for a good idea and have learned to negotiate with unresponsive and uncoordinated government agencies. When government and Indigenous groups are willing to engage, and each acknowledges the potential contribution of the other, then there is potential for a new way forward in the relationship between government agencies and Indigenous people.en_US
dc.languageEnglishen_US
dc.publisherGriffith Universityen_US
dc.publisher.placeBrisbaneen_US
dc.rights.copyrightThe author owns the copyright in this thesis, unless stated otherwise.en_US
dc.subject.keywordscriminal justiceen_US
dc.subject.keywordsIndigenous groupsen_US
dc.subject.keywordsgovernment agenciesen_US
dc.subject.keywordsNew Zealanden_US
dc.subject.keywordsAustraliaen_US
dc.subject.keywordsIndigenous communitiesen_US
dc.subject.keywordsstate sovereigntyen_US
dc.subject.keywordsindigenous peoples' sovereigntyen_US
dc.titleEngagement and Innovation in Criminal Justice: Case Studies of Relations between Indigenous Groups and Government Agenciesen_US
dc.typeGriffith thesisen_US
gro.facultyFaculty of Humanities and Social Sciencesen_US
gro.rights.copyrightThe author owns the copyright in this thesis, unless stated otherwise.
gro.hasfulltextFull Text
dc.contributor.otheradvisorRansley, Janet
dc.rights.accessRightsPublicen_US
gro.identifier.gurtIDgu1315531189689en_US
gro.identifier.ADTnumberadt-QGU20100609.144127en_US
gro.source.ADTshelfnoADT0803en_US
gro.thesis.degreelevelThesis (PhD Doctorate)en_US
gro.thesis.degreeprogramDoctor of Philosophy (PhD)en_US
gro.departmentSchool of Criminology and Criminal Justiceen_US
gro.griffith.authorGreen, Deirdre


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record