Advanced search options

Advanced Search Options 🞨

Browse by author name (“Author name starts with…”).

Find ETDs with:

in
/  
in
/  
in
/  
in

Written in Published in Earliest date Latest date

Sorted by

Results per page:

Sorted by: relevance · author · university · dateNew search

You searched for +publisher:"University of New South Wales" +contributor:("Brennan, Sean, Gilbert + Tobin Centre of Public Law, Faculty of Law, UNSW"). Showing records 1 – 2 of 2 total matches.

Search Limiters

Last 2 Years | English Only

No search limiters apply to these results.

▼ Search Limiters


University of New South Wales

1. Terrill, Leon Matthew. Beyond communal and individual ownership: demystifying Aboriginal land reform in the Northern Territory.

Degree: Law, 2013, University of New South Wales

Since 2006, the Australian Government has introduced three sets of reforms to Aboriginal land ownership in the Northern Territory. This thesis considers those reforms as they have been implemented in the period until 2013, and analyses how they came about, what they do, their consequences and the potential for alternative approaches. The three sets of reforms considered here are township leasing, the reforms introduced as part of the Northern Territory Emergency Response (including the compulsory acquisition of five-year leases) and ‘secure tenure’ policies as they apply to housing and other infrastructure. These reforms arose out of a widespread public debate about Aboriginal land reform that began in 2004. The thesis argues that this debate was conducted using vague and ill-defined terminology that was poorly suited to a discussion of communities on Aboriginal land, which are the areas affected by the recent reforms. In particular, there was a high reliance on the concepts of ‘communal ownership’ and ‘individual ownership’. This impacted in several ways. To a considerable extent, it led to the wrong issues being contested. It also resulted in pertinent issues, such as home ownership and economic development, being debated in a manner that was far more divisive and less instructive than was necessary or helpful. This contributed to confusion about what land reform can do, and some of that confusion is reflected in the implementation of the reforms. The reforms have not – as was suggested during the debate – led to widespread ownership of land by individual Aboriginal residents. They have resulted in the formalisation of tenure arrangements in accordance with new government policies. The two most significant consequences of this have been changes to community governance, including a deepening of the role played by governments, and the introduction of more widespread rent. The thesis assesses the consequences of these developments, as well as the impact of the reforms on home ownership and economic development. The thesis concludes by setting out a framework for developing alternative approaches to land reform that are more responsive to the needs and circumstance of communities on Aboriginal land. Advisors/Committee Members: Brennan, Sean, Gilbert + Tobin Centre of Public Law, Faculty of Law, UNSW, Davis, Megan, Indigenous Law Centre, Faculty of Law, UNSW.

Subjects/Keywords: Land tenure reform; Aboriginal land; Indigenous; Land reform; Land tenure reform

Record DetailsSimilar RecordsGoogle PlusoneFacebookTwitterCiteULikeMendeleyreddit

APA · Chicago · MLA · Vancouver · CSE | Export to Zotero / EndNote / Reference Manager

APA (6th Edition):

Terrill, L. M. (2013). Beyond communal and individual ownership: demystifying Aboriginal land reform in the Northern Territory. (Doctoral Dissertation). University of New South Wales. Retrieved from http://handle.unsw.edu.au/1959.4/53465 ; https://unsworks.unsw.edu.au/fapi/datastream/unsworks:12160/SOURCE02?view=true

Chicago Manual of Style (16th Edition):

Terrill, Leon Matthew. “Beyond communal and individual ownership: demystifying Aboriginal land reform in the Northern Territory.” 2013. Doctoral Dissertation, University of New South Wales. Accessed April 15, 2021. http://handle.unsw.edu.au/1959.4/53465 ; https://unsworks.unsw.edu.au/fapi/datastream/unsworks:12160/SOURCE02?view=true.

MLA Handbook (7th Edition):

Terrill, Leon Matthew. “Beyond communal and individual ownership: demystifying Aboriginal land reform in the Northern Territory.” 2013. Web. 15 Apr 2021.

Vancouver:

Terrill LM. Beyond communal and individual ownership: demystifying Aboriginal land reform in the Northern Territory. [Internet] [Doctoral dissertation]. University of New South Wales; 2013. [cited 2021 Apr 15]. Available from: http://handle.unsw.edu.au/1959.4/53465 ; https://unsworks.unsw.edu.au/fapi/datastream/unsworks:12160/SOURCE02?view=true.

Council of Science Editors:

Terrill LM. Beyond communal and individual ownership: demystifying Aboriginal land reform in the Northern Territory. [Doctoral Dissertation]. University of New South Wales; 2013. Available from: http://handle.unsw.edu.au/1959.4/53465 ; https://unsworks.unsw.edu.au/fapi/datastream/unsworks:12160/SOURCE02?view=true


University of New South Wales

2. Hartley, Jacklyn. Constructing a contextual model of indigenous participation in decision-making: a comparative analysis.

Degree: Law, 2016, University of New South Wales

Indigenous peoples have long argued that states must obtain their free, prior and informed consent (‘FPIC’) in order to undertake resource development within their territories. They have sought international recognition of this principle in order to protect their territories and to exercise their inherent authority over them. However, many states have opposed this principle and its status remains controversial. In Saramaka v Suriname, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (‘the Court’) injected a new perspective into this debate. Under the Court’s contextual model of ‘effective participation’, states must always consult Indigenous peoples regarding development projects within their territories. In addition, an obligation to obtain FPIC arises in relation to high impact development activities. The state’s obligations are therefore linked to the act’s potential impact.The Saramaka model has influenced international understandings of Indigenous peoples’ right to participate in decision-making. Nevertheless, significant gaps and tensions exist within this model. It is therefore unclear whether the model is capable of addressing the concerns that have inspired Indigenous peoples to seek recognition of the FPIC principle.This thesis examines two important unresolved issues. The first concerns the question of who is responsible for devising a consultation procedure. The second is whether the presence of pre-existing impact affects the application of the FPIC trigger test. Each issue can have a profound effect on the operation of the Saramaka model.To explore potential future directions for the Saramaka model, this thesis undertakes a comparative study of how these issues are addressed in Canada and Australia. Both the Canadian duty to consult doctrine and the Australian right to negotiate regime employ similar contextual devices to determine the extent of a non-Indigenous government’s obligations. The thesis finds that these jurisdictions contain beneficial features, which the Court can build upon. However, in relation to the two identified issues, both jurisdictions have adopted positions that potentially privilege non-Indigenous interests. The thesis proposes steps that the Court should take to avoid reproducing these problems within its model, with the objective of supporting Indigenous peoples to protect their territories and exercise their authority as far as possible within a contextual framework. Advisors/Committee Members: Brennan, Sean, Gilbert + Tobin Centre of Public Law, Faculty of Law, UNSW, Roux, Theunis, Law, Faculty of Law, UNSW, Davis, Megan, Indigenous Law Centre, Faculty of Law, UNSW.

Subjects/Keywords: Free, prior and informed consent; Indigenous peoples; Duty to consult; Right to negotiate

Record DetailsSimilar RecordsGoogle PlusoneFacebookTwitterCiteULikeMendeleyreddit

APA · Chicago · MLA · Vancouver · CSE | Export to Zotero / EndNote / Reference Manager

APA (6th Edition):

Hartley, J. (2016). Constructing a contextual model of indigenous participation in decision-making: a comparative analysis. (Doctoral Dissertation). University of New South Wales. Retrieved from http://handle.unsw.edu.au/1959.4/56276 ; https://unsworks.unsw.edu.au/fapi/datastream/unsworks:40442/SOURCE02?view=true

Chicago Manual of Style (16th Edition):

Hartley, Jacklyn. “Constructing a contextual model of indigenous participation in decision-making: a comparative analysis.” 2016. Doctoral Dissertation, University of New South Wales. Accessed April 15, 2021. http://handle.unsw.edu.au/1959.4/56276 ; https://unsworks.unsw.edu.au/fapi/datastream/unsworks:40442/SOURCE02?view=true.

MLA Handbook (7th Edition):

Hartley, Jacklyn. “Constructing a contextual model of indigenous participation in decision-making: a comparative analysis.” 2016. Web. 15 Apr 2021.

Vancouver:

Hartley J. Constructing a contextual model of indigenous participation in decision-making: a comparative analysis. [Internet] [Doctoral dissertation]. University of New South Wales; 2016. [cited 2021 Apr 15]. Available from: http://handle.unsw.edu.au/1959.4/56276 ; https://unsworks.unsw.edu.au/fapi/datastream/unsworks:40442/SOURCE02?view=true.

Council of Science Editors:

Hartley J. Constructing a contextual model of indigenous participation in decision-making: a comparative analysis. [Doctoral Dissertation]. University of New South Wales; 2016. Available from: http://handle.unsw.edu.au/1959.4/56276 ; https://unsworks.unsw.edu.au/fapi/datastream/unsworks:40442/SOURCE02?view=true

.