Cultural bridges – Infusing indigenous perspectives into infrastructure planning and development
Infrastructure development in Australia is seen as a key enabler of economic growth, leading to positive societal outcomes such as increased employment, productivity and enhanced quality of life as well as facilitating the reduction of social exclusion and inequity. Yet, studies show that Indigenous communities frequently do not share in these benefits, and often suffer major economic, health and cultural loses. While studies highlight the unequal impact of infrastructure development, guidance on reducing this disparity and involving Indigenous communities in infrastructure development is limited. To address this research gap, this study uses qualitative interviews with senior infrastructure leaders from both Indigenous and non-Indigenous backgrounds and analysis of existing literature to contextualize Indigenous needs and identify barriers hindering Indigenous participation in infrastructure development. The study then applies system analysis to understand the interdependency of these barriers and identifies leverage points within the system to target policy interventions. It was found that Indigenous people have different world-view perspectives leading to unique unmet needs during infrastructure development. Indigenous needs from infrastructure development can be split into three categories: (1) Economical and Financial, (2) Social and (3) Cultural. Further, barriers hindering Indigenous participation in infrastructure development into (1) Economical and Financial, (2) Human Capital, (3) Cultural Beliefs & Norms and (4) Government and Corporate polices. Four intervention areas were identified through the systems analysis to increase Indigenous participation in infrastructure development. These revolved around changes in fundamental mental models and include the adoption of a long-term funding strategy for infrastructure projects and programmes, respect for Indigenous traditions and practice, Indigenous trust-building towards Western organisations and shared decision making and the acceptance of Indigenous governance systems. Although limitations were present which impact the generalisability of the findings to other international Indigenous contexts, it is envisioned that the methodology can still be used and adapted to suit the unique cultural, social, and environmental conditions of different Indigenous communities worldwide.