Search results

One’s standpoint and consequent research paradigm impacts how we conduct research, including study design, analyses interpretation and dissemination of results. In 2017, the authors began PhD, studying the potential barriers to aftercare treatment for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children aged under 16 who had sustained a burn injury in one of five major hospitals in Australia. The paper aims to discuss this issue.

As Aboriginal PhD students, the authors are conducting research using Aboriginal ontology as a framework, which is based on a holistic framework with interconnectedness, person-centred care and Aboriginal ways of knowing as the foundation. The framework has been shaped by the first author’s knowing, being and doing, and the authors’ worldview has informed and shaped the standpoint and the way the research has been developed and conducted.

It was important for the authors to have a connectedness to each aspect of the research and to each individual person that shared their story: this was paramount to the ways of being.

This connectedness stems from growing up on the authors’ country and learning from elders, from the connection to all entities living around, within and with the authors. The Indigenous research methodology was used throughout the study, including yarning and Dadirri, a way of deep listening and learning, as the basis for interviewing.

This chapter looks at what it means to set out to do anthropological research with tangata whenua (New Zealanders of Māori descent; literally, ‘people of the land’), from the particular perspective of a Pākehā (New Zealander of non-Māori descent – usually European) musical anthropologist with an interest in sound-made worlds. In late 2017, Lowe was awarded funding for a conjoint PhD scholarship in anthropology at James Cook University, Australia, and Aarhus University, Denmark. However, following advice from several colleagues in Aotearoa New Zealand, Lowe decided to assess the viability of the project with his prospective Māori and non-Māori collaborators prior to officially starting his PhD candidature. Throughout this process of pre-ethics (Barrett, 2016), Lowe met with both Māori and non-Māori to discuss the proposed PhD project; a ‘listening in’ to his own socio-historical positioning as a Pākehā anthropologist within contemporary Aotearoa New Zealand. This approach to anthropological research is in response to George (2017), who argues for a new politically and ethnically aware mode of anthropology that aims to (re)establish relationships of true meaning between anthropology and Māori in Aotearoa New Zealand.

Over recent decades, research institutions have prescribed discrete ethics guidelines for human research with Indigenous people in Australia. Such guidelines respond to concerns about unethical and harmful processes in research, including that they entrench colonial relations and structures. This chapter sets out some of the limitations of these well-intentioned guidelines for the decolonisation of research. Namely, their underlying assumption of Indigenous vulnerability and deficit and, consequently, their function to minimise risk. It argues for a strengths-based approach to researching with and by Indigenous communities that recognises community members’ capacity to know what ethical research looks like and their ability to control research. It suggests that this approach provides genuine outcomes for their communities in ways that meet their communities’ needs. This means that communities must be partners in research who can demand reciprocation for their participation and sharing of their knowledge, time and experiences. This argument is not purely normative but supported by examples of Indigenous research models within our fields of health and criminology that are premised on self-determination.

The purpose of this paper is to determine whether a shared leadership governance arrangement facilitates improved outcomes within a social marketing service eco-system. The research was focussed on gaining an understanding of participants involved in a cross-institutional partnership. The case study selected to facilitate this exploration was a social marketing project that aimed to support aboriginal households in Victoria with regard to their energy efficiency. It thus investigated the meso-level insights experienced by partners and those delivering the service.

Interview (yarn-based) data from 20 individuals involved in an energy efficiency programme were collected and analysed. Participants shared their experiences via informal “yarns” that were conducted in the first 12 months of the programme. This timing was chosen to gain their initial self-reflective perspectives and their interactions within the shared leadership model.

The results of the analysis identified six key themes that are interrelated and fundamental to building trust between all actors involved. The themes include relationship building, advocating rights, managing competing priorities, being community driven, using communication that translates and using community networks. Four of the themes were found to be components of relationship and trust building, which collectively lead to effectively accessing aboriginal communities. These findings extend current knowledge on the structures necessary to ensure healthy eco-systems are sustained throughout social marketing programmes.

The authors established that shared leadership is well aligned with service-dominant logic, and the findings of this study reveal that it can positively contribute to meso-level service eco-systems and thus improve social outcomes for recipients of social marketing efforts. The findings also underscore the need for social marketers to recognise the importance of having a culturally acceptable value co-creation model in social marketing programmes when working with Aboriginal Australians.

This paper is the first to explore and develop the authors’ understanding of the efficacy of adopting a shared leadership approach in social marketing. Shared leadership has the potential to be an institutional arrangement that facilitates service-dominant logic and the value co-creation process, influencing positive behaviour change at the micro level in aboriginal communities. Specifically, it is the first to identify that “advocating rights” is an important component for partners to adopt in cross-cultural collaborations when collectively running social marketing programmes.