Building capacity in indigenous governance: Comparing the Australian and American experiences

Burke A. Hendrix, Danielle Delaney, Richard C. Witmer, Mark Moran, Will Sanders, Elizabeth Ganter

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

This paper compares key aspects of governance structures for Indigenous populations in the United States and Australia. The paper focuses on policy coordination and administration, in particular the nodes of decision-making in the two countries in relation to government contracting and accountability. The U.S. approach to funding Indigenous organizations stems from the 1975 Indian Self-Determination and Education Act and its subsequent expansions. Through the development of contracting into permanent compacting via block grants, this approach builds established nodes of Indigenous government and facilitates whole-of-government coherence at the level of the American Indian tribe. The U.S. approach seems correlated with better performance and may lighten bureaucratic loads over the long term. The Australian model, on the other hand, seeks to create whole-of-government coherence through top-down financial accountability in a way that hampers the development of Indigenous political capacity. The paper traces the development of these practices through time and illustrates how they contribute to the fragmentation rather than growth of Indigenous political capacities. It suggests ways the Australian model could be improved even in the absence of fundamental reform by drawing on the contracting-to-compacting framework of longstanding U.S. practices.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalAustralian Journal of Public Administration
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2019
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

governance
experience
responsibility
American Indian
self-determination
fragmentation
grant
ethnic group
funding
act
decision making
reform
performance
education
coherence
time

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Public Administration

Cite this

Building capacity in indigenous governance : Comparing the Australian and American experiences. / Hendrix, Burke A.; Delaney, Danielle; Witmer, Richard C.; Moran, Mark; Sanders, Will; Ganter, Elizabeth.

In: Australian Journal of Public Administration, 01.01.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{33ab3b7a09fd4476baaaceefc669a900,
title = "Building capacity in indigenous governance: Comparing the Australian and American experiences",
abstract = "This paper compares key aspects of governance structures for Indigenous populations in the United States and Australia. The paper focuses on policy coordination and administration, in particular the nodes of decision-making in the two countries in relation to government contracting and accountability. The U.S. approach to funding Indigenous organizations stems from the 1975 Indian Self-Determination and Education Act and its subsequent expansions. Through the development of contracting into permanent compacting via block grants, this approach builds established nodes of Indigenous government and facilitates whole-of-government coherence at the level of the American Indian tribe. The U.S. approach seems correlated with better performance and may lighten bureaucratic loads over the long term. The Australian model, on the other hand, seeks to create whole-of-government coherence through top-down financial accountability in a way that hampers the development of Indigenous political capacity. The paper traces the development of these practices through time and illustrates how they contribute to the fragmentation rather than growth of Indigenous political capacities. It suggests ways the Australian model could be improved even in the absence of fundamental reform by drawing on the contracting-to-compacting framework of longstanding U.S. practices.",
author = "Hendrix, {Burke A.} and Danielle Delaney and Witmer, {Richard C.} and Mark Moran and Will Sanders and Elizabeth Ganter",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/1467-8500.12403",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Australian Journal of Public Administration",
issn = "0313-6647",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Building capacity in indigenous governance

T2 - Comparing the Australian and American experiences

AU - Hendrix, Burke A.

AU - Delaney, Danielle

AU - Witmer, Richard C.

AU - Moran, Mark

AU - Sanders, Will

AU - Ganter, Elizabeth

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - This paper compares key aspects of governance structures for Indigenous populations in the United States and Australia. The paper focuses on policy coordination and administration, in particular the nodes of decision-making in the two countries in relation to government contracting and accountability. The U.S. approach to funding Indigenous organizations stems from the 1975 Indian Self-Determination and Education Act and its subsequent expansions. Through the development of contracting into permanent compacting via block grants, this approach builds established nodes of Indigenous government and facilitates whole-of-government coherence at the level of the American Indian tribe. The U.S. approach seems correlated with better performance and may lighten bureaucratic loads over the long term. The Australian model, on the other hand, seeks to create whole-of-government coherence through top-down financial accountability in a way that hampers the development of Indigenous political capacity. The paper traces the development of these practices through time and illustrates how they contribute to the fragmentation rather than growth of Indigenous political capacities. It suggests ways the Australian model could be improved even in the absence of fundamental reform by drawing on the contracting-to-compacting framework of longstanding U.S. practices.

AB - This paper compares key aspects of governance structures for Indigenous populations in the United States and Australia. The paper focuses on policy coordination and administration, in particular the nodes of decision-making in the two countries in relation to government contracting and accountability. The U.S. approach to funding Indigenous organizations stems from the 1975 Indian Self-Determination and Education Act and its subsequent expansions. Through the development of contracting into permanent compacting via block grants, this approach builds established nodes of Indigenous government and facilitates whole-of-government coherence at the level of the American Indian tribe. The U.S. approach seems correlated with better performance and may lighten bureaucratic loads over the long term. The Australian model, on the other hand, seeks to create whole-of-government coherence through top-down financial accountability in a way that hampers the development of Indigenous political capacity. The paper traces the development of these practices through time and illustrates how they contribute to the fragmentation rather than growth of Indigenous political capacities. It suggests ways the Australian model could be improved even in the absence of fundamental reform by drawing on the contracting-to-compacting framework of longstanding U.S. practices.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85074657219&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85074657219&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/1467-8500.12403

DO - 10.1111/1467-8500.12403

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85074657219

JO - Australian Journal of Public Administration

JF - Australian Journal of Public Administration

SN - 0313-6647

ER -