This study seeks to improve the understanding of Indigenous Enterprise Development (IED) efforts undertaken on communal Indigenous land in the Northern Territory of Australia. Success in enterprise may support the achievement of a range of social, political and economic objectives for Indigenous peoples. The thesis offers a contribution to knowledge and literature on IED by bringing understanding to the meaning of success for Indigenous enterprise, identifying those factors that contribute to its success as well as presenting the barriers that prevent it. This study is the most recent rigorous scholarly work of IED on Indigenous land in the Northern Territory. The focus of this research is on Indigenous commercial enterprise development at a communal and individual level. Indigenous enterprise development is said to be different from other forms of enterprise development because of the legal rights of Indigenous peoples and because of particular cultural attributes, such as different perceptions of property rights in the Indigenous context and an emphasis on values like collectivism and sharing. These differences are found to shape notions of success and approaches to development. The research reviews literature in the international and domestic context on Indigenous economic development and Indigenous entrepreneurship. It also draws from internal and external documents of relevant institutions and news sources. These sources and findings are then built upon with fifty six in-depth, face-to-face interviews of selected participants who are experts or opinion leaders on IED in the region. These participants represented a variety of interest groups such as the government, academia, the Indigenous community and businesses from both Indigenous and non-Indigenous cultures in the Northern Territory. This study used a qualitative research approach for data collection and analysis. The researcher utilized a qualitative data analysis method, including the reporting of field notes, preparation of field notes into transcripts, coding of data, display of data, the development of conclusions, and creation of a report. This study identified five categories of barriers to successful enterprise development on Indigenous land in the Northern Territory. These barriers are: high levels of conflict and mistrust, socio-cultural norms and values that can work against success, a lack of human capital, a poor institutional framework and economic and structural factors. There were four categories of factors found that support the development of successful Indigenous enterprise: developing business acumen, integrating culture within the enterprise, separating business from community politics and greater independence from government. While definitions of success varied across the region there were common objectives for Indigenous enterprise, such as eliminating welfare dependency and maintaining a link to land. Ultimately, success for Indigenous enterprise was deemed to be business survival, but in ways that are congruent with each Indigenous community?s values. The findings in this research emphasize that certain cultural attributes may act to constrain successful enterprise development, but can be integrated into an enterprise through changes in enterprise structure, or practice, to support successful economic outcomes. The research also emphasizes the importance of institutional settings on human capital and successful enterprise development in the region. This study?s findings can potentially guide and inform further research in this field. The research develops a number of policy recommendations which offer potential support to policymakers in addressing the important social problem of Indigenous disadvantage through enterprise development initiatives. / This study seeks to improve the understanding of Indigenous Enterprise Development (IED) efforts undertaken on communal Indigenous land in the Northern Territory of Australia. Success in enterprise may support the achievement of a range of social, political and economic objectives for Indigenous peoples. The thesis offers a contribution to knowledge and literature on IED by bringing understanding to the meaning of success for Indigenous enterprise, identifying those factors that contribute to its success as well as presenting the barriers that prevent it. This study is the most recent rigorous scholarly work of IED on Indigenous land in the Northern Territory. / Thesis (PhD)--University of South Australia, 2008

Depuis la fin des années 1980, les collaborations avec les communautés autochtones semblent s’accroître dans les musées canadiens. Un déplacement apparaît de la prise de parole en contexte de revendication au don de parole en contexte muséal. Après la remise en cause des musées ethnologiques, la prise en charge de la parole autochtone annonce le temps de la reconnaissance. Seulement, le mot reconnaissance est employé dans des contextes variés en muséologie. Ses occurrences indiquent plusieurs sens, dérivés de la volonté de redonner dignité et respect aux peuples autochtones et de produire des expositions qui présentent leur patrimoine d’origine à la lumière de leurs points de vue. Selon une approche communicationnelle, notre travail a porté sur les pratiques des musées qui consistent à donner la parole aux peuples autochtones et à l’exposer. Le travail a été centré sur la combinaison des points de vue autochtones avec ceux des concepteurs-muséographes. L’entreprise de la recherche a visé à cerner les opérations induites et générées par cette situation d’entrecroisements de points de vue, plus ou moins discordants, qui doivent, d’une manière ou d’une autre, s’unir dans un même espace communicationnel. Le système polyphonique de l’exposition est conceptualisé en trois moments de médiation : la prise en compte, la monstration et l’interprétation des points de vue autochtones. Ils correspondent aux intentions des concepteurs-muséographes et des expositions, puis à la manière dont elles sont interprétées par les visiteurs. Nous avons réalisé quatre enquêtes de terrain dans onze musées à travers le Canada : observation participante ; entretiens individuels auprès de professionnels des musées ; analyse de discours ; entretiens de groupes auprès de visiteurs autochtones et allochtones. Nous avons examiné les pratiques collaboratives et croisé ces quatre formes de discours des musées afin de mettre à l’épreuve le potentiel de reconnaissance des expositions qui tiennent compte des points de vue des représentants autochtones. Il résulte que la patrimonialisation est conçue en tant que processus de reconnaissance. De plus, l’intensification de la patrimonialisation des objets autochtones est synchronique de l’expansion coloniale. Néanmoins, l’analyse de la prise de distance du concepteur-muséographe vis-à-vis de son point de vue et de celui des autochtones rend compte des relations complexes entre le don de parole, l’autorité de discours et l’auctorialité. Malgré les divergences entre les intentions explicitées par les professionnels et leurs intentions implicites dans les expositions, les discours des visiteurs autochtones et allochtones traduisent un contrat de reconnaissance entre le musée et les visiteurs. Ainsi, le principe polyphonique et ses formes de reconnaissance sont mis en évidence dans les espaces de production et de réception des expositions produites en collaboration. Notre recherche révèle plusieurs modalités de reconnaissance manifestes dans la combinaison et l’entrecroisement des voix autochtones avec celles des praticiens. Cet essai d’interprétation met au jour des conflits d’ordre patrimonial et socio-historique qui engendrent des mécanismes de régulation par assimilation/accommodation. Il décrit deux logiques fondamentales relatives à l’identité et à la mémoire. De ces adaptations mises en œuvre par les musées ressort un phénomène permanent de reconnaissance amorcé depuis la colonisation des territoires autochtones. La recherche suggère finalement d’envisager le musée comme lieu de reconnaissance non seulement du patrimoine, mais aussi des publics et des peuples donateurs et donataires du patrimoine. / Collaborations with aboriginal communities appear to be increasing in Canadian museums, with the communities shifting from speaking in a context of claiming theirrights to being given a voice in the museum context. In keeping with the questioning about ethnological museums, taking into account the voice of the aboriginal peoplesprefigures since the eighties the time for recognition. But the word recognition is used indiverse museum contexts.Based on a communicational approach, our research considers the links between thepolyphonic and recognition modalities of the exhibition media. We have attempted toidentify and understand the processes induced and generated by exhibitions’ interactionaland intertextual systems. The polyphonic system is conceptualized in three mediation moments in the production and reception spaces of the exhibition: acknowledgment, monstration, and interpretation of aboriginal points of view. They correspond to there cognition intentions of the exhibitions and designers-museographers, then visitors’recognition. We have conducted four field studies in eleven different Canadian museums : participant observation; one-on-one interviews with museum professionals; discourse analysis ; group interviews with native and non-native visitors. We have studied the collaborative practicesand these four types of museum discourses to demonstrate the recognition potential ofexhibitions dedicated to the aboriginals’ perspectives.Our research reveals several recognition modes manifest in the combination andinterlinking of aboriginals’ and practitioners’ voices; it identifies logic in the polysemy ofthe word recognition. This interpretation essay reveals patrimonial and socio-historical conflicts that generate regulation mechanisms through assimilation/accommodation. A permanent recognition phenomenon emerges from the adaptations implemented by themuseums since the beginning of aboriginal patrimonialization during the colonizationperiod. Our research proposes to apprehend the museum as a recognition place of heritage, but also of the general public and the peoples, whether donors or donees of that heritage.

No description available.