Indigenous Ideas Benefit Collaborative Research Partnerships

As with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander tradition, we acknowledge and pay our respects to the First People and Traditional custodians of the lands and waterways of that we work and live in. We thank them for their continued hospitality. We acknowledge and celebrate the continuation of a living culture. We acknowledge Elders past and present as well as our emerging leaders of tomorrow and thank them for their wisdom and guidance as we walk in their footsteps.

The Australian Social Work (ASW) Editorial Board approached one of the Aboriginal authors to research and develop specific journal editorial policies and guidelines for authors wishing to publish content pertaining to Indigenous peoples. This important piece of work was funded by the Australian Association of Social Workers, and we are proud that the outcome is an Invited Keynote Article published both online and in this Issue of ASW (Bennett, 2022a). Recently, a group of international First Nations authors released a position statement for rural and remote health journals, which demonstrated that academic journal publishing is moving towards a more Sovereign approach (Lock et al., 2022). Although the ASW Proposed Guidelines are a long-overdue development, we recognise that by world standards, ASW is one of very few national or international social work journals to provide editorial recommendations for articles by First Nations authors and about First Nations issues.

Research can be a tremendous force for good, providing it reflects the needs and priorities of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples, is conducted in ways that empower these Peoples and communities, and privileges their ways of knowing, being, and doing. In recent years, we have witnessed encouraging developments with an increase in research production led by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander scholars along with a gradual shift in how such research is conceptualised and undertaken.

The assumption underpinning the Proposed Guidelines (Bennett, 2022a) is that Indigenous epistemologies, standpoints, and methodologies have been subjugated in the past. This is despite Francis and Munson (2016) pointing out the absurdity of Indigenous scholars still being required to argue for Indigenous research methodology despite “writing strong academic work that outlines the tenets of Indigenous philosophy for more than 50 years” (p. 50). Moreton-Robinson (2013) explained that Aboriginal Peoples often struggle against normative dominant patriarchal conceptual frameworks (such as journal author guidelines), and it is the ongoing privileging of these frameworks that perpetuate this struggle. This affects how the Aboriginal Peoples conduct research: where they research, why they research, and what they research. Aboriginal peoples are often over-researched with minimal benefits (Anderson et al., 2001), and research is often harmful and exploitative (Bourke, 1995; Johnstone, 1991), with little to no positive benefit. Thus, past research has led to many negative outcomes so a shift to considering Aboriginal values and focusing on benefit-led research is overdue and necessary. According to Evans et al. (2014), a fundamental goal of research involving Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples is to facilitate Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples to speak for and of themselves, to build a research praxis underpinned by Indigenous self-determination. As Bennett (2022a) has stated: “Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have the right to self-determination in their cultural affairs and the expression of their cultural material” (p. 276). This, of course, includes the conduct of any research relating to our lives.

According to Hendrick and Young (2017), non-Indigenous co-conspirator researchers need to employ ethical practices that include the “personal ethic of responsibility”, “interpersonal ethic of relationship” (reconciliation), and “public ethic of action” (restoration) (p. 17). Those engaging with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples need to ensure they do not engage in any form of cultural or knowledge appropriation, confirm they have permission to work in the space, and take responsibility for their actions and learning. Reading and learning from the latest articles and frameworks ensures actively working to avoid a false sense of knowing (Kluttz et al., 2020).

Many culturally-responsive social workers will look to engage local Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities in the future to support and guide their research, particularly if it is to be published. Thus, these are only Proposed Guidelines, and further considerations and additions may be warranted to ensure that all research respects the relationality and co-becoming of the researcher, participants, and space and place (Bawaka et al., 2015). In reality, how might we have Sovereignty in this space? How do we demonstrate cultural responsiveness as a social work profession? Will these Proposed Guidelines ensure research with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities is conducted in a respectful way? What impact will such research have for communities?

In addition to the Invited Keynote Article (Bennett, 2022a), other articles in this Issue of ASW (July 2022) are either authored by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples or are about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander issues. All offer a demonstration of author positionings as required by the Proposed Guidelines, and all focus on Indigenous ideas, values, the principles of equity and self-determination, and the benefits of collaborative research partnership. Four of the articles are focused on improving practice and services. These include: improving service delivery for Aboriginal women in remote central Australia experiencing sexual violence (Lindeman & Togni, 2022); advancing service delivery and policy development through listening to the voices of young people using a youth offender service in Townsville, Queensland (Savuro et al., 2022); highlighting the importance of deep listening and relational trauma-informed interventions for young Aboriginal women using violence (Blakemore et al., 2022); and strengthening positive and collaborative practice for Aboriginal hospital liaison officers and hospital social workers in Victoria (Orr et al., 2022). Three are articles located in education and academe: one is a qualitative study highlighting the unsupportive, untrustworthy, socially and politically unsafe academic environment for Aboriginal social work academics in Australia (Bennett, 2022b); another has investigated democratising and decolonising practices in Aotearoa New Zealand to better support both student and workforce diversity in social work education (McNabb, 2022); and the third is a scoping review identifying Indigenous students’ experiences of racism and discrimination, misrecognition and misrepresentation on placement (Pallas et al., 2022). The final two articles showcase innovative research partnerships. One is a case study focusing on the challenges and necessity of ethically capturing research impact in a community-industry partnership (Whiteside et al. 2022). The other applies a strength-based approach to analysing data from the Australian Government’s Longitudinal Study of Indigenous Children, and reframes predominantly deficit-based narratives about Indigenous fathering in Australia as far more positive experiences in which culture and love are communicated (Prehn et al., 2022).

Although there is more to be done in this space, these articles begin to discuss ethics in research; capacity building; and Indigenous knowledge, processes and protocols that need to be embedded into all stages of the research process, including:

• cultivating community-owned proposals;

• research team recruitment and leadership;

• culturally-responsive methodologies;

• strengthening community capacity;

• delivering community-focused outcomes;

• communicating outcomes with cultural-appropriate knowledge exchange media; and

• following up and engaging communities on research impact, including impact evaluation approaches established at project outset.

Next Steps: A Special Issue 2023

Given the history of research on Indigenous people and health without consent, engagement, or respect for culture and lore, this themed Issue of ASW (July 2022) represents a notable gesture of active reconciliation. A key strategy in decolonising social work policy, practice, education, community work, family work, and research is to continue to facilitate spaces that centre Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander/First Nation voices. To this end, a Special Issue of ASW in 2023 will advance the decolonising agenda for social work. The Guest Editors of this Special Issue seek to bring together a collection of articles that uphold Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander/First Nation voices, leadership, and healing. It is envisaged that articles will discuss existing and emerging Indigenous knowledge, challenge ineffective, paternalistic policies and approaches, forge new ground in decolonised practice, and advance key themes and challenges. Each article submitted will be expected to demonstrate that the Guidelines have been adopted in the research, preparation, and writing of the article. We aim to forge new ground in social work, community engagement, community development, cultural practice and services, policy, education, research, collaborations, and partnerships through prioritising and voicing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voices. This Special Issue will be a dedicated platform for these voices and, as such, represents a defining moment and a strong move away from the colonising practices of past research in Australian social work. A Call for Papers for this Special Issue has been published online and included in this Issue of ASW.