RURALITY, CRIME AND SOCIETY - Volume 1 Issue 2 - Lightning Speed Content ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
RURALITY, CRIME
AND SOCIETY
Volume 1 Issue 2
October 2020
ISSN: 2652-8673
1
RURALITY, CRIME AND SOCIETY VOLUME 1 ISSUE 2
IN THIS ISSUE
• Message from the Director
– Dr Kyle Mulrooney University of New England
• Message from the editor
– Dr Jenny Wise University of New England
• The latest news from International Society for the Study of Rural Crime (ISSRC)
– Dr Bridget Harris (QUT) and Dr Alistair Harkness (UNE)
• Rural Criminologist Profile
– Dr Danielle Watson Queensland University of Technology
• Graduate Student Profile
– Melina Stewart-North Federation University
• Research Feature
– Associate Professor Megan Williams: “Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander justice and health
research: More than themes and stories”
• Research Feature
– Dr David Rodríguez Goyes and Professor Nigel South : “The neglected rurality: Crimes against
and within Indigenous societies”
• Research Feature
– Professor Lisa Waller : “Set up for storytelling: Television representations of ‘ice’ use in rural
Australia ”
• PhD Research Feature
– Alexander Baird: “Drain the State: A Case Study of Water Theft in the Murray-Darling Basin,
Australia”
• Media Releases
– Conversation Piece: “Illegal hunters are a bigger problem on farms than animal activists – so
why aren’t we talking about that?”
• News and Announcements
– International Society for the Study of Rural Crime (ISSRC)
– Vodcast Series: Issues in Rural Crime & Society
– New book series: Research in Rural Crime
– 2020- 2021 Conferences
– Introducing the new editor: Dr Louise Nicholas
2
RURALITY, CRIME AND SOCIETY VOLUME 1 ISSUE 2
MESSAGE FROM DR KYLE MULROONEY
DIRECTOR OF THE CENTRE FOR RURAL CRIMINOLOGY
Dear colleagues
The Centre for Rural Criminology was launched a year ago on the 9 September 2019. We would like
to take this opportunity to sincerely thank members of the rural criminology community for the
ongoing support of the Centre.
Let’s reflect on some of the key milestones that the Centre has achieved over its first year:
• There are almost sixty members of the Centre, linking national and international academics,
practitioners and students together
• Five thematic groups have been created to accomplish the Centre’s aims with the following
passionate leaders to guide them:
1. Policing, justice and rurality
Leaders: Dr Bridget Harris and Dr Alistair Harkness
2. Criminological dimensions of food and agriculture
Leaders: Dr Richard Byrne and Emmanuel Bunei
3. Drug use, production and trafficking in the rural context
Leaders: Dr Katinka van de Ven and Dr Natalie Thomas
4. Violence and rurality
Leaders: Dr Tarah Hodgkinson and Dr Ziwei Qi
5. Environment, climate and crime
Leader: Dr Laura Bedford
Thank to these leaders for stepping into this role and promoting these key research areas.
• Researchers within the Centre have attracted several grants, including an evaluation of Ceres
Tag for the interruption and reduction of livestock theft. See ‘Our work’ for more
information: https://www.une.edu.au/about-une/faculty-of-humanities-arts-social-sciences-
and-education/hass/humanities-arts-and-social-sciences-research/centre-for-rural-
criminology
• The Centre launched a YouTube channel and vodcast series: Issues in Rural Crime and Society
• The Centre hosted NSWPF Commissioner Mick Fuller and the Rural Crime Prevention Team for
the launch of Operation Stock Check.
In addition, the Centre has been associated with numerous publications from our members. If you
would like your rural crime research to be listed on our webpage, please send through the details
of your published research to rucrim@une.edu.au.
We very much look forward to your continuing involvement with the Centre and with rural
criminology as we enter our exciting second year.
3
RURALITY, CRIME AND SOCIETY VOLUME 1 ISSUE 2
MESSAGE FROM THE EDITOR
Dear members,
I hope everyone is staying well and keeping safe. The second edition of Rurality, Crime and Society features numerous
research pieces on crucial issues within rural criminology. Thank you to everyone who contributed to this latest
edition.
This edition opens with a report from the International Society for the Study of Rural Crime (ISSRC) by Dr Bridget
Harris and Dr Alistair Harkness. Make sure you familiarise yourself with all of the wonderful opportunities that they
are creating, including roundtables, blogs and award programs!
Both Dr Danielle Watson from the Queensland University of Technology and Melina Stewart-North, a postgraduate
student from Federation University are profiled in this edition. Dr Watson is researching police/community
relationships in the Global South, with a focus on trying to improve these relationships; while Melina outlines her
Honours project on problems with access to criminal courts within rural Victoria.
We are fortunate enough to feature three research articles from a range of national and international scholars, as
well as a introducing ongoing research on water theft by a postgraduate research student. Associate Professor Megan
Williams presents the Wayarang list and 10 research projects aimed at improving the health and wellbeing of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, with relevance to rural criminology. Importantly, Associate Professor
Williams argues that innovation within evidence-based practice to reduce over-representation of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander people in Australian prisons is not only necessary, but overdue. Dr David Rodriguez and
Professor Nigel South argue that there is a need to “Indigenise rural criminality” and provide reflections on their
experience of utilising peer-research methodology. Their methodology highlights a truly inclusive way for collecting
and analysing data that involves Indigenous people and communities through the entire research process. Professor
Lisa Waller returns to her work on crime and the media, and writes about her current research with Dr Katrina
Clifford that focuses on three televisions representations of the ‘ice epidemic’ in rural Australia. From this, Professor
Waller and Dr Clifford identified three overarching narratives being presented: “ice as a small-town epidemic, ice as
everyone’s problem and the dualism inherent in agrarian imaginaries”. Alexander Baird presents a case study of his
PhD research on the ongoing prominent issue of water theft in the Murray-Darling Basin. Alexander aims to establish
a database of the factors associated with water theft that can be used to inform crime prevention strategies and
inform future policies around the use of water in the area.
A new section to the publication has been added and highlights relevant media stories focusing on rural crime issues.
This edition features a media piece first published in the Conversation: “Illegal hunters are a bigger problem on farms
than animal activists – so why aren’t we talking about that?”.
The publication concludes with a selection of important news items and announcements. As with the first edition, it is
important to note that COVID-19 has had an unparalleled impact on the ability for scholars to meet (face-to-face) and
share ideas; and the same uncertainties over events are likely to continue into 2021. However, in response to this,
many scholars are turning to online alternatives, such as the ISSRC’s roundtables, and in August this year, the Centre
for Rural Criminology launched its very first vodcast with our very own Director, Dr Kyle Mulrooney as the host (a
special thanks to ANZSOC for providing financial support for the credits to the program). Thank you to Dr Alistair
Harkness for being our inaugural guest on the series, and Dr Tarah Hodgkinson and Dr Richard Byrne for presenting
shorter vodcasts on the thematic groups of the Centre. We have more exciting vodcasts lined up with our thematic
leaders and others. Please make sure you reach out to us if you would like to feature on the vodcast.
Finally, I would like to thank everyone for their support and contributions during this inaugural year of the
publication. In 2021, we hand Rurality, Crime and Society over to the ISSRC for compilation with Dr Louise Nicholas as
the editor.
Best wishes,
Jenny
4
RURALITY, CRIME AND SOCIETY VOLUME 1 ISSUE 2
CENTRE FOR RURAL CRIMINOLOGY
EXECUTIVE BOARD
Dr Kyle J.D. Mulrooney
Director of the Centre for Rural Criminology
Lecturer
Criminology
University of New England
Associate Professor Glenn Porter
Director of the Centre for Rural Criminology
Associate Professor
Criminology
University of New England
Professor Joseph Donnermeyer
Professor Emeritus
School of Environment and Natural Resources
Ohio State University
Dr Bridget Harris
Senior Lecturer
School of Justice
Queensland University of Technology
Dr Alistair Harkness
Senior Lecturer
Criminology
University of New England
Dr Jenny Wise
Secretary
Senior Lecturer
Criminology
University of New England
5
RURALITY, CRIME AND SOCIETY VOLUME 1 ISSUE 2
THE LATEST NEWS FROM THE INTERNATIONAL
SOCIETY FOR THE STUDY OF RURAL CRIME
DR BRIDGET HARRIS
Australian Research Council DECRA Fellow
Senior Lecturer
School of Justice
Queensland University of Technology
DR ALISTAIR HARKNESS
Senior Lecturer in Criminology
School of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences
University of New England
It has been a very busy and active time for ISSRC since the first newsletter of 2020. The Society is growing
quickly, with a broad range of interests represented by both scholars and practitioners alike across all four
corners of the world.
ISSRC Roundtables
A particular highlight of the year was the inaugural ISSRC roundtable. In examining Rural Access to Justice
academics, advocates and practitioners considered: emerging issues, potential responses or solutions to
inequalities and future research and practice that could enhance access to justice.
Our fantastic panellists were: Dr Danielle Wilson, Senior Lecturer in Justice at Queensland University of
Technology; Dr Liz Curran, Honorary Associate Professor at the Australian National University and Principal
at ‘Curran Consulting: Enhancing Justice and Human Rights’; and ISSRC President and Emeritus Professor at
Ohio State University, Joseph F. Donnermeyer.
They discussed the notion of ‘postcode [or zipcode] justice’ – variances in justice system delivery and
outcomes based on the location of the criminal justice agency, offence or offender. Also explored was the
limitation of theoretical models and gaps in curriculum and training that hinders understandings of and
initiatives to bolster access to justice. Limitations in western models were also noted, as were tendencies to
employ Northern initiatives in Southern contexts, without considering the context and limitations of
imported models.
Technologies (Zoom and social media) ensure we could connect with scholars, practitioners and advocates
across the globe. We had an engaged audience and rigorous discussion and, hopefully, helped build
networks and directions to move forward in this arena. Thanks again to our panellists and audience
members! We appreciated your attendance and also feedback (which has guided how we will develop and
deliver future events).
A recording of the event can be accessed by ISSRC members via the members only section on
www.issrc.net. You can also see Twitter commentary and discussion of the event via: #ISSRC2020. Please
note that this hashtag will be utilised in future roundtables held this year, so you will be able to search for
and follow events via this channel.
Do you have you an idea for a future Roundtable? If so, let us know! Proposals should be submitted to
admin@issrc.net for consideration and should include:
• An overview / rationale for the event (minimum of 200 words)
• Details of the organising committee and roles identified
• A draft schedule / run sheet
• Proposed speakers (with 100-200 word biographies): Note that ideally speakers will include a range of
advocates or practitioners and advocates; more senior and junior participants; a diverse range of
participants (e.g. should reflect gender, ethnic, geographic diversity)
• A promotion and social media strategy (minimum 100 words)
6
RURALITY, CRIME AND SOCIETY VOLUME 1 ISSUE 2
Next Roundtable
The next Roundtable on “Policing Rural Communities” will take place on Tuesday 20 October 2020 at
5.30pm AEST.
This practitioner-focused roundtable investigates challenges and innovations in international contexts on
issues surrounding rural policing.
This roundtable will provide an opportunity for participants to hear first-hand from four leaders in rural
policing about work being done in both hemispheres to police rural crime.
We ask our panellists two key things:
What are the key challenges for rural policing?
What innovations are being deployed internationally to address these challenges?
Ample opportunity will be provided for attendees to engage with the panel.
Further details and registration: https://www.eventbrite.com.au/e/issrc-roundtable-policing-rural-
communities-tickets-120899326139
Annual General Meeting
The AGM will be held on 2 December 2020. Members will be advised by email of further details.
Call out to multi-linguists!
We are keen to translate a welcome message for the ISSRC website into a variety of different languages. The
message would only be a few paragraphs long, essentially briefly outlining the purpose of the Society and
encouraging membership, but aimed at providing a warm and friendly welcome.
Would this be something you might be able to do? If so, please email admin@issrc.net
Call for blog contributions
The blog on www.issrc.net provides an opportunity for pithy observations or reflections on topical rural
crime news and developments, a summary of research, promotion of publications, advertisements for
upcoming events… and more! Blog posts are a crucial way of sharing ideas amongst ourselves and also
more broadly.
If you would like to contribute something for the blog, email a submission of between 100 and 500 words
to admin@issrc.net
Establishment of an awards program
ISSRC has established an awards program to champion students, early career researchers and practitioners
making a strong contribution to the study of rural crime. The first award is the Joseph F. Donnermeyer
Award New Scholar Award. More details and application requirements are available at
https://issrc.net/awards/
Member profiles
Are you a member of ISSRC and want to publicise your research interests? We are in the process of
assembling a member profile section on the ISSRC website. A name, photo and key words will be presented
and visitors to the site can click through to a more fulsome biography of members. This will allow people to
connect their interests more quickly and clearly.
If you would like to appear on the website, please email your name, title, research interest keywords, photo
and brief biography to admin@issrc.net
Social Media
We are keen to support and promote rural work and events! If you have a publication, conference or project
you would like promoted, please email bridget.harris@qut.edu.au with information / links / photos and so
on, or tag us at @RuCrimSociety
7
RURALITY, CRIME AND SOCIETY VOLUME 1 ISSUE 2
RURAL CRIMINOLOGIST PROFILE:
DR DANIELLE WATSON
Can you tell us a little bit about yourself and what you are currently working on?
I’m originally from a rural community (Moruga) in the Caribbean country of Trinidad and Tobago. Though I
was born in Trinidad, I have familial ties to Barbados, St Lucia, Guyana and Montserrat, and I spent a
significant amount of time in Jamaica. In 2014, I was awarded a Caribbean-Pacific Mobility Scholarship
(CARPIMS) to complete a part of my PhD studies in Fiji. I was exposed to a region very similar to my own in
so many ways, yet so different. I fell in love with the place… After completing my PhD in 2016, I moved back
to the South Pacific. There I began researching police/community relations in Pacific island countries.
To date, I continue to research police/community relations in the Global South with a strong emphasis on
improving policing practices.
Can you please tell us why you started to research in rural criminology, and why you continue to research
in this space?
When your research focus is policing in places like the Caribbean and the Pacific, it’s more of a necessity
than a choice. Pacific Island Countries (PICs) for example cover large geographic areas with territories being
comprised of multiple islands and atolls. Each country has a mainland, where the capital is based, and many
other islands referred to as outer or offshore islands. Most of these outer islands would be considered rural
spaces. The police responsibility for maintaining law and order applies to both mainland and offshore
spaces within the country’s jurisdiction. It would therefore be irresponsible to conduct policing research in
such spaces without acknowledging how contexts, in this case rurality and issues of access to justice,
frames the narrative for police/community relations.
What areas of research are you most passionate about?
I’m most passionate about research geared towards improving the applicability of policing practices in
small-island developing countries. My view is that policing must be context specific. For many developing
countries, there is a tendency to borrow policing policies and practices from more developed contexts.
While borrowing can sometimes be a good thing, I think adaptation before adoption is critical. I also believe
that there is value in developing local solutions to local problems. If the police are there to protect and
serve the people, what harm can come from initiating dialogue among stakeholders about how best the
‘people’ can be protected and served?
What is next for you?
More of the same. There is much to be done on policing in developing country contexts and I intend to
continue working with police organizations across the Pacific as they attempt to improve service provision.
Is there anything else you would like to tell us?
I’d be very interested to collaborate with other researchers with shared interests.
Dr Danielle Watson
Senior Lecturer
School of Justice, Faculty of Law
Queensland University of Technology
Danielle.Watson@qut.edu.au
8
RURALITY, CRIME AND SOCIETY VOLUME 1 ISSUE 2
GRADUATE STUDENT PROFILE:
MELINA STEWART-NORTH
Melina Stewart-North is a PhD candidate at the Federation University campus in rural Gippsland in Eastern
Victoria, Australia. Her project focusses on the intersectionality between the nature, influences and impacts
of online vigilantism. Although, not the prime aim of this project, she is nonetheless interested to see if
there is a difference in behaviours based on geographical location.
As well as working full-time on her PhD project, Melina is a volunteer firefighter.
Melina’s honours project – entitled ‘'Good accessibility, is good business': A study of the intersection of
rurality and access to criminal courts’ – was based on principles of ‘access to justice’ in rural areas and was
specifically chosen because it was a vastly under researched area. Melina says that being a local resident of
a rural community, undertaking this project helped her see how under-resourced and disadvantaged rural
locations are, purely because of postcode.
She investigated with the aim of creating some solutions for not only her own locality, but with the
objective to help out other citizens in regional, rural and remote areas.
“I focused on a case study of the Latrobe Valley in Gippsland where I surveyed a group of individuals who
had close ties to the Criminal Justice System. My supervisor Dr Alistair Harkness helped my research process
run smoothly, and ultimately giving me a great final thesis”, Melina says.
The key findings that were highlighted by her research found that transportation was a major barrier in
access to justice, alongside lack of alternative resources. The justice system tends to use a ‘one size fits all’
approach, and this was clearly not the case when individuals had geographical disparity.
Melina is working with Alistair Harkness and Rachel Hale on a series of articles for publication on access to
justice issues, including on how rural residents access legal services in post disaster contexts – and with a
particular interest in the context of the bushfires that swept over East Gippsland in early 2020.
“The rural aspect has, and always will, play a role in my research”, Melina says. “This is my background, and
it would be remiss of me to not include it in shaping my future projects.”
9
RURALITY, CRIME AND SOCIETY VOLUME 1 ISSUE 2
RESEARCH FEATURE
ABORIGINAL AND TORRES STRAIT ISLANDER JUSTICE AND HEALTH
RESEARCH: MORE THAN THEMES AND STORIES
Associate Professor Megan Williams
Research Lead and Assistant Director
National Centre for Cultural Competence
Portfolio of Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Indigenous Strategy and Services)
Member, Sydney Institute of Criminology
The University of Sydney
megan.williams@sydney.edu.au
Research Associate, Centre for Rural Criminology, UNE
Acknowledgement
On behalf of colleagues, I acknowledge the Traditional Owners of the many lands on which this body of
work has occurred, and pay respects to ancestors across countless generations, as well as Elders and
leaders of today. This work is dedicated to improving the lives of all people in Australia, by promoting the
value and values of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures to guide current and future generations.
Introduction
Few criminology or justice health researchers could have avoided wondering why Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander people are so persistently over-represented in Australian prisons. But in response, how many
have sought partnerships with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations to bring about solutions?
How many use Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people’s research and community-driven solutions in
their work with general populations? Do many know how to translate findings about Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander people from large data sets, particularly in an ethical manner that reduces reinforcing the
message that Aboriginality is a risk factor? How many feel confident informing evidence-based decision
making to reduce Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander over-representation? It seems not the majority, by
virtue of over-representation rates, and the recent calls for better allyship of Australians for Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander people since the videoed death of 46-year old black man George Floyd at the hands of
Minnesota Police hit headlines around the world, which highlighted regular deaths of Aboriginal people in
police custody and prisons in Australia.
It seems the lens is shifting, though, from ‘the gap’ in the Australian government’s Closing the Gap
framework to reduce health inequity being the deficits of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in
relation to other Australians (Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, 2018). ‘The gap’ is more critically
being framed as the knowledge and skillset deficits that the mainstream Australian health, welfare and
justice workforces demonstrate in being unable to deliver through their programs and policies to reduce
over-representation in prisons, or genuinely support Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander leadership and
community-driven solutions. There is a real concern systematic and systemic bias and institutional racism is
at play, and/or good intentions have gone wrong, or there is ‘just’ a lack of cultural awareness. Whichever
way, the workforce is a social determinant of health and wellbeing; it is failing and there is an obvious void
in opportunities for learning and challenging assumptions about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people
in a way that brings about system improvements (Jackson Pulver, Williams and Fitzpatrick, 2019).
This paper aims to bring to light a range of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander-led research projects at the
nexus of justice and health disciplines and systems, as well as core concepts from Indigenous knowledge
systems that bring about rigour in research. In doing so, this paper encourages the emerging field of rural
criminology to gain confidence in collaborating with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community
organisations and Elders, and to use existing research in new and efficient ways, including identifying topics
about which mainstream workforce development might be useful.
10RURALITY, CRIME AND SOCIETY VOLUME 1 ISSUE 2
Background
The ongoing and worsening over-representation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Australian
prisons, who make up 28% of the prison population (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2019) but 3% of the
general population (ABS, 2018), shows more than just ‘Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people commit
more crime’: it shows systems unable to respond, programs unable to realise outcomes and Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander community health protocols not being met. Underscoring this is the criminal justice
system workforce, of which less than 1% are Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. This is lower than
the target of 1.6% (NSW Public Service Commission, 2019) and lower than Australian community
population parity of 3%.
Corrections policy makers are warned against decision making without evidence (McGuire, 2001), but with
few Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander staff or community partnerships to meet ethical research
requirements, the avenues to generate evidence from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people’s
perspectives are minimal. Further, Indigenous methodologies and community-driven research have met
with criticisms for being ‘too subjective’, ‘unscientific’, and lacking rigour (Denzin, Lincoln and Smith, 2008;
Nakata, 2007). That criminology and justice health research groups currently have few actions identified to
build the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander researcher workforce of the future or enhance the cultural
responsiveness of current researchers suggests the likely replication of current gaps and inequity going
forward: there is nothing particularly strategic occurring to not reproduce actions and mistakes of the past.
Because of the over-representation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in the criminal justice
system, any research in the criminal justice system will be of interest to and will affect Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander people and thus researchers are required to follow Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
research guidelines (Australian Institute for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies, 2012; National
Health and Medical Research Council, 2018). To follow the guidelines, in simple terms, partnerships with
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations are required, before research design, to influence
research design and its conduct, in the analysis and interpretation of results and in the translation of these
to policy and practice – Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have the right to lead and participate
across all of these. It follows then that any researchers in the criminal justice system that do not have
partnerships with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations and leaders must begin there – develop
them. Though, there are precursory self-preparation steps: querying why such partnerships have not been
developed, and what needs to be overcome for them to be developed such as lack of knowledge about
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures, Australia’s colonial history or local Eldership and protocols?
This article introduces Wayarang, meaning ‘teachable’ in Wiradjuri language, which is a list of 12 knowledge
elements to guide thinking and data analysis in research with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. A
summary is also provided of 10 research projects about the health and wellbeing of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander people with relevance to rural criminology. While there are many gaps, this is a taste of what
is possible by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander researchers and allies.
Indigenous knowledges
Indigenous knowledges come from the world’s longest continuing cultures including Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander peoples. In contemporary criminology and justice health projects, Indigenous knowledges
can be used to inform research design, and to analyse new and existing data and translate findings into
meaningful action. They do not necessarily have to be precluded from use with existing data due but are
complementary and can extend thinking about how to produce healthier communities. There need be no
‘either or’ but a ‘both’ so long as researchers involved have a commitment to strong working relationships
and critical self-reflection in the conduct of research.
Developed over the last 10 years of research with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in the
criminal justice system, including about health and wellbeing, the Wayarang list below includes 12 elements
of Wiradjuri knowledge and thinking for quality research (drawing on Minmia, 2007; Sheehan, 2011;
Sheehan, 2004) to identify:
(1) connections – a spiritual concept that occurs through actions, meeting points and similarities
(2) patterns in a similar way that grounded theorists might, or epidemiologists might in trying variables in
models and noting impacts
11RURALITY, CRIME AND SOCIETY VOLUME 1 ISSUE 2
(3) relationships between people
(4) clarity about roles people play
(5) influences of context
(6) improvements to the environment, on which all humans are dependent
(7) place-based perspectives acknowledging the profound influence of the local environment, cultures and
resources
(8) movement – change over time and ultimately growth toward goals
(9) holism – whether connecting past influences with the present or the future, the various elements of the
self (mental, physical, emotional, spiritual, social), or systems (community, services, policy and politics)
(10) equity – not only equality but an equity that understands needs and trajectories for wellbeing and the
resources required
(11) negotiation – for which time, safe processes and spaces is required, and about which data must be
gathered, especially to ascertain where power lies and how that will influence future wellbeing
(12) intergenerational transfer of knowledge that deliberately brings learnings from the past into the
present for the survival of future generations.
These 12 elements of Indigenous knowledge and thinking can help bring about a comprehensive
understanding of and response to an issue. They can be used as a checklist for research design, as part of a
conceptual framework for data analysis, and for critical self-reflection.
The following section outlines 10 research projects premised on and using both Indigenous knowledges and
ethical guidelines for the conduct of research by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. The projects
are diverse and demonstrate Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander research is more than themes and stories.
There is nothing in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures or Indigenous knowledge systems that
precludes working with numbers as data, randomised controlled trials or as one example below outlines –
data linkage. What must improve is the extent that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander governance and
leadership are included, drawn on, respected and resourced.
More information about each of the projects is available by contacting this paper’s author.
ABORIGINAL AND TORRES STRAIT ISLANDER-LED RESEARCH EXAMPLES
SYSTEMS AND WORKFORCE FOCUS: THREE PROJECTS
CRE-STRIDE
Looking big-picture, the STRengthening systems for InDigenous healthcare Equity (CRE-STRIDE) centres
Indigenous knowledges in all it does (CRE-STRIDE, 2019). It is an NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence
funded at the University of Sydney from 2019-2024 to progress two decades of work on continuous quality
improvement (CQI) in primary health care, which embedded systems of data collection, analysis and
reporting in Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Services. CRE-STRIDE has been established to translate
CQI to other disciplines including health promotion and is highly relevant to corrective services and justice
heath.
CRE-STRIDE has four areas of focus to improve systems indicated by the circles in the centre of Figure 1
below: 1) Community involvement, 2) strengthening health system capacity, 3) enhancing social and
emotional wellbeing, and 4) strengthening health promotion and prevention. For all, there are cross-cutting
themes of quality improvement, knowledge translation, ‘all teach, all learn’ capacity building and
purposeful engagement, as well as Indigenous research methodologies, economic and impact evaluation,
systems thinking and participatory action research.
12RURALITY, CRIME AND SOCIETY VOLUME 1 ISSUE 2
Figure 1: STRengthening systems for InDigenous
healthcare Equity (CRE-STRIDE) project
Over half of CRE-STRIDE’s investigators are
Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander people, and
activities occur in partnerships with Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander organisations including Gidgee
Healing. Overall, the work has a focus on health
system integration issues including via workforce
development.
Banga-ma-la-nha
Also focusing on the workforce is Banga-ma-la-nha: A collaborative throughcare program for young
Aboriginal women transitioning from prison to community. It is NHMRC-funded across 2019-2023,
administered through the University of Newcastle and occurring in partnership with Waminda Aboriginal
Community Controlled Health Organisation and the NSW Health Justice Health and Forensic Mental Health
Network. Banga-ma-la-nha means ‘to share’ in Wiradjuri language from whom three of the research team
are descended. It uses the Lowitja Institute’s collaborative decision making process, the Facilitated
Development Approach (Arabena and Moodie, 2011), to share and synthesise meanings from six existing
data sets and translate them into a ‘workforce capability framework’ including co-creating training, and
piloting and evaluating this, as outlined in Figure 2.
The research projects being translated for workforce development implications are the following, all of
which are of a substantial size and most of which are mixed-methods. They have all included Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander researchers:
1. Connections (Sullivan et al, 2019)
2. Network Patient Health Survey (JH&FMHN, 2015)
3. SCREAM: Social and cultural resilience and emotional wellbeing of Aboriginal mothers in prison (Wilson
and Jones, 2017)
4. Returning Home, back to community from custodial care (Haswell, Williams, Blignault, Grand Ortega,
and Jackson Pulver, 2014)
5. NSW Access 3 (Kang et al, 2017)
6. Connective Services (Williams, 2015).
13RURALITY, CRIME AND SOCIETY VOLUME 1 ISSUE 2
IMHIP-Youth
IMHIP-Youth is based on the Indigenous Mental Health Intervention Program, Australia’s first Indigenous-led
social and emotional wellbeing service for Indigenous adults in custody. After its trial and evaluation, it was
retained as a funded program, and program providers were approached to trial a similar program in a youth
detention centre. To do so, a Medical Research Futures Fund grant administered at the University of
Queensland includes allocations for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander staff and students across 2020-
2024. IMHIP-Youth is a multi-level mixed-methods design, comprising co-designed research with Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander governance, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander culturally-validated tools
including the Growth and Empowerment Measure (Haswell et al, 2010), and process, outcomes and impact
evaluation guided by the Ngaa-bi-nya Aboriginal evaluation framework (said ‘nar bin ya’ in Wiradjuri;
Williams, 2018).
INTERGENERATIONAL ANALYSIS: FOUR PROJECTS
Ngadhuri-nya ‘to care for’ (said nar-jury-nyah in Wiradjuri) has
Ngadhuri-nya ‘to care for’ occurred in partnership with the NSW Child Development Study
(Carr et al, 2016) and a community working group and was
funded by the Lowitja Institute. It is a process for engaging
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in data linkage
research, beginning with a community roundtable and using the
Facilitated Development Approach (Arabena and Moodie, 2011)
to decide which data to report, in what order, and by whom.
Efforts to engage Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community
members in data linkage are essential, particularly because of the
high likelihood that on almost every indicator Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander children fare worse than others. The NSW
Child Development Study linked parents’ criminal justice system
data with health and social outcomes data of children and young
people – an intergenerational analysis. Such data must be treated
with utmost sensitivity so as not to further stigmatise Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander people and not traumatise researchers
and community members engaging with it (Williams, 2019).
Keeping Us Together evaluation
The SHINE for Kids Keeping Us Together program evaluation has been funded by Queensland Department of
Child Safety, Youth and Women during 2020, and is led from the University of Newcastle in partnership with
Mibbinbah Spirit Healing Pty Ltd. It uses the Ngaa-bi-nya Aboriginal evaluation framework (‘nar bin ya’;
Williams, 2018) to examine contextual landscape factors influencing the adaption of a mainstream program
to an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander context, as well as resources used for the program, ways of
working that reflect Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander values, and learnings for future planning.
Mibbinbah Mad Bastards Be the Best You Can Be
Mibbinbah also uses the Ngaa-bi-nya Aboriginal evaluation framework (‘nar bin ya’; Williams, 2018), for a
process and outcomes evaluation of its Be the Best You Can Be program (Mibbinbah Spirit Healing, 2020).
The program uses the Australian feature film Mad Bastards in groups to explore social and emotional
wellbeing and prioritise next steps for individuals in their journeys of healing as well as organisations in
planning local programs. Be the Best You Can Be has been undertaken with urban, regional and remote
communities and diverse groups including workplaces for staff Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultural
awareness.
Aboriginal Family Wellbeing Program and Growth and Empowerment Measure
The Aboriginal Family Wellbeing Program (FWB) was developed over 30 years ago by members of the Stolen
Generation to provide multi-level healing and empowerment in their communities. This recognises that
individual empowerment is tied to family and community empowerment, to influence systems, and vice
versa (Tsey et al, 2010). To measure outcomes and impacts of FWB, the Growth and Empowerment
Measure (GEM) was developed, which has since been psychometrically evaluated and is known as a
culturally validated measure of social and emotional wellbeing (Haswell et al, 2010). Both FWB and the
GEM have been used among a wide range of populations including people in the criminal justice system and
14RURALITY, CRIME AND SOCIETY VOLUME 1 ISSUE 2
in rural and remote locations and there are over 40 associated publications. It has also been found valuable
for non-Indigenous forensic and health workforce education (Fitzpatrick et al, 2019).
WORKFORCE RESEARCH: THREE PROJECTS
We Are Working for Our People
The We Are Working for Our People report of the Lowitja Institute-
funded Career Pathways Project was released in August 2020 (Bailey
et al, 2020). The mixed-methods research was undertaken by the
Aboriginal Medical Services Alliance Northern Territory (AMSANT), Bila
Muuji Aboriginal Health Services from central NSW, consultants
Human Capital Alliance, UNSW and Western Sydney University. It
surveyed almost 400 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health
professionals, interviewed almost 250 people in groups and undertook
70 career trajectory interviews. It highlights Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander staff strengths: cultural knowledges and values,
culturally safe clinical practices, respectful communication,
trustworthiness, ability to address individual and community needs,
and leading system change.
These benefits were recognised success factors in highly accessed
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community-controlled health
organisations, some of which have over 50% Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander staff.
Aboriginal allied health career pathways
Benefits of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander staff were also explored in 50 in-depth interviews and 8
focus group discussions held across NSW in 2019, particularly about allied health, including those working
in the criminal justice system. Funded by NSW Health, the research report has not yet been released. From
a seven-step data analysis process, it identifies critical success factors to use to increase Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander staff numbers, verified by experts in the field (Williams, Ragg and Manton, submitted).
Gari Yala
Soon to be released is the Gari Yala research, the first National Aboriginal Workforce study, conducted
online by the Jumbunna Institute at UTS and the Diversity Council of Australia, and funded by NAB and
Coles (UTS, 2020). The Gari Yala report outlines reasons over 1000 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
people succeed at work, why they leave employment, and what their training levels and aspirations are.
Gari Yala was guided by a multi-disciplinary Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander workforce development
Expert Panel.
Conclusion
Innovation is not only necessary in evidence-based practice to reduce over-representation of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander people in Australian prisons – it is overdue. But the issues are circular – until the
mainstream workforce becomes confident working well with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people,
the soil is not ready for having Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander staff, and criminology and justice health
workforces and research then suffer from not including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander perspectives,
which in turn is a ‘turn off’ to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. The irony is that including
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander perspectives does not come at a cost – it is a gain to include the world’s
oldest continuing cultures in the way forward. The Wayarang Indigenous knowledges list and the research
projects outlined here show what is possible if the emerging field of rural criminology is willing. The new
mantras could easily be ‘put First Peoples first’ and ‘If you get it right for Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander people, you can get it right for everyone’.
15RURALITY, CRIME AND SOCIETY VOLUME 1 ISSUE 2
References
Arabena, K. & Moodie, D. (2011). The Lowitja Institute: Building a national strategic research agenda to
improve the health and wellbeing of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Medical Journal of
Australia, 194(10), 532-534.
Australian Institute for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies. (2012). Guidelines for ethical research
in Australian Indigenous Studies. Canberra: Author. Retrieved from
https://beta.aiatsis.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-09/gerais.pdf
Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2019). Prisoners in Australia. Canberra: Author. Retrieved from
https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/crime-and-justice/prisoners-australia/2019
ABS. (2018). Estimates of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians, June 2016. Cat. No.
3238.0.55.001. Canberra: ABS. Retrieved from
https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/7d12b0f6763c78caca257061001cc588/88b47d60dbd6c988ca2
574a900132f99!OpenDocument
Bailey, J., Blignault, I., Carriage, C., Demassi, K., Joseph, T. … Williams, M. (2020). We are working for our
people: Growing and strengthening the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health workforce. Melbourne:
Lowitja Institute. Retrieved from https://www.lowitja.org.au/page/research/research-categories/health-
services-and-workforce/workforce/projects/career-pathways
Carr, V. J. , Harris, F., Raudino, A., Luo, L., Kariuki, M., Liu, E. et al. (2016). New South Wales Child
Development Study (NSW-CDS): An Australian multiagency, multigenerational, longitudinal record linkage
study. BMJ Open, 6(2), [e009023]. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009023
CRE-STRIDE. (2019). Centre for Research Excellence: STRengthening systems for InDenous health care Equity
(CRE-STRIDE). https://ucrh.edu.au/cre-stride/
Denzin, N.K., Lincoln, Y.S., & Smith, L. T. (Eds). (2008). Handbook of critical and Indigenous methodologies.
Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
Department of Prime Minister & Cabinet. (2018). Closing the Gap Prime Minister’s Report 2018. Canberra:
Commonwealth of Australia. Retrieved from https://closingthegap.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/ctg-
report-2018.pdf
Fitzpatrick, S. A., Haswell, M. R., Williams, M., Nathan, S., Meyer, L., Ritchie, J., Jackson Pulver, L. (2019).
Learning about Aboriginal health and wellbeing at the postgraduate level: Novel application of the Growth
and Empowerment Measure. Rural and Remote Health, 19(2), doi.org/10.22605/RRH4708
Haswell, M. R., Kavanagh, D., Tsey, K., Reilly, L., Cadet-James, Y., Laliberte, A., . . . Doran, C. (2010).
Psychometric validation of the Growth and Empowerment Measure (GEM) applied with Indigenous
Australians. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 44(9), 791-799.
Haswell, M.R., Williams, M., Blignault, I., Grand Ortega, M., & Jackson Pulver, L. (2014). Returning Home,
Back to Community from Custodial Care: Learnings from the first year pilot project evaluation of three sites
around Australia. Sydney: UNSW Australia.
Jackson Pulver, L., Williams, M. & Fitzpatrick, S. (2019). Social determinants of Australia’s First Peoples: A
multi-level empowerment perspective. In. P. Liamputtong (Ed.). Social Determinants of Health (pp. 175-
214). Melbourne: Oxford University Press.
Justice Health and Forensic Mental Health Network (JH&FMHN). 2015 Network Patient Health Survey:
Aboriginal People’s Health Report. Sydney: Author.
Kang, M., Robardsm F., Sanci, L., Steinbeck, K., Jan, S., Hawke, C. et al. (2017). Access 3 project protocol:
Young people and health system navigation in the digital age: a multifaceted, mixed methods study. BMJ
Open, 7(8): e017047.
16RURALITY, CRIME AND SOCIETY VOLUME 1 ISSUE 2
McGuire, J. (2001). What works in correctional intervention? Evidence and practical implications. In G. A.
Bernfeld, D. P. Farrington, & A. W. Leschied (Eds.). Offender rehabilitation in practice: Implementing and
evaluating effective programs (pp. 25-44). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Mibbinbah Spirit Healing. (2020). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander wellbeing.
https://www.mibbinbah.org/
Minmia. (2007). Under the quandong tree. Mogo, NSW: Quandong Dreaming Publishing.
Nakata, M. (2007). Disciplining the savages, savaging the disciplines. Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press.
National Health and Medical Research Council. (2018). Ethical conduct in research with Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander Peoples and communities: Guidelines for researchers and stakeholders. Canberra:
Commonwealth of Australia.
NSW Public Service Commission. (2019). NSW Working together for a better future 2019-2025. Sydney:
NSW Public Service Commission. Retrieved from https://www.psc.nsw.gov.au/workplace-culture---
diversity/diversity-andinclusion/aboriginal-workforce-/aboriginal-employment-strategy
Sheehan, N. (2011). Indigenous knowledge and respectful design: An evidence-based approach.
DesignIssues, 27(4), pp. 68-80.
Sheehan, N. (2004). Indigenous knowledge and higher education: instigating relational education in a
neocolonial context [dissertation] Brisbane: University of Queensland.
Sullivan, E., Ward, S., Zeki, R., Wayland, S., Sherwood, J. … Chang, S. (2019). Recidivism, health and social
functioning following release to the community of NSW prisoners with problematic drug use: study protocol
of the population-based retrospective cohort study on the evaluation of the Connections Program. BMJ
Open, 9(7), http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030546
Tsey, K., Whiteside, M., Haswell-Elkins, M., Bainbridge, R., Cadet-James, Y., & Wilson, A. (2010).
Empowerment and Indigenous Australian health: A synthesis of findings from Family Wellbeing formative
research. Health and Social Care in the Community, 18(2), 169-179. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2524.2009.00885.x
UTS. (2020). Gari Yala: First National Survey of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Workers.
https://socialimpact.uts.edu.au/case-study/gari-yala-first-national-survey-of-aboriginal-and-torres-strait-
islander-workers/
Williams, M. (2019, June 7). The Ngadhuri-nya process for engaging Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
people in data linkage research. https://www.croakey.org/the-ngadhuri-nya-process-for-engaging-
aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander-people-in-data-linkage-research/
Williams, M. (2018). Ngaa-bi-nya evaluation framework. Evaluation Journal of Australasia, 18(1), 6-20.
Williams, M. (2015). Connective services: Post-prison release support in an urban Aboriginal population
[dissertation] Sydney: UNSW Australia.
Williams, M., Ragg, M., & Manton, D. (submitted). Aboriginal allied health workforce pathways scoping
project: Final report. Sydney: UTS.
Wilson, M. & Jones, J. (2017). The social and cultural resilience and emotional well-being of Aboriginal
mothers in WA prisons… and beyond. Drug and Alcohol Research Connections, May. Retrieved from
http://connections.edu.au/researchfocus/social-and-cultural-resilience-and-emotional-well-being-
aboriginal-mothers-wa-prisons%E2%80%A6
17RURALITY, CRIME AND SOCIETY VOLUME 1 ISSUE 2
RESEARCH FEATURE
THE NEGLECTED RURALITY: CRIMES AGAINST AND WITHIN
INDIGENOUS SOCIETIES
Dr David Rodríguez Goyes Professor Nigel South
Postdoctoral Fellow Department of Sociology,
Department of Criminology and Sociology of Law University of Essex
University of Oslo Adjunct Professor, School of Justice,
Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law, Antonio Nariño Faculty of Law,
University, Colombia Queensland University of Technology
d.r.goyes@jus.uio.no n.south@essex.ac.uk
Bias and blindness
Criminology has expanded through processes of identification of and reaction to its gaps, blind spots, and
biases. From embracing a harm and human rights perspective to counter the dominance of a legalistic view
(Schwendinger & Schwendinger, 1970), to the inception of a global criminology to surpass methodological
nationalism (Aas, 2007), criminologists have built upon the detection of knowledge lacunae to generate
theoretical, conceptual and empirical innovations. Such abysses are as much created by the professional
training around the topics ‘that matter’ (Goyes, 2019; Kuhn, 1962), as by the social everyday frameworks
within which most criminologists live their lives (Aas, 2012). Santos (2014) referred to the root cause of
academic biases and gaps as epistemological blindness, a concept which Goyes and South (2017, p. 168)
synthesized as ‘the conscious or unconscious preference to accommodate only that which accords with our
existing epistemological and methodological configurations, leaving other possibilities and data ignored.’
Because ‘criminology’ is a discipline originating in and dominated by anglophone, core, northern countries
(Agozino, 2003; Carrington, Hogg, Scott, Sozzo, & Walters, 2019; Morrison, 2006) it is unsurprising that it is
still informed by many consequential biases, among which are its over-concentration on urban issues
(Donnermeyer & DeKeseredy, 2013; Hollis & Hankhouse, 2019), and its exclusion, until quite recently, of the
wider natural environment (South, 1998) and continuing neglect of Indigenous issues (Goyes & South,
Unpublished manuscript-a). Although rural criminology has made extensive contributions to shifting the
focus of the discipline from cities to the countryside, it has not achieved much in remedying the neglect of
Indigenous societies as a central component of ‘the rural.’ Indeed, we might argue that rural criminology is
informed by the same limitations as rural sociology, described by Zabłocki (2013, p. 9) as retaining an
approach based on ‘strictly regional profiles’ and falling short of being ‘the science of social phenomena in
world-wide rural areas.’ Within both, there is the lacuna of a neglected rurality and in this essay we argue
that there is a need to Indigenise rural criminology, conceptually, theoretically, and methodologically.
Enabling, redefining, and protecting the rural
For Donnermeyer and DeKeseredy (2013, pp. 5-6), the rural has four characteristics: (1) ‘smaller
populations sizes and/or densities’, (2) ‘higher densities of acquaintanceship’, (3) less autonomy than
before, and (4) more obvious ‘cultural, social, and economic divides’ within them. Because this approach to
understanding the rural is primarily relational — reflecting material and historical relations — and primarily
informed by observations of societies in the global north, its application to a myriad of southern settings is
problematic given that these defining characteristics are not necessarily present. Meanwhile, Zabłocki
(2013, p. 11) provides a more restrictive and concrete, although also not entirely unproblematic, definition
of rural communities as ‘those which in many countries were and in others could be encompassed by …
[collective] forms of agricultural production.’ It is on this basis that we argue Indigenous communities in
many locations of the global south are at the centre of the rural.
18RURALITY, CRIME AND SOCIETY VOLUME 1 ISSUE 2
This argument, once more, leads us to the dangers of definitional processes, which are particularly tricky
when dealing with Indigeneity. Historically, those procedures of defining and categorizing have tended to be
‘driven by non-indigenous, liberal agendas that set indigenous peoples up as foils for the excesses and
shortcomings of western industrial society’ and have thus been prone to freezing Indigenous communities
‘in a specific time, space, and relationship to others’ (Coates, 2004, p. 8). Furthermore, definitions of
Indigeneity tend to collapse all concerned into ‘an undifferentiated mass’ (Heydon, 2019, p. 83) thereby
creating a ‘false and distorted identity through a false concept’ (Apaza Huanca, 2019, p. 4). As Greymorning
(2019) documents, colonial governments and academia have historically self-arrogated the right to define
who is and who is not Indigenous, as well as the criteria to define indigeneity. Those dynamics side-line
Indigenous voices —an issue to which we return later.
Despite the dangers and difficulties they have faced, Indigenous peoples themselves argue for the use of
characteristics and properties of ‘mindset, spiritual orientation, and attachment to traditional matters’ as
central to any definitions of Indigeneity and as mattering more than ‘bloodlines and […] externally imposed
legal descriptions’ (Coates, 2004, p. 2). Indeed, the definition proposed by José Martínez Cobo (1987),
United Nations special rapporteur and the sub-commission of the Working Group on Indigenous
Populations, embraces such a cultural approach by conceptualising Indigenous peoples as those descended
from the ‘original inhabitants of regions colonized or invaded by what became a dominant population’ and
who had ‘maintained cultural continuity distinct from other groups of state populations’ (Samson & Short,
2005, p. 170). Inspired by these reflections, we argue that there are four features1 that characterise
Indigenous peoples, and that they are different from current Indigenous’ circumstances.2 Of relevance for
this essay are Verne’s (2019, p. 175) listing of two central Indigenous characteristics: first, ‘a spiritual
relationship to their territories’ upon which they build their identity, and, second, the placement of the
collective over the individual. The combination of these two elements of Indigeneity implies that Indigenous
peoples ‘are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories’
(Martínez Cobo in Coates, 2004, p. 6) and that ‘the collective responsibility of the group is to the lands and
territories that the colonizers want to destroy’ (Verne, 2019, p. 173).
It is precisely these two characteristics which place Indigenous communities at the centre of ‘the rural.’
Indigenous communities have laid the foundations for agricultural production, and still —despite the
processes of global monopolisation by northern corporations— are responsible for much of it. Indigenous
communities have actively contributed to increasing the biodiversity of the world (Goyes & South, 2019;
Shiva, 2000) on which food production systems rely (Goyes, 2018); and via their traditional practices
continue nourishing millions of people around the world (Vargas Roncancio, 2011). Furthermore, in the
empirical research project we have been conducting for the past three years —described below— we
identified that our sample Indigenous communities host environmental ontologies conducive to protective
behaviours. Those environmental ontologies have, as first principles, that (1) human wellbeing is dependent
on, or influenced by, the actions of nonhuman animals and the spirits of the jungle – plants and trees, and
(2) all components of nature, not only humans, have a mystical, deeply spiritual story to be told, which
means that humans should consider them sacred (Goyes et al., 2021). In sum, Indigenous communities
enable, maintain, develop, and protect the rural.
Nevertheless, criminology —including its specialised green and rural branches—has remained largely
oblivious to crimes and harms against Indigenous communities. By extension, within our conceptualisation,
this also means crimes and harms against the very foundations of rurality. This implies being unaware or
uncaring regarding the plurality and variety of visible and hidden threats to the existence of Indigenous
communities and ways of living (Goyes & South, Unpublished manuscript-b). Indigenous ways of life and
memory are currently threatened with erosion as a result of several global dynamics. While many of the
most powerful forces involved in the extinguishment of Indigenous peoples and their cultures are visible
and direct forms of violence, such as murders, forced displacement, and intimidation, there are also
structural, systematic, and invisible factors at play. Elements like governmental intervention, and the
contents and effects of exogenous educational systems, are producing the extinction of Indigenous cultures.
These forces produce a form of ethnocide, which simultaneously creates a form of ecocide and the
disappearance of myriad non-Western ruralities. That is the reason for our call to Indigenise rural
criminology. As Cunneen and Tauri (2017) point out however, a real Indigenous criminology —including a
rural Indigenous criminology— must have Indigenous peoples at the centre of the process of knowledge
creation.
19You can also read
