Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1697628758305.pdf (Australia)
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect The Extractive Industries and Society journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/exis For the greater good?
Questioning the social licence of extractive-led development in Western Australia’s Martuwarra Fitzroy River region Anne Poelina a, Martin Brueckner b, *, Magali McDuffie c a Nulungu Research Institute, University of Notre Dame, Broome, Australia b Centre for Responsible Citizenship and Sustainability, Murdoch University, 90 South Street, Murdoch, WA 6150, Australia c SAE Creative Institute, Perth, Australia A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T Keywords: Colonialism Australia Social licence, First nations, Just development Economic development in Australia, especially resource development, has purportedly long been pursued for the greater good of the nation and its people and is thus often equated to moral progress.
Yet, despite the celebrated spoils of the resources sector, Indigenous Australians have persistently been denied the benefits of economic progress owing to a history of colonialism, dispossession, segregation and assimilation policies, which have contributed to the marginalisation of Indigenous people to the present day.

Thus, this article asks whether or- thodox resource-led development has a social licence, and importantly for whose greater good?
This paper applies a social licence lens to current water extraction proposals for Western Australia’s remote Martuwarra Fitzroy River region where ecological values have largely remained intact and Indigenous people make up over 60 per cent of the population.
It is argued the proposed water extraction plans hold little promise of serving either local or national interests when judged holistically and risk perpetuating adverse socio-cultural and ecological legacies from extractive activities for local Indigenous peoples.

Within the Martuwarra Fitzroy River context, this paper seeks to redefine the ‘greater good’ and to articulate ‘socially licenced’ development alternatives without the ecological and cultural trade-offs typical of orthodox development.

1.
1.

Introduction The Martuwarra (Fitzroy River) begins high up in the ranges in the Kimberley region of Western Australia, flows down past the Great Sandy Desert, meanders through the floodplains and forms a vast tidal delta where it flows into the King Sound (see Fig.

1).
1).

The Fitzroy River Catchment covers an area of over 95,000km2 (Centre of Excellence in Natural Resource Management, 2010, 12), which extends from Halls Creek and the Wunaamin Miliwundi Ranges in the east, through to Derby and the King Sound in the west (Department of Water, 2009, 1), and is fed by twenty tributaries (Australian Heritage Council, 2011, 32).
Portrayed as a land of beauty and abundance by early explorers, the Martuwarra Fitzroy River is much more than this to its peoples, who continue to manage and share their collective estate through their continued practice of First Law, customary law and lifeways as they have done for thousands of years (Poelina, 2020).

In this paper, we examine the Martuwarra, Fitzroy River Case, through the lenses of history, legislation, development and the concept of social licence.
Following a description and analysis of the history of colonialism and of the mech- anisms of dispossession in the region over the past 150 years (McDuffie, 2019), we argue using a social licence lens that current water mining proposals are not only a continuation of these processes but also fail to serve the public interest they are purported to contribute to.
This paper is a collaboration between trans-disciplinary researchers, each with their own connection and relationship with the Martuwarra Fitzroy River and local Indigenous people who we also refer to as Traditional Owners.

The lead author is a Nyikina Warrwa Traditional Owner and Chair of the Martuwarra Fitzroy River Council (Martuwarra Council).
Our collaboration resulted in the use of multiple forms of data, from archival historical accounts from the 1800s and contemporary development narratives through to socio-economic policy documents and interviews with Martuwarra Traditional Owners captured in the film ‘Voices for the Martuwarra’ (RiverOfLife et al., 2020).

We encourage the reader to view the film to hear the voices of Traditional Owners, * Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: anne@majala.com.au (A. Poelina), m.brueckner@murdoch.edu.au (M. Brueckner), m.mcduffie@sae.edu (M. McDuffie).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2020.10.010 Received 29 June 2020; Received in revised form 21 October 2020; Accepted 22 October 2020 TheExtractiveIndustriesandSocietyxxx(xxxx)xxxPleasecitethisarticleas:AnnePoelina,TheExtractiveIndustriesandSociety,https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2020.10.0102214-790X/©2020PublishedbyElsevierLtd.Inquiry into the destruction of 46,000 year old caves at the Juukan Gorge in the Pilbara region of Western AustraliaSubmission 108 - Attachment 4 A. Poelina et al.
economists, scientists and conservationists, sharing their views on the importance of the River ecologically, culturally, spiritually and economically.1 From a methodological perspective it bears noting that film has become a medium of choice for Martuwarra Aboriginal people and communities to not only voice their concerns but also to promote their own development initiatives on their Country (McDuffie, 2019).
Construed as a dialogic, participatory and iterative process occurring in a collaborative, intercultural space, film has facilitated the emergence of a counter-discourse in multiple domains such as history, gender issues, anthropology, development, and agency, reclaiming the dominant discourse (McDuffie, 2019, 98–99).

The multiple sources informing this paper paint a picture of histor- ical and contemporary colonialism and illustrate the ongoing legacy of unjust development.
The paper demonstrates – by way of a brief his- torical overview – how the dominant discourse, conceiving of orthodox development and resource extraction as moral progress, is still used as a tool of colonisation and dispossession to expedite current plans for extensive water extraction on the Martuwarra Fitzroy River by the Western Australian government.
Employing the social licence concept and the notion of ‘just development’ we argue that the government Water Allocation and Planning Proposal needs to be grounded in local cultural governance mechanisms, such as the Martuwarra Fitzroy River Council, and based on rigorous decision-making informed by both Indigenous and Western science.
Importantly, decision-makers need to listen to the voices of the guardians of the Martuwarra as it is time to decolonise development and transition to just development on just terms.

2.

Background: orthodox development and resource extraction – tools of colonisation and dispossession The Martuwarra Fitzroy River Country, prior to colonisation, was a culturally diverse and managed estate.
Like everywhere else on the continent, over thousands of years, Aboriginal people used diverse ecologically-attuned practices including fires to shape and maintain its landscapes (see Stokes, 1846, Martin, 1864, McRae, 1881, Archdeacon, 1880, Brockman, 1881, Hardman, 1884, Gregory, 1923).
What early explorers described as the “land of abundance” was the result of a careful, finely tuned regime of care and maintenance, driven by an intimate knowledge of local ecosystems (Gammage, 2011) and thou- sands of years of Aboriginal First Law, authority and order (Lim et al., 2017; Poelina, 2020).

In more recent times, this type of practice has become known as ecoscaping in Australia’s Kimberley (Ouzman et al., 2017).
For Europeans, however, nature was a resource, seen only in terms of commercial potential (Horton, 2000, 149); constructed along- side “the native primitive Other” or the “savage” (Sachs, 1999, 104), both existing to be colonised and “civilised”, exploited for progress (Shiva, 1999, 211–212).
The concept of Terra Nullius (De Vattel, 1797) dictated that Aborig- inal people were not considered as landowners but instead seen as hunters and gatherers, moving through the country from one season or one food source to the next.

This concept was also given legitimacy by evolutionary anthropologists at the time who established the premise of the supposed “inferiority” of a “dying race” (Wolfe, 1999, 27, 35, 55).

Fig.

1.
Fig.

1.

The Martuwarra (Fitzroy River) Catchment (adapted from data available at data.wa.gov.au).

1 Voices for the Martuwarra can be accessed at https://vimeo.com/ 387436447 (Password: MFRC2020).

The film showcases the contemporary voices of Martuwarra people and their ongoing guardianship, concerns and authority to manage, protect and promote their home, the Martuwarra River Country.
The combination of an insatiable thirst for new and productive terri- tories, a “supreme self-confidence about continued linear progress” (Scott, 1998) and an unwavering sense of Eurocentric superiority (Blaser, 2004) led to the horrific abuse and marginalisation of Aborig- inal people (McDuffie, 2019).
From the 1870s onwards, Martuwarra Fitzroy River people were kidnapped to work on pearling luggers (Streeter, 1886; Neville, 1936; TheExtractiveIndustriesandSocietyxxx(xxxx)xxx2Inquiry into the destruction of 46,000 year old caves at the Juukan Gorge in the Pilbara region of Western AustraliaSubmission 108 - Attachment 4 A. Poelina et al.
Durack, 1969; Hunt, 1986; Reynolds, 2005) or coerced to work as in- dentured slave labourers on pastoral stations for meagre rations (Marshall and Hattersley, 2004; Poelina et al., 2015).
Resistance meant violent retaliation: Aboriginal people were killed in massacres (Isaac and Torres, 2002; Marshall and Hattersley, 2004; Poelina et al., 2014; C. Owen, 2016; Centre for 21st Century Humanities 2019), put in faraway jails with no hope of return (Green 2011) or chained up like animals (Pilmer, 1998; Moran, 2009; C. Owen, 2016).
Those who were not killed were forcefully taken off their Country and families entrusted to mis- sions under the guise of “protection” to be educated in the “civilised” ways of the European invaders (Hasluck, 1942; Elkin, 1979).

Many fell sick to new diseases (Davidson, 1978) and were forbidden to speak their language, to practice their Law (Wilson, 1997).
Records of the time (see Picture 1) vividly depict the all-out, overt warfare waged against Kim- berley Aboriginal people (Roth, 1905; Mjoberg, 1915, 2012, Robinson and York, 1977, Pilmer, 1998).

This form of oppression was facilitated by government legislation, both at State and Federal levels (McDuffie, 2019) and supported by the police, missionaries, and pastoralists.

While it was difficult to build a white labour force, Aboriginal slave labour was free, and relevant legislation (e.g.
Masters and Servants Act 1892, Aborigines Act 1905, Aborigines Amendment Act 1936) could control people’s movements (C. Owen, 2016).

These laws were drafted by politicians who often had pastoral interests themselves (Gribble, 1987; Hasluck, 1942 cited in McDuffie, 2019, 155–156).
These kinds of power relations between different political and legal institutions (Foucault, 1980, 38) prompted members of the British House of Commons to express concerns about Western Australia being in the hands of a “small oligarchy backed by northern pastoralists” (J.R. Owen, 2016 cited in McDuffie, 2019, 156).
Aboriginal people were able to work hard in challenging climatic conditions, and their knowledge about everything in relation to water, weather patterns, food sources was invaluable information for early settlers (Marshall and Hattersley, 2004).
Unsurprisingly, the Kimberley Aboriginal population became the backbone of the pastoral industry, performing “almost every task required on a sheep station, including shepherding, mustering, shearing, wool-scouring, cooking, housework, carting, blacksmithing, pit-sawing, and fencing” (Reynolds, 2005 citing Olivey 1900, 21).
The Northwest pastoral empires were built on Aboriginal people’s slave labour who witnessed the slow, but contin- uous, degradation of their Country under the hooves of non-native an- imals, whilst native ones, their food source, were being poisoned and killed in the thousands, right up to the 1960s (Mjoberg, 1915, 2012, Gooding and Long, 1958).
Water was taken away from rivers, natural soaks and wells for cattle and sheep, and native weeds took over fragile ecosystems (Department of Primary Industries and Regional Develop- ment, 2018).

Yet, despite the widespread, senseless violence of colonisation, Kimberley Aboriginal people survived and adapted.

They became stockmen, pastoral station workers and overseers, educating white pastoralists about their Country, and finding common ground to make things work.
They became part of the workforce, vital to run those stations - but when they demanded equal wages, they were driven out to the local towns and cast away from their Country (Marshall and Hat- tersley, 2004; Lawford, 2011).2 With unemployment rife in the towns in the late 1960s and 1970s, some took the opportunity to work on development schemes such as the Camballin irrigation project (Watson, 2011), or for the Agricultural Protection Board.
Again, they witnessed the dismal failures of poorly designed development schemes (Ash and Watson, 2018), or worse, became victims of unconscionable work practices, which saw many Aboriginal men die or suffer ongoing, inter-generational health issues from spraying lethal pesticides to kill invasive, non-native weeds as part of the Agricultural Protection Board program in the 1970s and 1980s (McMahon et al., 2018, McDuffie, 2019, 172–175).
Throughout all this, as discussed further below, Kim- berley Aboriginal people have striven to maintain their agency in de- cisions regarding the development of their Country.

3.

Contemporary colonialism Colonial practices of the past continue to persist in Australia.
In what follows we show that the Martuwarra, and the broader Kimberley region, continue to be framed as a development venture to new colonisers intent on using its resources for economic profits and job creation, echoing the historically Eurocentrist development lens described above.
In resource- rich states such as Western Australia, successive governments have long pursued developmentalist ambitions in the North (Kellow and Nie- meyer, 1999) where governments still continue to have a central role in “attracting, facilitating and supporting development” (Phillimore, 2014, 42), pursing economic advancement as a form of moral progress (Trigger, 1997).
Unsurprisingly, given the centrality of Australia’s extractive industries to the country’s economic fortunes (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2019), the moral standing of the sector tends to be promoted routinely by industry and governments alike on grounds of economic necessity and moral obligation (Blondeel and Van de Graaf, 2018) particularly in many of Australia’s regional and rural areas (Warren et al., 2015).
Australia’s remote northern regions have long been regarded by government and industry as ‘under-developed’ (Harman and Head, 1982; Brueckner et al., 2014.

The North is seen as a resource rich region with substantial growth prospects.

National statistics reveal that northern Australia is home to the nation’s most disadvantaged com- munities with a disproportionate representation of Indigenous commu- nities (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2018).
This situation is reflected in the persistent gap in welfare statistics3 between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians (Commonwealth of Australia, 2020).

Min- ing is purported to hold great promise of delivering socio-economic benefits to regional Indigenous communities; however, there are few examples of sustainable community economic outcomes.
Furthermore, subdued economic development is often framed as a response to Indigenous concerns rather than the interplay of remoteness, race pol- itics and lack of appropriate economic investment (Pritchard, 2005; Wesley and MacCallum, 2014).
Resource extraction in Australia predominantly occurs adjacent to Indigenous communities and on Indigenous land and waters (Scambary, 2013) and is often defended in the name of Aboriginal economic development (Neale and Vincent, 2017); especially in the face of devolved responsibilities from the state to mining companies in relation to Indigenous development and service provision (Howlett et al., 2011).
The extractive sector also portrays itself as an economic lifeline for Indigenous communities in terms of employment generation and regional development (Minerals Council of Australia, 2016); a claim seemingly supported by national census data, which suggest that mining activities over the last 20 years had a positive economic effect for both Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities (Hunter et al., 2015).
Yet, while resource-based development undeniably offers benefits to, and opportunities for, society, it also harbours environmental, socio-cultural and economic sustainability risks and challenges (Brueckner et al., 2 The Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission removed wage discrimination from the Federal Pastoral Industry Award in 1967, phasing in equal wages for Aboriginal pastoral workers in the Kimberley region.
Consequently, Aboriginal people were evicted from the stations, which were in many cases on their traditional Country, and congregated in squalid refugee camps.

3 Since 2008, the Australian government has been seeking to address Indig- enous disadvantage under the so-called Closing the Gap framework, providing Indigenous-specific funding to implement reforms in remote housing, health, early childhood development, jobs and improvements in remote service delivery.
TheExtractiveIndustriesandSocietyxxx(xxxx)xxx3Inquiry into the destruction of 46,000 year old caves at the Juukan Gorge in the Pilbara region of Western AustraliaSubmission 108 - Attachment 4 A. Poelina et al.

Picture 1.

Aboriginal prisoners in chains in a railway waggon, Derby, 1897 (Martin 1897).

2014).
2014).

Such risks and challenges include the extractive industry’s cumula- tive environmental impacts (Roche and Mudd, 2014), which contribute to the deteriorating state of the country’s ecosystems and biodiversity (Australian Government, 2017).

Also, in economic terms the sector’s activities have been producing mixed results over the years.
During the so-called resource ‘super cycle’ (Tonts et al., 2016) between 2001 and 2013 — caused by historically unparalleled growth in demand and prices for Australian mineral and energy commodities — income growth was largely restricted to people inside the mining sector and related industries (Brueckner et al., 2014).
By contrast, other sectors experienced only very modest if any in- come growth, forcing many people outside mining to absorb not only higher costs of living due to the resources boom (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2011) but also reductions in real income.
Further, despite record levels of employment in mining during the boom (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2012) and industry claims of driving Indigenous development (Hooke, 2013), Indigenous employment figures in mining remained subdued, suggesting that many of mining’s material benefits did not reach the Traditional Owners whose land was being mined (Dockery, 2014).
In this regard, resource extraction in Australia can be seen as the continuation of colonialisation and the intensification of dispossession for Indigenous people (Gordon, 2006 cited in Howlett et al., 2011, 310).

Extractivism contributes to the “ongoing exclusion and structural inequities that continue to beset remote Aboriginal communities and their participation in the resource boom” (Brueckner et al., 2013, 119) and resource extraction more generally.
Today, an increasing number of mining and fracking exploration li- cences cover a large portion of the Kimberley region (see Fig.

2), putting enormous pressure on the region’s Native Title Prescribed Body Cor- porates4 to negotiate with government and industry.
These negotiations also focus on major irrigation and agricultural projects along the Mar- tuwarra Fitzroy River, which are part of the Western Australian gov- ernment’s Water Allocation and Management Plan.5 The region is earmarked for commercial water extraction inter alia for irrigation projects referred to here as ‘water mining’ (after Broderick and Horwitz, 2014) alongside other major invasive developments that continue to be imposed onto Aboriginal people.
These projects are, from a local com- munity perspective, expedited without due consideration of the risks and benefits for the sake of productivity and progress (Kimberley Development Commission 2018, McDuffie, 2019).
In contrast, research commissioned by the Martuwarra Fitzroy River Council champions the need for responsible development to ensure projects are fully explored, thoroughly researched, mitigated and adapted to local circumstances to operate through a negotiated social licence (RiverOfLife et al., 2020); this concept we explore further below.

4.
4.

Social licence to operate The social licence to operate (SLO) concept is largely seen as a business construct (Hall et al., 2015) with its origins in the extractives sector in the late 1990s (Bice et al., 2017) where it has since gained 4 The Native Title Act 1993 recognises that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have rights and interests to land and waters according to their traditional law and customs.
Under the Act, Native Title groups are required to nominate a Prescribed Body Corporate to hold or manage their Native Title (Kimberley Land Council 2020).

5 At the time of writing, the Western Australian government is preparing in consultation with stakeholders a management and water allocation plan for surface water and ground water resources in the Fitzroy River catchment, determining future use and management of water from the Fitzroy River and aquifers.
Planning involves the setting of water resource and management ob- jectives, decisions on how much ground and surface water is available for use and development of a regulatory framework to manage water resources (e.g.

licensing rules, policies, performance indicators and monitoring program) (Department of Water and Environmental Regulation 2019).
TheExtractiveIndustriesandSocietyxxx(xxxx)xxx4Inquiry into the destruction of 46,000 year old caves at the Juukan Gorge in the Pilbara region of Western AustraliaSubmission 108 - Attachment 4 A. Poelina et al.

Fig.

2.

Kimberley Resources Map (adapted from data available at data.wa.gov.au).

widespread acceptance (Jenkins 2018).


While the concept has largely remained a metaphorical device (Bice, 2014), over the years the attainment and maintenance of an SLO have become matters of strategic importance to mining companies (Overduin and Moore, 2017) and a recognised tool for enhancing corporate reputation, minimising cost and avoiding project delays (Parsons et al., 2014).
An SLO - though numerous definitions exist6 - is generally understood to be: “the ongoing acceptance and approval of a [project] by local community members and other stakeholders that can affect its profitability” (Moffat and Zhang, 2014, 61).

Its attainment is said to provide companies with a legitimate basis for their projects and operations (Black, 2013).
Of interest to this paper, however, is the way in which communities have begun to employ the SLO construct as a vehicle for asserting their objectives and values (Bice and Moffat, 2014).

In light of companies’ often transactional approach to SLO concerns (Williams and Walton, 2013), which tends to prioritise social issues mainly as a means of realising business benefits (C. Owen, 2016).
Communities frequently challenge companies’ SLO claims (Brueckner and Eabrasu, 2018) and use the threat of SLO withdrawal from firms’ exploration, operation or expansion projects (Bice and Moffat, 2014).

Notwithstanding, at the heart of SLO contestations often lies an inattentiveness by companies to the inherent complexities associated with the ‘issuance’7 of SLOs per- taining to due process, informed consent, stakeholder inclusion and power relations (Solomon et al., 2008).
As a result, SLO issuance can be at risk due to companies failing to establish trust with stakeholders and to meet the expectations of local 6 While there is general agreement in the literature that SLO broadly speaks to the nature of the relationship a company has with its stakeholders, defini- tions differ considerably in scope, ranging from narrow to broad SLO concep- tions (see Joyce and Thomson 2000, Gunningham, Kagan, and Thornton 2004, Aguilera et al.
2007, Solomon, Katz, and Lovel 2008, Thomson and Boutilier 2011, Prno and Slocombe 2012, Owen and Kemp 2013).

7 Issuance is an abstraction as SLOs are mostly implied de facto licenses.

communities and/or wider society (Moffat and Zhang, 2014).

This sit- uation is particularly problematic for an industry such as the extractives sector, which portrays itself as a “development industry that creates new social possibilities” (Cutifani, 2013, 5).
The sector’s SLO legitimacy is dependant on more than promises of “bringing new jobs to a region” (Black, 2013, 19).

Instead it requires an understanding of local contexts, needs and aspirations (Boutilier, 2009; Luke, 2017) as well as perceived social risks associated with industry activities and methods of stake- holder engagement that can address these sensitivities (Agrawal and Gibson, 1999 cited in Owen and Kemp, 2013).
Social risks, or socio-cultural risks, are particularly pertinent to this article for they are at the heart of concerns about development impacts amongst the Indigenous communities of the Martuwarra, Fitzroy River Country.

The Martuwarra Fitzroy River case highlights the realexistenz of threatened human values and social order (after Rosa, 1998 cited in Aven and Renn, 2009) as well as customs, spirituality and livelihoods deemed at risk from planned water extraction proposals.
Values such as these require protection, yet these protections are rarely afforded by prevailing actuarial licences and political licences, which intersect and often conflict with SLOs (Bice et al., 2017).

Actuarial licences are concerned with companies operating lawfully and include permits, approvals, rules of conduct and due process.

Ideally, these licences are reflective of social licences, providing legal standing to issues such as public health, safety or environmental con- cerns.
Political licences can be understood on the one hand as a “licence to govern” (Morrison, 2014, 21) and seen as a badge for political legit- imacy.

On the other hand, a political licence can also take the form of a government granting rights and lending political support to an organi- sation to carry out a particular activity (Brueckner et al., 2014).
Ideally the three licence types are in balance (Bice et al., 2017), working to ensure that the public interest (understood here in terms of welfare (Ho, 2013) is protected.

Tensions exist, however, in each licensing space and between the different licences.
Actuarial licensing may prove controversial, for example, due to competing views on regulatory efficacy and equity TheExtractiveIndustriesandSocietyxxx(xxxx)xxx5Inquiry into the destruction of 46,000 year old caves at the Juukan Gorge in the Pilbara region of Western AustraliaSubmission 108 - Attachment 4 A. Poelina et al.

(Matten and Crane, 2005), while the issuance of both actuarial and political licences can be met with community disapproval and threats of SLO withdrawal.
In other situations, actuarial licences, for example, may trump both political and social licences as independent assessments by statutory bodies can run counter to both political and/or social interests.

In Western Australia, there is a rich history of industry-community conflicts that speak to the complex interplay between the different li- cences and the various political actors that mobilise them.
For example, tensions surrounding resource development projects such as liquified natural gas processing (Wesley and Maccallum, 2014) or unconven- tional gas development (Luke, Brueckner and Emmanouil 2018) have erupted over the years in situations where SLOs have been contested and found in conflict with political and actuarial licences.
In these instances, the state government’s economic agenda was seen to have effectively outweighed community opposition to the various extractive projects, privileging the government’s political licence and overriding perceived social risks that prevailing actuarial licences8 were unable to safeguard against Brueckner et al., 2014.
In a similar vein, research into current water mining proposals for the Kimberley region suggests that these are premised merely on an eco- nomic legitimacy, promising to assist with the economic development of Western Australia’s North and thus aligning well with the state gov- ernment’s own development agenda (Connor et al., 2019).
Indeed, the current government discourse touts northern Australia as the next “great food bowl”, identifying thousands of hectares in the Fitzroy River basin as potentially suitable for irrigated agricultural crops (Petheram et al.

2018).
2018).

However, economic assumptions underpinning these water extraction proposals are found to be overly optimistic, with closer analysis revealing a strong likelihood of negative public investment returns, especially when the range of commonly unaccounted environ- mental public good externalities of water mining are considered (Con- nor et al., 2019, 24).
Overall, there is community concern that the ‘mining’ of the Mar- tuwarra Fitzroy River and surrounding areas will proceed on the basis of assessments by industry that – akin to the Ord River (Western Australia) and the Murray-Darling Basin (Queensland, New South Wales, Austra- lian Capital Territory, Victoria and South Australia) (Adamson, 2013; Molinari, 2016) – will over-estimate the benefits and under-estimate the often invisible costs of orthodox development.
In socio-cultural terms, proposed water extraction is seen as a threat to local Indigenous place-based cultures (RiverOfLife et al., 2020), running counter to water-based customary law activities, spiritual affiliations, beliefs and rituals (see also Toussaint, 2008).
There is also concern about the yet poorly understood future climate change impacts on the region’s aquatic systems and broader environment (see Jacob et al., 2012; Department of Water and Environmental Regulation, 2020; Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, 2020).
As these future impacts are prone to be exacerbated by development, a holistic approach to water allocation and management is sine qua non so as to avoid adverse socio-cultural and environmental legacies from water mining.9 8 Chandler (2014) questions the effectiveness of Western Australia’s regula- tory framework and its ability to balance adequately economic social and environmental concerns, seeing political barriers and powerful industry in- terests as key impediments to its effective functioning.
9 We recognise the efforts in areas such as conservation science (e.g.

Gadgil, Berkes, & Folke 1993; Reyes-García & Benyei 2019) and impact assessment (e. g. O’Faircheallaigh 2009; Bond, Pope, Retief, & Morrison-Saunders 2018) to draw on, and involve Indigenous knowledge and values.

We contend, however, that while the marriage between Indigenous knowledge and western science is well theorised (e.g.

Salomon et al.
Salomon et al.

2018; Vanclay 2020), in practice these fields still “carry a legacy of colonial constructs and relationships” (Mulrennan & Bussi`eres 2020, p. 283) and remain closed to the ontological messiness required to see the world from different vantage points (Finn & Jackson 2011; Barbour & Schlesinger 2012; Awume 2018; Roche, Brueckner, John, Walim, & Sindana 2020).
It is these broader socio-cultural and ecological trade-offs of ortho- dox development that the Martuwarra Fitzroy River Traditional Owners speak to (RiverOfLife et al., 2020).
They raise concerns over the likely negative impacts of development projects earmarked for the region and urge due regard for the impacts of such developments on Indigenous peoples’ Native Title rights, interests and authority over water, land, natural and cultural resources.10 A particular fear is the seeming align- ment between industry’s commercial interests and the state’s develop- ment ambitions, as this risks producing a Water Allocation and Management Plan that effectively overrides what Martuwarra Fitzroy River communities see to be in their public interest; in other words, a de facto and de jure trumping of social licence concerns by way of political and actuarial licences.
Traditional Owners see their concerns validated in the government’s pro-industry stance evident in the recently unveiled Pastoral Lands Reform package.

This land reform seeks to provide better opportunities to pastoralists across Western Australia through a suite of measures designed to enhance land management and improve security of tenure (Department of the Premier and Cabinet, 2019).
While mandated consultation processes with the region’s Traditional Owners give the impression that due process is being followed and that actuarial licencing conditions are being met, community-derived data reveals a schism between Indigenous and non-Indigenous value systems pertaining to the Martuwarra Fitzroy River (RiverOfLife et al., 2020).
This division points to an incommensurability between the orthodox colonial development paradigm that views the river system as an underutilised resource, effectively an irrigation channel.

Whereas local understandings of, and connections with, the River that regard it as ontological anchor view the water as fully utilised for the maintenance of vital ecological and cultural values.
Pastoralists and irrigators feel that 99 per cent of the Martuwarra Fitzroy River’s floodwater is wasted because it flows into the Indian Ocean (Courtney, 2019), whereas Traditional Owners see the River in its wider relationship feeding the surrounding environment.

To this end, Traditional Owners consider the “river as a living ancestral being with a right to life” (RiverOfLife et al., 2020).
This paradigmatic and ontological mismatch, evidenced by different ideas about water availability, abundance and normative water consumption values (Kimberley Water Resources Development Office, 1993), raises questions about the social licence of extraction-led devel- opment and for whose benefit development occurs.
Overall, Martuwarra Fitzroy River Council and communities are concerned that proposed water extraction plans hold little promise of protecting the largest registered Aboriginal Heritage site in Western Australia, the Martuwarra Fitzroy River; that these types of development neither serve local nor national interests when examined holistically; and that they risk perpetuating adverse socio-cultural and ecological legacies for local Indigenous peoples (RiverOfLife et al., 2020).
In what follows, we seek to redefine, within the Fitzroy River context, the ‘greater good’, and to articulate – using the social licence concept as a lens to critique water mining proposals – just development alternatives for the region without the ecological and cultural trade-offs that typi- cally come with orthodox development.

5.

A case study of the Martuwarra Fitzroy River council for just development “We are not saying we are anti-development.
All we are saying is be careful with the decision you make” 10 There are currently no requirements for either a cumulative impacts or social impact assessment in the context of water planning and the issuing of water licences for water resource extraction in the state (Western Australia Rights in Water Irrigation Act 1914).

We understand the Act is currently being reviewed with consideration given to requirements for cumulative impact assessment with the burden of proof resting with developers.
TheExtractiveIndustriesandSocietyxxx(xxxx)xxx6Inquiry into the destruction of 46,000 year old caves at the Juukan Gorge in the Pilbara region of Western AustraliaSubmission 108 - Attachment 4 A. Poelina et al.
(McLarty cited in RiverOfLife et al., 2020) Since colonisation, Kimberley Aboriginal people have been intent on making their voices heard through the inter-generational transmission of oral stories (Langdon, 2009), their engagement in land rights strug- gles (Wergin, 2016) and their determination to be involved in all dis- cussions relating to development on their Martuwarra Country.
These dialogic attempts have been both public and private, engaging at times with individual members of settler society, and at other times with government institutions at large.

They have taken the shape of letters, petitions, meetings, committees and inquiries, witness statements, life narratives, and later on, autobiographies and films, and have been consistent in their presence through time and space (Van Toorn 2001).
The importance of speaking the Martuwarra Fitzroy River Traditional Owners worldview into existence, of educating non-Aboriginal people about Country, of seeing, naming, living on, and sharing Country, of place-making – envisaging all spatio-temporal interactions as being based in Booroo (Country) – forms the basis of their aspirations for development on Country (McDuffie, 2019).
Blaser (2004, 29–31) argues that place-basedness, or local place specificity, is a significant concept for Indigenous peoples across the world, which is often systematically ignored for more universal devel- opment models (McDuffie, 2019).

Contemporary socio-economic con- structs view places as singular “assets” to be used up and abandoned as ruins once their productivity has run out (Tsing, 2011).
Placeless mul- tinationals exploit resources in foreign spaces, leaving the people who inhabit these places to deal with the cumulative impacts of rushed, invasive, short-term projects.

Just development alternatives are there- fore seen to reclaim a sense of identity that is grounded in place (McDuffie, 2019).
Community development initiatives have been underpinned by a strong belief in maintaining and protecting Country, language, people’s wellbeing, and preserving culture and identity, through a consultative and holistic approach to regional development (McDuffie, 2019, 226).

Aboriginal aspirations for alternative types of development take into account economic, social, cultural health and wellbeing considerations such as hybrid economies (Altman, 2005) and hybrid businesses.
They advocate Indigenous social inclusion through economic participation while also serving vital environmental and socio-cultural functions Brueckner et al., 2014c.

Unfortunately, such approaches are often dis- missed by governments and industries alike in favour of orthodox extractivism (McDuffie, 2019).

The reductionist nature of government approaches and their wed- dedness to the ideals of the market economy continue to disadvantage Aboriginal people.
Native Title negotiations with the resource in- dustries, and the CDP (Community Development Program) have done little to increase the participation of Aboriginal communities in the economy and the labour market (McDuffie, 2019).
Ever-changing gov- ernment policies, rationalisation (Scott, 1998), and the mainstreaming of Aboriginal affairs (Sullivan, 2011) continue to fragment service de- livery and fail Kimberley Aboriginal people through another form of assimilation, failing to consider them as distinctive members of the Australian polity (McDuffie, 2019, 271).

As argued by Amartya Sen (1999 14, 70), key markers of successful development should go beyond wealth accumulation, gross national product or income statistics.
Development should be also be concerned with enhancing lives and freedoms (14), both “as the primary end of development but also as the principal means of it” (36).

Different people hold different opinions on what they consider to be “a life of value” (68, 75, 87), and therefore should be actively participating in the decision-making processes that influence their lives (242) and have the freedom to choose what they consider to be important to them.
Instead, governments have mostly tended to view the general pop- ulation as a homogenous mass sharing similar life aspirations, or have imposed similar programs, services, or development strategies on culturally distinct peoples in a diversity of places (Bulloch and Fogarty, 2016); for the “greater good”.
Indigenous peoples across the world have seen their cosmologies being denied a right of existence through the imposition of the dominant settler society’s values and have lacked the opportunities to achieve the outcomes they have reason to value in their own lives (Sen, 1999, 291).
Rather than reinforcing a dichotomy be- tween the “traditional” and the “modern”, a way forward may reside, not solely in the maintenance of “old ways of living” but rather in the development of a new “way of seeing” the world, neither old nor new, a multi-layered, place-based perception of the world - a counter-discourse to universalism (Blaser, 2004, 28).
Cultural actions (Poelina, 2009) put in place in the Kimberley region, as part of a sustainable, culture-conservation economy, are an important part of what Blaser (2004, 34–36) calls “life projects”– more than mere acts of resistance to development, they are a way for Indigenous people to live a life of purpose and value.
In the Kimberley, these projects have ranged from micro-industries in remote communities, pastoralism, cul- tural tourism, the development of cultural centres, to youth training on Country, book publishing, scientific research collaborations, traditional ecological knowledge research, language programs, and ranger pro- grams (McDuffie, 2019).
These “life projects” strengthen relationships within community, local governance, and promote increased engage- ment with employment and education services (Morrison 2007, 13).

Programs such as the Yiriman Ranger Project enable young people to reconnect with their identity, build their resilience, and spend valuable time with family and community (Palmer, 2016, 1; Pilbara and Kim- berley Aboriginal Media, McDuffie, and Dixon 2018).
Nationally, the positive impacts of Caring for Country initiatives on the physical and mental health of Aboriginal people, and on the ongoing conservation of highly bio-diverse landscapes, have been demonstrated through many studies (Weir et al., 2011; Altman and Kerins, 2012).

In the Martuwarra Fitzroy River Country ‘Place’ (Booroo) continues to be celebrated, respected, and loved by Traditional Owners.
In the lives of Traditional Owners, the Martuwarra will forever remain a life project: the centre of all social, economic, cultural, spiritual, educational and political in- teractions (McDuffie, 2019, 225).
Over the years, Martuwarra Traditional Owners have continued to engage in consultative groups set up to discuss potential developments on, or the protection of, the Martuwarra, such as the Our Place Our Future conference, organised by the Kimberley Land Council in 1998, the Kimberley Appropriate Economies Roundtable in 2005 (Hill et al., 2006), or the Fitzroy Catchment Management Group (FitzCAM), created in 2007.
The Martuwarra Traditional Owners’ continued determination to have agency in all future development plans for the region is also demon- strated in the Walalakoo Healthy Country Plan (2017–2027) (Walalakoo Aboriginal Corporation RNTBC 2016).

Indigenous leaders have also and consistently business-mindedness, implementing cultural actions and life projects in their communities (Poelina, 2009; Poelina et al., 2008; Pandanus Park Community et al., 2016).
entrepreneurship demonstrated their In 2018, Martuwarra people, comprising six Aboriginal nations along the Fitzroy River, formed an alliance to establish the Martuwarra Fitzroy River Council (Martuwarra Council), in response to what they see as the new wave of colonisation: miners, agriculturalists, and irrigators eyeing the region.
Traditional Owners have adopted a collective united posi- tion, “One Mind and One Voice”, to be included in decision-making processes, with Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) (Poelina et al., 2019).

International covenants and obligations consider FPIC a specific right that pertains to Indigenous peoples under the United Na- tions Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) (Ward, 2011), relating to just development on Indigenous people’s lands and waters.
It allows Traditional Owners to issue or withhold a social licence to a project that may affect them or their territories and enables them to negotiate the conditions under which the project will be designed, implemented, monitored and evaluated.
Since the formation of the Martuwarra Council, Traditional Owners from the Martuwarra have strengthened their capacity for collaborative TheExtractiveIndustriesandSocietyxxx(xxxx)xxx7Inquiry into the destruction of 46,000 year old caves at the Juukan Gorge in the Pilbara region of Western AustraliaSubmission 108 - Attachment 4 A. Poelina et al.

planning between government, Native Title holders and industry (Laborde and Jackson, 2018).
The Martuwarra Council position of standing, ‘One Mind and One Voice’, encapsulates their collective guardianship responsibility and authority to protect the Martuwarra’s right to continue to flow as a living entity for generations to come (Poelina, 2020).

Traditional Owners are concerned about the extent to which Aboriginal voices will be heard, or whether the impositions of the last 150 years will continue unabatedly under ever-renewing colonisers.
The quote below exemplifies the concerns of Martuwarra people: We are highly dependant as Traditional Owners on the Fitzroy River as a food source, as a way of connecting with our Native Title, importantly how the river and living on Country is therapeutic and that there is a sense it’s a healing.

One of the things we want to be very clear about is understanding that there is lots of other forms of value other than economic development and extraction of water for somebody else from somewhere else.
As the old people are saying: no river, no people.

No people, no life.

(Poelina cited in RiverOfLife et al., 2020) In June 2018, the Martuwarra Council, called on the Western Australian government to take a science-based approach to water allo- cation in the Fitzroy River basin.
Council representatives met with the heads of three government departments to promote a more coordinated approach to water management, at a time when pastoralists in the re- gion, led by mining magnate and station owner Gina Rinehart, began lobbying for greater access to the Martuwarra for irrigation purposes (Wahlquist, 2019).
The Western Australian government’s Water Allo- cation Planning earmarked for the Martuwarra separates people, land, water, plants and animals into distinct assets, and assigns rights to multiple interests, such as pastoralists, irrigators and miners, to use and develop water, land and environmental resources through separate legal processes and instruments.
In theory, these licences and leases are meant to be issued to those who can generate the most prosperity and well- being to the community by way of their enterprise.

Extractive water rights are one of these legal instruments.
The Martuwarra Council over the past 12 months has engaged in a wide range of workshops, meetings and partnerships to produce two peer reviewed published reports; firstly, Martuwarra Country a Historical Perspective (1838-Present), (RiverOfLife et al., 2020) and A Conservation and Management Plan for the National Heritage Listed Fitzroy River Catchment Estate, (RiverOfLife et al., 2020).
Both reports demonstrate the need to for governments to invest in a statement of commitment in their engagement with Indigenous Western Australians, and to decolo- nise policies, laws, regulation, and management towards an inclusive earth-centred regional governance approach.
The 15 Position State- ments identified in the Martuwarra Council’s Conservation and Man- agement Plan justify the need to develop a Fitzroy Catchment Management Authority to guide the development, management and regulation of water extraction in the Fitzroy River Catchment for the “greater good” of all (Poelina, 2020).

In this context, the Martuwarra Council has requested a cumulative impact assessment of current and proposed development around water use and or drawdown within the Fitzroy River Catchment.
Furthermore, the Martuwarra Council have requested a social impact assessment that is designed to guide the planning and mitigate the impacts of the pro- posed Fitzroy River Management Plan and Fitzroy Catchment Water Allocation Plan.

As part of the right of Traditional Owners to FPIC, the Martuwarra Council has asked the Western Australian government to undertake these assessments prior to the release of the Fitzroy River Management Plan and Fitzroy Catchment Water Allocation Plan.
At the time of writing, there were several national and senate in- quiries into multiple forms of legislation which directly affect the wellbeing of Indigenous peoples in the Martuwarra.

We have referred to them briefly as the information was published by the Martuwarra Council.

The first enquiry came about through the global attention emanating from the National Inquiry into the destruction of the Western Australian 46,000-year-old Juukan Gorge Caves.
Initial findings reveal the politics of economics legitimise the failure to protect the evidence of the first form of human thought from destruction.

This has been described as ‘incremental genocide’ by Indigenous Senator Patrick Dodson (Michel- more, 2020).

The intent of this enquiry is to make sure processes are put in place to prevent such destruction from ever happening again.
With the Martu- warra Fitzroy River being the largest recorded Registered Aboriginal Heritage site in Western Australia, the Martuwarra Council’s public submission makes the case that the political goodwill of governments is needed to protect the River.

Not only as an Aboriginal and National Heritage listed River, but also as a global asset under World Heritage protection for generations to come (RiverOfLife et al., 2020a).
The second public enquiry, which closed on October 9th, presented the Martuwarra Council with the opportunity to make a submission for the review of the outdated Western Australian Aboriginal Heritage Act (1972) (RiverOfLife et al., 2020b) The Martuwarra Council along with many traditional owners, scientists, and legal experts, remain concerned that the Western Australian government appears to be fast-tracking a Review of the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Bill prematurely, before the Juukan Gorge Inquiry is finalised in December 2020.
The Martuwarra Council is calling for Reform, not just a Review of the Bill.

Despite calls for additional time, and an overwhelming number of public submissions still to be registered with the Department of Planning, Land and Heri- tage, the Minister for Indigenous Affairs believes there has been suffi- cient time and consultation and is looking to enact the Bill prior to the next state elections in March 2021 (Michelmore, 2020).
The Martuwarra Council advocate for the political goodwill and research investment required to ensure the concept of ‘Just Develop- ment’ is based on Indigenous First Law.

First Law incorporates Indige- nous Lifeways and Livelihoods coupled with Western science and actioned through genuine FPIC, as identified in the Kimberley Science and Conservation Strategy (Department of Environment and Conserva- tion, 2011).
When First Law is applied to the present and future devel- opment planning in the Kimberley region it is important to recognise that the following questions from the Martuwarra Council need to be fully explored from a social licence perspective: • Who and what counts and is counted?

• How are values assigned?

• How do relationships between people and the ‘natural’ world work to produce value?

• How are existing values of the riverine system understood and measured?

• Whose laws and values matter?


• What impacts and risks are accurately predicted and deemed acceptable?

• Who gets to decide?

And what kind of ‘evidence’ is weighed up in the decision-making process?

• How and where are decisions made?

• Whose visions of the future are being pursued?

Ultimately, Traditional Owners’ concerns are about property rights, power and values in regard to deeply different ontologies and episte- mologies.
At the time of publication, the Martuwarra Council await further engagement and negotiations with the WA government commitment to working cooperatively with the Martuwarra Council in the ongoing development and implementation of the Fitzroy River Management Plan and Fitzroy Catchment Water Allocation Plan.

Time will tell whether positive socio-cultural and environmental legacies for the Martuwarra Fitzroy River region will eventuate.
TheExtractiveIndustriesandSocietyxxx(xxxx)xxx8Inquiry into the destruction of 46,000 year old caves at the Juukan Gorge in the Pilbara region of Western AustraliaSubmission 108 - Attachment 4 A. Poelina et al.

6.

Conclusion The violent history of colonial invasion and occupation of the Mar- tuwarra Fitzroy River Country has morphed from extreme physical violence into endemic structural violence (Galtung, 1969).
The conse- quence is the ongoing subjugation of Kimberley Aboriginal people in the name of wealth creation for private and foreign interests at great cul- tural and ecological expense.

Notwithstanding, Martuwarra Traditional Owners are surviving and building their capacity to decolonise through “co-operation, unity, cultural synthesis, and organisation” (Freire, 1970).
The Martuwarra Council provides a model for Indigenous-led regional cultural water governance, advocating decolonising the Catchment by promoting new and emerging economies.
The Council is championing decolonising the Fitzroy Catchment by promoting new economies that demonstrate that ‘just forms of northern development’ are not only possible but also vital in the context of climate change, water scarcity, food security and their impacts on people, communities and businesses within the Martuwarra, Fitzroy River Catchment/Estate.
The Martuwarra Council research and planning reports affirms there is a strong sentiment that the entire Catchment needs to be protected including the King Sound from irrigation, mining and gas development.

In this regard, the Martuwarra Council is eager to continue discussions with the government on water planning, allocation and River protection.

It is important to note consultation does not mean consent.
Through the Martuwarra Council they will ensure Traditional Owner decisions are grounded in Free Prior and Informed Consent.

At the present time, Traditional Owners are concerned government may use the COVID 19 Pandemic and the current economic downturn brought on by the pandemic as a pretext for fast-tracking resource development projects.
Resource development advocates are increasing pressure on gov- ernment to weaken cultural and economic policy and scientific research in a bid to promote their view of a resource-led economic recovery (Anon, 2020).

Industry-led development would effectively limit the scope for community-sanctioned water allocation processes and perpetuate marginalisation processes.
Thus, the time has come for structural reform and systemic change in the way development strate- gies are devised and implemented in remote Australia.

Orthodox development cannot proceed as ‘business as usual’ at the regional, na- tional, and global levels.

Economic development in the West Kimberley region, particularly in regard to ‘water resource’ development of the Martuwarra, Fitzroy River Catchment, requires the involvement of Traditional Owners.
Genuine partnerships, involving government, industry and Tradi- tional Owners, are necessary to ensure a) the sustainable management of water resources and b) dedicated government investment is committed into Traditional Owner-determined economies, to ensure equitable distribution of wealth creation from diverse ‘new and forever’ industries and economies.

It is only then that development can be considered a form of moral progress.
The justification for imposed resource extraction from the region to more populated centres has been touted as being “for the greater good”.

The notion of the “greater good” needs to be expanded to include Traditional Owners.

Furthermore, there needs to be greater recognition of the enduring First Law of guardianship and au- thority of Martuwarra Traditional Owners of these natural assets.
These natural assets are located on the estates that Traditional Owners have managed from the beginning of time through to today.
In this time of climate change and global economic, human, social, cultural, and environmental uncertainty,11 there is an opportunity to redefine the moral compass of development, by introducing the concept of a ‘social 11 Indigenous land management is recognised for maintaining the world’s highest biodiversity values, underscoring that collaboration with Indigenous land stewards is essential in ensuring that species and ecosystems survive and thrive (Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services 2019).
licence’ into water planning.

Sustainable water management requires holistic applied research to ensure Indigenous economies and values are included in the ‘greater good of all’.

It is time to decolonise development and shift the paradigm towards just development on just terms.

Acknowledgement We acknowledge the equal contribution of all authors of this article to engage in this collaborative exploratory, reiterative process of evi- dence; theory, principle-gathering, and analysis.
This research is sup- ported by an Australian Government Research Training Program (RTP) Scholarship.

We would like to thank the reviewers for their helpful comments and feedback.

References Aborigines Act 1905.

14 (WA) (Austl).

Retrieved August 24, 2019, from https://aiatsis.

gov.au/sites/default/files/catalogue_resources/52790.pdf.

Aborigines Amendment Act 1936.

43 (WA) (Austl).


Retrieved August 24, 2019, from https://www.legislation.wa.gov.au/legislation/prod/filestore.nsf/FileURL/mrdoc _12388.pdf/$FILE/Aborigines%20Act%20Amendment%20Act%201936%20-%20% 5B00-00-00%5D.pdf?OpenElement.

Adamson, D. 2013.

"Romancing the north: the food bowl furphy."

The Conversation, 28 June.

https://theconversation.com/romancing-the-north-the-food-bowl-furph y-15469.

Agrawal, A., Gibson, C.C., 1999.


Enchantment and disenchantment: the role of community in natural resource conservation.

World Dev.

27 (4), 629–649.

Aguilera, R.V., Rupp, D.E., Williams, C.A., Ganapathi, J., 2007.

Putting the S back in corporate social responsibility: a multi-level theory of social change in organizations.

Acad.

Manage Rev.

32 (3), 836–863.

Edited by the Altman, J., Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies, 2005.
Development options on aboriginal land: sustainable indigenous hybrid economies in the twenty-first century.

In: Taylor, L.

(Ed.

), The Power of Knowledge, the Resonance of Tradition.

Aboriginal Studies Press, Canberra.

Edited by the.

Altman, J., Kerins, S., 2012.

People on country: vital landscapes.

Indigenous Futures.

Federation Press, Annandale.

Anon, 2020.

Mining can lead economic surge after the pandemic - editorial.

The Australian, 13 April.


https://www.theaustralian.com.au/commentary/editorials /mining-can-lead-economic-surge-after-the-pandemic/news-story/ad661014ff4dd 8d149aa76ef88d9d315.

Archdeacon, W.E., 1880.

Report on King’s sound.

Fremantle Herald 3.

December 25.

Ash, A., Watson, I., 2018.

Developing the north: learning from the past to guide future plans and policies.

Rangel.

J.

40 (4), 301–314.

Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2011.

Consumer Price Index Table 12 (Perth) [Cat.No.

6401.0].
6401.0].

ABS, Canberra.

Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2012.

Labour Force, Australia - Detailed Quarterly Time Series Workbook [Cat.

No.

6291.0.55.003].

ABS, Canberra.

Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2018.

Socio-economic Advanatge and disadvantage.

[Cat.

No.

2071.0] - Census of Population and Housing: Reflecting Australia - Stories from the Census, 2016.

ABS, Canberra.

Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2019.

Australian System of National accounts, 2018-19 [Cat.No.

5204.0].

ABS, Canberra.


Australian Government, 2017.

Australia State of the Environment 2016.

Department of Environment and Energy, Canberra.

Australian Heritage Council, 2011.

West Kimberley Place Report.

Department of the Environment and Energy, Perth.

Accessed August 24, 2019. https://www.environme nt.gov.au/system/files/pages/ed0b4e39-41eb-4cee-84f6-049a932c5d46/files/ahc- final-assessment-full.pdf.

Aven, T., Renn, O., 2009.

On risk defined as an event where the outcome is uncertain.

J.
J.

Risk.

Res.

12 (1), 1–11.

Awume, O.

2018.

"Indigenizing water security."

PhD, Department of Geography and Planning, University of Saskatchewan.

Barbour, W., Schlesinger, C., 2012.

Who’s the boss?

Post-colonialism, ecological research and conservation management on Australian Indigenous lands.

Ecol.

Manage.

Restor.

13 (1), 36–41.

Bice, S., 2014.

What gives you a social licence?

An exploration of the social licence to operate in the Australian mining industry.

Resources 3 (1), 62–80.


Bice, S., Brueckner, M., Pforr, C., 2017.

Putting social license to operate on the map: a social, actuarial and political risk and licensing model (SAP Model).

Resour.

Policy 53, 46–55.

Bice, S., Moffat, K., 2014.

Social licence to operate and impact assessment.

Impact Assess.

Proj.

Apprais.

32 (4), 257–262.

Black, L., 2013.

The Social Licence to Operate: Your Management Framework For Complex Times.

Do Sustainability, Oxford.

Edited by Blaser, M., 2004.


Life projects: indigenous peoples’ agency and development.

In: Mario, Blaser, Harvey, A Feit, Glenn, McRae (Eds.

), In the Way of development: Indigenous peoples, Life Projects and Globalization.

Zed Books in association with International Development Research Centre Ottawa, London & New York, pp.

26–47.

Edited by.
26–47.

Edited by.

TheExtractiveIndustriesandSocietyxxx(xxxx)xxx9Inquiry into the destruction of 46,000 year old caves at the Juukan Gorge in the Pilbara region of Western AustraliaSubmission 108 - Attachment 4 A. Poelina et al.

Blondeel, M., Van de Graaf, T., 2018.

Toward a global coal mining moratorium?

A Edited by Foucault, M., 1980.

In: Gordon., C.

(Ed.).

Harvester Press, Brighton, comparative analysis of coal mining policies in the USA, China, India and Australia.

Clim.

Change 150 (1), 89–101.


pp.

1972–1977.

Edited by.

Freire, P., 1970.

Pedagogy of the Oppressed.

(M. Ramos, Trans.).

The Continuum Bond, A., Pope, J., Retief, F., Morrison-Saunders, A., 2018.

On legitimacy in impact Publishing Company, New York.

assessment: an epistemologically-based conceptualisation.

Environ.

Impact Assess.

Rev.

69, 16–23.

Boutilier, R., 2009.

Stakeholder politics: Social capital, Sustainable Development and the Corporation.

Stanford University Press, Stanford.


Gadgil, M., Berkes, F., Folke, C., 1993.

Indigenous knowledge for biodiversity conservation.

Ambio 151–156.

Galtung, J., 1969.

Violence, peace, and peace research.

J.

Peace Res.

6 (3), 167–191.

Gammage, B., 2011.

The Biggest Estate On earth: How Aborigines Made Australia.

Allen Brockman, J.G., 1881.

Notes of an Exploratory Trip Northwards from the Fitzroy.

The & Unwin, Sydney.

West Australian 7.

September 20. edited by Broderick, G., Horwitz, P., 2014.
Sustainability Mining: water for Mining, and Mining Water.

In: Brueckner, M., Durey, A., Mayes, R., Pforr, C.

(Eds.

), Resource Curse Or Cure ?

On the Sustainability of Development in Western Australia.

Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp.

207–219.

edited by.

Gooding, C.D., Long, J.L., 1958.

The Kimberley wallaby menace - water poisoning experiments, 1955-1957.

J.

Depart.

Agric.

West Australia (January-February), 173–178.

Gordon, T., 2006.
Gordon, T., 2006.

Canadian capitalism and the dispossession of Indigenous peoples.

New Socialist 58, 18–19.

Brueckner, M., Durey, A., Mayes, R., Pforr, C., 2013.

The mining boom and western Gregory, C.J., 1923.

Cotton Culture: west Kimberley and the Fitzroy Valley.

Sunday Australia’s changing landscape: towards sustainability or business as usual?

Rural Soc.

J.

22 (2), 111–124.

Brueckner, M., Durey, A., Mayes, R., Pforr, C., 2014.

Resource Curse Or cure?


On the Sustainability of Development in Western Australia.

Springer, Heidelberg.

Brueckner, M., Durey, A., Pforr, C., Mayes, R., 2014.

The civic virtue of developmentalism: on the mining industry’s political licence to develop Western Australia.

Impact Assess.

Proj.

Apprais.

32 (4), 315–326.

edited by Brueckner, M., Durey, A., Mayes, R., Pforr, C., 2014.

Confronting the ‘resource curse or cure’ binary.

In: Brueckner, M., Durey, A., Mayes, R., Pforr, C.

(Eds.
(Eds.

), Resource curse Or cure?

On the Sustainability of Development in Western Australia.

Springer, Heidelberg, pp.

3–23.

edited by.

Times 3.

April 22.

Gribble, J.B., 1987.

Dark Deeds in a Sunny land: Or Blacks and Whites in North-West Australia.

University of Western Australia Press and Institute of Applied Aboriginal Studies, Western Australian College of Advanced Education, Nedlands, WA.

Gunningham, N.A., Kagan, R.A., Thornton, D., 2004.


Social license and environment protection: why businesses go beyond compliance.

Law & Social Inquiry 29 (2), 307–341.

Hall, N., Lacey, J., Carr-Cornish, S., Dowd, A.-.M., 2015.

Social licence to operate: understanding how a concept has been translated into practice in energy industries.

J.

Clean Prod.

86, 301–310.

Hardman, E.T., 1884.

Geology of the Kimberley District.

Legislative Council, Western Brueckner, M., Eabrasu, M., 2018.
Pinning down the social license to operate (SLO): the Australia.

problem of normative complexity.

Resour.

Policy 59, 217–226.

Harman, E.J., Head, B.W., 1982.

State, Capital and Resources in the North and West of Brueckner, M., Spencer, R., Wise, G., Marika, B., 2014.

Indigenous entrepreneurship: Australia.

University of Western Australia Press, Nedlands.

closing the Gap on local terms.

J. Aust.

Indig.

Issues 17 (2), 2–24.

Bulloch, H., Fogarty, W., 2016.


Freeing the ‘Aboriginal Individual’: deconstructing ‘Development as Freedom’ in Remote Indigenous Australia.

Soc.

Anal.

60 (3), 76–94.

Hasluck, P., 1942.

Black Australians: A survey of Native Policy in Western Australia.

Melbourne University Press; Oxford University Press, Melbourne, London, pp.

1829–1897.

Centre For 21st Century Humanities, 2019.

Colonial Frontier Massacres Map (1780- Hill, R., Golson, K., Lowe, P., Mann, M., Hayes, S., Blackwood, J.

(Eds.
(Eds.

), 2006.

Kimberley 1930).

University of Newcastle, Newcastle.

Accessed on May 16. https://c21ch.new castle.edu.au/colonialmassacres/map.php.

Appropriate Economies Roundtable: Forum Proceedings.

Kimberley Land Council; Environs Kimberley; Australian Conservation Foundation.

Centre of Excellence in Natural Resource Management, 2010.

Fitzroy River Catchment Management Plan.

The University of Western Australia, Perth.


Accessed 16th May 2020. https://rangelandswa.com.au/wpcontent/uploads/2017/01/FitzroyRiverCa tchmentPlanV1.pdf.

Ho, L.-s, 2013.

Public Policy and the Public Interest.

Routledge, Abingdon, Oxon.

Hooke, M. 2013.

"When the boom is over."

ABC - Q&A, 15 July.

Horton, D. 2000.

The pure state of nature: sacred cows, destructive myths and the environment.

St Leonards: Allen & Unwin.

edited by Chandler, L., 2014.

Regulating the resource juggernaut.


In: Brueckner, M., Howlett, C., Seini, M., McCallum, D., Osborne, N., 2011.

Neoliberalism, Mineral Durey, A., Mayes, R., Pforr, C.

(Eds.

), Resource curse Or cure?

On the Sustainability of Development in Western Australia.

Springer, Heidelberg, pp.

165–177.

edited by.

Development and Indigenous People: a framework for analysis.

Australian Geographer 42 (3), 309–323.

Commonwealth of Australia, 2020.

Closing the Gap Report 2020.


Department of the Hunt, S.-.J., 1986.

Spinifex and hessian: Women’s lives in North-Western Australia.

Prime Minister and Cabinet, Canberra.

Connor, J.D., Regan, C., Nicol, T., 2019.

Environmental, Cultural and Social Capital As a Core Asset For the Martuwarra (Fitzroy River) and Its People.

University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA.

Courtney, P., 2019.

Fitzroy Water Plan: proposal to open water allocations.

ABC Landline.

Cutifani, M., 2013.


Mining’s contribution to sustainable development..

In: African Mining Indaba 2013.

CapeTown, 4-7 February.

Davidson, W.S., 1978.

Havens of refuge: A history of Leprosy in Western Australia.

University of Western Australia Press, Perth, WA.

Edited by De Vattel, E., 1797.

In: Whatmore, R., Kapossy, B.

(Eds.).

Liberty Fund, Indianapolis.

Edited by.

Department of Environment and Conservation, 2011.

Kimberley Science and Conservation Strategy.

DEC, Perth.
DEC, Perth.

University of Western Australia Press, Perth, pp.

1860–1900.

Hunter, B., Howlett, M., Gray, M., 2015.

The Economic Impact of the Mining Boom on I ndigenous and Non-I ndigenous A ustralians.

Asia Pac Policy Stud 2 (3), 517–530.

Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, 2019.

The Regional Assessment Report On Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services For Europe and Central Asia.

IPBES, Bonn.

Isaac, G., Torres, M., 2002.


Whispering in Our hearts: The Mowla Bluff massacre.

Australian Film Finance Corporation; Mayfan Pty Ltd, Ronin Films, DVD, Australia.

Jakob, D., Imielska, A., Charles, S., Fu, G., Frederiksen, C., Frederiksen, J., Zidikheri, M., Hope, P., Keay, K., Ganter, C., Li, Y., Phatak, A., Palmer, M., Wormworth, J.A., McBride, J., Dare, R., Lavender, S., Abbs, D., Rotstayn, L., Rafter, T., Lau, R., Bates, B., 2012.
Western Australia’s Weather and Climate: A Synthesis of Indian Ocean Climate Initiative Stage 3 Research.

CSIRO, Perth, WA.

Jenkins, K. 2018.

"Can I see your social license please?"."

Policy Quarterly 14 (4).

doi: Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development.

2018.

Noogoora burr: 10.26686/pq.v14i4.5146.

what you should know (Agriculture and Food).

Accessed May 16, 2020. https://www.agric.wa.gov.au/declared-plants/noogoora-burr-what-you-should -know.
Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development.

2020.

Climate projections for Western Australia.

Accessed October 8, 2020. https://www.agric.wa.gov.au/cli mate-change/climate-projections-western-australia.

Joyce, S., Thomson, I., 2000.

Earning a social licence to operate: social acceptability and resource development in Latin America.

CIM Bulletin 93, 49–53.

Kellow, A., Niemeyer, S., 1999.


The development of environmental administration in Queensland and Western Australia: why are they different?

Aust J Polit Sci 34 (2), 205–222.

Kimberley Development Commission, 2018.

Annual Report 2017-2018 (No.

1).

KDC, Department of Water, 2009.

Fitzroy Catchment Subregion Overview and Future Kununurra, Western Australia.

directions: Kimberley regional Water Plan Working Discussion Paper.

Government of Western Australia; Department of Water, Perth.
Accessed August 24, 2019. https ://www.water.wa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/5554/89814.pdf.

Department of Water and Environmental Regulation, 2019.

Water Planning in the Fitzroy River Catchment.

DWER, Perth.

Department of Water and Environmental Regulation.

2020.

Climate trends – Kimberley.

Accessed October 8, 2020. https://www.water.wa.gov.au/planning-for-the-future /allocation-plans/managing-water-in-a-changing-climate/climate-trends-kimberley.

edited by Dockery, A.M., 2014.


The mining boom and Indigenous labour market outcomes.

In: Brueckner, M., Durey, A., Mayes, R., Pforr, C.

(Eds.

), Resource curse Or cure?

On the Sustainability of Development in Western Australia.

Springer, Heidelberg, pp.

75–89.

edited by.

Durack, M., 1969.

The Rock and the Sand.

Constable Limited, London.

edited by Elkin, A.P., 1979.

Aboriginal-European relations in Western Australia: a historical and personal record.

In: Berndt, R.M., Berndt, C.

(Eds.


), Aborigines of the West: Their past and Their Present.

University of Western Australia Press, Perth, pp.

85–323.

edited by.

Finn, M., Jackson, S., 2011.

Protecting Indigenous Values in Water Management: a Challenge to Conventional Environmental Flow Assessments.

Ecosystems 14 (8), 1232–1248.

Kimberley Land Council 2020.

What is native tile?

Accessed May 19, 2020. https://www.

klc.org.au/what-is-native-title.

Kimberley Water Resources Development Office, Vol.


1.

Perth, 1993.

Fitzroy Valley Irrigation: a Conceptual Study.

Report Prepared By ACIL Economics and Policy Pty Ltd, Kinhill Engineers, Bryn Roberts and Associates.

Water Authority of Western Australia, Perth.

Laborde, S., and Jackson, S. 2018.

"New river council will give traditional owners in the Kimberley a unified voice".
The Conversation, June 20. http://theconversation.co m/new-river-council-will-give-traditional-owners-in-the-kimberley-a-unified-voice- 98390.

Langdon, J.

(Ed.

), 2009.

Indigenous knowledges, Development and Education.

Sense Publishers, Rotterdam.

Edited by Lawford, E., 2011.

Crowbar saved my life.

In: Marshall, P.

(Ed.

), Raparapa: Stories from the Fitzroy River Drovers.

Magabala Books, Broome, WA, pp.

21–50.

Edited by.

Lim, M., Poelina, A., Bagnall, D., 2017.


Can the Fitzroy River Declaration ensure the realisation of the First Laws of the River and secure sustainable and equitable futures for the West Kimberley?

Aust.

Environ.

Rev.

32 (1), 18–24.

Luke, H., 2017.

Social resistance to coal seam gas development in the Northern Rivers region of Eastern Australia: proposing a diamond model of social license to operate.

Land Use Policy 69, 266–280.


TheExtractiveIndustriesandSocietyxxx(xxxx)xxx10Inquiry into the destruction of 46,000 year old caves at the Juukan Gorge in the Pilbara region of Western AustraliaSubmission 108 - Attachment 4 A. Poelina et al.

Luke, H., Brueckner, M., Emmanouil, N., 2018.

Unconventional gas development in Poelina, A., 2009.

Action research to build the capacity of Nyikina Indigenous Australia: A critical review of its social license.

The Extractive Industries and Society 5 (4), 648–662.
Australians.

Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation.

University of New England, Armidale, NSW.

Marshall, L., Hattersley, C., 2004.

Reflections of a Kimberley woman.

Madjulla Inc., edited by Poelina, A., 2020.

A coalition of hope!

A regional governance approach to Broome.

Martin, J., 1864.

Journal and Reports of Two Voyages to the Glenelg River and the North West Coast of Australia (1863-1864).

A. Shenton, Perth.

Martin, W. H. S. (1897).

Aboriginal prisoners in chains in a railway wagon.


Collection of photographs of Derby and surrounding region.

026300PD.

State Library of Western Australia, Perth.

Retrieved August 24, 2019, from http://purl.slwa.wa.gov.au/slwa- b1927700-001.

Matten, D., Crane, A., 2005.

Corporate citizenship: towards an extended theoretical conceptualization.

Acad.

Manage.

Rev.

30, 166–179.

McDuffie, M. 2019.


"Jimbin Kaboo Yimardoowarra Marninil: listening to Nyikina Women’s Voices, from the inside to the outside.

Nyikina women’s agency: an intergenerational journey of cultural actions, economic and self-determination initiatives, through film".

Australian National University Open Research Repository, https://openresearch-repository.anu.edu.au/handle/1885/165459.

McMahon, E., Hayes, A., McDuffie, M., 2018.


On Australian shores, survivors’ stories: sue Sinclair.

Online Video.

Ngikalikarra Media, Perth, WA.

Accessed August 24, 2019. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emeA3aKP-KQ.

Indigenous Australian cultural wellbeing.

In: Campbell, A., Duffy, M., A., Edmondson, B.

(Eds.

), Located Research.

Palgrave McMillan, Singapore, pp.

153–180.

edited by.

Poelina, A., Marshall, L., Warbie, J., McDuffie, M., 2015.

Three sisters, Women of High Degree.


Madjulla Inc; National Indigenous Television (NITV), Australia.

http:// www.magalimcduffie.com/films/2015/9/19/three-sisters-women-of-high-degree- 2015.

Poelina, A., Perdrisat, I., McDuffie, M., McDuffie, B., 2008.

The Majala Wilderness Centre (Online Video).

Madjulla Inc., Australia.

Accessed August 24, 2019. http://www.ma galimcduffie.com/films/2017/12/9/the-majala-wilderness-centre.
Poelina, A., Perdrisat, I., Mulligan, R., Mulligan, G., Mulligan, E., Warbie, J., McDuffie, M., 2014.

Warlangkooroo-Kandarra: Stories of Noonkanbah Country.

Madjulla Inc., DVD, Australia.

Poelina, A., Taylor, K.S., Perdrisat, I., 2019.

Martuwarra Fitzroy River Council: an Indigenous cultural approach to collaborative water governance.

Aust.

J. Environ.

Manage.

26 (3), 236–254.

Pritchard, B., 2005.

Beyond the resource enclave: regional development challenges in McRae, A., 1881.
Report By Alexander Mcrae of a Trip to the Fitzroy River from Roebuck northern remote Australia.

J. Aust.

Pol.

Econ.

55, 77.

Bay in the Year 1866.

Richard Pether, Government Printer, Perth.

Michelmore, K. 2020, October 16.

Rio Tinto accused of ‘incremental genocide’ after grilling at Juukan Gorge inquiry.

ABC News.

Retrieved from https://www.abc.net.

au/news/2020-10-16/rio-tinto-grilled-at-juukan-gorge-inquiry/12775866).

Minerals Council of Australia.

2016.

"Indigenous economic development."


accessed 10 March.

https://minerals.org.au/sites/default/files/Indigenous%20Communique_ MCA_FINAL.pdf.

Translated by Mj¨oberg, E., 1915.

In: Luotsinen, M., Akerman, K.

(Eds.).

Hesperian Press, Carlisle, WA.

Translated by.

Moffat, K., Zhang, A., 2014.

The paths to social licence to operate: an integrative model explaining community acceptance of mining.

Resour.

Policy 39 (0), 61–70.

Molinari, S., 2016.

Ord Scheme Economics.


Australasian Agribusiness Perspectives Paper 112.

Moran, K.J., 2009.

Sand and stone, Foreign footprints: Police in the Kimberley 1880- 1890s.

Hesperian Press, Carlisle, WA.

Morrison, J., 2014.

The Social license: How to Keep Your Organization Legitimate.

Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.

edited by Mulrennan, M.E., Bussi`eres, V., 2020.

Indigenous Environmental Stewardship: do Mechanisms of Biodiversity Conservation Align with or Undermine It?
In: Turner, N.J.

(Ed.

), Plants, People, and Places: The Roles of Ethnobotany and Ethnoecology in Indigenous Peoples’ Land Rights in Canada and Beyond.

McGill- Queen’s University Press, Montreal, pp.

282–312.

edited by.

Neale, T., Vincent, E., 2017.

Mining, indigeneity, alterity: or, mining Indigenous alterity?

Cult.

Stud.

31 (2–3), 417–439.

Neville, A.O., 1936.

Relations between settlers and aborigines in Western Australia.

J. Proc.

West.

Aust.

Hist.

Soc.

2 (19), 10–46.


O’Faircheallaigh, C., 2009.

Effectiveness in social impact assessment: aboriginal peoples and resource development in Australia.

Impact Assess.

Proj.

Apprais.

27 (2), 95–110.

edited by Ouzman, S., Veth, P., Myers, C., Heaney, P., Kenneally, K.F., 2017.

Plants before animals?

: aboriginal rock art as evidence of ecoscaping in Australia’s Kimberley.

In: David, B., McNive., I.

(Eds.

), The Oxford Handbook of the Archaeology and Anthropology of Rock Art.
Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.

edited by.

Overduin, N., Moore, M.-.L., 2017.

Social licence to operate: not a proxy for accountability in water governance.

Geoforum 85, 72–81.

Owen, C., 2016a.

Every Mother’s Son is guilty: Policing the Kimberley frontier of Western Australia.

University of Western Australia Publishing, Perth, pp.

1882–1905.

Prno, J., Slocombe, D.S., 2012.


Exploring the origins of ‘social license to operate’ in the mining sector: perspectives from governance and sustainability theories.

Resour.

Policy 37 (3), 346–357.

Reyes-García, V., Benyei, P., 2019.

Indigenous knowledge for conservation.

Nat.

Sustain.

2 (8), 657–658.

Reynolds, H., 2005.

North of Capricorn: The untold Story of Australia’s North.

Allen & Unwin, Crows Nest, NSW.

RiverOfLife, M., Poelina, A., McDuffie, M., 2020a.


Voices For the Martuwarra.

Martuwarra Fitzroy River Council, Derby, WA.

RiverOfLife, M., Poelina, A., Alexander, J., & Samnakay, N. 2020.

A Conservation and Management Plan for the National Heritage Listed Fitzroy River Catchment Estate (No.1), edited by A. Hayes, KS Taylor, & I. Perdrisat.

Western Australia: Martuwarra Fitzroy River Council, Fitzroy Crossing, Nulungu Research Institute, The University of Notre Dame.
RiverOfLife, M., McDuffie, M., Poelina, A., 2020c.

Martuwarra Country: A Historical Perspective (1838-Present).

Martuwarra Fitzroy River Council, Fitzroy Crossing, Western Australia.

Nulungu Research Institute, The University of Notre Dame, Broome, Western Australia.

RiverOfLife, M., Poelina, A., Taylor, K., 2020a.

Submission 108 to the Joint Standing Committee on Northern Australia Inquiry into the destruction of 46,000 year old caves at the Juukan Gorge in the Pilbara region of Western Australia.
Fitzroy Crossing.

Martuwarra Fitzroy River Council, Western Australia.

October 11edited by RiverOfLife, M., Poelina, A., Taylor, A., 2020bb.

Submission to the Western Australian Government on the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Bill 2020/ Aboriginal Heritage Act Review: reform Not Review and On Just Terms.

In: Hayes, A.

(Ed.

), Fitzroy Crossing.

Martuwarra Fitzroy River Council, Western Australia.

Robinson, F., York, B., 1977.


The Black resistance: an Introduction to the History of the Aborigines’ Struggle Against British colonialism.

Widescope International, Camberwell, Vic.

Roche, C., Brueckner, M., John, E., Walim, N., Sindana, H., 2020.

Understanding why Impact Assessment fails; a case study of theory and practice from Wafi-Golpu, Papua New Guinea.

Environ.

Impact Assess.

Rev.

x (x), xx.

edited by Roche, C., Mudd, G., 2014.

An Overview of Mining and the Environment in Western Australia.
In: Brueckner, M., Durey, A., Mayes, R., Pforr, C.

(Eds.

), Resource curse Or cure?

On the Sustainability of Development in Western Australia.

Springer, Heidelberg, pp.

179–194.

edited by.

Rosa, E.A., 1998.

Metatheoretical foundations for post-normal risk.

J.

Risk Res.

1 (1), 15–44.

Owen, J.R., 2016b.

Social license and the fear of Mineras Interruptus.

Geoforum 77, Roth, W.E., 1905.

Royal Commission on the Condition of the Natives.

Western Australian 102–105.

Government, Perth, WA.


Owen, J.R., Kemp, D., 2013.

Social licence and mining: a critical perspective.

Resour.

edited by Sachs, W., 1999.

In: Sachs, W.

(Ed.).

Witwatersrand, Johannesburg; London & Policy 38 (1), 29–35.

Palmer, D., 2016.

“We know they healthy cos they on country with old people”: demonstrating the value of the Yiriman Project.

Submission to Inquiry into Aboriginal Youth Suicide.

Education and Health Standing Committee, Perth.

Retrieved August 24, 2019, from.


https://researchrepository.murdoch.edu.au /id/eprint/42383/1/Yiriman%20Project.pdf.

Petheram, C., Gallant, J., Stone, P., Wilson, P., Read, A., 2018.

Rapid assessment of potential for development of large dams and irrigation across continental areas: application to northern Australia.

The Rangeland Journal 40 (4), 431–449.

Pilbara & Kimberley Aboriginal Media (PAKAM) (Producer), McDuffie, M., & Dixon, C. (Directors).

(2018).

Return toWalkali.


Australia: Indigenous Community Television (ICTV).

Retrieved October 27th, 2020, from https://ictv.com.au/video/item/5803.

Pandanus Park Community, Riley, P., Poelina, A., McDuffie, M., 2016.

Our community, Our story.

(Online Video).

Madjulla Inc., Broome, WA.

Accessed August 24, 2019. http://www.magalimcduffie.com/films/2017/12/3/ourcommunity-our-story.

Parsons, R., Lacey, J., Moffat, K., 2014.


Maintaining legitimacy of a contested practice: how the minerals industry understands its ‘social licence to operate’.

Resour.

Policy 41 (0), 83–90.

edited by Phillimore, J., 2014.

The politics of resource development in Western Australia.

In: Brueckner, M., Durey, A., Mayes, R., Pforr, C.

(Eds.

), Resource curse Or cure?

On the Sustainability of Development in Western Australia.

Springer, Heidelberg, pp.

25–40.

edited by.

Pilmer, R.H., 1998.


Northern patrol: an Australian saga.

Hesperian Press, Carlisle, WA.

New York, pp.

102–116.

edited by.

Salomon, A.K., Lertzman, K., Brown, K., Wilson, K.i.B., Secord, D., McKechnie, I., 2018.

Democratizing conservation science and practice.

Ecol.

Society 23 (1).

Scambary, B., 2013.

My country, Mine country: Indigenous people, Mining and Development Contestation in Remote Australia, 33.

ANU E Press, Canberra.

Scott, J.C., 1998.


Seeing Like a state: How certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed.

Yale University Press, New Haven.

Sen, A., 1999.

Development As Freedom.

Oxford University Press, Oxford.

edited by Shiva, V., 1999.

Resources.

In: Sachs, W.

(Ed.

), The Development Dictionary: a Guide to Knowledge As Power.

Witwatersrand, Johannesburg; London & New York, pp.

206–219.

edited by.

Solomon, F., Katz, E., Lovel, R., 2008.


Social dimensions of mining: research, policy and practice challenges for the minerals industry in Australia.

Resour.

Policy 33 (3), 142–149.

Stokes, J.L., 1846.

Discoveries in Australia: with an account of the coasts and rivers explored and surveyed during the voyage of H.M.S.

In: Beagle in the Years 1837- 1843, 1.

T & W Boone, London.

Streeter, E.W., 1886.

Pearls and Pearling Life.

G. Bell & Sons, London.

Sullivan, P., 2011.


Belonging together: Dealing With the Politics of Disenchantment in Australian Indigenous Policy.

Aboriginal Studies Press, Canberra.

edited by Thomson, I., Boutilier, R.G., 2011.

The social licence to operate.

In: Darling, P.

(Ed.

), SME Mining Engineering Handbook.

Society for Mining, Metallurgy and Exploration, Littleton, CO, pp.

1779–1796.

edited by.


TheExtractiveIndustriesandSocietyxxx(xxxx)xxx11Inquiry into the destruction of 46,000 year old caves at the Juukan Gorge in the Pilbara region of Western AustraliaSubmission 108 - Attachment 4 A. Poelina et al.

Tonts, M., McKenzie, F.H., Plummer, P., 2016.

The resource’super-cycle’and Australia’s remote cities.

Built Environ.

42 (1), 174–188.

Toussaint, S., 2008.

Kimberley Friction: complex Attachments to Water-Places in Northern Australia.

Oceania 78 (1), 46–61.


Tsing, A.L., 2011.

Friction: An Ethnography of Global Connection.

Princeton University Press, Princeton.

Trigger, D.S., 1997.

Mining, landscape and the culture of development ideology in Australia.

Ecumene 4 (2), 161–180.

Vanclay, F., 2020.

Reflections on Social Impact Assessment in the 21st century.

Impact Assess.

Proj.

Apprais.

38 (2), 126–131.

Edited by Van Toorn, P., 2001.

Indigenous Australian life writing: tactics and transformations.

In: Attwood, B., Magowan, F.


(Eds.

), Telling stories: Indigenous history and Memory in Australia and New Zealand.

Allen and Unwin, Crows Nest, pp.

1–20.

Edited by.

Wahlquist, C., 2019.

Sawfish deaths on Gina Rinehart station kept quiet by WA government, FOI reveals.

The Guardian.

August 5, 2019.

Walalakoo Aboriginal Corporation RNTBC.

2016.

Walalakoo healthy Country plan.

Derby: walalakoo Aboriginal Corporation RNTBC.


Accessed August 24, 2019, from https://static1.squarespace.com/static/54cee140e4b04d4fe172c60b/t/592272b5b 8a79b59dfc2c7a5/1495429843809/Walalakoo+Final+screen+res+version+hi+res +images-2.pdf.

Ward, T., 2011.

The Right to Free, Prior and Informed Consent: indigenous Peoples’ Participation Rights within International Law.

J. Int.

Hum.

Rights 10 (2), 54–84.

Warren, S., McDonald, D., McAuliffe, D., 2015.


Homelessness in Queensland mining communities: a down payment on Australia’s wealth or inevitable product of a neo- liberalist society’s response to the cyclical fortunes of mining.

J. Soci.

Incl.

6 (1).

Edited by Watson, H., 2011.

Not even the Cattle.

In: Marshall, P.

(Ed.

), Raparapa: Stories from the Fitzroy River Drovers.

Magabala Books, Broome, WA, pp.

21–50.

Edited by.

Weir, J., Stacey, C., Youngetob, K., 2011.


The benefits associated with caring for Country: literature review.

Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities.

Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies, Canberra.

edited by Wesley, A., MacCallum, D., 2014.

The political economy of corporate social responsibility in the resource sector in Western Australia.

A case study of the proposed James Price Point LNG precinct.
In: Brueckner, M., Durey, A., Mayes, R., Pforr, C.

(Eds.

), Resource curse Or cure?

On the Sustainability of Development in Western Australia.

Springer, Heidelberg, pp.

59–73.

edited by.

Wergin, C.H., 2016.

Dreamings beyond “opportunity”: the collaborative economics of an Aboriginal heritage trail.

J. Cult.

Econ.

9 (5), 488–506.

Williams, R., Walton, A., 2013.

The social licence to operate and coal seam gas development.
A Literature Review Report to the Gas Industry Social and Environmental Research Alliance Canberra.

GISERA.

Wolfe, P., 1999.

Settler Colonialism and the Transformation of anthropology: The politics and Poetics of an Ethnographic Event.

Cassell, London & New York.

Wilson, R.S., 1997.

Bringing Them home: Report of the National Inquiry Into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families.

Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, Sydney.
TheExtractiveIndustriesandSocietyxxx(xxxx)xxx12Inquiry into the destruction of 46,000 year old caves at the Juukan Gorge in the Pilbara region of Western AustraliaSubmission 108 - Attachment 4