A national research project has delivered a framework for how species and ecosystems of deep cultural importance to Indigenous Australians can be recognised in environmental policy and conservation.
The study explored the concept of Culturally Significant Entities (CSE) — animals, plants and ecological communities that are vital to cultural identity, knowledge systems and the health of Country.
Led by Professor Stephen van Leeuwen and Dr Teagan Shields at Curtin University and funded through the National Environmental Science Program Resilient Landscape Hub, the research establishes a nationally consistent definition of CSE and sets out a pathway to embed Indigenous Knowledge and governance into land and sea management.
“Despite strong cultural importance, Culturally Significant Entities are not recognised in the same systematic way as threatened species under legislation,” Dr Shields said. “The project’s findings call for a shift in how governments engage with Indigenous Australians, from viewing them as stakeholders to recognising them as rightsholders with cultural authority and responsibilities for Country.”
Culturally Significant Entities may be part of creation stories and songlines, serve as totems, provide food, medicine or materials, signal the health of ecosystems, or play roles in ceremony and customary practice. A CSE may be rare, common, or even a non-native species identified as a threat to cultural values or a food and economic resource. Culturally Significant Entities are place-based cultural assets with both tangible and intangible value.
Over 18 months, researchers worked with 300 participants across six national workshops and co-developed 22 case study examples spanning Australia. An Indigenous Leadership Group and Indigenous-led National Project Steering Committee, including representatives from the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water, guided the project.
The framework delivered three key outcomes: a national CSE definition by Indigenous Australians; agreement on biocultural objectives to guide identification and management of CSE; and recommendations for legislative and policy reform.
Participants identified urgent actions, including embedding Indigenous Knowledge in environmental planning, creating Indigenous Knowledge and Science teams within agencies, mandating Indigenous representation in environmental decision-making, and redesigning monitoring and funding systems to include Indigenous-led biocultural measures.
Longer-term recommendations include establishing an Indigenous Land and Sea Commissioner with statutory powers, recognising CSE as a new category of environmental significance under law, and aligning legislation with international obligations such as the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the Nagoya Protocol.
Explore the case study examples map here.
