Dias al inicio de floración

Non-Governmental / University Sector. The Centre for Appropriate Technology (CAT) undertakes technology research and development which can be categorised as technology assessment. Publications such as the ‘Bush Tech’ sheets (see for example Wilson

Unknown) (which compare different technologies on the basis of cost, reliability and operation and maintenance requirements), as well as advice regarding individual queries, provide crucial information for communities at the point of making decisions about the range of technologies available for their identified needs. CAT’s work in the development of technologies suitable for conditions in remote communities (Centre for Appropriate Technology 2005) represents a form of ‘constructive’ technology assessment, seeking to shape technologies early to avoid negative impacts upon their introduction into society. The Indigenous Design Collaborative associated with Murdoch University is another example of a constructive TA process which seeks to broaden input into technology development to include those who will use technologies in order to generate better outcomes (Environmental Technology Centre 2003).

Governmental.From an institutional perspective, government departments responsible for funding infrastructure in remote communities have a critical role to play. Whilst such decisions occur at a late stage of the technology decision-making process, and relate only to a decision to proceed (fund) or not, their effects on the conditions in remote settlements are considerable.

A number of assessment criteria are outlined in the 2006-07 CHIP guidelines for funding submissions submitted to FaCSIA. Included amongst these are criteria such as an

established level of need, demonstrated links between the funding applicant and the target community, and the sustainability of the project or resource (FaCS 2005, p.11). In light of the issues highlighted in Section 3.2 above, these criteria all seem important. However, there is no detail in the guidelines about howthese criteria are assessed, and submissions are ranked relatively against other submissions rather than against any identified absolute level of achievement. Additionally, the need to incorporate the values and preferences of Indigenous people into decision-making about technologies (Federal Race Discrimination Commissioner 1994) is implicit in the references to ‘need’ and

‘community links’, but a more explicit test or demonstration that such input has gone into the proposal could also improve outcomes.

In the case of proposals which include the purchase of equipment that represents a new technology in that context, the issue of the sustainability of the project (and the

technology) will be critical to success. Sustainability of water technologies depends on a number of environmental, social, economic, institutional and technical factors, including (but not limited to) the sustainability of the water resource itself, the human resources available for operation and management (in light of the complexity of the technology), the availability of funds for initial and ongoing costs, and the reliability of the technical equipment (Harvey and Reed 2004). The CHIP guidelines make no explicit mention of requirements for technological sustainability, or of how these are taken into account in assessing submissions which involve technologies. Research into these factors for water technologies in remote Central Australian communities is currently underway.

Sustainability of Indigenous Communities in Australia 4 Water Supply

Goulet, D. (1994). "Participatory Technology Assessment: Institutions and Methods." Technological Forecasting and Social Change45: 47-61.

Grey-Gardner, R. (2005). "Project 4.702. Remote Community Water Management." Retrieved 9/1/06, 2006, from

http://www.desertknowledge.com.au/index.cfm?attributes.fuseaction=showProjects#. Grey-Gardner, R. and B. Walker (2002). What Lies Beneath: Sustainable Groundwater

Management for Communities of Indigenous People. International Groundwater Conference 'Balancing the Groundwater Budget', Darwin.

Harvey, P. and B. Reed (2004). Rural Water Supply in Africa: Building Blocks for

Handpump Sustainability. Leicestershire, Water Engineering and Development Centre Loughborough University.

La Porte, T. M. (1997). "New Opportunities for Technology Assessment in the Post-OTA World." Technological Forecasting and Social Change54: 199-214.

Mohr, H. (1999). "Technology Assessment in Theory and Practice." Techne4(4): 22-25. NHMRC (2004). Australian Drinking Water Guidelines 6. Canberra, National Health and

Medical Research Council: 511.

Rip, A. (2001). Technology Assessment. International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences. N. J. Smelser and P. B. Baltes. Amsterdam, Elsevier. 23: 15512- 15515.

Schot, J. (2001). "Towards New Forms of Participatory Technology Development." Technology Analysis & Strategic Management13(1): 39-52.

Territory Health Services (2001). Environmental Health Standards for Remote Communities in the Northern Territory. Department of Health and Community Services. Darwin.

Vanstone, A. (2005). Beyond Conspicuous Compassion: Indigenous Australians Deserve More Than Good Intentions. Department of Families Communities and Indigenous Affairs. Australia and New Zealand School of Government, Australian National University.

Wilson, L. (Unknown). "Bush Tech Brief #1: Hot Water." Retrieved 4/11/05, 2005, from http://www.icat.org.au/documents/bt1.pdf.

Sustainability of Indigenous Communities in Australia 4 Water Supply

References

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner (2001). Review of the Water Report, Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission.

ABS (2002). Housing and Infrastructure in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Communities. Canberra, Australian Bureau of Statistics: 112.

Altman, J., M. Gillespie, et al. (1999). National Review of Resource Agencies Servicing Indigenous Communities. Canberra, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission. Bailie, R., F. Siciliano, et al. (2002). Atlas of Health-Related Infrastructure in discrete

Indigenous communities. Melbourne, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission: 1-72.

Centre for Appropriate Technology. (2005). "Product design." Retrieved 23/4/06, 2006, from http://www.icat.org.au/included/cat.asp?area=proddesign.

Chaibi, M. T. (2000). "An overview of solar desalination for domestic and agriculture water needs in remote arid areas." Desalination127(2): 119-133.

Coenen, R. (2002). Sustainable Development - New Challenges for Technology Assessment. Technology Studies and Sustainable Development. A. Jamison and H. Rohracher. Munich, Profil. 39: 127-143.

DAFF (2002). Economical and Technical Assessment of Desalination Technologies in Australia: With Particular Reference to National Action Plan Priority Regions. Canberra, Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry: 80.

Department of Planning and Infrastructure. (2006, 13/3/06). "Indigenous Essential Services." Retrieved 24/1/06, 2006, from

http://www.dpi.nt.gov.au/whatwedo/indigenous/ies/index.html.

Dillon, M. C. (2003). Submission to the Inquiry into Future Water Supplies for Australia's Rural Industries and Communities. Department of Community Development Sport and Cultural Affairs. Darwin, Northern Territory Government: 2.

Environmental Technology Centre. (2003, 28/10/2003). "Indigenous Design Collaborative." Retrieved 12/4/06, 2006, from

http://www.etc.murdoch.edu.au/pages/radg/idc/idc_1.html.

FaCS (2005). Community Housing and Infrastructure Program (CHIP): E-Sub Program Guidelines 2006 - 07. Department of Family and Community Services. Canberra: 37. Federal Race Discrimination Commissioner (1994). Water: A Report on the Provision of Water and Sanitation in remote Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission, Australian Government Press: 164.

Fischer, F. (1999). "Technological deliberation in a democratic society: the case for participatory inquiry." Science and Public Policy26(5): 294-302.

Fitzgerald, J., D. Cunliffe, et al. (1999). Groundwater Quality and Environmental Health Implications, Anangu Pitjantjatjara Lands, South Australia. Department of Agriculture Forestry and Fisheries. Canberra, Bureau of Rural Sciences: 30.

Sustainability of Indigenous Communities in Australia 4 Water Supply