Settler Colonialism and the Australian Environment: A Sociolegal Discourse Analysis of Decolonising Narratives Mobilised by First Nations Peoples in Modern Australian Environmental Conflicts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis uses a historical discourse analysis of sociolegal narratives mobilised by First Nations peoples in environmental conflicts in modern Australia to develop three case studies on (1) the Wild Rivers Act 2005, (2) the National Radioactive Waste Management Facility (3) the McArthur River mine. Each case triggered social, legal, and political action by affected Traditional Owners who mobilised narratives that contributed to decolonisation by critiquing and replacing colonial assumptions about the environment and environmental governance. The sources evidencing these decolonising narratives are diverse, reflecting the diverse forms of legal, social, and political participation within First Nations peoples’ resistance to ongoing settler colonialism and its effects on their lands and waters. It is this fact that necessitates the analysis of a broad scope of sources such as petitions; open letters; protest narratives; and legal documents such as court transcripts, submissions, and reports, with O’Brien (2018) providing important precedents for decolonising projects based on the extensive historical study of petitions and related documents. By exploring the sociolegal achievements and narrations of First Nations peoples (individually and collectively) asserting rights to their lands and waters, this research adopts a decolonising approach adept at critiquing and replacing colonial normativity (Mignolo, 2009, 2021). This approach allows the research to answer questions on how decolonisation is framed by First Nations peoples within public debates about the environment, and the implications for understanding environmental politics and policy in Australia and other settler colonial contexts. The results, which are particularised to each case, support the overall argument that the mobilisations and narrations of First Nations peoples defending their lands and waters are decolonising because they critique and replace colonial environmental norms in public fora.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".