The Productivity Commission's Draft Report on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander visual arts and crafts features the following key points
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have been creating visual arts and crafts for tens of thousands of years. This practice has grown into a significant industry, generating income for artists and art workers, creating economic opportunities for communities, and helping to maintain, strengthen and share Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures.
Total sales of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander visual arts and crafts reached about $250 million in 2019–20 — this includes $30–47 million in artwork sales through art centres and at least $83 million in sales of merchandise and consumer products (mostly souvenirs) bearing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander art and designs. While a small number of artists command high prices, the average income for the 5800–7700 artists who sold art through an art centre in 2019 20 was just over $2700. For independent artists, average income was about $6000.
Inauthentic arts and crafts — predominantly Indigenous style consumer products not created by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people — are a pervasive and longstanding problem. They disrespect and misrepresent culture and, by misleading consumers and denting confidence in the market, they deprive Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander artists of income. Inauthentic products accounted for well over half of spending on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander souvenirs in 2019 20.
Mandatory labelling of inauthentic products would raise consumer awareness and help them distinguish between authentic and inauthentic products, impose a negligible compliance burden on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander artists (and their commercial partners), and involve modest establishment and administration costs.
Some visual arts and crafts make use of Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property (ICIP), such as sacred symbols, without the authorisation of traditional custodians. This undermines customary laws and limits the economic benefits flowing back to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Legal recognition and protection of ICIP is patchy, with very few limits on whether, how and by whom ICIP is used in visual arts and crafts.
A new law that strengthens protection for aspects of ICIP used in visual arts and crafts would formally recognise the interests of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities in their cultural assets, promote respectful collaborations and allow for legal action where protected cultural assets are used in visual arts and crafts without the authorisation of traditional owners.
Art centres assist thousands of established and emerging artists to practise their arts and crafts and engage in the marketplace; they fulfil important cultural and social roles. Other organisations provide vital services to artists — including addressing instances of unethical conduct from other market participants. Improving funding and the effectiveness of support services, as well as strengthening the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander arts sector workforce, will be critical for future growth. An independent evaluation of Australian Government funding to the sector — undertaken in partnership with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people — is needed to inform future funding needs, objectives and strategic priorities.
The Commission's draft findings and recommendations are -
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander arts and crafts are a cornerstone of culture
Draft Finding 2.1 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander arts and crafts generate broad cultural and economic benefits
isual arts and crafts have been central to the practice and preservation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures for tens of thousands of years. Arts and crafts — as expressions of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people’s connection to culture, Country and kin — are fundamental to the wellbeing of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, and bring wider benefits for all Australians. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander visual arts and crafts are foundational to Australia’s national identity. The visual arts and crafts sector generates income for artists and economic opportunities for communities, and is a major source of direct employment and income in many remote areas. It also supports complementary industries such as tourism. Visual arts and crafts markets are substantial, diverse and growing
Draft Finding 3.1 The total value of annual spending on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander visual arts and crafts — including artworks and consumer products — is about $250 million
In 2019 20, the total value of spending on (authentic and inauthentic) Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander visual arts and crafts was about $250 million. This includes sales of original art made through art centres, commercial galleries, auction houses and other retailers, as well as consumer products such as souvenirs and homewares. Some of the spending on these consumer products was on inauthentic arts and crafts — about 55–61% of spending on souvenirs was on inauthentic Indigenous style products, purchased predominantly by international visitors.
Draft Finding 3.2 Visual arts and crafts sales contribute to the economic wellbeing of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander artists
For many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander artists across Australia, selling their arts and crafts contributes to their economic wellbeing. In remote areas, arts and crafts activities provide economic opportunities for artists, through artwork sales and the teaching of art and culture. Artists in regional and metropolitan areas also benefit economically from the sale of their arts and crafts, although they are more likely to have access to a wider range of income sources.
Draft Finding 3.3 Art centres support most of the production and sales of art in remote areas The Commission estimates that sales of artworks produced by art centre artists totalled between $30–47 million in the 2019 20 financial year, from about 5800–7700 artists who sold at least one artwork. Total sales by art centres have more than doubled since 2012, but growth has been concentrated mostly in Northern Territory art centres. The scale of production at art centres varies substantially, with the largest scale operations taking place in the Western Desert, Arnhem Land and APY Lands art regions. Art centres rely on several methods to sell artworks, but have shifted towards sales through consignment agreements with intermediaries such as commercial galleries. Art centres have also moved towards selling art direct to consumers, either through their own galleries or through art fairs.
Draft Finding 3.4 Artworks by independent artists have a material presence in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander arts and crafts markets Independent artists have a material presence in markets for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander visual arts and crafts — the Commission’s preliminary estimates based on limited data show that about 1700 independent artists generate sales of about $10 million a year. About half of art dealer businesses sell the works of independent artists. In addition, independent artists produce commissioned artworks and sell direct to consumers through art fairs, online marketplaces and social media.
Draft Finding 3.5 The total value of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander artworks sold on the secondary market remains below its peak
Following strong growth up to 2008, resales of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander artworks collapsed following the Global Financial Crisis (GFC). The total value of resales has since remained below the pre GFC peak, with average prices of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander artworks sold by public auction houses lower than resales of artworks by non Indigenous artists.
Inauthentic visual arts and crafts are pervasive and cause significant cultural harm and economic costs
Draft Finding 4.1 Visual arts and crafts are considered authentic Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander arts and crafts if they are authored by an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander person, or produced under a licensing agreement
For the purpose of this study, a product or artwork is considered authentic Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander visual art or craft if it is: • an original piece authored (or co authored) by an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander person, or • produced under a licensing agreement with the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander artist(s). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander visual arts and crafts that do not meet these criteria, including those that infringe the copyright of an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander artist’s work, or are Indigenous style arts and crafts made by non Indigenous people without licensing agreements, are considered inauthentic.
Draft Finding 4.2 Inauthentic Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander arts and crafts are rife in the consumer product, digital and print on demand merchandise markets
Inauthentic products dominate the consumer product (mostly wholesale souvenirs), digital, and print on demand merchandise markets. Copyright infringement is also common in the print on demand merchandise market. In the consumer product (wholesale souvenirs) market: • approximately two thirds to three quarters of product offerings are inauthentic, though the prevalence of inauthenticity varies by product category • on average, authentic products are nearly twice as expensive as an inauthentic product of the same type • most consumer products are manufactured overseas regardless of their authenticity. Based on random sampling, inauthentic products are commonplace in the print on demand merchandise market (over 60% of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander merchandise was found to be inauthentic) and even more prevalent in the digital art marketplace (over 80% of digital stock images depicting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander designs, styles and motifs were inauthentic).
Draft Finding 4.3 The negative effects of inauthentic visual arts and crafts outweigh any benefits
The existence and prevalence of inauthentic arts and crafts in the market has wide ranging and predominantly detrimental effects on both Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and the broader Australian community. These include personal and cultural harms (such as emotional distress, loss of identity and self) and economic harms (such as a loss of income for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander artists, and consumer hesitancy in purchasing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander arts and crafts). Inauthentic products disrespect and misrepresent Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures, and have the potential to mislead consumers.
Draft Finding 4.4 Consumers’ lack of awareness and difficulties in identifying authentic products, as well as the legal landscape are the main enablers of inauthentic arts and crafts
Inauthentic Indigenous style visual arts and crafts continue to be prevalent in the market due to: • limited legal barriers to the creation or sale of inauthentic arts and crafts under Australian law (in particular, the Copyright Act and the Australian Consumer Law) • a lack of awareness and understanding of inauthenticity and its harms by producers and purchasers of inauthentic arts and crafts • difficulties identifying and distinguishing inauthentic products from authentic ones.
A mandatory labelling scheme to reduce trade in inauthentic products
Draft Finding 5.1 Some approaches to distinguish between authentic and inauthentic Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander art and craft products are already in place
Some approaches are already in place to help consumers distinguish between authentic and inauthentic Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander artworks and other products. These include certificates of authenticity provided by art dealers (such as those produced in accordance with the Indigenous Art Code), as well as other branding and marketing initiatives used by artists and dealers to provide information and assurances to consumers. However, only limited information is provided for some products, particularly in the lower end of the market, including souvenirs and digital products.
Draft Finding 5.2 Voluntary industry-wide labelling schemes for authentic products are unlikely to be effective in materially reducing inauthentic arts and crafts
Notwithstanding the possible marketing benefits to participants themselves, industry wide voluntary labelling schemes (such as certification trade marks) are unlikely to reduce the prevalence and harms of inauthentic products substantially. To address information gaps in the market and allow consumers to distinguish between authentic and inauthentic products, voluntary labelling schemes require high levels of participation. Yet the risk of limited uptake by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander artists, coupled with the costs of establishing and administering an industry wide voluntary labelling scheme, make the net benefits uncertain.
Draft Finding 5.3 Education and awareness-raising measures should complement other initiatives
Education and awareness raising measures can inform consumers and businesses about the existence and harms of inauthentic products. However, on their own their effectiveness in countering inauthentic products is limited, especially where the information used to promote and label products is confusing or inaccurate. Education measures are more effective where they accompany measures that help consumers distinguish between authentic and inauthentic products.
Draft Finding 5.4 Banning inauthentic products is unlikely to be the most cost effective response
A ban on the sale of inauthentic products could be an effective way to mitigate the economic and cultural harms they cause and prevent consumers from unwittingly purchasing inauthentic products. However, there are substantial risks in imposing a ban. A broad ban would increase the risk of costly errors (for example, authentic products incorrectly excluded from sale). A narrow ban would not resolve the harms caused by many inauthentic products. A ban would also limit choice in the market, and consumers would arguably be better served by being able to make more fully‑informed choices. Therefore, the Commission considers that a ban is unlikely to be the most appropriate response.
Draft Finding 5.5 Labelling inauthentic products is a targeted and cost effective way of informing consumers and improving the functioning of the market for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander visual arts and crafts
A mandatory labelling scheme for inauthentic products could be a targeted and cost effective option for addressing the issue of inauthentic Indigenous style products. While it would not eliminate inauthentic products, it would improve the operation of the market, by helping consumers to distinguish between authentic and inauthentic products. A well designed labelling scheme focused on inauthentic products would only impose minimal compliance burdens on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander artists.
Draft Recommendation 5.1 A mandatory labelling scheme for inauthentic products should be developed
The Australian Government should develop a mandatory information standard to require the labelling of inauthentic Indigenous style products to indicate to consumers that they are not created by or under licence from an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander person. In developing the standard, the Australian Government should engage effectively with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
Information request 5.1 How might a mandatory labelling scheme for inauthentic products operate in practice and what should be considered further in its design? • Is the suggested approach to product coverage workable? Are there ways to provide greater certainty about coverage without unduly narrowing its scope? • Are the authenticity criteria for the scheme appropriate? Do they pose any unintended consequences? If so, how could these be addressed? • Are there any other considerations about the design and implementation of the standard?
Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property is used in arts and crafts without permission and inappropriately
Draft Finding 6.1 Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property has intrinsic value
Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property (ICIP) refers to all dimensions of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander heritage and cultures, from languages and performances to traditional scientific and ecological knowledge. It has intrinsic value to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and is a unique national asset that forms an important part of Australia’s identity. Expressions of ICIP in the form of visual arts and crafts are often more than creative outputs. They can play a role in transmitting and thereby preserving laws, history, culture and customs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
Draft Finding 6.2 Existing laws do not directly protect Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander visual arts and crafts
Current laws provide some protection of Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property (ICIP) in visual arts and crafts. But these protections are piecemeal and do not enable Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and communities to directly control whether and how their ICIP is used in visual arts and crafts. This means that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ICIP is often used in inappropriate contexts without the consent of the relevant Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and communities. There is a strong case for examining how legal protections for ICIP in visual arts and crafts could be strengthened to reduce misappropriation and help to protect and preserve ICIP in visual arts and crafts.
Draft Finding 6.3 Dedicated legal protections may assist in addressing misappropriation of Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property in visual arts and crafts
Minor amendments to existing laws could improve protection of Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property (ICIP) in visual arts and crafts, but gaps would remain. Larger scale amendments are likely to be incompatible with the frameworks or objectives of existing legislation. Dedicated legislation has the potential to provide stronger recognition and more fit for purpose protection for ICIP used in visual arts and crafts. Legislation directly focused on ICIP in visual arts and crafts would provide a framework for negotiation and presents an opportunity to do so in a way that promotes a fair allocation of benefits.
Recognising cultural rights to protect the ICIP in visual arts and crafts
Draft Recommendation 7.2 New cultural rights legislation should be introduced to recognise and protect cultural assets in relation to visual arts and crafts
To address the issue of Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property being used in visual arts and crafts without authorisation from traditional owners, the Australian Government should introduce new legislation that formally recognises the interests of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities in their traditional cultural assets. To achieve this, the legislation should create a new cause of action that specifies that a traditional owner’s rights are infringed if a person uses a cultural asset to create a cultural expression, such as a piece of art or craft, without the authorisation of a traditional owner, unless an exception applies.
Draft Finding 7.2 A cultural rights regime must balance the interests of traditional owners and those seeking access to cultural assets
The recognition of cultural rights needs to strike the right balance between the interests of traditional owners and the interests of those seeking to access and use cultural assets. This will help ensure that the preservation and maintenance of culture does not come at the cost of preventing traditions and culture from evolving or adapting over time. To achieve this, checks and balances should be built into the legislative regime — including by specifying criteria for: what is protected under the legislation; who can take action to assert cultural rights; and what uses of cultural assets require authorisation.
Information request 7.1 What should be protected by the new cultural rights legislation? • What is the best way to define what should be in scope for protection? • Should there be limits on protection, such as conditions on when protections apply or threshold criteria for what is protected? If so, what should they be?
Information request 7.2 How should the legislation deal with the issue of standing to bring a cultural rights action? • What criteria should determine whether a claimant has standing? • What is the best way to recognise communities or groups as having standing? • What are the merits, drawbacks and challenges of giving a government regulator the power to bring cases in relation to cultural misappropriation?
Information request 7.3 What types of conduct should be considered an infringement of a traditional owner’s cultural rights? • What types of uses of cultural assets should be recognised as having the potential to be infringing? For example, should there be a requirement for the use to be in material form or a substantial use? • How should a court determine whether a user has been granted authorisation to use a cultural asset in a certain way? • Should there be exceptions when cultural assets are used for certain purposes? If so, what should those exceptions be? What should the legislation say about remedies for infringements of cultural rights? • What suite of remedies are needed to achieve fair and just outcomes? • What should the new cultural rights legislation say about how remedies are awarded?
Information request 7.4 What institutional arrangements are needed to support a new cultural rights regime? • What types of dispute resolution options should be available? What is needed to ensure that dispute resolution processes are responsive to the needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and communities? • Is there a case for a statutory Cultural Authority? What would its remit, functions and powers be?
Draft Finding 7.1 There are advantages to taking a multi pronged approach to protecting Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property
Given its multi faceted nature, it is not clear that stronger legal protection for all aspects of Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property (ICIP) could be pursued through a single regulatory measure. A multi pronged approach to protecting ICIP would enable regulatory responses to be tailored to specific types of ICIP, resulting in more nuanced and fit for purpose protections. It would also take the pressure off any single measure to solve all issues relating to ICIP and give implementation bodies the licence to focus on specific policy issues.
Draft Recommendation 7.1 An Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property Strategy is needed to coordinate regulatory measures
The Australian Government should develop and publish an Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property (ICIP) strategy that sets out how policy and regulatory measures will address different aspects of ICIP. The development of the strategy should be led by the Minister for Indigenous Australians, in partnership with state and territory governments and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
Some artists encounter unfair and unethical conduct
Draft Finding 8.1 Unethical conduct towards Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander artists still occurs
Longstanding and serious allegations continue to be made of exploitation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander artists in some remote areas of Australia. There are also examples across the country of unfair contract terms, copyright infringement and plagiarism, which affect the rights, wellbeing and economic returns to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander artists and their communities.
Draft Finding 8.2 Enforcement of the Indigenous Art Code is constrained by resourcing
The Indigenous Art Code is one of the key mechanisms used to mediate interactions between artists and the market. However, the company enforcing the code is under resourced and overstretched.
Draft Finding 8.3 Artists face difficulties accessing justice and other support services
Key legal protections, including copyright and the prohibition on unconscionable conduct, can be difficult for artists to access. There are also gaps in support services for independent artists, including those working outside of areas served by art centres and regional peak organisations.
There is scope to improve government support to the sector
Draft Finding 9.1 The big picture of government funding is hard to piece together
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander artists and art organisations receive funding from a multitude of sources, including targeted and mainstream arts programs and various non arts portfolios across all levels of government, as well as from philanthropy and corporate sponsorship. Outside of the few targeted programs, data on funding provided to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander visual arts and crafts is not reported. As a result, it is hard to determine the overall amount of funding available to the sector, or assess how well different funding streams are addressing the needs of the sector.
Draft Finding 9.2 The National Indigenous Visual Arts Action Plan provides a time-limited funding increase
The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander visual arts and crafts sector has seen recent injections of funds both directly through the Australian Government’s National Indigenous Visual Arts Action Plan, and indirectly through commitments to establish Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander art and cultural centres. The National Indigenous Visual Arts Action Plan provides $25 million of additional funding to the sector over five years, including for infrastructure upgrades and building digital capacity. The governments of the Northern Territory, South Australia and Western Australia are funding art and cultural centres in their respective jurisdictions while New South Wales is investigating similar opportunities. The Australian Government has also committed to establishing a National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultural complex in Canberra, which will include art and artefact collections.
Draft Finding 9.3 Primary funding sources from the Australian Government have plateaued in real terms in recent years The Australian Government provides targeted annual funding of about $24.5 million to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander visual arts and crafts sector through its key art funding programs: the Indigenous Visual Arts Industry Support (IVAIS) and the Australia Council’s Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Arts programs. After increasing for many years, since 2015–16, total IVAIS funding has declined in real terms by 5%. Average funding for art centres — the main recipients of government support — has fallen by 6.3% as the number of art centres has increased while funding under the program has remained fixed. Since 2016 17, funding to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Arts Program under the Australia Council has fallen in real terms by 5%. The recent funding commitments through the National Indigenous Visual Arts Action Plan will assist a number of art centres over a five year period, but there has been no change to the ongoing operational funding provided by IVAIS.
Draft Finding 9.4 Many roles that art centres fulfil are out of scope for arts funding programs
The Australian Government’s flagship funding program for the sector, the Indigenous Visual Arts Industry Support (IVAIS) program, focuses on art production and operational costs. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community-controlled art organisations fulfil a range of important cultural and social roles within their communities, which are not funded under IVAIS. This increases the administrative burden on art organisations (as they seek to secure funding from other sources) and limits their ability to undertake activities highly valued by their communities. Securing funding to meet the infrastructure needs of art centres has been a longstanding issue. While some funding has been made available for this purpose under the National Indigenous Visual Arts Action Plan, this commitment is only for five years at this stage.
Building the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander arts workforce requires a strategic approach
Draft Finding 9.5 A strategic approach to building the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander arts workforce is lacking
Art centres and other art organisations continue to face significant difficulty recruiting and retaining skilled art workers, especially in remote areas. There is no strategic approach at the national level to build the pipeline of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander visual arts and crafts workers — and leaders — in remote, regional and urban areas. The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander arts sector was not included as an area of focus under the National Roadmap for Indigenous Skills, Jobs and Wealth Creation, and there is a risk that strategic opportunities will be missed as a result. With a number of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander art and cultural institutions being built across the country, investment in career pathways and traineeships is required to ensure Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people lead — and are employed by — these institutions, and to meet broader policy goals as agreed by governments on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employment, self determination, leadership and empowerment.
Draft Finding 9.6 Appropriate training and professional development opportunities appear limited
Governments provide funding for professional development and training for workers in the visual arts and crafts sector. However, only a limited number of targeted training, professional development and support programs are available to existing and aspiring Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander visual arts and crafts workers and artists. In particular, it is not clear how adequate or accessible professional development opportunities are for independent artists.
Information request 9.1 • What are the barriers facing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people wishing to develop the skills required for leadership and senior management positions in the visual arts sector? For example, is funding support to study or gain accreditation while away from home a barrier? • Is there merit in establishing an accreditation that formally recognises the practices, skills and knowledges learnt from Elders on Country? • Are the professional development programs offered to arts workers (and independent artists) by art centres, industry service organisations and regional hubs delivering the skills required by the industry? • Are these programs over subscribed? If so by how much? If not, how can art workers be supported to attend?
Strengthening the sector
Draft Recommendation 10.3 Australian Government funding should be evaluated to inform future arrangements
The Australian Government should commission an independent evaluation of the effectiveness of Australian Government expenditure directed to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander visual arts and crafts sector. The scope of the review should include the Indigenous Visual Arts Industry Support (IVAIS) program, the National Indigenous Visual Arts (NIVA) Action Plan and relevant Australia Council programs. This evaluation should be undertaken in partnership with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander representatives of the sector, in accordance with the principles of the Productivity Commission’s Indigenous Evaluation Strategy, and be completed by December 2025. The evaluation should consider: • how effectively funding has met existing objectives, and whether these objectives are the right ones • whether and what additional support is required to help meet sector priorities (for example, whether a sector wide Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander workforce strategy is required) • what aspects of the NIVA Action Plan, such as support for independent artists, should be maintained as part of ongoing government funding to the sector.
Draft Recommendation 10.4 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people should be part of shared decision-making in setting objectives for government funding for visual arts and crafts
Under the National Agreement on Closing the Gap, governments committed to build and strengthen the structures that empower Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to share decision making authority with governments. The current approach to determining funding objectives in the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander visual arts and crafts sector is not characterised by shared decision making between governments and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. The Australian Government (led by the Australian Government’s Office for the Arts) should establish a formal shared decision making partnership with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander artists and art organisations to help identify funding priorities and strategic initiatives to support growth across the sector.
Information request 10.1 • What is the best approach to bring together the range of perspectives of the sector to establish a formal shared decision making partnership with government? • Does the sector support the development of a national peak organisation to advocate on behalf of the sector? • What would be required to develop a national peak organisation? How should governments support this process?
Draft Finding 10.1 The case for an ACCC enforced mandatory or voluntary Indigenous Art Code is not strong Although there is some indication of ongoing unethical conduct in some remote areas of Australia, there is inadequate evidence that this conduct is sufficiently widespread to justify an ACCC enforced voluntary or mandatory code of conduct for the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander arts and crafts industry. An industry wide code risks being a blunt and costly tool that would not necessarily address existing shortcomings.
Draft Recommendation 10.1 The Indigenous Art Code can be strengthened through a joint commitment of government and industry The Australian Government, in partnership with state and territory governments, should modestly increase funding to Indigenous Art Code Limited to support key priorities, including: • an enhanced dispute resolution process, with a referral pathway to independent review of decisions and public reporting of deidentified dispute outcomes • more detailed performance indicators to inform evaluation of the Code’s effectiveness, alongside public reporting of progress. Additional funding should be subject to ongoing monitoring and evaluation of the Code’s effectiveness. Commensurately higher membership fees from dealer members should also be levied to co fund these improvements.
Draft Recommendation 10.2 Artists should be aware of and able to access legal support services The Australian Government should ensure that legal support services for artists are accessible. Referral pathways should be comprehensive and accessible to independent artists, and promoted such that artists are aware of them. Through its review of the Indigenous Art Code Limited, the Australian Government should assess whether it is the best organisation to undertake this role. Depending on the outcome of that review, the Australian Government should provide funding to the responsible organisation to maintain these referral pathways.
Information request 8.1 • Are there shortcomings in the processes that governments, large corporations and non government organisations use to purchase Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander art and design services? • What changes could be made to enable artists to better engage with these procurement processes?
