Equity and institutional reform in Aboriginal Australia and Zimbabwe: a framework for analysis

Abstract

This paper has attempted to identify some of the problems of inequity associated with the globalisation of public sector reform principles which societies in developing countries (Zimbabwe) share with indigenous societies in developed countries (Australian Aborigines). The decision to take an institutional approach to comparative research in Zimbabwe and Australia arose from pressures to reform and perceptions of democratisation, including recognition of the need to develop stronger and more substantial processes for ensuring equity in development. <p> The role of democracy in public sector reform remains unresolved in the Zimbabwe one-party state where the costs of compromising the mechanics of democracy remain to be seen. Assistance with economic and democratic development needs to be carried out in a strong framework of self-determination. Without self-determination, it is difficult to effect a coordinated approach to public sector reform in any substantial way; without institutions that can respond to self-determination, there is little chance of reform. The Zimbabwean public sector is on a steep upward learning curve. Strikes and confrontations have been unsettling but, in this case, they should be seen as a sign of healthy unrest—people taking issue against corruption, demanding to have the right to free association, demanding democracy and, to be governed through a more equitable process. In Australia, the democratic institutions are entrenched—constitutionalism is a fundamental principle. But institutional equity and the ability of the system to respond to the needs of the Aboriginal people is unresolved. Democracy and liberalisation do not guarantee equity.