Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and communities through consultation has been a key feature of policy implementation throughout the Australian Government\'s \"Closing the Gap\" (CTG) strategy. However, consultation often reinforces power imbalances between government and local community and can undervalue or marginalise Indigenous knowledge and leadership. Occupational therapy has a short history of examining colonial power structures within the profession, but there has been limited progress to decolonise consultation and practice.
METHODS: Drawing on decolonising research methodology and positioned at the interface of knowledge, comparative case studies were used to understand policy implementation in two regions. In Shepparton, Victoria, CTG policy was implemented predominately through an Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation, and in Southern Adelaide, South Australia, CTG policy was implemented through mainstream state government and non-government providers in the absence of a local Aboriginal-controlled organisation. Findings were examined critically to identify implications for occupational therapy.
RESULTS: Our case studies showed that policy stakeholders perceived consultation to be tokenistic and partnerships were viewed differently by Aboriginal and non-Indigenous participants. Participants identified the need to move beyond a rhetoric of \"working with\" Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, to promote Aboriginal leadership and really listen to community so that policy can respond to local need. The findings of this research show that Aboriginal-controlled services are best positioned to conduct and respond to community consultation.
CONCLUSIONS: A decolonising approach to consultation would shift the status quo in policy implementation in ways that realign power away from colonial structures towards collaboration with Indigenous leadership and the promotion of Aboriginal-controlled services. There are lessons for occupational therapy from this research on policy implementation on authentic, decolonised consultation as a key feature of policy implementation. Shifting power imbalances through prioritising Indigenous leadership and honouring what is shared can drive change in CTG policy implementation processes and outcomes.
METHODS: Drawing on decolonising research methodology and positioned at the interface of knowledge, comparative case studies were used to understand policy implementation in two regions. In Shepparton, Victoria, CTG policy was implemented predominately through an Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation, and in Southern Adelaide, South Australia, CTG policy was implemented through mainstream state government and non-government providers in the absence of a local Aboriginal-controlled organisation. Findings were examined critically to identify implications for occupational therapy.
RESULTS: Our case studies showed that policy stakeholders perceived consultation to be tokenistic and partnerships were viewed differently by Aboriginal and non-Indigenous participants. Participants identified the need to move beyond a rhetoric of \"working with\" Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, to promote Aboriginal leadership and really listen to community so that policy can respond to local need. The findings of this research show that Aboriginal-controlled services are best positioned to conduct and respond to community consultation.
CONCLUSIONS: A decolonising approach to consultation would shift the status quo in policy implementation in ways that realign power away from colonial structures towards collaboration with Indigenous leadership and the promotion of Aboriginal-controlled services. There are lessons for occupational therapy from this research on policy implementation on authentic, decolonised consultation as a key feature of policy implementation. Shifting power imbalances through prioritising Indigenous leadership and honouring what is shared can drive change in CTG policy implementation processes and outcomes.
摘要：
背景：通过协商将原住民和托雷斯海峡岛民和社区包括在内，一直是澳大利亚政府“缩小差距”（CTG）战略中政策实施的关键特征。然而,协商通常会加剧政府与当地社区之间的权力失衡，并可能低估或边缘化土著知识和领导能力。职业疗法在研究职业中的殖民权力结构方面有很短的历史，但是在非殖民化协商和实践方面进展有限。
方法：借鉴非殖民化研究方法，定位在知识界面，比较案例研究被用来了解两个地区的政策执行情况。在Shepparton,维多利亚,CTG政策主要通过土著社区控制的健康组织实施，在南阿德莱德,南澳大利亚,CTG政策是在没有当地原住民控制组织的情况下通过主流州政府和非政府提供者实施的。对调查结果进行了严格检查，以确定对职业治疗的影响。
结果：我们的案例研究表明，政策利益相关者认为协商是象征性的，土著和非土著参与者对伙伴关系的看法不同。与会者认为有必要超越“与原住民和托雷斯海峡岛民合作”的言论，促进原住民领导，真正听取社区的意见，以便政策能够满足当地的需求。这项研究的结果表明，原住民控制的服务最适合进行和应对社区咨询。
结论：协商的非殖民化方法将改变政策执行的现状，使权力从殖民结构转向与土著领导人合作和促进土著控制的服务。从这项关于真实性政策执行的研究中，有职业治疗的经验教训，非殖民化协商是政策执行的一个关键特征。通过优先考虑土著领导和尊重共享内容来改变权力失衡，可以推动CTG政策实施过程和成果的变化。
方法：借鉴非殖民化研究方法，定位在知识界面，比较案例研究被用来了解两个地区的政策执行情况。在Shepparton,维多利亚,CTG政策主要通过土著社区控制的健康组织实施，在南阿德莱德,南澳大利亚,CTG政策是在没有当地原住民控制组织的情况下通过主流州政府和非政府提供者实施的。对调查结果进行了严格检查，以确定对职业治疗的影响。
结果：我们的案例研究表明，政策利益相关者认为协商是象征性的，土著和非土著参与者对伙伴关系的看法不同。与会者认为有必要超越“与原住民和托雷斯海峡岛民合作”的言论，促进原住民领导，真正听取社区的意见，以便政策能够满足当地的需求。这项研究的结果表明，原住民控制的服务最适合进行和应对社区咨询。
结论：协商的非殖民化方法将改变政策执行的现状，使权力从殖民结构转向与土著领导人合作和促进土著控制的服务。从这项关于真实性政策执行的研究中，有职业治疗的经验教训，非殖民化协商是政策执行的一个关键特征。通过优先考虑土著领导和尊重共享内容来改变权力失衡，可以推动CTG政策实施过程和成果的变化。
