A big thank you to everyone who attended PowerMakers 2025! We now have a 2 minute short film showing some of the highlights.

Inequalities in income, housing, and health between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians are well documented, yet differences in energy outcomes remain understudied.

While prior research has largely focused on remote areas or specific aspects, this paper provides the first national-level analysis of Indigenous households’ experiences in the energy market, measuring the existence, scale, and structural drivers of energy inequality.

Two indicators are examined: difficulties in paying energy bills on time and self-reported inability to heat homes adequately.

Across two decades and independent datasets, Indigenous households are 9–10 percentage points more likely to experience energy stress, a difference that persists after accounting for income.

Wealth emerges as the strongest explanatory factor, with housing tenure, education, and financial resilience also contributing substantially.

Objective measures—arrears, disconnections, and hardship program participation—account for around 43% of the observed gap and provide practical means of identifying households at risk of energy stress.

Energy stress is highly persistent, with households that had prior bill payment difficulties 47 percentage points more likely to encounter similar challenges again in 2023.

These findings show that energy inequality is not merely a matter of short-term affordability but reflects deeper structural dimensions of economic inequality.

Policies centred on income support alone are unlikely to eliminate these disparities. Access to modest emergency funds of only a few thousand dollars reduces the observed gap by about 73%, highlighting the potential of targeted, government-backed assistance to strengthen household resilience and prevent disconnections.

Authors: Rohan Best & Duygu Yengin & Andrew Taylor & Maneka Jayasinghe & Ruth Wallace, 2025. "Energy Inequality for Indigenous Australians: Evidence on Structural Drivers Across Two Decades," School of Economics and Public Policy Working Papers 2025-06 Classification-., University of Adelaide, School of Economics and Public Policy.

Read the report

'Renewable projects can help by leaving a legacy of infrastructure and programs to make life better in the bush. Shared equity schemes go even further.'

The transition of Australia’s energy and economic system - built around clean energy - provides an opportunity (including through processes like the Economic Reform Roundtable) to design and deliver mutually beneficial outcomes by: 

• addressing inefficiencies in the prevailing system which entrench unnecessary costs, like First Nations economic exclusion and inequality, 
• improving productivity, equity and economic efficiency by investing in First Nations communities and First Nations outcomes, and 
• supporting First Nations clean energy leadership and projects. 

A forthcoming Network report highlights the commercial benefits for investors that comes with First Nations ownership and participation - bringing trust, long-term stability, improving project delivery, mitigating conflict and reputational risk, and providing numerous benefits to investors. 

Priority reforms, ideas and proposals 

Drawing from global precedents, especially the United States’Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), Canadian fiscal innovations and Canadian government investment in First Nations communities, our proposals below directly support Treasury’s reform objectives. 

Efficient resource use and increased local economic activity 

Australia cannot realise the full value of its clean energy potential without investing in the inclusion and leadership of First Nations. This is an economic point. 

Local projects create durable jobs and unlock system benefits if properly supported. Unlocking local First Nations workforces and opportunities through targeted investment and inclusion will increase productivity - improvement in participation and skills will lead to large gains in household incomes and local economic activity. 

First Nations hold significant rights and interests over land and waters required for the industries of the future - areas that are rich in renewable energy resources, critical minerals, and regions that will support green metals extraction and production. Legal uncertainty, administrative, regulatory and agreement-making systems that are chronically underfunded entrenches high transaction costs. Properly embedding First Nations rights in law and process, and Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) will reduce project delays, lower risk, and unlock underutilised economic resources. 

Economic exclusion is a cost to the Australian economy 

Inequality and exclusion are sources of national economic loss; inclusion is a driver of national productivity gains - inclusion of First Nations will accelerate capital flows and reduce risk. 

As Canadian First Nations economic leaders have argued, First Nations should be reframed not as a ‘cost centre’in the economy, but as key drivers of national productivity. Equity-enhancing policies, such as the merit criteria in the Capacity Investment Scheme and the community benefit principles in the Future Made in Australia Act are examples of emerging productivity enhancing policies which need to be strengthened and scaled throughout Australia’s policy and fiscal frameworks. 

Driving productivity and economic resilience - tax reform 

The Network proposes: 

• First Nations Clean Energy Tax Credit. Modelled on IRA Section 48 (Investment Tax Credit), this would provide a refundable or transferable tax credit for eligible clean energy projects with verified First Nations ownership or participation. 
• Clean Energy Bonus Tax Credits. Stackable with other tax credits and modelled on the IRA’s Low-Income Communities Bonus Credit and Energy Community Bonus, these should be available for projects that:
  • ○ serve remote / energy-insecure First Nations communities 
  • deliver measurable household energy savings 
  • embed First Nations outcomes in their design. 

Unlock investment 

The Network’s 2024-25 Pre-Budget Submission highlighted the need for a First Nations Clean Energy Investment Fund. Delivered by the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, and backed by government guarantees for First Nations equity investment in large-scale energy infrastructure (as successfully achieved in Canada), this package of initiatives would directly improve economic efficiency by treating First Nations as partners, co-investors and co-developers (rather than passive stakeholders or a barrier to overcome). 

Support inclusive and sustainable growth 

Modelled on the IRA’s Section 6417 (Direct Pay) and Canada’s Clean Energy Investment Tax Credit, permit tax-exempt First Nations organisations to receive cash equivalents of clean energy tax credits. And similarly, modelled on the IRA’s environmental justice goals, link tax access to energy justice outcomes, e.g. projects reducing diesel reliance and which improve energy affordability in First Nations communities. 

Conclusion 

Inequality and exclusion creates risk, which increases costs and reduces productivity. 

A policy and fiscal system which results in First Nations inclusion will deliver national productivity gains. The clean energy transition and associated economic transformation that necessarily accompanies the energy transition provides an historical opportunity to establish an inclusive economy which recognises the economic value of First Nations leadership, participation and benefit. 

Read our submission

Exploring the impacts of offshore development on First Nations’ cultural heritage, this article proposes integration of free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), into the regulatory and legislative offshore environment.

In the Australian context, this particularly regards administrative and regulatory reforms to overcome uncertainty arising from recent decisions in the Federal Court.

The international focus on new energy has fast-tracked many processes that sideline First Nations’ rights, hitherto understood within the onshore minerals extraction regimes.

The reforms proposed in this article recognise an international commitment to enact the principles contained in the UNDRIP and other relevant international law.

Authors: Hoskins, R.; Ogilvie, G.; Storey, M.; Hill, A. Why Are Cultural Rights over Sea Country Less Recognised than Terrestrial Ones? Heritage 2025, 8, 283. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/heritage8070283

Read the report

Thanks for use of the photo by Maël BALLAND on Unsplash

The Guarantee of Origin (GO) Scheme must incorporate First Nations rights, interests and priorities, including FPIC, as core components of the GO Scheme’s framework. 

We note the current draft rules refer exclusively to native title, omitting any reference to statutory land rights schemes and comparable statutory land rights frameworks across Australia. This omission risks failing to recognise the full extent of First Nations legal interests in land, and should be correct to ensure the GO Scheme properly reflects the diversity of First Nations rights and interests. 

Recommendations 

Require evidence of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC)

The GO legislative instruments should be amended to require that: 

• Registration of facility, production or delivery profiles include documented evidence that the project has obtained FPIC (as defined in accordance with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, to which Australia is a signatory) from Traditional Owners or their representative bodies. 
• Self-declaration or minimal disclosure (as currently required in the draft legislative instruments) is not sufficient. 

Expand the Guarantee of Origin Certificate to include First Nations Attributes 

Certificates issued under the GO Scheme should reflect more than emissions and energy source. They should also certify: 

• Whether the project has obtained FPIC 
• Whether the project is subject to an Indigenous Land Use Agreement (ILUA) or other agreement under a statutory land rights regime. 
• That cultural heritage protections are in place. 
• That First Nations ownership, benefit-sharing, or participation arrangements are in place. 
• The provenance of products, including whether production occurred on land or waters where Traditional Owners hold rights and whether those Traditional Owners have consented. 

These points would ensure the GO Scheme is a tool to ensure and verify First Nations outcomes and FPIC, and reflects the importance of product origin as a marker of ethical and lawful production. 

Public Transparency and Notification 

The GO Register should include details of whether a project is on native title land or land held pursuant to a statutory land rights scheme, and whether it is subject to an ILUA or other agreement with the Traditional Owners. 

Traditional Owners, Prescribed Bodies Corporation, Native Title Representative Bodies or statutory land rights bodies (as the case may be) should be notified when an application for a GO certificate is lodged. 

Cultural Heritage Protections 

Applicants should be required to demonstrate how they have identified, assessed, and planned to protect First Nations cultural heritage. This should be a mandatory element of profile registration and should be auditable. The Regulator should be empowered to consider the adequacy of cultural heritage protection measures, not just legal contraventions. 

Resourcing to enable First Nations Engagement 

The GO Scheme should include mechanisms to fund Prescribed Bodies Corporate and Traditional Owner groups to engage with project proponents and regulators. Without proper resourcing, meaningful consultation and participation cannot occur, and legal, reputational and social licence risks will remain high. 

Recognition of First Nations Verification Tools 

The GO Rules should recognise First Nations-developed tools like the Dhawura Ngilan Business and Investor Guides as valid frameworks for assessing cultural heritage protection and FPIC. 

Projects aligned with these tools should be prioritised or granted preferred status. 

Strengthened Suitability and Eligibility Criteria 

The GO Scheme should align with other emerging aligned policy schemes, such as that in the Capacity Investment Scheme (CIS), and include: 

• Pass/Fail Eligibility: Applicants must warrant they have not breached relevant First Nations protection laws, such as the Racial Description Act 1975 (Cth), the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1984 (Cth), and others. 
• First Nations Merit-Based Assessment Criteria: Applicants should have to provide clear evidence of early and culturally respectful engagement with Traditional Owners and First Nations communities. 

Read our submission

We’re excited to share our new guide providing a general overview of how Australia’s electricity system works, some of the drivers and policy settings driving energy and climate targets, and an example of the steps to develop a renewable energy project.

The transition to renewable energy in Australia represents a significant opportunity for First Nations communities to benefit from developments on their land.

In partnership with the First Nations Clean Energy Network and Indigenous Land and Sea Corporation, the authors conducted research exploring this opportunity, with a specific focus on the barriers preventing First Nations from achieving these benefits and what different groups of actors could do to help overcome these barriers.

In this paper we present the findings from a series of semi-structured interviews with Traditional Owners, First Nations groups, renewable energy developers and industry representatives, legal experts and other academics.

We identified two groups of barriers – overarching barriers including ongoing disadvantage and a lack of funding and resourcing for First Nations groups, and barriers specific to renewable energy developments such as the absence of Indigenous free, prior and informed consent in project approval processes and unclear, non-uniform legislative frameworks.

To overcome these barriers, we recommend strategies for different actors. For example, governments could implement Indigenous free, prior and informed consent in regulatory regimes and the renewable energy industry could establish cultural education and training programs for company staff.

Authors: Katie Quail, Donna Green, Ciaran O’Faircheallaigh, Large-scale renewable energy developments on the Indigenous Estate: How can participation benefit Australia's First Nations peoples?, Energy Research & Social Science, Volume 123, 2025, 104044, ISSN 2214-6296

Read the paper

First Nations groups in Australia hold important rights, interests, and leverage in the shift to renewable energy through native title, land rights, and other legal property rights. Many clean energy projects will be developed on land and waters where First Nations people have legally recognised responsibilities and connections.

Switching to renewable energy is crucial for cutting emissions and creating a sustainable future. For First Nations communities, this transition offers reliable and affordable power, energy-efficient homes, and opportunities for jobs, self-determination, and economic growth.

This guide to First Nations contribution to the renewables and clean energy sector was published by the ILSC.

Download the guide

The Indigenous Land and Sea Corporation have published a comprehensive guide to assist First Nations understand, participate, and lead in the renewables and clean energy sector.