It is a question often asked these days. When a project sets up in a remote area why is there little indigenous participation?

This is not to have a go at the mining companies operating in those regions. They often have very specific policies in place to try and maximise indigenous involvement.

Nor is this having a go at the indigenous groups themselves. Many see the opportunities the resources sector brings them and want to make the most of it for their people.

Yet, for whatever reason, the two never seem to quite come together enough to create a critical mass.

Part of the problem for the indigenous communities seems to stem from the competing views within traditional land owner groups.

The James Price Point battle in Western Australia’s Kimberley is a case in point. At one stage negotiations bogged down because one representative seemed to take the position that he would oppose whatever the other representative said.

Perhaps these Aboriginal groups can take heart from the NANA Development Corporation, a $US1.8 billion corporation owned by the Alaskan Inupiat people.

That corporation was formed by a massive oil and gas opportunity that happened to take place on the Inupiat’s doorstep and a desire to ensure a legacy for the future.

That very same corporation has formalised a strategic alliance with Pilbara-based Aboriginal company PLWA Group – once known as Pilbara Logistics.

The deal gives NANA access to an established workforce in the area and helps PLWA bid for larger, more demanding contracts.

What NANA brings to the table is funding, plus expertise and systems gleaned from 30-odd years in the resources industry.

It also shows local indigenous groups what is possible.

One gets the sense that NANA had to fight its way through similar problems of managing competing interests and expectations.

Its managing director Helvi Sandvik has been quite open about the fact it has made more than a few errors along the way.

However, it has been able to create what would have to be regarded as a successful business by any measure.

NANA coming into Australia is not going to be a magic wand to bring economic empowerment to remote Aboriginal communities.

Let’s be honest, this is a for-profit business that is representing its shareholders – aboriginal Alaskans.

Net profits will be finding their way back to the Inupiat – NANA is a for-profit business after all.

Chief executive officer Simon Haigh said the company would, however, be investing in local businesses, hiring local people and paying tax.

Haigh, a former principal, economic development – sustainability for BHP Billiton, said NANA could help bridge some of the divides that stop mining companies and Aboriginal communities coming together.

He said miners and Aboriginal communities could usually see the benefits they could bring to one another.

However, on the mining side there is often a perception of risk and on the Aboriginal side, a need for capital to scale up to maximise the opportunities coming their way.

This, Haigh said, was where NANA could come in.

He said it could provide the capital and expertise needed to help the Aboriginal communities be ready for what is coming their way, while helping remove some of the risk to miners.

This article first appeared in ILN's sister publication MiningNews.net.