Cultural Values Assessment

Strata Heritage can deliver cultural heritage values assessment from both an anthropological and archaeological perspective. This dual qualification enables us to deliver a holistic understanding of cultural heritage that addresses both physical (tangible) and non-physical (intangible) aspects of place, identity, and history. 

A guide for developers, land managers, councils and infrastructure proponents seeking a deeper understanding of Aboriginal cultural heritage values beyond the archaeological record.

Not all Aboriginal cultural heritage can be found through a ground survey or a register search. Some of the most significant connections between Traditional Owners and Country are held in memory, in oral tradition, in ceremony, in language, and in the intangible knowledge that has been passed across generations for tens of thousands of years. A standard archaeological assessment — however thorough — cannot access these values. A Cultural Values Assessment can.

This article explains what a Cultural Values Assessment (CVA) is, how it differs from an archaeological assessment or a Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP), when it is needed, what the process involves, and why it is increasingly being recognised as best practice for significant development projects, land management programmes, and infrastructure planning across Victoria.

A Cultural Values Assessment is a holistic, anthropologically-led assessment that identifies, documents and evaluates the full range of cultural heritage values held by Traditional Owners in relation to a defined area of land or Country — including both tangible and intangible cultural heritage.

Where an archaeological assessment focuses primarily on the physical evidence of past Aboriginal occupation — artefact scatters, stone arrangements, shell middens, culturally modified trees, and subsurface deposits — a Cultural Values Assessment goes further. It captures the living, continuing relationship between Traditional Owners and Country: the stories, the song lines, the ceremonial knowledge, the spiritual and sacred connections, the ecological knowledge, and the community memories that give physical places their deepest meaning.

The distinction matters because Aboriginal cultural heritage, as understood by Traditional Owners, is not simply a collection of objects and places from the past. As the Victorian Aboriginal Heritage Council has articulated, Aboriginal cultural heritage is the continuing record of Aboriginal societies — a rich legacy that includes both physical evidence of past occupation and the intangible values that connect Aboriginal people to one another, to their ancestors, and to Country. 

Cultural heritage is not just a remnant of history. It is alive, constantly changing and evolving.

A CVA is the assessment tool designed to capture that living dimension.

Understanding the distinction between tangible and intangible cultural heritage is essential to understanding why a CVA is sometimes necessary in addition to — or instead of — a purely archaeological assessment.

Tangible cultural heritage refers to the physical, material evidence of Aboriginal occupation and cultural practice. Under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Vic), this includes:

• Aboriginal places — sites of cultural significance registered on the Victorian Aboriginal Heritage Register (VAHR), including stone artefact scatters, earth mounds, rock shelters, ceremonial grounds, scarred trees and burial sites
• Aboriginal objects — moveable items of cultural significance, including stone tools, grinding stones, possum skin cloaks, and ceremonial objects
• Culturally modified trees (CMTs) — trees bearing evidence of Aboriginal cultural practice, such as bark removal for canoe making or shelter construction, branch modification, or carved designs
• Shell middens — accumulations of shell, bone and other food refuse that mark places of past Aboriginal occupation and activity
• Ancestral Remains — the physical remains of deceased Aboriginal persons

These are the values that archaeological survey methods — pedestrian ground survey, test pit excavation, geomorphological analysis — are designed to find, document and assess.

Intangible cultural heritage refers to the non-physical dimensions of Aboriginal cultural knowledge and expression. Under Section 79B of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (as amended in 2016 — making Victoria the first and, to date, only Australian state to legislate specifically for the protection of intangible Aboriginal heritage), intangible cultural heritage includes:

• Oral traditions and narratives — the stories, histories and knowledge systems passed down through generations
• Performing arts — song, dance, music and ceremony
• Social practices, rituals and festivals
• Craft traditions and visual arts
• Environmental and ecological knowledge — Traditional Owner knowledge of land, water, plants, animals and seasonal patterns
• Spiritual and sacred connections to specific places and landscapes — including places not recorded on the VAHR but well known to Traditional Owners
• Song lines and Dreaming tracks — the networks of spiritual and narrative meaning that traverse Country and connect communities across vast distances

These values are, by their nature, not visible on the ground surface. They cannot be identified through a desktop assessment of the ACHRIS database or a pedestrian survey. They exist in the knowledge, memory and lived experience of Traditional Owners — and they can only be accessed through direct engagement with Community. This is the space that a Cultural Values Assessment is designed to occupy.

A Cultural Values Assessment is not a substitute for a CHMP where one is legally required. It is a different tool, serving a different purpose. Understanding where each sits in the heritage assessment landscape helps clarify when a CVA adds value.

Assessment Type Primary focus Who leads? RAP/Traditional Owner engagement Statutory requirement?     Due Diligence Assessment Determining whether a CHMP is required Heritage Advisor Typically none No   CHMP (Desktop/Standard/Complex) Archaeological identification, impact assessment, management conditions Heritage Advisor Statutory (RAP evaluation) Where triggered under AHA 2006   Cultural Values Assessment (CVA) Tangible and intangible cultural values; living connection to Country Anthropologist + Heritage Advisor Central — community-led No — but increasingly required by planning authorities and government agencies   PAHT Determining whether a CHMP is required (formal, regulated) Heritage Advisor Typically none No — voluntary    

The key differences are in scope and method. A CHMP's standard assessment phase involves systematic survey for physical evidence. A CVA involves structured engagement with Traditional Owners and knowledge holders — interviews, on-Country workshops, site visits conducted with Elders and community members, and the collection and recording of oral histories, cultural narratives, and place-based knowledge. The Heritage Advisor, typically an anthropologist, facilitates this process, but the knowledge itself comes from Community.

In practice, CVAs are often commissioned alongside or following a CHMP, to complement the archaeological findings with a richer cultural context. They can also be commissioned independently — for land management planning, precinct structure planning, conservation planning, or infrastructure corridor assessment — where a full understanding of cultural values is needed even in the absence of a mandatory CHMP.

A CVA is not mandated by the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 in the way that a CHMP can be mandatory. It is, however, increasingly required or strongly recommended in a range of circumstances.

The Victorian Planning Authority (VPA) has incorporated CVAs into its precinct planning process for significant growth areas. In the Melton East Precinct Structure Plan, for example, the VPA worked with the Wurundjeri Woi-wurrung Cultural Heritage Aboriginal Corporation to produce a Cultural Values Assessment that identified tangible and intangible cultural heritage values across the precinct — including an on-Country walk-over with Community members — resulting in an Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Plan embedded in the PSP itself.

As precinct structure planning becomes more sophisticated in its approach to cultural heritage, CVAs are increasingly being treated as a standard component of the evidence base for significant planning decisions, not an optional extra.

Major infrastructure projects — transmission lines, pipelines, road and rail corridors, renewable energy facilities — traverse large areas of Country and may pass through landscapes of deep cultural significance that would not be captured by standard archaeological survey alone. A CVA allows Traditional Owners to identify and document the cultural values of the full corridor, enabling project designers to understand the heritage landscape they are working within and to make genuinely informed decisions about alignment, design and impact mitigation.

Land management agencies — Parks Victoria, the Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action (DEECA), local councils managing Crown land reserves — are increasingly required to incorporate Traditional Owner cultural knowledge into their land management planning. A CVA provides the structured framework for capturing that knowledge and translating it into management outcomes that reflect the priorities of Traditional Owners, not just the scientific heritage record.

Where a developer is undertaking a significant project in an area of known or likely cultural sensitivity — particularly in landscapes with a high density of registered Aboriginal places, near waterways, in volcanic landscapes, or on land with a long history of Traditional Owner connection — a voluntary CVA is increasingly recognised as best practice. It demonstrates genuine respect for Traditional Owner authority, reduces the risk of unforeseen cultural heritage issues arising during construction, and — as discussed in our article on early engagement — can generate genuine development value through authentic partnership with Community.

Where Aboriginal places have been identified through CHMP fieldwork and the significance of those places needs to be assessed for the purposes of VAHR registration, conservation planning, or management condition development, a CVA provides the anthropological and cultural context that transforms an archaeological site record into a meaningful understanding of what the place represents to its Traditional Owners.

Every Cultural Values Assessment is tailored to the specific landscape, the relevant Registered Aboriginal Party (RAP) or Traditional Owner group, and the purpose for which it is commissioned. However, a well-structured CVA typically involves the following elements:

The process begins with a thorough desktop review of the existing knowledge base for the area: historical ethnographic sources (including the records of early anthropologists such as Baldwin Spencer, Alfred Howitt and Donald Thomson, where relevant), missionary and protectorate records, early colonial accounts, oral history collections, previous heritage reports and CHMPs, registered heritage places in ACHRIS and the VAHR, and any existing cultural mapping or language documentation available for the relevant Country.

This background research forms the foundation for the on-Country engagement that follows, ensuring that knowledge holders are not asked to repeat what is already documented, and that the assessment is grounded in the existing record.

Meaningful engagement with Traditional Owners is the core of a CVA. This stage involves establishing contact with the relevant RAP or Traditional Owner corporation, negotiating the scope, format and protocols of the engagement, and agreeing on how the knowledge collected will be recorded, stored, used and — critically — who controls access to it.

Cultural safety is paramount. The engagement process must be designed in partnership with Community, not imposed upon it. This means understanding which knowledge can be shared with the broader project team and which is sacred or restricted, ensuring that women's and men's business protocols are observed where relevant, and establishing clear informed consent processes for all knowledge holders who participate.

The on-Country component is the heart of the CVA. This typically involves:

• Structured interviews with Elders, knowledge holders and community members, documenting oral histories, place narratives, ecological knowledge, and cultural practices associated with the assessment area
• On-Country walk-overs conducted with Traditional Owners, allowing knowledge holders to identify places of significance, explain their cultural meaning, and document connections between physical features and cultural narratives that would not be apparent to an outside observer
• On-Country workshops bringing together multiple community members to collectively document and validate cultural knowledge about the assessment area
• Site visits to registered and unregistered places of cultural significance, with Traditional Owners guiding the interpretation and significance assessment of those places

The anthropologist or Heritage Advisor facilitates this process — managing logistics, recording sessions (with consent), and structuring the documentation — but the knowledge itself is generated by Community.

Drawing on the background research and the community engagement, the CVA assesses the cultural significance of the identified values using an established significance assessment framework. This considers the breadth of knowledge held about specific places and values within the community, the historical and ongoing importance of those values to Traditional Owner identity and wellbeing, the rarity or uniqueness of the values within a broader cultural landscape context, and the vulnerability of the values to harm.

Where a CVA is being prepared in connection with a development project, the significance assessment directly informs the impact assessment — identifying which values are at risk from the proposed activity and what measures would be required to avoid, mitigate or offset that impact.

The CVA report documents the findings of all assessment stages: the background research, the engagement methodology, the cultural values identified, the significance assessment, and the recommendations for management, protection or further assessment. Where values are sensitive or restricted, a confidential appendix or a separate restricted report may be prepared for the use of the RAP or Traditional Owner group only.

Critically, the draft report is reviewed by the participating community members before finalisation — ensuring that the knowledge has been recorded accurately and that Traditional Owners are comfortable with the way their heritage is being represented.

A CVA is only as valuable as what is done with it. The final stage involves translating the assessment findings into practical management outcomes — whether that means embedding heritage values into a precinct structure plan, developing conservation management recommendations for a land management agency, informing the management conditions of a CHMP, or guiding the alignment of an infrastructure corridor away from places of particular significance.

Where appropriate, findings from a CVA can support the registration of new Aboriginal places on the Victorian Aboriginal Heritage Register (VAHR), ensuring that the values documented through the assessment process receive the ongoing statutory protection they deserve.

A well-conducted CVA requires a combination of disciplinary expertise that not all heritage consultancies possess. The lead practitioner should have formal qualifications in anthropology — not just archaeology — with demonstrated experience in:

• Designing and conducting culturally safe community engagement processes with Aboriginal communities
• Recording and interpreting oral histories and ethnographic material
• Applying recognised cultural significance assessment frameworks
• Working respectfully and effectively with Registered Aboriginal Parties and Traditional Owner corporations
• Understanding the regulatory context of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006, including the intangible heritage provisions introduced by the 2016 amendments

At Strata Heritage, our CVA work is led by practitioners with master's-level qualifications in both archaeology and anthropology, with close to two decades of experience working with Traditional Owner communities across Victoria. We approach every CVA from a position of genuine respect for Traditional Owner authority — understanding that the knowledge we are privileged to be entrusted with belongs to Community, not to the consultant.

CVA costs vary more widely than other heritage assessment types, because the scope is driven primarily by the complexity and extent of the community engagement — which depends on the number of knowledge holders involved, the geographic scope of the assessment area, the depth of cultural connection to the Country in question, and the sensitivity of the values being documented.

Indicative cost ranges:

• A CVA for a major infrastructure corridor or large precinct structure plan: $46,000–$80,000+
• A comprehensive landscape-scale cultural values programme for a national park or large Crown land reserve: $90,000+

Timeframes are similarly variable. A focused CVA might be completed within 8–12 weeks of engagement. A complex, multi-stage programme involving multiple community engagement sessions, on-Country workshops, and restricted knowledge documentation may take 6–12 months or longer.

The single most important factor affecting both cost and timeline is the readiness and availability of the relevant Traditional Owner group to engage. Early, respectful relationship-building — ideally well before a project timeline becomes constrained — is the most effective way to ensure a CVA process that is both thorough and efficient.