Your search

This article considers the puzzle of the location of tino rangatiratanga in the post-Treaty settlements era in the context of current controversy in New Zealand over recognising Maori self-determination or tino rangatiratanga as guaranteed by Art 2 of the Treaty of Waitangi. On one level, the current political and legal struggles reflect a fundamental tension between Maori aspirations for tino rangatiratanga and the state's desire to maintain centralised sovereignty. At a deeper level, the government opposition to co-governance stems from questions about the evolving role of the Treaty - in particular the guarantee of tino rangatiratanga and its ability to apply to a much wider range of Treaty issues (other than natural resources) and Treaty partners; for example, non-tribal Maori collectives serving urban Maori and not bound like tribes by kinship ties. The Waitangi Tribunal, originally established to facilitate Treaty settlements, is now at the centre of this shift in thinking to expand the interpretation of tino rangatiratanga. In a recent series of reports, the Tribunal has recognised the diversity of Maori identity and the legitimacy of non-tribal collectives as Treaty partners, particularly when these organisations are created by and responsive to the socio-economic needs of Maori. The proliferation of Treaty partners thus raises issues of co-ordination and coherence - how do these many partners engage effectively with the Crown and is every Maori organisation a Treaty partner for the purposes of Art 2 tino rangatiratanga? And does provision of social services by these Treaty partners violate the right to equality?

This article brings perspectives from three Māori activists, each promoting issues of self-determination in different ways. It centres on tino rangatiratanga and mana motuhake, two concepts that inform modern Māori activism and life and practice, and more recently conceptions of Māoridom as “nation”. Using a Gramscian framework we argue that the New Zealand state has over time created a notion of one people within one state, and has in the past incorporated challenges to its legitimacy within a framework of popular consent. The desire by some Māori activists for self-determination promotes a separateness that to some extent challenges this idea of nation–state unity. An examination of these modern Māori activist politics allows us to observe the operations of hegemony as it forms and reforms in modern New Zealand.

This collection brings together over forty years of thought and comment by Dr Whatarangi Winiata on Māori spirituality, social development, education and political affairs. Each chapter discusses the importance andimpact of Māori management of Māori matters and the ongoing pursuit of tino rangatiratanga in all areas of life. Dr Winiata has worked to achieve Māori development, wellbeing and attainment of aspirations over decades: driving the iwi development programme Whakatupuranga Rua Mano that led to the foundation of the first contemporary wānanga, Te Wānanga o Raukawa; being key in restructuring the working of Te Hāhi Mihingare; galvanising the New Zealand Māori Council to hold the Crown accountable over fisheries, forestry, languageand broadcasting; and co-founding the Māori Party with Dame Tariana Turia and Sir Pita Sharples. Thesepapers, curated by Dr Winiata and Daphne Luke, provide an analysis of recent Māori experience, pursuit ofself-determination and history of Aotearoa.

Examines ‘significant’ reforms implemented in NZ over the past 30 years to recognise the rights of Māori as an indigenous people. Overviews the conceptual basis for settlements lodged under the Treaty of Waitangi, legal claims by Māori to natural resources and other reforms. Identifies a lack of measures that recognise Māori political authority, and asserts that successive governments have deliberately discounted the normative value of ‘historical conceptual categories’, instead choosing to emphasise categories that deliver lesser substantive rights.

This article is a response to the recent surge of interest over extractive industry in New Zealand and the opposition to this by many iwi. The New Zealand government has in recent years made offshore exploration and production a high priority. By the extractive industry, we mean the people, companies, and activities involved in removing oil and gas, metals, coal, stone and other useful resources from the ground.

This article will argue that Māori prophetic movements were sites of political resistance where Māori prophets resisted colonisation and developed syncretic theologies that gave their followers a sense of hope within a tumultuous colonial environment. The movements of four Māori prophets will be discussed in chronological order: Te Atua Wera and the Nākahi movement; Te Ua Haumēne and the Pai Mārire or Hauhau movement; Te Kooti’s Ringatū movement; and Rua Kēnana and the Iharaira movement. This article will critically analyse these Māori prophetic movements as sites of religious and political resistance to show how Māori prophets challenged colonisation and land loss.

This paper demonstrates that the philosophical premises underlying biculturalism and self-determination lead to different conclusions about where power properly resides with respect to Crown/Maori relations in New Zealand. It is argued that biculturalism is not the panacea for the realisation of legitimate Maori aspirations that has been assumed by both Maori and Pakeha policy elites over the past twenty years because it makes assumptions about power relationships which limit greater degrees of Maori autonomy ' one step towards self-determination is permitted, but the next prevented. Biculturalism can not realise greater autonomy because it is concerned primarily with relationships among people in institutional settings and within and among bureaucratic institutions. Therefore it is less likely to meet Maori aspirations than self-determination which is concerned with creating, to the greatest extent possible, independence and autonomy for groups, not necessarily in isolation from wider society, but certainly apart from controls and regulations imposed from outside the would be self-determining community. Self-determination locates power, at least to some extent, within traditional Maori social units, while biculturalism, although assuming a sharing of power, inevitably gives Maori the status of junior partner in a project designed to modify state institutions to make them more responsive to Maori interests. While in itself this is advantageous to Maori, biculturalism is not a substitute for the affirmation of traditional social structures as the central point in a Maori quest for greater independence from an historically intrusive state.

In the second half of the nineteenth century, settlers poured into Aotearoa demanding land. Millions of acres were acquired by the government or directly by settlers; or confiscated after the Land Wars.By 1891, when the Liberal government came to power, Maori retained only a fraction of their lands. And still the losses continued. For rangatira such as James Carroll, Wiremu Pere, Paora Tuhaere, Te Keepa Te Rangihiwinui, and many others, the challenges were innumerable. To stop further land loss, some rangatira saw parliamentary process as the mechanism; others pursued political independence.For over two decades, Maori men and women of outstanding ability fought hard to protect their people and their land. How those rangatira fared, and how they should be remembered, is the story of Maori political struggle during the Liberal era.

Science and evidence form the foundation of decision-making at the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA). The EPA has committed to a multi-year mātauranga work programme that focuses on ways of weaving mātauranga, indigenous knowledge, into its decision-making processes. The first step is to develop a deeper understanding of the concepts involved, and their implications for the EPA’s decision-making processes. The aspiration is to weave an understanding of mātauranga into the daily work of the EPA, and to build on Mäori partnerships. The EPA has engaged proactively with Ngā Kaihautū Tikanga Taiao, the EPA’s statutory Māori advisory committee; Te Herenga, the EPA-supported kaitiaki network centred in the regions; and Ngā Parirau o te Mātauranga, the kaumātua group drawn from the Te Herenga network. One of the most critical strands of work of the mātauranga work programme will be to create a mātauranga framework for decision-makers to use to examine the veracity of mātauranga when presented as evidence. This paper explores the EPA’s journey towards being ready to create a mātauranga framework.

Persistent health inequities between rangatahi Māori (Indigenous young people) and other young people within Aotearoa New Zealand are incurred by a colonial machinery of institutions, service systems and sociocultural contexts that facilitates the marginalisation of Māori. Despite a skilled and dedicated Māori workforce, current service contexts severely limit the innovation of Māori practitioners working from a basis of mātauranga Māori (Māori ways of knowing and being), and curtail their ability to support rangatahi Māori and their whānau (community of related families). We report on an interview study with 13 Māori practitioners in youth development, exploring their struggles, strengths and strategies, as part of a larger project exploring rangatahi wellbeing and whanaungatanga (connectedness and relationality). Utilising reflexive thematic analysis, we describe three conceptual domains that participant accounts spoke into: mitigating system failures to embrace rangatahi and their whānau, sustainability and longevity of services for rangatahi Māori, and fostering rangatahi tino rangatiratanga. Participant accounts illustrate the need for bold reform within youth services, towards sustainable models premised upon tino rangatiratanga – services led by Māori, designed by Māori, and intended to cater for the unique needs and aspirations of rangatahi Māori.

By 2051 the ethnic Maori population will almost double in size to close to a million, or twenty-two percent of the total New Zealand population. Even more dramatically, by 2051 thirty-three percent of all children in the country will be Maori?' This substantial change in our society will have major implications for Maori and wider society. Professor Durie discusses traditions and customs and addresses contemporary needs in order to build development strategies for the launch of the Maori population into the new millennium.

Resistance: An Indigenous Response to Neoliberalism is a collection of papers from Maori academics, activists and leaders on the connection between global practices of neoliberalism and the diverse forms of Maori resistance that aim to destablize them.Aotearoa is one of the world leaders of neoliberalism. Successive New Zealand governments since 1984 have pursued neoliberal policies with a faith, vehemence and confidence in their success that few other governments appear to possess. At a time when 'capital flows across borders as it has never done before, and multinational companies have bigger budgets than many states have ever had', this book encourages people to look more closely at Maori views as integral and inspiring in a globalizing world.