Your search

Reconciliation in New Zealand involves recognition, reparations and an apology for past injustices relating to breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi. In 1840, Māori and the British Crown signed a treaty that promised a beneficial relationship to both signatories. Almost immediately after the Treaty was signed and continuing through to today, promises inherent in the principles of the Treaty have been breached. However, in 1975, a government-appointed permanent commission of inquiry was established to investigate actions or omissions of the Crown that breach the promises made in the Treaty of Waitangi. The Waitangi Tribunal and the Ministry of Justice provide the institutional mechanisms used in New Zealand to foster reconciliation. This article will discuss how the state has moved iwi from being in Treaty ‘grievance mode’ to one of tino rangatiratanga/Māori self-determination and demonstrates how reconciliation has integrated Treaty settlement iwi into the mainstream New Zealand economy.

A diversity of perspectives and wide variety of cultural and social features characterize Māori society and there is no one consensus view held by Māori in relation to gender roles, political orientations, or Māori/government (or state) relations. Both Māori women and men have shared in the struggle to assert Māori resistance to colonial encroachment and one gender cannot be elevated over the other. Moreover, Māori views and perspectives on the different roles of Māori men and women are contested and differ tribally and between individuals. This entry describes aspects of precolonial Māori society that shaped traditional values and discusses key sociohistorical factors shaping gender roles among Māori. A focus on the contribution of Māori women to Māori development and advancement is offered. The relationship between Māori identity, culture, and the New Zealand government (or state) is highlighted throughout.

'We have always owned the water . . . we have never ceded our mana over the river to anyone', King Tuheitia Paki asserted in 2012. Prime Minister John Key disagreed: ‘King Tuheitia's claim that Maori have always owned New Zealand's water is just plain wrong'. So who does own the water in New Zealand – if anyone – and why does it matter? Offering some human context around that fraught question, Tupuna Awa looks at the people and politics of the Waikato River. For iwi and hapu of the lands that border its 425-kilometre length, the Waikato River is an ancestor, a taonga and a source of mauri, lying at the heart of identity and chiefly power. It is also subject to governing oversight by the Crown and intersected by hydro-stations managed by state-owned power companies: a situation rife with complexity and subject to shifting and subtle power dynamics. Marama Muru-Lanning explains how Maori of the region, the Crown and Mighty River Power have talked about the ownership, guardianship and stakeholders of the river. By examining the debates over water in one New Zealand river, over a single recent period, Muru-Lanning provides a powerful lens through which to view modern iwi politics, debates over water ownership, and contests for power between Maori and the state.

This practice-research based article explores the relationship between mana motuhake and white patriarchal sovereignty in Aotearoa New Zealand, focusing on Ngāti Tūwharetoa as a case study. It seeks to find the relevance of Aboriginal academic Aileen Moreton-Robinson’s white possessive doctrine to the Aotearoa New Zealand context. In particular, it highlights the racist nature of the law and planning systems and their inadequacies to provide for hapū and iwi. It provides a key theoretical analysis regarding the nature of white patriarchal sovereignty in Aotearoa and the need of the state to appear virtuous, to continue the legacy that started with the Treaty of Waitangi to maintain this whenua as a white possessive. Lastly, the piece questions the position of Britishness within Aotearoa New Zealand and asks key philosophical questions for all about the need to find common understandings or māramatanga about our collective future as a society.

Arguments for constitutional reform to recognise Rangatiratanga and Tikanga Maori.

As the global ‘data revolution’ accelerates, how can the data rights and interests of indigenous peoples be secured? Premised on the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, this book argues that indigenous peoples have inherent and inalienable rights relating to the collection, ownership and application of data about them, and about their lifeways and territories. As the first book to focus on indigenous data sovereignty, it asks: what does data sovereignty mean for indigenous peoples, and how is it being used in their pursuit of self-determination? The varied group of mostly indigenous contributors theorise and conceptualise this fast-emerging field and present case studies that illustrate the challenges and opportunities involved. These range from indigenous communities grappling with issues of identity, governance and development, to national governments and NGOs seeking to formulate a response to indigenous demands for data ownership. While the book is focused on the CANZUS states of Canada, Australia, Aotearoa/New Zealand and the United States, much of the content and discussion will be of interest and practical value to a broader global audience.

Freshwater environments are challenged by multiple pressures from all parts of society, as well as contests over ownership and availability as a public or private resource. In many parts of the world, indigenous peoples are one part of society asserting rights in relation to water and advocating for the inclusion of indigenous knowledge within policy frameworks. Aotearoa New Zealand provides a fascinating case study of efforts to demonstrate the value and utility of indigenous knowledge (mātauranga Māori) in addressing contemporary issues of freshwater management. National policy statements for freshwater now recognize the role of Māori communities in decision-making and acknowledge the potential for mātauranga Māori to inform the management of freshwater. In a regional context, treaty settlements have resulted in specific provisions for tribal (iwi) consultation and engagement, and the formulation of iwi management plans that will underpin freshwater management into the future. The New Zealand experience illustrates the challenges of integrating different value sets and knowledge traditions as part of the governance and management regime. We argue that “post-normal” science provides a theoretical basis for problem-solving complex issues related to science and indigenous knowledge based on the notion that uncertainty, value loading, and the plurality of legitimate perspectives are an integral part of the context for policy making, particularly for the natural environment.

This commentary reflects upon the major Māori land reforms in te Ture Whenua Māori Bill (2016). The reforms implement more bureaucracy and replace some mechanisms used by the Māori Land Court to protect against Māori land loss. The Waitangi Tribunal, which has dealt with Māori grievances over land loss for over 30 years, issued a critical report in March 2016 along with recommendations about the reforms. That report was largely ignored by the New Zealand Government. This commentary contains a review of the literature on Māori land to date, as it helps to understand the ideas behind the Tribunal's report as well as the reforms. There is also an examination of the main points made by the Waitangi Tribunal, as well as aspects of te Ture Whenua Māori Bill (2016). The overall conclusion is that the Māori people should be very nervous about the reforms for their lands.

As the global ‘data revolution’ accelerates, how can the data rights and interests of indigenous peoples be secured? Premised on the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, this book argues that indigenous peoples have inherent and inalienable rights relating to the collection, ownership and application of data about them, and about their lifeways and territories. As the first book to focus on indigenous data sovereignty, it asks: what does data sovereignty mean for indigenous peoples, and how is it being used in their pursuit of self-determination? The varied group of mostly indigenous contributors theorise and conceptualise this fast-emerging field and present case studies that illustrate the challenges and opportunities involved. These range from indigenous communities grappling with issues of identity, governance and development, to national governments and NGOs seeking to formulate a response to indigenous demands for data ownership. While the book is focused on the CANZUS states of Canada, Australia, Aotearoa/New Zealand and the United States, much of the content and discussion will be of interest and practical value to a broader global audience.

Situated 65 kilometres south-east of Hamilton, Putāruru (population 3747 in the 2013 Census) is typical of the many farming service towns scattered across rural Aotearoa New Zealand. Bakeries, op shops, a sports bar and a farm equipment supplier occupy the main street. Unlike nearby Tirau, which transformed from a one-stop shop into a vibrant boutique village in the late 1990s, Putāruru township remains largely indistinguishable from other rural centres. There are few clues to the substantial farming-based and water-generated wealth that lies beyond the town.

Local government in New Zealand faces major challenges. Among the most pressing are continual legislative change, threats to its autonomy, the gradual erosion of community voices in council planning and decision-making, and the need for funding solutions to ensure property rates remain affordable. As well, there is an urgent need for a more coordinated approach across central government on major policy issues such as climate change and housing. This book exposes these challenges and proposes and debates solutions for the future of our local government. Strong local government is vital for ensuring economic growth across and within regions and local communities, for enhancing community wellbeing, for funding and providing the infrastructure needed for, in some cases, rapidly growing and diverse communities, for ensuring our environment is valued and protected, and for planning for development in a time of constraint on resources. This book is a 'one-stop information shop' on local government that can be used by those who regularly interact with or study this area of government, by those working within local authorities, and by those who actively work to ensure their communities grow in a sustainable way.

Drawing on the work of Matike Mai Aotearoa: The Independent Iwi Working Group on Constitutional Transformation (the Working Group), this article argues that there is an evolving New Zealand constitutionalism, one that offers a constitutional understanding grounded in the Māori constitutional system. The article opens with a descriptive analysis of the Māori constitutional system, explains the key features of New Zealand’s existing constitution and concludes with an argument that the existing constitution can evolve – and, through the political process, ought to evolve – according to the constitutional models that the Working Group recommends. This article deploys legal research methods, primarily doctrinal research and applied doctrinal research.1

In this article, I outline the existing legislative options available and rationale for Māori representation in local government. I suggest that the arguments and rationale against Māori representation have been exacerbated by a lack of clarity around local government's duties and obligations stemming from the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. In the second part of this article, I explore more recent arguments by Māori for representation and involvement in local government decision-making on the basis of being mana whenua, which means to have territorial authority and power associated with the possession and occupation of tribal land. This argument foregrounds specific iwi (tribes) as holding territorial authority and therefore rights to representation and involvement in decision-making sourced in tikanga Māori (Māori law), over and above other Māori who live in that area. I examine in detail the Rotorua District Council's establishment of the Te Arawa Partnership Board in 2015 and argue that this Board and its first election results provide unique insights into the relationship between Te Arawa people living in and outside the district and has implications for broader conversations about the rights of Māori living away from their tribal areas.

This article will aim to determine the form and place of te ao Māori in the New Zealand Parliament. The article will analyse the maiden speeches of 12 Māori Members of Parliament from across the political spectrum and from different Parliaments since the adoption of Mixed Member Proportional Electoral System in 1996, and will investigate their commitment to te ao Māori based on deductive and inductive discourse analysis. It seeks to determine the presence of Māori identity indicators, as well as to determine themes unique to the Māori political context. The election of the 51st New Zealand Parliament was noted as having the greatest representation of Māori of any parliament in New Zealand history. Of the 121 Members of Parliament, 26 identify as Māori or as having Māori heritage. However, while the number of Māori Members of Parliament has increased, this does not provide the full picture of Māori representation in Parliament. This article will ask ‘How do Māori Members of Parliament best represent te ao Māori in the New Zealand Parliament?’. The research considers how Māori Members of Parliament ‘represent’ Māori in the debating chamber in Parliament, specifically, to what extent these Members of Parliament represent te ao Māori. This research also asks whether substantive representation of te ao Māori varies across the electorate types, Māori, general and list seats. The research seeks to provide qualitative analysis of the presence of te ao Māori in Parliament and which Members of Parliament most often represent a Māori worldview. Both descriptive and substantive representation provide the means for a minority perspective to be present within a parliament.

Objectives: The aim of the current research is to test predictions derived from the rejection-identification model and research on collective action using cross-sectional (Study 1) and longitudinal (Study 2) methods. Specifically, an integration of these 2 literatures suggests that recognition of discrimination can have simultaneous positive relationships with well-being and engagement in collective action via the formation of a strong ingroup identity. Method: We test these predictions in 2 studies using data from a large national probability sample of Māori (the indigenous peoples of New Zealand), collected as part of the New Zealand Attitudes and Values Study (Ns for Study 1 and 2 were 1,981 and 1,373, respectively). Results: Consistent with the extant research, Study 1 showed that perceived discrimination was directly linked with decreased life satisfaction, but indirectly linked with increased life satisfaction through higher levels of ethnic identification. Perceived discrimination was also directly linked with increased support for Māori rights and indirectly linked with increased support for Māori rights through higher levels of ethnic identification. Study 2 replicated these findings using longitudinal data and identified multiple bidirectional paths between perceived discrimination, ethnic identity, well-being, and support for collective action. Conclusion: These findings replicate and extend the rejection-identification model in a novel cultural context by demonstrating via cross-sectional (Study 1) and longitudinal (Study 2) analyses that the recognition of discrimination can both motivate support for political rights and increase well-being by strengthening ingroup identity. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved)