Your search

This article examines why and how scholars should acknowledge and name each of the diverse political actors and institutions that typically are objectified as ‘indigenous peoples’ on the global stage, or ‘Māori’ in New Zealand. For instance, rather than suggesting a political relationship or conflict exists between ‘Māori and the Crown’, political scientists and theorists should name the political actors and political institutions for which Māori is a shorthand, for example, ‘Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu (the corporate entity of the Ngai Tahu whanui) and the Committee of Tuahiwi Marae disagreed with the Crown’. A variety of reasons are discussed as to why this objectification of Māori (and any other indigenous population) as a single political actor has occurred, the problems are pointed out, and a range of examples are given. Not every use of the terms ‘Māori’, ‘indigenous peoples’ or similar descriptors in political science stands in for a specific political actor (e.g. sometimes, it is suggesting a cleavage or a group at whom a policy is directed), but where scholars are describing or suggesting political action, they should be careful in their use of ethnic labels. I suggest that it would be more productive to study the specific contexts, intentions and actions of individuals and institutions that might consider indigeneity as being part of their identity.

While there is much research and writing on Māori self-determination, little of it focuses on how Māori individuals and organisations conceive the necessary antecedent to self-determination; Māori political agency. To remedy this research gap, we explored the political aspirations of Māori individuals with a research method built to study such subjective topics: Q method. Combining Q method with some practical innovations from Kaupapa Māori Research method, we developed a unique way of researching the stories our participants tell themselves about politics. Our results suggest some Māori individuals do think of politics as a collective endeavour as the self-determination literature suggests, but just as often Māori collective forums and other non-Māori political institutions are seen as barriers to Māori individual and collective political agency and thus to Māori self-determination. We also found that Māori view the political autonomy and participation necessary for self-determination as possible in numerous diverse spaces, suggesting the focus on low voter turnout amongst Māori in the literature is missing the point: the stories told by this research suggest Māori individuals perceive their political agency to be hindered, not by majoritarian politics of non-Māori, but by Māori and non-Māori elites.

The guaranteed Mäori seats are a distinguishing and controversial feature of New Zealand’s democracy. In recent years, a number of reports, commentators and politicians have called for the seats to be abolished on the grounds that they are no longer “needed” in New Zealand’s proportional electoral system. These claims are usually grounded in principles of equality. This paper makes the opposite claim: that principles of equality create convincing and coherent justifications for the Mäori seats. Drawing on feminist theories of representation, particularly the work of Iris Marion Young, Melissa Williams and Anne Phillips, this paper argues that the Mäori seats provide crucial mechanisms of accountability that ensure the fidelity of Mäori representatives to their constituencies. This notion of accountability has been largely absent in debates about the Mäori seats and challenges arguments against the seats that are based solely on perceived “need” relative to proportionate presence.

As government policy settings have become more responsive to aspirations of Indigenous communities and researchers are more sensitive to the concerns of Indigenous communities, the research environment has become more conducive to understanding the cultural implications of genomic research. CELSI-us is a tongue-in-cheek reference to taking the temperature of the relationship between genomic researchers and Indigenous communities. If we create friction, then the temperature rises. But if we engage in a culturally responsive manner, then we take the heat out of the relationship and can focus on achieving mutually beneficial outcomes. This has been the focus of our work to date, and we hope that the guidelines we have produced make this challenging path easier for others to traverse.

This article explores the tensions one research team has faced in securing appropriate governance or stewardship (which we refer to as kaitiakitanga) of research data. Whilst ethical and regulatory frameworks exist which provide a minimum standard for researchers to meet when working with Maori, what our experience has highlighted is there is currently a “governance” gap in terms of who should hold stewardship of research data collected from Maori individuals or collectives. In the case of a project undertaken in the traditional healing space, the organisation best placed to fulfil this governance role receives no funding or support to take on such a responsibility; consequently by default, this role is being borne by the research team until such time as capacity can be built and adequate resourcing secured. In addition, we have realised that the tensions played out in this research project have implications for the broader issue of how we protect traditional knowledge in a modern intellectual property law context, and once again how we adequately support those, often community-based organisations, who work at the interface between Indigenous knowledge and the Western world.

Gene editing is arguably the most significant recent addition to the modern biotechnology toolbox, bringing both profoundly challenging and enabling opportunities. From a technical point of view the specificity and relative simplicity of these new tools has broadened the potential applications. However, from an ethical point of view it has re-ignited the debates generated by earlier forms of genetic modification. In New Zealand gene editing is currently considered genetic modification and is subject to approval processes under the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA). This process requires decision makers to take into account Māori perspectives. This article outlines previously articulated Māori perspectives on genetic modification and considers the continuing influence of those cultural and ethical arguments within the new context of gene editing. It also explores the range of ways cultural values might be used to analyse the risks and benefits of gene editing in the Aotearoa New Zealand context. Methods used to obtain these perspectives consisted of (a) review of relevant literature regarding lessons learned from the responses of Maori to genetic modification, (b) interviews of selected ‘key Maori informants’ and (c) surveys of self-selected individuals from groups with interests in either genetics or environmental management. The outcomes of this pilot study identified that while Māori informants were not categorically opposed to new and emerging gene editing technologies a priori, they suggest a dynamic approach to regulation is required where specific uses or types of uses are approved on a case by case basis. This study demonstrates how the cultural cues that Māori referenced in the genetic modification debate continue to be relevant in the context of gene editing but that further work is required to characterize the strength of various positions across the broader community.

The number of referenda taking place in established democracies has been increasing, but oftentimes the use of referenda is controversial. This paper utilises two New Zealand national probability mail surveys collected before (2015; n = 901) and after (2016; n = 1350) the controversial flag change referendums initiated by Prime Minister John Key. We found that support for referenda increased from 54.5% in 2015 to 70.7% in 2016. We examined how demographics, party vote, political attitudes, and support for changing the flag related to change in support for referenda Younger age groups and those with moderate levels of education had larger increases in support for referenda. We did not find any evidence of ‘loser effects’ as National voters and flag change supporters were just as likely to increase in support for referenda as other voters and those opposing change, respectively. In summary, the results of this paper show that despite controversy, referenda have become more popular, especially among certain groups.

Bauböck’s (2005, 2009) concept of “stakeholdership” provides a theoretical framework for the extension of political rights to “external citizens” who live outside the territorial boundaries of the polity of which they are members. But is this concept useful in developing normative claims for external citizenship rights of indigenous peoples, who are widely recognised as having “citizensplus” status in their nation-state of origin? This article offers an original contribution to political theory by drawing together both the indigenous rights and the external citizenship literatures to analyse the specific case of expatriate Māori living in Australia. It finds that Bauböck’s (2005, 2009) stakeholdership criteria are more useful for framing proposals for an eighth Māori electorate seat than funding for te reo Māori in Australia. But, overall, his concept provides useful insights into what plausible normative claims can be made for external citizenship rights on behalf of Māori living in Australia.

Māori domestic violence issues were examined by consideration of convictions for assaults on females and children over the last 27 years. Assault convictions increased substantially from the mid 80s to the mid 90s, fell off, and today continues its upward trend. Māori now account for more convictions than any other ethnic group in New Zealand including Europeans. It is time to stop and reconsider the problem of domestic violence because it is quite clear that current policies aimed at ameliorating the problem may not be working. The data indicates that there are social factors that influence Māori domestic violence, factors that should be identifiable, but for the moment remain largely unknown. The progression of domestic violence as measured by convictions over the last 27 years clearly indicate that the problem is amenable to social intervention if only the right interventions can be identified. Changes in the conviction rates for violent crimes and assaults against females and children coincided with the introduction of the Children’s, Young Person’s, and Their Families Act of 1989, and the introduction of the Domestic Violence Act of 1995 suggesting that government legislation could have influenced the conviction rates. Following the introduction of the Domestic Violence Act in 1995 the conviction rate of Māori offenders increased substantially above that of Pākehā forcing one to ask the question summarized in the title of this paper. In addition, the Sentencing Act of 2002 coincided with an upsurge in convictions of Mäori for domestic violence offenses suggesting that the higher rates of Mäori convictions might be linked more to the manner in which Statutes are interpreted by the criminal justice system than to a sudden behavioural change in Mäori. The data suggests the possibility of discriminatory application of the law against Mäori by the courts that deal with domestic violence issues. Unemployment is another factor that was also considered, but the relationship between unemployment and domestic violence is not an obvious one and, in fact, based on the non-alignment of unemployment with violence convictions, unemployment may not be a driver for domestic violence at all. Current approaches to the problem of Māori domestic violence are at present speculative, and without understanding the driving forces behind the phenomenon those programmes may be limited in their success.

Nineteenth-century British missionaries and the colonial government in New Zealand adopted a policy of assimilation of Maori into Pakeha (European) culture through actively discouraging Maori language, belief systems and culture. Central to the goal of assimilation was a Native School policy which in particular, emphasised the ‘Europeanising’ of young Maori. Church-run schools for Maori, which were subsidised by the state, aimed to return young Maori to their homes to model a Christian Pakeha lifestyle. This article argues that it was Maori girls, rather than Maori boys who were viewed as critical agents of change in the transformation of Maori society and that the colonial curriculum they were taught led to a political socialisation of generations of Maori women.

Studies of multiethnic families often assume the ethnic identification of children with the minority group results from the minority parent. This study examines an alternate view that mainstream parents also play an important role in transmitting minority ethnicity. It explores this argument using data from New Zealand on the ethnic labels mothers assign to their Maori-European children. It finds that European mothers are just as disposed as Maori mothers to designate their child as Maori, either exclusively or in combination. Two explanations, grounded in ethnic awareness and gendered inheritance, are proposed. Although neither satisfactorily predicts maternal designation decisions, the readiness of European mothers to identify their child as Maori underscores their role in diffusing Maori ethnicity.

In this situation report I highlight how Te Tiriti o Waitangi is relevant to state and Mäori regulation related to the COVID-19 pandemic, suggesting also that it was somewhat ignored by Aotearoa New Zealand’s state institutions during the country’s initial response. Focusing on the te reo text of Te Tiriti as the constitutionally and legally primary text of the Treaty of Waitangi, I argue, first, that Te Tiriti requires joint Mäori and state regulation over the territories and peoples of Aotearoa New Zealand, including with respect to the COVID-19 pandemic. Second, Te Tiriti requires state government to regulate equitably and, third, it requires state government not to interfere unreasonably with taonga Mäori and our culture. The government needs to do more in its COVID-19 regulatory response to comply with Te Tiriti, and therefore to act constitutionally and with legitimacy.

The current model of ethical governance in research involving humans in the social sciences and humanities relies on prospective ethics review in ensuring that research in conducted ethically. One of its key features is distrust to researchers and their initiatives regardless of the subject matter, discipline, research methodology or settings, sources of funding, or researcher's experience. This article discusses the New Brunswick Declaration on Research Ethics adopted by the participants of the Ethics Rupture: Alternatives to Research-Ethics Review Summit in 2013. In particular, it provides background for the regulatory capture of the social sciences by the biomedical institutions of ethics review. It concludes by examining the limitations of the Declaration, and offers a set of principles for the development of the New Brunswick Declaration following its discussion at the Ethics in Practice: Tensions around Ethics Review and Maori Consultation Conference at the University of Otago in Dunedin in May 2015.

Using indigenous citizenship as a frame, the article examines the deeply ambiguous effects of globalisation for indigenous peoples in the Antipodes. We demonstrate that processes of economic globalisation have had an impact upon New Zealand Maori and Australian Aboriginals in ways that have heightened their vulnerability and undermined their citizenship entitlements. However, we also argue that Maori and Aboriginal peoples have used the reforms of state practice brought about by globalisation to gain greater control over their existence.

Reforms of local government legislation in the United Kingdom (2000) and in New Zealand (2002) both introduced well-being powers. The UK reform gave local government a new power to promote social, economic and environmental well-being, but New Zealand added a fourth dimension - cultural well-being. This paper examines the background to New Zealand's 'quadruple bottom line' approach. It explains that it was the result of policymakers in New Zealand grappling for 25 years with the question of how to give effect to what the Town and Country Planning Act 1977 described as 'the relationship of the Maori people and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands'. New Zealand's legislation requires a fully integrated approach by decision-makers using the well-being power, and the essay concludes with a discussion of how this has provided a forum for contests and compromises over cultural well-being to take place within a framework of democratic local decision-making by communities.

The Covid-19 lockdown over March to May 2020 meant households became their own “bubbles”, with residents physically interacting only with those in their household and staying close to home. Māori leaders recognised the potential of the lockdown to exacerbate whānau vulnerability due to confinement, financial hardship and, depending on their household, issues of crowding or isolation. Steps were quickly taken to support households with care packages, health care and social connectivity. This paper describes these initiatives as mahi aroha and argues that housing is a foundation from which Māori go out into the world and add meaning and quality to the lives of others. If the mahi aroha of Māori during a lockdown or other crisis is to be sustained into the future, then access to quality, affordable housing must be ensured for Māori essential workers.

Māori land data produced through colonial systems of dispossession lack interoperability, preventing kin-based communities from tracking their land. Our novel approach to repatriate and harmonise historic land data traces the history of the 45,500 acre Opuatia Block allocated to hapū Ngāti Tiipa in 1866, following the confiscation of 1.2 million acres of Waikato land. Ngāti Tiipa resisted Crown and settler pressures for 30 years, but 80% of Opuatia was alienated within a decade. We discuss the devastation of ‘judicial raupatu’ and the implications of this work for hapū data sovereignty and wider international efforts to achieve Indigenous data sovereignty.

Background and objectives: ‘Race’ and ethnicity data have become increasingly institutionalised within health research about indigenous peoples. While these data are critical to monitoring the differential distribution of risks and benefits in racialised societies, their uncritical and under-theorised use can perpetuate harmful biologically-deterministic and essentialist approaches to indigenous health. Additionally, indigenous rights and interests in data about us are often overlooked, with issues of indigenous data governance unresolved. The workshop objectives are to: Develop skills to critique uncritical use of ‘race’/ethnicity in indigenous health researchProvide examples from Aotearoa/New Zealand of frameworks or principles of indigenous data sovereignty

In the last decade iwi have begun to shift their focus from challenging the state to developing internal capacity. In so doing, the need for accurate, relevant data on iwi populations has been amplified. Using Waikato-Tainui as a case study, we examine the potential gaps between the statistical needs of iwi in a postsettlement context and the official data available to them. Our analysis uses two time points: 1996, shortly after the raupatu settlement, and 2006, the most recent census. Comparing data from the Waikato-Tainui register with those from the 1996 and 2006 censuses, we find significant variation in the parameters and characteristics of Waikato-Tainui in official statistics versus the tribe’s own register. We discuss some of the implications of these gaps and suggest ways in which the statistical needs of iwi could be better met. Our key recommendation is that the existing iwi question in the census be expanded to prompt for tribal registration status. This change would better align official data with the concept of membership used by iwi authorities and yield data that are more relevant for their policy and planning needs.