Your search

The genesis of direct negotiation and the fiscal envelope, for the settlement of Maori land claims under the Treaty of Waitangi, is portended in the aim of the National Party's Manifesto for the 1990 election to settle all claims by the year 2,000. To meet that ten year time-line, the National Government decided to set aside a fixed sum for the settlement of all claims. This fiscal cap was signalled in the (Sealords) Deed of Settlement for the Maori Fisheries Claim as the Treaty of Waitangi Settlement Fund. Under this clause, the signatories to the Deed agreed that the Crown had fiscal constraints which restricted its ability to settle other claims. In a memorandum dated 17 March 1992, Doug Graham, Minister in charge of Treaty Claims, recommended to the Cabinet Strategy Committee the policy direct negotiation to settle Maori claims that were well founded. This policy of 'chiefs talking with chiefs' obviates the need for claimants to go through the drawn out process of hearings with the Waitangi Tribunal. It is a seductive scenario which assumes a level playing field between the Crown and tribal negotiators. But it is hardly that as the Whakatahea negotiators discovered after the settlement of the Tainui Claim in 1995.

To standardise the use of a single factor measure of cultural identity based on the cultural indicators developed by Te Hoe Nuku Roa (1996). The single measure of cultural identity proposed in this paper was supported by statistics drawn from a longitudinal study of Maori households, Te Hoe Nuku Roa (n = 650). The measure of cultural identity displayed a normal distribution with a theoretical range of 0 to 18 (where a higher score is consistent with a more secure identity), a mean of 11, and a SD of 2. 7. The measure is expected to be particularly useful in understanding Maori cultural identity within a statistical framework.

The Local Government Act 2002 explicitly requires Māori contributions to local authority decision-making processes. Seven years on, it is timely to review the outcomes of the new statutory provisions and to consider Māori aspirations in relation to local political participation. This paper describes research that was carried out to investigate Māori participation in local elections and other forms of decision-making. Focus groups were conducted with four main types of Māori electors: urban Māori and rural Māori aged 25 years and over, and 18-24 years old Māori engaged in tertiary education or the workforce. The focus groups were part of a wider project on local political participation which explored linkages between what people know about local government and their participation in local government. Focus groups (hui rangahau) proved to be a particularly valuable vehicle for engaging with Māori youth (rangatahi Māori) about their participation in local authority decision-making. The purpose of this paper is to report the findings on the views of rangatahi Māori about local political participation, and offers reflections on the utility of the focus group methodology. The research highlights a number of strategies that local authorities can deploy to reduce the barriers to voting and other forms of participation experienced by Māori youth. Improved engagement with Māori youth is vital to ensure that Māori contributions to decision-making processes do not remain under-developed in future.

Within the indigenous paradigm lies a paradox over what constitutes legitimate Māori authority: Iwi structures are legitimated and recognised by the state, and traditional forms (for example, Hapū and Māori women), have had their authority diminished. Iwi authorities are colonial constructs that diminish the rights of Hapū and Māori women. The manner in which such constructs have come about generally has not involved tribewide debate over important issues in which Hapū and Māori women have an interest. For their legitimacy, emergent self-governing structures will need to be grounded in principles that ensure legitimate representation of Māori people and not socially constructed hybrids of a colonial past. Structures need to recognise Hapū and Māori women in the formulation, anything less than this will trigger a legitimation crisis.

The term 'sustainable development' has been widely used since the latter part of the 20th century. The concept implies economic and social development, economic growth, and environmental responsibility in order to sustain improved standards of living based on economic growth, to achieve some form of social equity, and to manage the environment in a sustainable way. Sustainable development should generally be at a rate that allows future generations to meet their needs without causing degradation of the natural environment, and should avoid economic or social decay. The concept has been debated and criticised by many as being ambiguous, untenable, and difficult to achieve, and frequently labelled part of global capitalism. But the concept provides a challenge to all of us, on how to balance economic, social, and cultural goals, while at the same time safeguarding and responsibly managing the environment for future generations. Attempts by indigenous peoples internationally to achieve sustainable development have been based on holistic approaches and frameworks that seek to balance economic, social, cultural and environmental objectives, and these provide effective models for viable sustainable development approaches. Maori Sustainable Development in Aotearoa-New Zealand is a term often used to describe a pathway to Maori autonomy, self-determination, the building of human and social capacity, as part of a strategic direction to capitalise on opportunities in the 21st century. This paper outlines research undertaken between 1998 and 2002 and funded by the Foundation for Research, Science, and Technology (FRST) in the programme "Maori Sustainable Development in Te Puku o Te Ika", contract UOWX0005, simply referred to as the MSD programme. It focuses on the importance of determining Maori values, a vision, strategic planning and development of information systems as a holistic framework and process method to achieve Maori sustainable development.

There has been, and continues to be, considerable debate about the meaning and intent of different versions of the Treaty of Waitangi and about the extent of its relevance to contemporary New Zealand. It is in this context that a number of organisations and institutions in New Zealand, anxious to demonstrate their positive support for the creation of a just society, have attempted to restructure in ways that allow for a 'partnership' between M ori and P keh . With reference to three different case studies, I argue here that such restructuring, although generally very well intentioned and very welcome, should not be seen - as it frequently is - as an expression of the fulfilment of partnership obligations arising out of the Treaty of Waitangi. To treat organisational restructuring in this way, particularly where it does not provide both 'partners' with an equal right to determine the operational parameters and future direction of the organisation, is to misrepresent (often wholly unintentionally) the nature of the Treaty. Nevertheless, one way of resolving some of the debates concerning the meaning and intent of the Treaty of Waitangi might be to establish a principle of equal partnership in the governance and management of state institutions.

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.

In New Zealand, the Crown and Local Authorities are required to engage with iwi in resource management matters, yet iwi engagement is a widely recognised weakness in many resource management professionals' skillsets. Coloniality permeates many interactions with iwi, and reflects a profession where practitioners' skillsets have not kept pace with developments in resource management legislation that better recognise the rights and interests of mana whenua. This article explores the real‐life impacts of this skill paucity on Ngāi Tahu environmental kaitiaki, and, through a Braided River methodological approach comprised of Kaupapa Māori research and Narrative Inquiry, offers recommendations for best practice mana whenua engagement. The article concludes by discussing the coloniality of planning, and how this impacts practitioners' ability to implement these best practice recommendations.

The English Laws Act, passed in 1858, declared the Laws of England applicable in New Zealand and cemented the hitherto alien ideology of land as property. Part of this ideology was the separation of tangata from whenua along with the separation of ownership of land from ownership of water. Māori, as tangata whenua – people of the land, made no such distinctions. Ownership affects how people ‘manage’ whenua (land), make decisions and account to the legal system. Under English law, financial considerations are at the forefront. In contrast, Māori kaitiakitanga values are concerned with the interests of land, understanding that the best interests of people will follow. Despite stark contrasts between the ideology of land as property and the ethics of kaitiakitanga – obligation, sustainability and nurture – Māori engage with mainstream agencies and lead by example in efforts to promote the wellbeing of people and environments in a unified approach. This paper outlines competing paradigms, changing relationships and challenges faced by communities who seek to nurture and respect whenua in the face of colonization. Interview data from Māori involved in community land-based initiatives illustrates past and present struggles and what some possibilities might be for the future.