Your search

Resource type
  • This article considers the relevance of identity and history for Māori development policy. It explores community-based priorities for socioeconomic development in defining “gaps” and compares this with programmes initiated and implemented by government. This article argues that major gaps are historically based and provide clues for present gaps that are measured cross-culturally in, for example, education, health, housing, justice and employment, as well as for some gaps that are not represented in statistical analysis and are inadequately considered in officialdom. Moreover, cultural principles remain fundamental to individual and group identity and, therefore, socio-economic and political survival. Thus, some major gaps are measured internally within the group and are concerned with cultural vitality. However, in order for cultural principles to have proper legitimacy and development programmes to have rigour, it is necessary to consider carefully various shades of meaning and establish which dimensions are applicable to particular gapclosing policies. And while history and identity are essential features of community development policies, it is important that there is a clear relationship between analysis, policy and practice.

  • 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.

  • This paper argues that self-determination to the greatest extent possible is a legitimate aspiration for Maori people. It is argued that in education this requires a philosophical and policy response more focused on Maori autonomy than can be provided within the bicultural framework that has lately informed Maori relationships with other actors in the education arena. The paper considers the place of kohanga reo, kura kaupapa Maori and wananga in relation to broader Maori aspirations for self-determination and discusses proposals that these aspirations be furthered through the establishment of a Maori Education Authority. It is also argued that opportunities for self-determination in New Zealand are compromised by the government's unwillingness to alter a tightly controlled centralised education market to provide genuine Māori autonomy over what type of education might be available and to what end.

Last update from database: 10/23/26, 4:11 AM (UTC)