Your search

This paper explores associations between crime reporting and Maori ethnicity in a large representative sample of newspaper items gathered in Aotearoa New Zealand between November 2007 and April 2008, using content, thematic and discursive analyses and audience interpretations. The association of Maori and crime was prominent in these newspapers and Maori were frequently labelled as possible or actual perpetrators of crime on superficial judgements, often by victims. This practice associates Maori with all accounts of crime and embeds crime as a background for all other items about Maori. In contrast, newspaper coverage of Pakeha perpetrators of a crime against a Maori organisation worked to valorise the convicted thieves. This embedding of crime as a background to other stories about Maori, the pervasive but unacknowledged Pakeha1 norms, and media positioning of Maori as a threat in non-crime stories, is central to hegemonic discourses of Maori-Pakeha relations. Focus groups participants indicated that these discourses support real-world marginalisation and discrimination against Maori in Aotearoa New Zealand.

Policies increasingly reinforce the self-determination of Indigenous peoples, but issues remain around group definitions. Colonization has led to (de)identification with Māori (New Zealand's Indigenous peoples) identity markers. We explore differences between Māori on combinations of descent, ethnicity and Iwi (extended kinship group) knowledge in the 2013 Census, and self-reported discrimination. There were six groups within the Māori descent population: two did not know their Iwi – some identified solely as Māori ethnicity (2.8 per cent) – or Māori plus another ethnicity(-ies; 6.8 per cent); two did not identify as Māori ethnicity: more named their Iwi (7.2 per cent), than not (6.9 per cent); the largest groups knew their Iwi and identified as Māori ethnicity, either solely (30.8 per cent), or alongside another ethnicity(-ies; 34.3 per cent). We found a pattern of differences across demographics and discrimination, highlighting the complexity of Māori identity and the need to account for differences within Indigenous groups.

A content analysis of editorial items about Māori issues and the Treaty of Waitangi in 14 Suburban Newspaper publications in Auckland and Northland found a low proportion of articles about these issues, despite high proportions of Māori resident in several areas served by these publications. Stories included a higher proportion of apparent news releases compared to a national sample of non-daily papers. Māori perspectives came largely from sources representing pan-Māori non-government organisations; Suburban Newspapers used a low proportion of iwi and hapū sources compared with other community papers. Use of te reo Māori was low, and there were no signs of attempts to support readers in learning or increasing their understanding of te reo Māori. This article concludes that Māori and non-Māori readers are poorly served by the poverty of Suburban Newspapers’ reporting of Treaty and Māori issues.

To be Māori is to be political. Our history is filled with political struggles and victories. These struggles, originating from experiences of colonisation and assimilation, have greatly influenced what it is to be Māori today. This thesis explores the relationship between Māori ethnic identity, and political attitudes and outcomes. In this thesis, I present five studies (across four published papers and one full manuscript) which validate the Multidimensional Model of Māori Identity and Cultural Engagement (MMM-ICE2). I focus particular attention on the scale’s Socio- Political Consciousness dimension, and illustrate the links between identity and politics for Māori. The MMM-ICE2 is a seven-dimension scaled designed with Māori, by Māori, and for Māori to measure Māori ethnic identity (Houkamau & Sibley, 2010, 2015a). In the first two studies, I focus on using psychometric techniques to further validate the MMM-ICE2 as a measurement tool. Firstly, I use random intercept exploratory factor analysis to show that the scale is not vulnerable to acquiescent responding (yea-saying; Greaves, Houkamau, & Sibley, 2017). The second study uses multigroup confirmatory factor analysis to illustrate that the MMM-ICE2 shows reasonable measurement equivalence across diverse Māori groups (Greaves, Manuela et al., 2017). In the third study of the thesis, I demonstrate that Māori, broadly defined, are more likely to vote for the political left – the Labour, Green, and New Zealand First parties – over the centre-right National Party (Greaves, Robertson et al., 2017). The results lay the groundwork for two further studies, which demonstrate the construct validity of the Socio-Political Consciousness dimension of the scale by predicting a range of political attitudes and behaviours. Study Four shows that, above and beyond the effects of demographics, Māori enrolled to vote on the Māori electoral roll were higher on the Socio-Political Consciousness and Group Membership Evaluation dimensions (Greaves, Osborne, Houkamau, & Sibley, 2017). Additionally, in Study Five, I demonstrate that higher Socio-Political Consciousness for Māori is related to higher levels of support for Māori rights protests, the left-wing Green Party, and the Māori-issue focussed, Māori and Mana political parties (Greaves, Sengupta et al., 2017). Yet, lower levels of Socio-Political Consciousness were related to higher support for the right-wing National Party. Taken together, these studies show that the MMM-ICE2 scale and the Socio-Political Consciousness dimension can predict important, realworld political outcomes and attitudes for Māori. Finally, I discuss the contributions that the papers in this thesis have made to the literature, and the inevitable limitations of the research. I then provide future research directions for the study of quantitative Māori identity and for Māori political participation more generally. I finish with reflections on the process of writing this thesis and on being an emerging Māori quantitative researcher.

The article argues that Maori political participation in New Zealand constitutes a positive example of how the current international standards on indigenous political participation can be implemented at the national level. Notwithstanding the weaknesses of the system and the challenges laying ahead, the combination of the Mixed Member Proportional electoral system, dedicated Maori seats and the establishment of the Maori Party have ensured a Maori voice in Parliament and have broadened the possibilities of effective indigenous participation in the political life of the state. Such state practice that implements the 2007 UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples firmly confirms the position of the Declaration within current international law.

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.

In 2004 the appointment of a Coordinating Minister Race Relations, signalled a shift in elite Māori policy thinking from a long-standing cautious bipartisan acceptance of selfdetermination towards a re-emergent assimilationist ‘one law’ for all discourse. The question simplistically posed by the Leader of the Opposition was should welfare entitlements be granted on the basis of need or race (Brash 2004)? Beneath this question lies an ideological assumption which privileges assimilation over indigeneity as the basis of Māori participation in public affairs. This paper therefore asks: are Māori peoples with rights, or individuals with needs? Is there a deeper politics of indigeneity providing a legitimate foundation for rights which are not necessarily superior to the rights of citizenship, but are important and distinguishable adjuncts? These questions transcend the issue of welfare entitlements to wider questions about the nature and terms of Māori belonging to the liberal polity. The paper highlights the political tension between government attempts to remove indigeneity from the public agenda in response to populist pressure and a pragmatic acceptance that New Zealand ‘needs’ Māori to increase their contribution to the national economy and that the realisation of this goal may in fact depend on the fuller citizenship imagined by the politics of indigeneity.

This paper identifies three discourses that are prominent in contemporary Treaty of Waitangi policy debate, each with significantly different implications for Maori political status within the modern nation-state. At one extreme the Treaty's significance is exaggerated by overemphasis on partnership as an implicit Treaty principle. At another extreme the Treaty's significance is understated by an assimilationist position that denies the Treaty's relevance to Indigenous rights which, in turn, imposes serious constraint on the extent to which partnership can actually develop into comprehensive policy practice. An alternative position is one that sees the Treaty, which is supported in international law, as affirming a twofold conception of citizenship as the basis of both individual and collective Maori rights.

This paper examines contemporary debates in Maori politics by responding to the argument of the former leader of the opposition National party, Don Brash, that Maori public policy is most properly based on "need" alone because indigenous status offers no "rights" beyond those of common national citizenship. The paper's alternative argument is that the politics of indigeneity and associated theories of self-determination provide a way of avoiding a general belief that addressing need is all that is required to include Maori fairly in the national polity. It is argued that Maori ought to enjoy rights of indigeneity as the basis of an inclusive, cohesive and fair society. /// Cette étude examine certains débats dans le domaine de la politique maorie en répondant aux propos de l'ancien chef du parti National, Don Brash, selon qui la politique publique maorie se baserait le plus aptement sur la notion du seul 'besoin', le statut de peuple indigène ne conférant aucun 'droit' au-delà de ceux qu'accorde la citoyennenté nationale régulière. Nous proposons par contre que la politique de l'indigénéité et les théories de l'auto-détermination qui y sont associées constituent un moyen de parer à une croyance généralisée qu'il suffirait de suppléer au besoin pour inclure avec justice les Maoris dans la politique nationale. Nous démontrerons que dans une société inclusive, cohésive et juste, les Maoris devraient jouir des droits accordés par l'indigénéité.

Reconciliation brings together Christological and anthropological dimensions of human thought to illustrate the nexus between religious principles and political means. For the state reconciliation is concerned with social cohesion and political stability. For the church, it extends the sacramental notion of reconciliation between God and penitent to public relationships. This article examines Roman Catholic contributions to secular reconciliation debates. It shows how religious precepts create moral imperatives to engagement with secular discourses as a necessary element of Christian mission. It also argues that the church’s role in the disruption of indigenous societies creates an additional moral imperative to engage in reconciliation as mission and to articulate a Christian vision of indigenous rights.

Indigenous peoples inevitably associate globalization with imperial expansion and the colonization of their territories. One associated scholarly view is that globalization's focus on capital accumulation sets aside indigenous cultural priorities to undermine self-determining authority over lands and resources (Fenelon and Hall, 2008; Friedman, 1999; Kelsey, 2005a, 2005b; Stewart-Harawira, 2005). Alternatively, globalization is an ambiguous paradox also providing significant benefits to indigenous peoples. In two very different Pacific countries, Fiji and New Zealand, the globalization of political and jurisprudential thought on the rights of indigeneity provides a significant counter to state assertions of absolute sovereignty. Globalization creates economic opportunities to reduce indigenous dependence on the state and in its contemporary expression is less significant than domestic factors in inhibiting indigenous aspirations. Inevitablemente, la población indígena asocia a la globalización con la expansión imperial y la colonización de sus territorios. Una visión académica asociada es que el enfoque de la globalización en la acumulación de capital, desestima las prioridades culturales indígenas para entorpecer la autoridad autodeterminante sobre la tierra y los recursos. (Fenelon and Hall, 2008; Friedman, 1999; Kelsey, 2005a; 2005b; Stewart-Harawira, 2005). Por otro lado, la globalización es una paradoja ambigua que también provee beneficios a las poblaciones indígenas. En dos países diferentes del Pacífico, Fiyi y Nueva Zelanda, la globalización del pensamiento político o jurisprudencial sobre los derechos del indigenismo, provee una lucha importante contra las afirmaciones estatales de una soberanía absoluta. La globalización crea oportunidades económicas para reducir la dependencia indígena del estado y su expresión contemporánea es menos importante que los factores domésticos que inhiben las aspiraciones indígenas. 伴随着帝国的扩张和其领土的被殖民化，土著居民无可避免地被卷入全球化中。一种相关学术观点认为，全球化对资本积累的关注不顾土著民的文化优先权，损害了土著民对土地和资源的自决权力。（Fenelon 和 Hall, 2008; Friedman, 1999; Kelsey, 2005a; 2005b; Stewart-Harawira, 2005）另一种观点认为，全球化是一种不确定的悖论, 也为土著民带来了巨大利益。在两个截然不同的太平洋国家———斐济和新西兰，关于土著民权利的政治和法律思考的全球化对国家声称的绝对主权提出了挑战。全球化为土著民减少对国家的依赖创造了经济机遇；而且在抑制土著民的权利主张方面，其当今表现作用不及国内因素显著。 원주민들은 불가피하게 세계화를 제국주의적 팽창과 영토의 식민화와 연계시킨다. 관련된 학술적 견해는 자본축적에 초점을 맞춘 세계화가 토지와 자원에 대해서 자결 권위를 약화시키 위하여 원주민들이 문화적으로 우선시 하는 사항을 제켜 놓는다는 것이다 (Fenelon and Hall, 2008; Friedman, 1999; Kelsey, 2005a; 2005b; Stewart-Harawira, 2005). 대안적으로 세계화는 원주민들에게 상당한 이익을 가져다 주는 애모보호한 패러독스이다. 서로 다른 두 태평양 국가인 피지와 뉴질란드에서 원주민의 권리에 대한 정치적, 법률적 사유의 세계화는 절대적 주권을 주장하는 것에 대한 중요한 반론을 제공한다. 세계화는 국가에 의존하는 원주민들의 종속성을 약화시키는 경제적인 기회를 만들고 또한 현대적인 표현으로 내생적인 갈망을 금지시키는데 국내적인 요인들보다 덜 중요하다.

Abstract Christian public theology extends reconciliation beyond its principal sacramental concern for relationships between God and penitent to the construction of ‘socially just’ public relationships for the settlement of intra-national conflict. In theological terms, reconciliation brings public relationships into what Hally calls ‘the Christ narrative of passion, death and resurrection’ in which the perpetrators of injustice repent and seek forgiveness. This article introduces the conflicts that these discourses aim to resolve in Australia, Fiji and New Zealand and explains and contrasts reconciliation’s relative importance in each of these jurisdictions. Moreover, the article’s cross-jurisdictional comparison shows reconciliation’s limits and possibilities as public theology, and argues that in Australia and New Zealand it has helped to create political environments willing to admit indigenous perspectives on a range of policy issues. On the contrary, however, the article also shows that the Fijian churches have distorted the concept of reconciliation to support political imperatives that are difficult to rationalize theologically, even though they are presented by the churches as being concerned with religious goals.

This chapter draws on New Zealand examples to contextualize its assessment of reconciliation as public memory in Australian policy discourse. The Treaty of Waitangi has provided the rationale and framework for successive New Zealand governments to say sorry for acts of aggression against Maori tribes. In New Zealand, sorrow is expressed through Acts of Parliament that serve not only as instruments of restitution but as symbols of public memory. Faith and memory are similarly important to wider Christian treaty discourses, as it was Anglican missionaries who drafted the agreement and translated it from English to Maori. The Pastoral letter is drawn into Catholic public memory to justify the development of a public theology of reconciliation. Self-determination belongs first and foremost to individuals, but in Catholic teaching the human person is fundamentally social and exercises the rights and responsibilities of their human being in association with others.

A framework/model based on Māori knowledge, values and perspectives is presented that distinguishes ‘cultural values’ from ‘cultural services’ and extends the definition of cultural values across the whole ecosystem services framework. Māori aspirations and well-being are interdependent on ecosystems and ecosystem services. Ultimately Māori wish to use these ecosystem approaches and frameworks to increase participation and inclusion in decision-making, to achieve multidimensional aspirational goals and desired indigenous outcomes.

" On 15 of October 2007, three hundred police officers dressed in full riot gear, including balaclavas and sunglasses, raided the township of Ruatoki which lies at the northern end of the Ureweras. At the same time as Ruatoki was being lockeddown, police raids were taking place in other parts of the country. By the end of the day, 17 people were reported as arrested; four from Wellington, six in Auckland, one in Palmerston North, one in Hamilton and five in the Bay of Plenty area. The 'global war on terror', launched in the US five years earlier, had finally arrived in New Zealand "--Publisher website., Contributors: Pou Temara, Moana Jackson, Sue Abel, Maria Bargh, Te Urikore Biddle, Luke Crawford, Rawinia Higgins, Richard Hill, Brendan Hokowhitu, Craig Innes, Tonga Karena, Danny Keenan, Ocean Rīpeka Mercier, Dominic O'Sullivan, Māmari Stephens and Alice Te Punga Somerville.

Indigenous peoples find themselves locked in power struggles with states and transnational actors who resist their claims, raising important questions in theory and practice. Edited by Marc Woons.