Your search

Abstract Aotearoa New Zealand acknowledges mātauranga Māori in the two Acts and one Memorandum of Understanding recognising the ‘personhood’ status of three geographical regions—Te Awa Tupua, Te Urewera and Taranaki Maunga. They blend the legal fiction of corporate personhood with the already always understanding of human-nonhuman kinship and entanglement of M!ori philosophy, Māori knowledge and wisdom, and Māori epistemology. Through kaitiaki (trustees) these three entities have volition in their ongoing maintenance, development negotiations, and ‘land-use’, and ‘the rights, powers, duties and liabilities of a legal person’. These attributes suggest something more than mere volition in self-management and protection: they suggest agency. This article explores the implications of nonhuman agency as potential for political voice. As representatives of entanglement for all being—animal (including human), vegetable and elemental—and as a matter of justice they are, perhaps, obliged to participate in democracy and the nation is, perhaps, obliged to give them a ‘seat at the table’. As political agents with equal status to human and corporate persons Te Awa Tupua, Te Urewera and Taranaki Maunga might unsettle settler politics and challenge the imbalances of the Anthropocene.

This paper argues that stoicism as a central element of whiteness shapes, controls, and ultimately limits the experience and expression of emotion in public space. I explore how this may play out in particular medical settings like hospitals in Aotearoa New Zealand. I argue that working in conjunction with other values of whiteness identified by Myser (2003)—hyper-individualism, a contractual view of relationships, and an emphasis on personal control and autonomy—this makes hospitals emotionally unsafe spaces for Māori and other groups who place high importance in the collective sharing of emotion. Using death and bereavement as an example, I suggest that challenging and addressing stoicism in the structure and performance of whiteness in hospital settings may provide an important point of entry for anti-racism measures and health equity.

The COVID-19 pandemic has inequitably impacted Indigenous communities in the United States. In this emergency state that highlighted existing inadequacies in US government and tribal public health infrastructures, many tribal nations contracted with commercial entities and other organization types to conduct rapid diagnostic and antibody testing, often based on proprietary technologies specific to the novel pathogen. They also partnered with public-private enterprises on clinical trials to further the development of vaccines. Indigenous people contributed biological samples for assessment and, in many cases, broadly consented for indefinite use for future genomics research. A concern is that the need for crisis aid may have placed Indigenous communities in a position to forego critical review of data use agreements by tribal research governances. In effect, tribal nations were placed in the unenviable position of trading short-term public health assistance for long-term, unrestricted access to Indigenous genomes that may disempower future tribal sovereignties over community members' data. Diagnostic testing, specimen collection, and vaccine research is ongoing; thus, our aim is to outline pathways to trust that center current and future equitable relationship-building between tribal entities and public-private interests. These pathways can be utilized to increase Indigenous communities' trust of external partners and share understanding of expectations for and execution of data protections. We discuss how to navigate genomic-based data use agreements in the context of pathogen genomics. While we focus on US tribal nations, Indigenous genomic data sovereignties relate to global Indigenous nations regardless of colonial government recognition.

This literature review has been conducted to consider the various national legislation and international agreements that comprise New Zealand’s Intellectual Property Rights (IP) regime. It will evaluate if and how such legislation and agreements protect and enable Māori IP rights and interests with respect to Māori data, genomic data and mātauranga Māori. The review also identifies some mechanisms that might also enhance Māori control of these types of data. The Westminster approach of legislation in New Zealand and its approach to IP protection based on Copyrights, Patents and Trade Marks are juxtaposed against traditional Maori approaches of communally held ancestral knowledge (mātauranga) passed down through generations (whanaungatanga) based on guardianship and protection (kaitiakitanga) and the self-determination of use of such knowledge (rangatiratanga). Attempting to align tikanga concepts to the Westmionster model of law is challenging as the two share completely different notions of ownership and responsibility. Expectations of protection, to prevent misappropriation and commercialisation by non- Māori of mātauranga Māori and Māori data, extend beyond the parameters of existing IP law, creates a similar disjunct. Genomic Research generates data, some of which can be protected by IP, however researchers working with genetic/genomic data from taonga species have often failed to acknowledge the non-IP interests of Maori. As a result, Maori have taken it upon themselves to advocate for their rights to data through Māori data sovereignty discourse as well as create guidelines for culturally appropriate genomic research with explicit references to data security and management (e.g. Te Mata Ira, Te Nohonga Kaitiaki). Other extra-legal options, such as Biocultural Labelling to alert users where particular data has Māori rights and/or interests, are emerging to maintain create durable provenance data and connect next users of data with the responsible Indigenous communities. Though the intellectual property regime in New Zealand may provide some protections, there are still significant areas where the legal system does not provide sufficient protections for Māori data, taonga species and mātauranga. The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples provides a framework of international support for Indigenous rights, but local government and other home-grown mechanisms are important to enable Māori governance of data. Local approaches Māori Data Sovereignty and Māori Data Governance afford Maori the opportunity to be directly involved as kaitiaki of their mātauranga and assert rangatiratanga over data and its use.

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.

Lana Simmons-Donaldson speaks to University of Auckland Associate Professor Donna Cormack about the dire state of Maori health inequity and her thoughts on the government's health sector reforms.

Colonization fundamentally disrupted Indigenous knowledge systems, establishing epistemic hierarchies that privilege Eurocentric colonial epistemologies and methodologies. In this chapter, the authors explore how epistemic hierarchies are (re)produced in the current context of “big data” and datafication, in particular for mokopuna Māori in the nation-state known as New Zealand (NZ). (We use the concept of “mokopuna Māori” to refer to and position Māori babies, children, and young people within the Māori world as the sacred reflection of our ancestors and a blueprint for future generations.) The chapter then considers the possibilities for Indigenous epistemic justice in the “zone of nonbeing” or beyond the “abyssal line.”

In this article I examine some of the challenges for Māori and Local Government on the path to Treaty-based Local Government relationships. I suggest significant challenges exist in three core areas. The first relates to the attitudes towards the ideas of Treaty-based Local Government and evident in common terminology which has a narrow focus on the identity of Māori as ‘representatives' rather than ‘Treaty partners’. The second area of challenge is in having Māori wards/constituencies established which, when they are established, are symbolically the beginnings of an acknowledgment of Treaty obligations and relationships. The third challenge is the lack of good data which limits understandings of Māori involvement in Local Government. In the second part of the article I ask whether any specific challenges can be seen that might impact on Treaty-based relationships in regard to Māori involvement as candidates and voters in Local Government elections.

Minerals in Aotearoa New Zealand are regulated by the Crown Minerals Act, 1991 (the CMA). Like other statutes in New Zealand, the CMA recognizes Te Tiriti o Waitangi (the Treaty of Waitangi), signed by the British and Māori in 1840, and therefore the relationship between Māori and the lands and resources governed by the Act. The Treaty relationship continues to play a crucial role in conflicts about land and resources and is central to the practice of decolonization for Māori. However, as we argue, the governance of relationships between people and minerals, as foundational elements of material systems, extend much further to the Māori legal orders developed throughout Aotearoa.

Examines two prominent environmental issues – sea level rise and taonga species protection – facing iwi, hapū, Māori and the Crown, exploring the barriers, solutions and positive steps in each area towards a ‘tika transition’ whereby iwi, hapū and Māori (the rangatiratanga sphere) and the Crown (kāwanatanga sphere) exist within distinct and equal political entities, with the rangatiratanga sphere leading and governing tikanga and mātauranga Māori policy and legislation. Source: National Library of New Zealand Te Puna Matauranga o Aotearoa, licensed by the Department of Internal Affairs for re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 New Zealand Licence.

The New Zealand government has been globally praised for its response to Covid-19. Despite the global accolades, little attention has been given to the swift and innovative Māori response to Covid-19. This paper will detail some of this rapid Māori response to Covid-19 in Aotearoa New Zealand and argue the response can be understood as key examples of Māori exercising tino rangatiratanga (self-determination), independent of the government's measures and policies. We suggest that this exploration of tino rangatiratanga during Covid-19 demonstrates central aspects of Māori well-being that move beyond a government focus on statistics as the key measure of well-being and how tikanga Māori (Māori values) are being used to develop successful responses to the global pandemic.

Global disease trackers quantifying the size, spread, and distribution of COVID-19 illustrate the power of data during the pandemic. Data are required for decision-making, planning, mitigation, surveillance, and monitoring the equity of responses. There are dual concerns about the availability and suppression of COVID-19 data; due to historic and ongoing racism and exclusion, publicly available data can be both beneficial and harmful. Systemic policies related to genocide and racism, and historic and ongoing marginalization, have led to limitations in quality, quantity, access, and use of Indigenous Peoples' COVID-19 data. Governments, non-profits, researchers, and other institutions must collaborate with Indigenous Peoples on their own terms to improve access to and use of data for effective public health responses to COVID-19.

Is this the springboard for a bigger resurgence in 2023?