Your search

Worldwide, large amounts of administrative data are collected within official statistics systems on Indigenous Peoples. These data are primarily used for government and state policy purposes as opposed to by Indigenous Peoples to support Indigenous agendas (Taylor & Kukutai, 2017). In Aotearoa me Te Waipounamu New Zealand, Māori need high quality data to develop evidence-based policies and programs and to monitor government policies that impact on Māori. In this methodological paper, we describe uses of administrative data for Māori and current barriers to its use. We outline the development of a novel administrative data infrastructure and future longitudinal study. By explicating our Indigenous initiated, designed and controlled data project, we make a methodological contribution to Indigenous Data Sovereignty and Kaupapa Māori (Māori worldview) epidemiology.

Introduction. Although opportunities exist for positive experiences in research, Māori in New Zealand, like other indigenous people colonised by Europeans in the nineteenth century, have also been subject to research and associated policies that have had long-lasting negative consequences. Researchers have subsequently been challenged by Māori to conduct research that is acceptable, accountable and relevant. Much of this debate has taken place within the framework of the Treaty of Waitangi, a treaty of cession signed between Māori and British Crown representatives in 1840. Nowadays, health and health research statutes exist that require researchers to respond to the ‘principles’ of the Treaty. Few practical examples of how health researchers have undertaken this have been published. Aims. We examine how, in developing a national study of injury outcomes, we responded to the Treaty. Our study, the Prospective Outcomes of Injury Study, aims to quantitatively identify predictors of disability following injury and to qualitatively explore experiences and perceptions of injury outcomes. Discussion. Responses to the Treaty included: consultation with Māori groups, translation of the questionnaire into te reo Māori, appointment of interviewers fluent in te reo Māori, sufficient numbers of Māori participants to allow Māori-specific analyses and the inclusion of a Māori-specific qualitative component. While this article is located within the New Zealand context, we believe it will resonate with, and be of relevance to, health researchers in other former settler societies. We do not contend this project represents an ‘ideal’ model for undertaking population-based research. Instead, we hope that by describing our efforts at responding to the Treaty, we can prompt wider debate of the complex realities of the research environment, one which is scientifically, ethically and culturally located.

For the past decade, collaboration has been the preferred method of devising land and water policy in Aotearoa New Zealand to achieve agreed outcomes. However, the use of collaboration in policymaking is at a crossroads, as some argue it is unrealistic to expect stakeholders and tangata whenua with competing interests to work in partnership on contentious policy issues. To help clarify the future direction of collaboration, this paper provides authorising agencies (those with responsibility for the policy problems) with prompts to reflect ex ante on the advantages and disadvantages of pursuing collaboration. Based on a retrospective review of collaborations in New Zealand’s land and water policymaking, and a two-day symposium with collaboration practitioners, we identify situations that are potentially less suited to collaboration owing to factors that are challenging to overcome through process design. Four issues that affect the success of collaborations are identified: the nature of the policy problem, the personal and collective qualities of those involved, power relationships, and the collaborative process. Finally, we draw together practical lessons from history, the symposium, and the literature to develop a list of questions for authorising agencies to use to reflect on the advantages and disadvantages of pursuing collaboration.

One of the great challenges for indigenous and non-indigenous entrepreneurs in the twenty-first century is to move beyond profit maximisation as an acceptable modality for doing business and gravitate towards the concept of socially optimal outcomes, where maximising community well-being and minimising externalities to the natural environment and social justice are paramount. We present findings from a case-study analysis of M?ori enterprises that demonstrate a wealth of successfully kaupapa M?ori (M?ori ideology)-attuned strategy and policy. The case studies provide practical examples of the incorporation and expression of kaupapa M?ori values into strategy and policy of M?ori enterprises. We also identify the numerous challenges to implementing kaupapa M?ori in the management of M?ori Asset Holding Institutions and offer a way forward. Although the case studies are context specific, they provide some key principles and learning that can guide the greater uptake of kaupapa M?ori entrepreneurship.

In First World colonised nations such as Aotearoa New Zealand and Australia, population statistics form the evidentiary base for how Indigenous peoples are known and `managed' through state policy approaches. Yet, population statistics are not a neut

Governments in multicultural democracies are increasingly being challenged to justify the collection of ethnic and racial data, and the targeted policies they support. Given mounting opposition to ethnicbased policies in New Zealand, it is timely to consider two questions that have arisen from ongoing debate. The first is what criteria ought to apply to determine who is Mäori for policy purposes. The second is which Mäori ought to benefit from targeted policies and programmes. This paper addresses both questions empirically and makes two suggestions: (1) that statistical and legal definitions of Mäori be amended to take account of both self-identified ethnicity and descent; (2) that programmes which seek to militate Mäori disadvantage be oriented towards those who strongly identify as Mäori, since they are the most likely to be in need.

Colonisation has deeply harmed Maori communities, seriously and consistently undermining their vitality, aspirations and potentials, particularly since the 1860s, at inestimable cost to the entire nation. The British arrival in Aotearoa commenced a relationship between two very different peoples that has profoundly influenced their distinct and collective fortunes ever since. Despite manifest breaches of te Tiriti o Waitangi, this relationship has centred settler interests ensuring that Maori sovereignty has been displaced in favour of colonial hegemony, entrenching longstanding, preventable inequities in health and other important domains of social life. In this paper we trace some broad indicators of relational health and wellbeing in Aotearoa and consider how Maori thinking about whenua, health and wellbeing might lead healing opportunities for people and whenua. We outline ways in which a unified, dynamic, relational Maori concept based on whenua as the determinant of health could contribute. We believe this could expand, strengthen and revitalise prevention, protection and promotion approaches, to counter the injustices of colonisation, contribute toward health equity and move toward just, sustainable shared futures for the benefit of all New Zealanders.