Your search

Māori and Pasifika populations in New Zealand experience poorer health outcomes than other New Zealanders. These inequalities are a deeply entrenched injustice. This qualitative study explores the experiences of six Māori and Pasifika leaders on health policy-making advisory committees. All had extensive experience in the health system. They were recruited, provided semi-structured interviews, the data coded, and a thematic analysis undertaken. Our findings show that inequalities in the health system are reproduced in advisory committees. Participants noted their knowledge and interests were devalued and they experienced racism and tokenistic engagement. Some indicated it took considerable effort to establish credibility, be heard, have impact, and navigate advisory meetings, but even then their inputs were marginalised. Health policy advisory committees need deeper engagement and more genuine recognition of Māori and Pasifika knowledge. Māori and Pasifika leaders have constructive solutions for eliminating health inequities that could benefit all New Zealanders.

During the 1980s and 1990s biculturalism was the ascendant political philosophy for managing the relationship between the New Zealand Crown and the indigenous Maori population. Biculturalism understood Maori politics as a partnership between Maori and the state, grounded in the Treaty of Waitangi, the agreement signed in 1840 from which British government was established. Biculturalism was presented as morally superior to multiculturalism which was understood as setting aside Maori Treaty rights and rights of prior occupancy in favour of less substantive rights available to Maori as one of many ethnic minorities. However, a deeper reading of multicultural political theory provides an instructive critique of biculturalism's inherent limits from the perspective of the Maori right to self-determination. It shows why biculturalism's influence waned. It also shows why Matike Mai o Aotearoa, a blueprint for constitutional transformation commissioned by tribal leaders is unlikely to succeed as a contemporary attempt to reassert biculturalism's influence. Multicultural theory is not a panacea for the right to self-determination, but it does not restrict the development of a broader Maori-centred differentiated liberal citizenship in the ways that biculturalism precludes.

Whanau Ora, a social policy initiative designed to build the capacity and capability of Maori families, has been variously described as: a 'revolutionary public-sector initiative', an 'Indigenous policy success story' and as having the transformative power to improve health and social outcomes for Maori. Since its launch in April 2010, Whanau Ora has positively impacted the lives of many of our nation's most vulnerable Maori families. Through a kaupapa Maori lens, this article provides a brief overview of the initiative, the key goals of Whanau Ora and the mechanisms by which these goals were to be attained. It is argued that it reflects a 'paradigm shift' by fundamentally reorienting government thinking about how to improve Maori outcomes through policy. The article examines the success of Whanau Ora by highlighting a number of innovative aspects the National-led government introduced which contributed towards the success of the initiative through the period 2008-2017, as well as areas of tension. The article then turns to explore the likelihood of the Whanau Ora initiative continuing in the future, building on its early success embedding its innovative, empowering and sustainable social policy approach to working with Maori whanau, hapu, Iwi and communities.

The article discusses the history of the political participation of the Maori people of New Zealand in the 19th century which started with the creation of the Maori seats of Parliament under the Maori Representation Act 1867 (MRA). Topics discussed include the incorporation of MRA into the Electoral Act of 1893, the history of their voting rights, practices and election participation, and the issue of giving fair representation to Maori in the House of Parliament in 1862.

Communities of colour are racialised and oppressed differentially by settler colonial states (Saranillio, 2013), yet the discourse of diversity and inclusion that dominates state interactions with communities of colour tends to conflate marginalised groups as equivalent and interchangeable to the detriment of intergroup relations. An approach to community building that recognises racial difference in general and the irreducibility of indigeneity in particular is needed if racialised communities are to create solidarities for transformative change. We engage Indigenous and settler colonial theories to address these imperatives, while noting the distinct character of these frameworks. In particular, we seek to highlight the specificity of indigeneity in settler colonial contexts, such as Aotearoa New Zealand, and to generate a model for relationship building that is not founded on settler colonial ideologies, by drawing on Indigenous concepts. Through thematic analysis of interviews with Māori community leaders, we explore Māori-–tauiwi (settler) of colour (ToC) relations. The results of our qualitative analysis provide evidence for Māori–ToC relations that are consistent with whanaungatanga (good relationships characterised as family-like, based on similar experiences, and bound in conditional solidarity; see Benton, Frame, and Meredith, 2013). Furthermore, we identify the following four aspects of whakawhanaungatanga (relationship building): positioning, power sharing, dialogue and cultural practice. Thus, we suggest whakawhanaungatanga as a Māori approach to relationship building with the potential to generate Indigenous–settler of colour solidarities towards transformative change.

This article considers research conducted on the impact of the Crown’s treaty claims settlement policy on Māori in New Zealand. It provides a brief background to the Treaty of Waitangi and the subsequent British colonisation process that relied on the Doctrine of Discovery in breach of the treaty. It outlines how colonisation dispossessed Māori of 95 percent of their lands and resources, usurped Māori power and authority and left them in a state of poverty, deprivation and marginalisation while procuring considerable wealth, prosperity and privilege for British settlers. The work of the Waitangi Tribunal, the commission of inquiry set up to investigate those breaches, is considered, as is the Crown’s reaction to the 1987 Lands case in developing its treaty claims settlement policy. The Crown unilaterally imposed the policy despite vehement opposition from Māori. Since 1992, it has legislated more than seventy ‘settlements’. The research shows that overall, the process has traumatised claimants, divided their communities, and returned on average less than one percent of their stolen lands. Proposals for constitutional transformation have drawn widespread support from Māori as a solution to British colonisation. United Nations treaty-monitoring bodies have recommended that the government discuss this with Māori

Māori leaders in New Zealand continue the battle to end British colonisation. The aim is to restore the balance between Māori and the Crown guaranteed in the treaty that Māori and the British Crown agreed to in 1840 so that we can live in peace and harmony. Early European visitors subjected our ancestors to numerous atrocities. Relying on the Doctrine of Discovery, they illegitimately usurped our power and dispossessed us, leaving us in a state of poverty, deprivation and marginalisation. They fabricated myths to justify their criminal activities, set up an illegitimate parliament with unfettered powers, passed laws legalising their crimes and then covered it up with amnesia. They established the Waitangi Tribunal in 1975 to inquire into breaches of the treaty, not realising that it would dismantle the myths and look beneath the amnesia. Governments then instigated the ‘treaty claims settlement’ process to extinguish all Māori claims, remove Māori rights and entrench colonisation. Research undertaken has shown that Māori loathe this process and do not accept that settlements are full and final. Research on constitutional transformation has identified a possible solution. The first step towards that goal involves implementing the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

In this paper, we emphasis a critical perspective on inclusive organizations by taking an Indigenous perspective. The diverse economies framework, which acknowledges economic and non-economic activity, provides a lens through which we counter the dominant Western construction of organization and economy, bringing to the fore forms of organization and practice all too often hidden, viewed as alternative and therefore deemed inferior. In this paper we present the notion of alternative economic and organizational forms drawn from Indigenous Maori theories, models and mechanisms of practice. This paper presents preliminary findings from a study that explored the diversity of Maori organizational forms, in this instance a case study on Maori weavers, who use traditional knowledge, to support social, cultural, environmental and economic outcomes for themselves and their communities. Our contribution is two-fold: First we offer insight into the theorisation and practice of organization studies in general by giving weight to the processes and relations of socio-cultural exchange that occur in localised settings. Second, we suggest that socio-cultural system of knowledge and values, offers insight into forms of organization that could be considered to be reflective of inclusive organizations.

Land and natural resources are at the core of conflicts between Indigenous peoples and Settlers in settler-colonial nations. This article explores the coloniality of natural resource law in the context of the New Zealand Crown Minerals Act 1991 (CMA) Block Offer process; the annual tender process for mineral prospecting and exploration. While there is often strong Māori participation, we will argue that Aotearoa New Zealand settler-colonial mining law is structured in such a way that Māori views rarely influence the substantive outcomes of mineral exploration decisions. Through a case study of the 2013 Epithermal Gold Block Offer in the Central North Island, we will explore the factors that might contribute to the mismatch between the level of Māori participation and the influence of Māori views on final decisions in the Block Offer process. We examine how different views are valued by bureaucrats within New Zealand Petroleum and Minerals, a government agency within the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, and explore whether the criteria applied to Māori submissions genuinely and appropriately reflect the full range of interests, aspirations and concerns raised by Māori participants. In particular, we consider how mining regulation is structured to exclude Māori law and jurisdiction in order to uphold settler-colonial authority over key natural resources and extractivist economies. Finally, we consider alternatives to the CMA process and explore the potential to ensure substantive outcomes that better reflect the Māori views and interests. In doing so we point to the need to shift from colonial extractivist models of natural resources law towards Settler-Indigenous partnerships in relation to environmental planning in settler-colonial states.

Purpose This paper aims to examine indigenous governance and economies of iwi Maori (Maori tribes) in Aotearoa New Zealand. Research into persisting inequities amongst iwi that have settled treaty claims and the potential for intervention through new governance models and indigenous entrepreneurship contextualise the paper. Design/methodology/approach Kaupapa Maori (Maori philosophy) is used as an indigenous methodology to facilitate and empower transformative change, underpinned by Maori knowledge, language and culture. A multi-level approach is used to collect data from international, national and local tribal organisations. Validity is established through stakeholder engagement. Findings A central challenge in the post-treaty settlement context is exponentialising tribal capabilities because of the multiple purposes ascribed to post-settled iwi. Four themes, characterised as “unfolding tensions”, offer a critique and basis for solving tribal development challenges: how do tribes create culturally grounded global citizens; how do tribes rebalance wealth creation and wealth distribution; how do tribes recalibrate tribal institutions; and how do tribes embed entrepreneurship and innovation within their economies? Research limitations/implications As data collection is still underway, the paper is conceptual. Practical implications Five strategies to address unfolding tensions are identified for tribes to consider. Social implications Tribal governors and tribal members are implicated in the analysis, as well as the architects of post-treaty settlement governance models. Originality/value The paper contributes to theorising about tribal governance, economies and entrepreneurship.

<em>Gale</em> Academic OneFile includes Decolonising Dignity for Inclusive Democracy by Christine J. Winter. Click to explore.

Gene editing is arguably the most significant recent addition to the modern biotechnology toolbox, bringing both profoundly challenging and enabling opportunities. From a technical point of view the specificity and relative simplicity of these new tools has broadened the potential applications. However, from an ethical point of view it has re-ignited the debates generated by earlier forms of genetic modification. In New Zealand gene editing is currently considered genetic modification and is subject to approval processes under the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA). This process requires decision makers to take into account Māori perspectives. This article outlines previously articulated Māori perspectives on genetic modification and considers the continuing influence of those cultural and ethical arguments within the new context of gene editing. It also explores the range of ways cultural values might be used to analyse the risks and benefits of gene editing in the Aotearoa New Zealand context. Methods used to obtain these perspectives consisted of (a) review of relevant literature regarding lessons learned from the responses of Maori to genetic modification, (b) interviews of selected ‘key Maori informants’ and (c) surveys of self-selected individuals from groups with interests in either genetics or environmental management. The outcomes of this pilot study identified that while Māori informants were not categorically opposed to new and emerging gene editing technologies a priori, they suggest a dynamic approach to regulation is required where specific uses or types of uses are approved on a case by case basis. This study demonstrates how the cultural cues that Māori referenced in the genetic modification debate continue to be relevant in the context of gene editing but that further work is required to characterize the strength of various positions across the broader community.

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.