He Ara Waiora/A Pathway Towards Wellbeing (DP 18/11)

Executive summary#

Print this section

“Nāu te rourou, nāku te rourou, ka ora ai te iwi”

“With your contribution and mine, the people will prosper”

The vision of the New Zealand Treasury is to promote higher living standards for all New Zealanders. The Treasury has always recognised that there are many possible ways to understand intergenerational wellbeing. The Treasury indicated earlier this year that the Crown–Māori relationship is integral to all four capitals in our Living Standards Framework (LSF), and that the Treasury would be further exploring how this might be reflected in the framework.[1]

One avenue through which this has been explored is in the Tax Working Group (TWG). The TWG's call for public submissions asked:[2]

How could tikanga Māori (in particular manaakitanga, whanaungatanga, and kaitiakitanga) help create a more future-focused tax system?#

Print this section

A lot of support was expressed from Māori for exploring this and through the input from submissions and a number of hui, we in the TWG secretariat have developed a “prototype” framework that integrates the four capital stocks in the LSF and the established principles of tax policy design.

Waiora speaks to a broad conception of human wellbeing, grounded in water (wai) as the source of all life.

The foundations for wellbeing come through kaitiakitanga (stewardship of all our resources), manaakitanga (care for others), ōhanga (prosperity) and whanaungatanga (the connections between us).

These foundations support the development of the four capital stocks: financial and physical capital; human capital; social capital; and natural capital. Wellbeing depends on the sustainable growth and distribution of these four capitals, which together represent the comprehensive wealth of New Zealand.

 

However, this is just a starting point. We recognise the weight of responsibility of drawing on concepts of such cultural, spiritual and historical significance. We understand that it is not enough to incorporate kupu (words) and whakaaro Māori (Māori ideas): the framework must generate substantive, measurable change. We recognise that there is a whakapapa, or lineage, to these kupu and that they fit within a wider values-based framework in Te Ao Māori (the Māori world). We are drawing on a range of expertise to help us to live up to this challenge, for which we are extremely grateful. In our next stage of work we will be further developing the framework in accordance with the knowledge that has been shared with us, informing development of tools to support practical policy application and outcomes measurement. This work will support the evolution of the Treasury's Living Standards Framework Dashboard.

By releasing this discussion paper at this early stage in the process, the work can be informed by a range of perspectives and ensure that our pathway, as well as the ultimate product, has, and is seen to have, integrity. This is important to ensure respect for the knowledge from Te Ao Māori that is being shared with us for this purpose, but also so we understand how the kupu fit with non-Māori New Zealanders' perspectives and values.

The TWG will be holding hui in October to test the thinking and approach, alongside the Interim Report recommendations. Ultimately, the success of this mahi (work) - enabling Māori and all New Zealanders to live the lives they value - will be in the breadth and quality of engagement from a range of people across Aotearoa/New Zealand. Over time, this will need to include Māori and non-Māori, academics and practitioners, public policy experts and people applying the values they hold dear in their daily lives to achieve their goals.

1. Evolution of the Living Standards Framework#

Print this section

The New Zealand Treasury's work is to advise on improved wellbeing for our people by building the collective strengths of our country and ensuring the sustainability of that wellbeing for the future. The LSF is a step in the Treasury's long-term work that builds on 30 years of evidence of what New Zealanders value. The diversity of New Zealand means no set of measures will ever capture all that matters for each person, family and community, but our work is intended to inform advice to the New Zealand Government so where government can improve outcomes for New Zealanders, the agencies tasked with delivery work together to efficiently improve wellbeing.

Since the 1972 Royal Commission report, Social Security in New Zealand, government has consulted on what New Zealanders valued.[3] In particular, the 1988 Royal Commission on Social Policy systematically consulted across New Zealand, analysing 6,000 written submissions, 60 public hearings, visits to 35 marae and dedicated phone lines for further oral submissions.[4] Most importantly, their work put Te Ao Māori and the Treaty of Waitangi at the forefront of their analysis.[5] This consultation was repeated when the Social Report was developed, and the General Social Survey (GSS) designed.[6] As shown in King et al.[7] there is a great deal of similarity between frameworks on the dimensions of wellbeing and the indicators used to assess them, including those developed through extensive consultation for the New Zealand Social Report. The LSF draws on Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) analysis starting with four capitals to organise indicators of sustainable intergenerational wellbeing. The Treasury LSF uses the OECD codification to improve international comparability where appropriate, but will make Māori and other New Zealand perspectives central to the framework.

Figure 1 - The Living Standards Framework

The Treasury indicated earlier this year that the Crown-Māori relationship is integral to all four capitals, and that it would be further exploring how perspectives from Te Ao Māori might enhance our framework.[8]

One avenue through which this has been explored is in the work supporting the TWG. The TWG considers it is important to bring a broad conception of wellbeing and living standards to its work on the tax system. This approach reflects the composition of the group, which includes members with a diverse range of skills and experience, including perspectives from beyond the tax system.

Many factors affect living standards, and many of these factors have value beyond their contribution to material comfort. Only a subset of those values can be captured in monetary terms, but non-monetary factors are key determinants of wellbeing and living standards. As an example, certain types of economic activity may increase material comfort, but reduce wellbeing overall, if the by-products of that activity degrade the natural environment.

In the Future of Tax:Submissions Background Paper in March this year, the TWG referred to two perspectives for assessing the full range of impacts from tax policy: the LSF and the established principles of tax policy design.Previous tax reviews, in New Zealand and elsewhere, have used a relatively consistent set of principles to assess the design of the tax system. These principles are efficiency, equity and fairness, revenue integrity, fiscal adequacy, compliance and administration costs, and coherence.[9]

In light of the recognition by the Treasury for a need to explore how Te Ao Māori perspectives can inform our understanding and application of the LSF, the background paper invited views on how tikanga Māori could help to create a more future-focused tax system:[10]

How could tikanga Māori (in particular manaakitanga, whanaungatanga, and kaitiakitanga) help create a more future-focused tax system?#

Print this section

The TWG received a range of positive feedback about the role that tikanga Māori could play in the future of tax. This has led to an exploration of the possible relationship between tikanga Māori, the LSF and the established tax principles, focusing on how these might be woven together in a way that is complementary.

The importance of this work to develop a more holistic framework has been reinforced by the feedback through the public consultation process on the proposed Living Standards Dashboard (written by independent wellbeing expert Conal Smith), where many submitters wanted to see Te Ao Māori perspectives more visible in the work.

2. How we are exploring Te Ao Māori perspectives#

Print this section

The TWG's journey started with the “Future of Tax: Submissions Background Paper” by the TWG. From 1 March to 30 April 2018 the TWG asked New Zealanders to have their say:

In submissions, a lot of support was expressed from Māori for the role that tikanga could play in shaping a future-focused tax system. Feedback included, for example:

Specific tikanga considered relevant or appropriate for a tax context were identified in many submissions. For example:

At some small hui in July, we asked questions such as:

• How could tikanga Māori (in particular manaakitanga, whanaungatanga and kaitiakitanga) help create a more future-focused tax system?

Participants responded with enthusiastic discussion and debate. In summary:

• There was a lot of support for the intention of bringing Te Ao Māori perspectives to enhance the evolution of the tax system.
• However, notes of caution were sounded about the risks of tokenism. It is important that the work is developed through meaningful engagement and draws on appropriate expertise.
• Thinking about tikanga requires starting with the highest order of things (“tika” meaning what is “right”). This means starting at the beginning - what is the highest purpose of tax? Generally, this was identified as coming back to a theme around wellbeing, in the broadest meaning of the term (interconnected between natural, physical and spiritual worlds and being intergenerational).
• Supporting concepts that consistently seemed to resonate included kaitiakitanga (often defined as stewardship or guardianship), manaakitanga (care for others) and whanaungatanga (relationships). Different kupu for a concept around prosperity were identified, including ukaipōtanga and ōhanga.
• The work needs to result in concrete outcomes - improvement in living standards for Māori in particular.
• There was recognition that such a framework would need to be enduring to achieve this, and the work should not be rushed.

As a result of these submissions and hui, the TWG secretariat has developed a prototype framework “He Ara Waiora / A Pathway Towards Wellbeing”.

3. He Ara Waiora / A Pathway Towards Wellbeing#

Print this section

Mindful of the fact that the word “tikanga” derives from “tika” or what is “right”, the framework begins with the concept of wellbeing.

Figure 2 - He Ara Waiora - a prototype framework

Waiora speaks to a broad conception of human wellbeing, grounded in water (wai) as the source of all life.

The foundations for wellbeing come through kaitiakitanga (stewardship of all our resources), manaakitanga (care for others), ōhanga (prosperity) and whanaungatanga (the connections between us).

These foundations support the development of the four capital stocks: financial and physical capital; human capital; social capital; and natural capital. Wellbeing depends on the sustainable growth and distribution of these four capitals, which together represent the comprehensive wealth of New Zealand.

 

We have integrated within this framework the established principles of tax policy design:

• efficiency
• equity and fairness
• revenue integrity
• fiscal adequacy
• compliance and administration costs, and
• coherence.

For example, achieving fairness can be seen as an expression of manaakitanga, efficiency as a facet of prosperity and revenue integrity as necessary to support kaitiakitanga by maintaining the durability of the tax system over time.

As such, this approach enables us to link our highest-level aspirations for our tax system with the specific design characteristics of the system. It provides a common language for us to debate the trade-offs between our aspirations, and merits of different mechanisms for achieving them.

However, this is just a starting point. We recognise the weight of responsibility of seeking to draw on concepts of such cultural, spiritual and historical significance. We recognise that there is a whakapapa, or lineage, to these kupu and that they fit within a wider values-based framework within Te Ao Māori. We are seeking to build our understanding as we develop this framework, as well as developing tools to support practical implementation in public policy and to enable impact to be identified through outcome measures. This will also support the evolution of the Treasury's Living Standards Framework Dashboard.

By releasing this discussion paper at this early stage in the process, the work can be informed by a range of perspectives to ensure that our pathway, as well as the ultimate product, has, and is seen to have, integrity. This is important to ensure respect for the knowledge that is being shared with us for this purpose, but also so we understand how the kupu fit with non-Māori New Zealanders' perspectives and values. In our initial discussions within government, we have heard that these concepts and the approach we are taking has cross-cultural resonance and relevance. This is something we will need to further test and explore to enable the framework to support effective public policy for Māori and for all New Zealanders.

We are currently engaging with a range of academics and recognised thinkers in Te Ao Māori as well as public policy expertise within government. Recent input from a group of people with respected knowledge in Te Ao Māori in an academic and/or operational setting, facilitated by Sacha McMeeking (Head of School, Aotahi / School of Māori and Indigenous Studies, University of Canterbury) has provided a range of valuable insights for our next steps in development. The group expressed that the Crown adopting tikanga frameworks is potentially a meaningful and important expression of Te Tiriti o Waitangi because doing so will change the values and processes adopted by the Crown. The consequential impact is that the resulting policy outcomes could be of greater benefit to Māori and the spirit of the Treaty of Waitangi could be more fully embodied. There was a shared view from the group that an integrated framework should incorporate a clear sense of purpose, a set of values, guidance for how policy is developed and implemented, as well as performance and accountability measures. One framework that may support the further development of the framework in this way is one that has been developed by Associate Professor Mānuka Henare[11]:

The preamble of the Māori text of Te Tiriti states, “kia tohungia ki a ratou o ratou rangatiratanga me to ratou wenua, kia mau tonu hoki te Rongo ki a ratou me te Atanoho hoki”.

This is translated in principle as the desire “to preserve to them their full authority as leaders (rangatiratanga) and their country (to ratou wenua), and that lasting peace (Te Rongo) may always be kept with them and continued life as Māori people (Atanoho hoki)”.

 

In terms of “Kawa” or purpose, a tikanga framework should be anchored in a conception of the moral imperative. This could be framed through the Āta noho principle from the preamble of the Māori text of Te Tiriti, meaning that the moral imperative for the tax system could be that all New Zealanders live a life they value, with specific recognition of Māori living the lives that Māori value and have reason to value.

This approach is consistent with Nobel Prize-winning Economist Amartya Sen's “capabilities approach” that has informed the development of the LSF since 2011.[12] Amartya Sen maintained that a truly developed society would enable humans to be and do, and to live and act, in certain valuable ways.[13]

The tikanga concepts in the prototype framework could sit within the “Tikanga” level. There would also be value in exploring concepts such as tika, pono and aroha.

“Ritenga” would include the development of practical policy tools to support implementation.

Two types of outcomes from the tax system related to tikanga that should be sought were identified as:

• Reflecting values and aspirations pertaining to collective wellbeing - concepts of collective wellbeing were discussed with reference to historical practices within the kāinga and the whakataukī “nāu te rourou, nāku te rourou; ka ora ai te iwi”, as well as contemporary practices associated with the distribution of mahinga kai. There were specific historical practices that related to concepts of a tax in respect of whāngai and early contact examples, such as the taxation of boats by Māori. These examples were used to exemplify values and expected behaviour around the distribution of goods for community wellbeing.
• Giving contemporary expression to the Treaty partnership - it was recognised that taxation is one of the most direct expressions of Crown authority (the ability to collect money from individuals and re-distribute it for notions of the collective good) and that, as such, it should be exercised in such a way as to best reflect the Treaty partnership.

4. Where to from here#

Print this section

We in the TWG secretariat understand that it is not enough to incorporate kupu and whakaaro Māori: the framework must generate substantive, measurable change. To help us to live up to this challenge, in our next stage of work we will be building the integrity of the framework in accordance with the knowledge that has been shared with us so far and developing tools to support practical policy application and outcomes measurement (informing the evolution of the Treasury's Living Standards Framework Dashboard). We are working with a range of government agencies to explore areas of alignment in this work.

The TWG will be holding hui in October to test our thinking and approach to this. The success of this mahi - enabling Māori and all New Zealanders to live the lives they value - will be in the breadth and quality of engagement and contribution from a range of people across Aotearoa/New Zealand. Over time, this will include Māori and non-Māori, academics and practitioners, public policy experts and people applying the values they hold dear in their daily lives to achieve their goals.

Appendix 1: About the Tax Working Group#

Print this section

The Government has established the Tax Working Group to examine further improvements to the structure, fairness, and balance of the tax system. The Group was also directed to apply a particular focus on the future to its work, with a view to exploring the major challenges, risks, and opportunities facing the tax system over the next decade and beyond.

The Group is chaired by Hon Sir Michael Cullen and is supported by a secretariat of officials from the Treasury and Inland Revenue. The Chair has appointed an independent advisor to assist the Group with its deliberations and understanding of the issues.

The Group held its first meeting in January 2018 and will continue to meet regularly until February 2019, when the Group's final report to the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Revenue will likely be issued. The timeline for the Group's work also includes an interim report to the Minister of Finance and Minister of Revenue in September 2018. There will be a further opportunity for public submissions on the Group's proposals contained in the interim report following its publication.

Appendix 2: Literature review of key tikanga concepts#

Print this section

This review consolidates academic commentary on the key concepts in the prototype framework. It is authored by Madi Williams and Hamuera Kahi of Aotahi / School of Māori & Indigenous Studies, University of Canterbury.

It is structured according to each of the key concepts:

• waiora
• ōhanga
• manaakitanga
• kaitiakitanga
• whānaungatanga.

Waiora (Wellbeing)#

Print this section

Summary

The term waiora is most frequently used to refer to “wellness” or “wellbeing”. It has been used for a variety of purposes, primarily in the context of health and wellness. Waiora is a common term for use in health models and it has also been utilised by programmes and initiatives focused on wellbeing. A secondary use of waiora is in relation to the environment and the link to wellness.

Definitions and use

The term waiora has been defined as “health, soundness” or “wellbeing”[14], although as with many Māori concepts it does not translate neatly into English and “a simple translation of Māori terms into English cannot convey the intricacies of the webs of meaning within which the terms are embedded in Te Ao Māori.”[15]

Explanations that derive from ancestral knowledge translate waiora “rainwater” which was “the most pure” and was use for drinking and “ritualistic purposes”.[16] In this sense, “the symbolic properties of water were elevated to being at least as important as physical attributes”.[17] Mason Durie describes a genealogy of waiora, locating it within ngā kōrero tuku iho as:

Related to this understanding is that it also “refers to the seed of life” and “incorporates the foundations of life and existence and the total well-being and development of people”.[19] Manuka Henare, in his paper for the Royal Commission on Social Policy, described it as “the source of life, the potential to give life, sustain well-being and counteract evil”.[20]

Waiora is most often used in the context of health and wellness. For instance, it has been defined as “total well-being (traditionally the seed of life)” and is frequently used in relation to the “spiritual, mental and physical well-being [of] individuals, whānau, hapū and iwi”.[21] In the Proceedings of the New Zealand Population Health Congress, the connection between waiora and wellness was explained as follows:[22]

Waiora is used in Māori models of health. Stephanie Palmer's Hōmai te Waiora ki Ahau, a tool for measuring Māori wellbeing, posits waiora as wellbeing. Her tool describes 12 components, including tinana, mauri, te ao tawhito and whenua, that contribute to wellbeing. In Rangimarie Rose Pere's Te Wheke model of health, waiora represents “total well-being for the individual and the family”.[23] The eight tentacles of the octopus are intertwined and all are required to “attain waiora or total well-being”.[24]

The head and body of the wheke represent the whānau unit, the eyes represent waiora - the essential ingredient of life which, when blessed, is able to heal the body, mind and spirit - and the eight tentacles represent eight dimensions of health: wairuatanga (spiritual), tinana (physical), hinengaro (mental), whānaungatanga (relationships), mana ake (uniqueness), mauri (vitality), hā a koro mā, akui mā (inspiration from ancestors) and whatumanawa (emotional).[25]

The term waiora has often been utilised by programmes and initiatives centred on health and wellness. For example, the Waiora initiative based in Auckland in the 1980s was set up to “encourage Māori youth to identity with positive Māori cultural values as a way of enhancing self-esteem and adopting relevant, healthy lifestyles”.[26]

Waiora is used in one of the Healthier Lives research projects, as part of the National Science Challenges “He Pikinga Waiora [Enhancing Wellbeing]”.[27] The name was derived from the whakataukī “He oranga, he pikinga waiora”, which “refers to the relationship between positive feelings and a sense of self-worth, key aspects of well-being”.[28] The research project focuses on reducing health inequalities and achieving health equity for Māori.

The other key use of waiora that emerged from the literature was in relation to the environment. Mason Durie wrote of waiora as “environmental protection” and “one of the four tasks of health as named in Te Pae Māhutonga model of Māori health promotion”.[29] In this understanding, waiora “is linked more specifically to the natural world and includes a spiritual element that connects human wellness with cosmic, terrestrial and water environments”.[30] Waiora, according to this definition, is still related to wellness, but with a focus on the environment and how this informs wellness.

Waiora extends to mean “spirituality” in relation to the environment. For example, “waiora (spirituality)” was described as one of the “guiding principles” for the “co-governance and co-management structures” for the Waipa River.[31]

Alternative terms

There were a few alternative terms for waiora that emerged from the literature: “whaiora, toiora, koiora, mauriora, and oranga”.[32] These terms are analogous or extend Māori concepts of health. Garth Harmsworth defined “Ora, Waiora, and Hauora” as “Health” and “Waioratanga” as “soundness, quality”.[33]

In Durie's Te Pae Mahutonga model, the various terms are used to denote different but related concepts. “The four central stars represent mauriora (access to the Māori world), waiora (environmental protection), toiora (healthy lifestyles) and te oranga (participation in society).”[34]

The alternative term that emerged most frequently was “hauora”.[35] Hauora has been used widely to mean “health”:[36]

Ōhanga and Whairawa (Prosperity)#

Print this section

Summary

There is a smaller body of literature regarding the terms ōhanga and whairawa. Both terms are used primarily in relation to economics and Māori economy, and reflect the emergent focus on Māori economic development. There are minimal examples of both terms and where they were utilised they were employed in titles and project names. No alternative terms emerged in the literature.

Definitions and use

The term ōhanga has been defined as “economics, economic, economy”. It is also translated as analogous to kōhanga, as “nest”.[37]

They key use of “ōhanga” in the literature was in reference to the Māori economy and it is often used as a title or name for a project. For instance, the annual trends and insight report on Te Ao Māori published by law firm Chapman Tripp, includes a section entitled “Te Ōhanga Māori/The Māori economy”.[38]

The term was employed in 1999 for the Hui Ōhanga conference on Māori business and economic development.[39] In the Māori Economic Development: Te Ōhanga Whanaketanga Māori report, the term ōhanga was used as follows:[40]

In Te Pae Tawhiti: Manawatū-Whanganui Māori Economic Development Strategy 2016-2040, the term “Whai ōhanga” was used to mean “Entrepreneurship and innovation”.[41] The report also used the phrase “Te Ōhanga Whanaketanga Māori: Māori Economic Development” for a section that outlined “how Māori economic development intersects with regional growth in this rohe”.[42] The term was explained as:[43]

A project entitled “Key Māori values strengthen the mapping of forest ecosystem services” found that the four most frequently identified values were “Mauri (life force), mahinga kai (food procurement), oranga (human well-being) and te ohanga whai rawa (economic development)”.[44] The definition was also given as “economic development and livelihoods” later in the same article.[45]

Whairawa is defined as to “be rich, wealthy” by way of possessing resources, and is primarily used in regards to the Māori economy.[46] The most prominent use of whairawa in the literature is similar to that of ōhanga, and it is mainly used as a label for various programmes and institutions. For instance, Whai Rawa is the name of Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu's iwi savings scheme.[47]

The term Whai Rawa is also used by Ngā Pae o te Māramatanga as a name for their Māori Economy research programme.[48] This programme is focused on:[49]

Alternative terms

There were no alternative terms to emerge from the literature.

Manaakitanga (Care/Respect)#

Print this section

Summary

The concept of manaakitanga in the literature generally denotes “hospitality”. However, a number of works highlighted that this is an oversimplification and it is a much more complex term. As put by Sir Hirini Moko Mead, the “principle and the values attached to manaakitanga are held to be very important and underpin all tikanga Māori”.[50]

In the literature, manaakitanga is associated with the values that describe an ethic of care, reciprocity, relationships, nurturing and collaboration. As these values imply, manaakitanga has multiple applications including within the education sector and to a lesser extent in relation to the Māori economy and businesses. Manaakitanga was also identified in Durie's whānau wellbeing model.

Definitions and use

Manaakitanga is translated to mean “hospitality” and “kindness, generosity, support - the process of showing respect, generosity and care for others”.[51] The definition provided in Williams' Dictionary of the Māori Language is similar: “Show respect or kindness to, entertain.”[52] John C. Moorfield defined “manaaki (-tia)” as “to support, take care of, give hospitality to”. [53] As Neil et al. caution, manaakitanga is more complex than simply “hospitality” and it “is severely devalued by limiting its translation to mere ‘hospitality', as defined by many Pākehā and academics”. [54] Definitions are elevated when the association with mana is made, as the term manaaki “is derived from the power of the word as in mana-ā-ki” and in Tikanga Whakaaro it is used “to mean express love and hospitality towards people”.[55]

Mason Durie provided an explanation of the link between mana and manaaki: “Manaakitanga is the process whereby mana (power, authority) is translated into actions of generosity.”[56] This link was also described as: “Reciprocity is at the heart of manaakitanga, and rests upon a precept that being of service enhances the mana of others; mana is the ethic of power, authority and the common good…”.[57]

Expanding on these definitions, Hope Tupara described manaakitanga as:[58]

Sir Hirini Moko Mead provides an extensive description of manaakitanga in his work Tikanga Māori, describing how manaakitanga is positioned as a value and a practice that is integrated across all tikanga Māori, as follows:[59]

Sir Hirino Moko Mead highlights the hospitality aspect of manaakitanga, while also implying that it is more complex than simply “hospitality”.[60]

The principle and the values attached to manaakitanga are held to be very important and underpin all tikanga Māori. Manaakitanga focuses on positive human behaviour and encourages people to rise above their personal attitudes and feelings towards others and towards the issues they believe in. Being hospitable and looking after one's visitors is given priority. The aim is to nurture relationships and as far as possible to respect the mana of other people no matter what their standing in society might be. The value is often expressed as “acting like a rangatira”. Such a person is prepared to hear about the other arguments relating to any particular issue.[61]

The term manaakitanga refers to relationships and collaboration. This is because it is a key value that guides interactions in Te Ao Māori: “There are associated rights, duties and responsibilities for each group, and the formalities of marae encounters ensure that this interaction happens in a mutually understood fashion.”[62] One explanation of this understanding of manaakitanga is:[63]

For example, the Ngā Pae o Rangitikei collective utilises the value of manaakitanga which is interpreted as:[64]

Manaakitanga is used as a concept in research methodologies and the education sector:[65]

It has been described as “developing an ethic of care for students”.[66] For instance, Te Whare Wānanga gave manaakitanga as one of their values explaining it as:[67]

Mason Durie's whānau wellbeing model “defines wellbeing in terms of the collective capacity of whānau to perform six key tasks within their historical scope and influence” and manaakitanga is defined as “the capacity to care for whānau members”.[68] Durie describes how manaaki operates amongst whānau, writing:[69]

In the 2017 Te Ao Māori report, manaakitanga was employed in the context of the Māori economy:[70]

Māori-owned businesses are unique in that they are driven not only by financial outcomes but by principles of kaitiakitanga (responsibility), manaakitanga (supporting people) and taonga tuku iho mō ngā uri whakatipu (guardianship of resources for future generations).

It has also been used as a concept in Māori entrepreneurship and relationships with Māori entrepreneurs. In an article on the use of traditional Māori values by Māori entrepreneurs “one of the consultants agreed emphatically that whānaungatanga, manaakitanga and aroha were essential to his business relationships with iwi/hapū and Māori individuals”.[71]

Although it has been used in relation to the economy, it has been noted that “the essence of manaakitanga is not focused on commercial imperatives, but rather holistic care”.[72]

Another of the other key uses to emerge from the literature was in relation to the environment and the term “extends to care that is taken to manage and protect resources”.[73] The expansion of the term to “the protection of our environments” has even led to the concept of manaakitanga being used as a “framework when envisaging a tika system for immigration”.[74]

Manaakitanga has been utilised as a principle in approaches and programmes focused on enhancing wellbeing.

An exemplar is the “Four wellbeings” approach that underpins the Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau, developed by the Independent Māori Statutory Board (IMSB) (Independent Māori Statutory Board, 2012).[75] The plan presents a wellbeing framework anchored around four wellbeing domains - cultural, social, economic and environmental - to inform local government planning and policy legislation.[76]

In this approach, manaakitanga was interpreted as to “improve the quality of life”.[77]

Alternative terms

No alternative terms were used frequently in the literature.

Kaitiakitanga (Stewardship)#

Print this section

Summary

There was a wealth of literature that discussed the term kaitiakitanga and it has been used in a variety of ways. Primarily, it has been associated with the environment and sustainability and is taken to mean “guardianship”. It has strong connotations of responsibility and obligation. A key feature of kaitiakitanga is its intergenerational nature - the responsibility is passed down through the generations. Kaitiakitanga has been linked to the concept of self-determination throughout the literature.

It has been given effect in various pieces of legislation. The most frequently referred to were the Resource Management Act 1991 and Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993. Alongside this, kaitiakitanga has been employed in the social and cultural spheres, and to a lesser extent in relation to the economy.

Definitions and use

The term kaitiakitanga is most often used in relation to the environment. It has been defined as “guardianship, stewardship, trusteeship, trustee” and “stewardship and protection, often used in relation to natural resources”.[78]

Literal interpretations stem from the core word tiaki meaning “to care for, guard, protect, to keep watch over and shelter” (Marsden & Henare, 1992), hence kaitiakitanga meaning trusteeship and guardianship. Kai is a generic term and when applied to tiaki as a prefix, it has a literal translation meaning “caretaker, guardian, conservator, or trustee”.[79]

Merata Kawharu describes kaitiakitanga through the pathway towards resource management:[80]

It has often been referred to as an “institution”; for example:[81]

This discourse is then linked to opportunities for enhancing the mana whenua or authority of hapū through an increased recognition of indigenous rights and the recovery of the institution of kaitiakitanga.

Kaitiaki is defined as “guard, guardian, caretaker” and “trustee, minder, guard”.[82] Some definitions retain a traditional perspective of kaitiaki: “guardian spirits are left behind by deceased ancestors to watch over their descendants and to protect sacred places”.[83] While it is often used as “a human function, it was also creatures, and natural features, who embodied kaitiaki - who were, themselves, the guardians”.[84] McCully Matiu provided insight into the terms kaitiaki and kaitiakitanga:[85]

This quote highlights the need to “incorporate the spiritual as well as physical responsibilities of tangata whenuaand relate to the mana not only of tangata whenua, but also of the gods, the land and the sea” when interpreting kaitiakitanga.[86]

As explained by Carwyn Jones:[87]

This idea was also expressed by Carmen Kirkwood:[88]

Traditionally, kaitiaki “acting directly or indirectly through the medium of tohunga or animal guardians were an essential ‘controlling' component of this complex network of checks and balances whereby relationships within the environmental family were maintained”.[89]

Kaitiakitanga has recognition through legislation due to “increased political commitment and recognition of the rights of indigenous peoples and the view of sustainability as the fundamental principle of environmental management have resulted in legislative provisions that give recognition to kaitiakitanga”.[90] This is “as a direct consequence of prolonged and relentless demand by Māori for autonomy”.[91]

The key example of this is the Resource Management Act 1991 which provided “statutory recognition of kaitiakitanga”.[92] This Act defines kaitiakitanga as “the exercise of guardianship by the tangata whenua of an area in accordance with tikanga Māori in relation to natural and physical resources; and includes the ethic of stewardship”.[93]

Kawharu writes that “Māori interpretations of kaitiakitanga as guardianship is perhaps a response to the Crown's need to understand more fully what kaitiakitanga means in terms intelligible to the Crown”.[94] There have been concerns that:[95]

A subsequent piece of legislation that employs the term “kai tiaki” is Te Ture Whenua Māori Land Act 1993 where the definition is given as “guardian”.[96] Te Ture Whenua Māori Amendment Act 2002 uses the term kaitiaki and gives the same definition.[97]

Kaitiakitanga has been primarily used in the literature to refer to the environment and sustainability, as the “vital component of traditional Māori resource management”.[98] “Sustainability is key to the concept of kaitiakitanga.”[99] The contemporary importance and relevance of kaitiakitanga was highlighted in the literature:[100]

Ngā Pae o Rangitikei utilise kaitiakitanga as one of their foundation principles and it is interpreted as:[101]

One example from the literature was regarding restoration initiatives in the Wairoa-Mahia regions. The initiatives “illustrate new opportunities to exercise kaitiakitanga responsibilities and obligations, to be active kaitiaki, and to ensure wetlands and lakes remain a central feature of hapū identity”.[102]

Kaitiakitanga encompasses an “obligation” and a “responsibility”.[103]

As Māori communities became fixed to a geographical area and developed manawhenua relationships and obligations, a sustainable resource use ethic emerged, known today as kaitiakitanga. Through the institution of kaitiakitanga, Māori have a long tradition of sustainable resource use, of maintaining the mauri or health of an ecosystem while balancing natural resource use and development.[104]

Similarly, in Māori and the Environment: Kaitiaki it was explained as:[105]

The Waitangi Tribunal's report, Ko Aotearoa Tēnei, in 2011 “made a clear link between the concepts of mana and kaitiakitanga, noting that, in Te Ao Māori, kaitiaki relationships always include both rights and corresponding responsibilities”.[106]

The responsibility aspect is linked to the intergenerational nature of kaitiakitanga. The “traditional Māori resource management role of kaitiakitanga” is described as “a responsibility to protect a resource for future generations”.[107] As described by Margaret Mutu:[108]

Alongside environmental uses, kaitiakitanga is often employed in the social and cultural spheres. It “pervades not only the environmental realm but also the social”.[110] For instance, it was described as “guardianship (environmental and cultural)” by Harmsworth.[111] Kaitiakitanga should also be understood as “[embracing] social protocols associated with hospitality, reciprocity and obligation (manaaki, tuku and utu)”.[112] Kawharu wrote that “implementing kaitiakitanga is as much about managing resources of the environment as it is about managing people. It applies to people, particularly between kin group leaders and the wider kin group.”[113] She comments further that “Accountability, reciprocity, guardianship and trusteeship equally apply to leaders and their people as they apply to the relationship between people and their environment.”[114]

Margaret Forster identified the connection between self-determination and kaitiakitanga:[115]

In another article, Forster reiterates that a:[116]

The term kaitiakitanga has been used in economic literature but not to a significant extent. It was identified in the 2003 Māori economic development report as important to any “useful concept of Māori [economic] development”.[117] Te Ao Māori report released by Chapman Tripp in 2017 stated that:[118]

Alternative terms

One term that emerged as an alternative to, or in addition to, was “taonga tuku iho mō ngā uri whakatipu” which was defined as “guardianship of resources for future generations”.[119] However, it did not appear frequently, and only in conjunction with a more limited definition of kaitiakitanga as “responsibility”.[120]

Whanaungatanga (Relationships/Connectedness)#

Print this section

Summary

Whanaungatanga was frequently utilised in the literature and was mainly used in the context of relationships. It referred to blood relations and expands to include a wider range of relationships. There is a sense of obligation and responsibility in the concept and this theme emerged repeatedly in the literature.

It has been incorporated into a range of models in the health, education and social spheres. There were also a small number of uses of whanaungatanga in relation to the economy.

Definitions and use

Whanaungatanga is defined broadly as “relationship”, “relationships” and “kinship”.[121] It has also been defined in a more limited sense as “person related by blood”.[122]

Mead wrote of whanaungatanga as:[123]

The definition of whanaungatanga as “kinship” is due to the fact that:[124]

In a traditional sense, whanaungatanga “is the interconnectedness and relationships amongst whānau, hapū (sub-tribe) and iwi (tribe) through whakapapa”.[125] To expand on this it is “the relationship that binds people together through their common genealogy, unity of purpose and mutual support. It can be defined as family cohesion.”[126]

There is a sense of obligation and responsibility in the concept: “In its simplest form, whanaungatanga can be described as a host of obligatory actions such as sharing, and providing support as well as a sense of belonging both physically and spiritually.”[127] An example from the literature was: “If the person seeking support and assistance is a blood relative, one is obliged to be helpful. Relatives are expected to be helpful and to render such assistance as is in their power and means to give.”[128] Because it is “grounded in genealogical connections, whanaungatanga is central to individual and community identity and the rights and obligations that are associated with that identity”.[129]

Although it “may be grounded in genealogical connections … today [it is] applied to other types of relationships where reciprocal obligations apply”.[130] Whanaungatanga “has extended beyond the nucleus of whānau, hapū and iwi to include non-whakapapa links and relationships of people who are bonded together through shared purposes (such as community groups)”.[131] It is now also about “attaining and maintaining relationships” and is “a process by which people collectively socialize and engage in enhancing their relationships”.[132]

The Online Māori Dictionary defines the term as:[133]

This was a prevalent theme throughout the literature. For example, Mead wrote that:[134]

The Subjective whānau wellbeing in Te Kupenga report found that “the broadening of whanaungatanga to include non-whakapapa relationships appears to reflect the endurance and vitality of whānau values rather than a weakening of them”.[135] The “Four wellbeings” approach discussed in this report defined whanaungatanga as to “develop vibrant communities”.[136]

Whanaungatanga has been incorporated into a range of models in the health, education and social spheres.[137] For instance, it was included in Te Wheke as one of the eight necessary dimensions for whānau health.[138] In the late 1990s, the Health Funding Authority outlined requirements for kaupapa Māori services. The use of whanaungatanga was interpreted as “links to whānau, kaumatua, elders, and tribal groups”.[139]

Whanaungatanga has often been used within the education sector. For instance, Te Whare Wānanga o Awanuiārangi gave whanaungatanga as one of their values and it was explained as “to establish relationships”.[140] The result of “caring for people means relationships are formed consequently resulting in oneness of spirit, mind and body”.[141]

There were a small number of uses of the term in relation to the economy. It was shown that “any useful concept of Māori development must have regard to Māori collective aspirations, including key Māori concepts such as whanaungatanga (kinship) …”.[142]

One of the key uses of whanaungatanga in this space was its role in creating business relationships:[143]

In a study on the importance of Māori values and Māori entrepreneurs, some viewed “those values as being essential to looking after resources belonging to iwi/hapū”, with one consultant agreeing “emphatically that whanaungatanga, manaakitanga and aroha were essential to his business relationships with iwi/hapū and Māori individuals”.[144]

Alternative terms

No alternative terms appeared throughout the literature.

References#

Print this section

Amoamo, M., Ruwhiu, D., & Carter, L. (2018). Framing the Māori economy: The complex business of Māori business. MAI Journal, 7(1), 66-78.

Aranga, M. H., & Ferguson, S. L. (2016). Emancipation of the dispossessed through education. Education and Development Conference, Bangkok.

Barlow, C. (1996). Tikanga whakaaro: Key concepts in Māori culture. Auckland: Oxford University Press.

Berman, J., Edwards, T., Gavala, J., Robson, C., & Ansell, J. (2015, November). He mauri, he Māori: Te iho, te moemoea, te timatanga ōmātou journey into Te Ao Tūroa (the world in front of us). Psychology Aotearoa, 7(2), 100-105.

Browning, C. (2017). Finding ecological justice in New Zealand. Wellington: New Zealand Law Foundation.

Butterworth, G. V., & Smith, R. W. N. (1987). Māori Tourism Task Force report: A taskforce set up by the Manaakitanga conference to report to the Minister of Māori Affairs and the Minister of Tourism. Wellington: The Task Force.

Came, H., Doole, C., Zander, A., & Okezie, P. (2014). Connecting communities, policy and science: Proceedings of the New Zealand Population Health Congress. Auckland: Public Health Association of New Zealand.

Campbell, B. (2011). Te Tiriti O Waitangi: A blueprint for the future. In H. Tomlins-Jahnke & M. Mulholland (Eds.), Mana tangata: Politics of empowerment (pp. 45-64). Wellington: Huia Publishers.

Chapman Tripp. (2017). Te ao Māori -trends and insights. Wellington.

Durie, M. (1996). Whaiora: Māori health development. Auckland: Oxford University Press.

Durie, M. (2001). Mauri ora:The dynamics of Māori health. Auckland: Oxford University Press.

Durie, M. (2003). Ngā kāhui pou: Launching Māori futures. Wellington: Huia Publishers.

Durie, M. (2011). Ngā tini whetū: Navigating Māori futures. Auckland: Huia Publishers.

Forster, M. (2016). Indigenous Environmental Autonomy in Aotearoa New Zealand. AlterNative: An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples12(3): 316-330.

Forster, M. (2011). Kaitiakitanga: A Māori environmental ethic. In H.Tomlins-Jahnke & M. Mulholland (Eds.), Mana tangata: Politics of empowerment (pp. 221-241). Wellington: Huia Publishers.

Forster, M. (2010). Recovering our ancestral landscapes: A wetland's story. In R. Selby, P. Moore, & M. Mulholland (Eds.), Māori and the environment: Kaitiaki (pp. 199-218). Wellington: Huia Publishers.

Harmsworth, G. (2005). Report on the incorporation of traditional values/tikanga into contemporary Māori business organisation and process. Palmerston North: Landcare Research.

Harris, R. C. (2015). The changing face of co-governance in New Zealand: How are Ngāi Tahu and Ngāi Tūhoe promoting the interests of their people through power-sharing arrangements in resource management? A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Laws, University of Canterbury, Christchurch.

Heaton, S. (2011). The co-opting of hauora into curricula. Curriculum Matters, 7, 99-117.

Henare, M. (1988). Nga tikanga me nga ritenga o te ao Māori: Standards and foundations of Māori society. Report of the Royal Commission on Social Policy, 3, 3-41

Independent Māori Statutory Board. (2012). Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau. Independent Māori Statutory Board, Auckland.

Jones, C. (2014). A Māori constitutional tradition. New Zealand Journal of Public and International Law, 12, 187-203.

Kara, E., Gibbons, V., Kidd, J., Blundell, R., Turner, K., & Johnstone, W. (2011). Developing a kaupapa Māori framework for whānau ora. AlterNative: An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples, 7(2), 100-110.

Kawharu, M. (2000). Kaitiakitanga: A Māori anthropological perspective of the Māori socio-environmental ethic of resource management. The Journal of the Polynesian Society, 109(4), 349-370.

Kawharu, M. (2010). Environment as a marae locale. In R. Selby, P. Moore, & M. Mulholland (Eds.), Māori and the environment: Kaitiaki (pp. 221-237). Wellington: Huia Publishers.

Kukutai, T., & Rata. A. (2017). From mainstream to manaaki: Indigenising our approach to immigration. In D. Hall (Ed.), Fair borders? Migration policy in the twenty-first century (pp. 26-44). Wellington: Bridget Williams Books.

Kukutai, T., Sporle, A., & Roskruge, M. (2017). Subjective whānau wellbeing in Te Kupenga. Wellington: Social Policy Evaluation and Research Unit (Superu).

Love, C. M. A., & Rangimarie, R. P. (2004). Extensions on Te Wheke. In Working Papers Lower Hutt: Open Polytechnic of New Zealand.

Lyver, P. O'B., Timoti, P., Gormley, A. M., Jones, C. J., Richardson, S. J., Tahi, B. L., & Greenhalgh, S. (2017). Key Māori values strengthen the mapping of forest ecosystem services. Ecosystem Services, 27, 92-102.

Māori Dictionary Online. Available at: http://Māoridictionary.co.nz/

Mead, H. M. (2016). Tikanga Māori: Living by Māori values (revised ed.). Wellington: Huia Publishers.

Mika, J. P., Bishara, S., Selwyn, K., Kiwi-Scally, T., Taurau, M., & Dickson, I. (2016). Te Pae Tawhiti: Manawatū-Whanganui Māori Economic Development Strategy 2016-2040. Māori Economic Strategy Group (MESG). Retrieved from https://www.horizons.govt.nz/HRC/media/Media/Accelerate%2025/Te-Pae-Tawhiti-A4-Booklet-WEB.pdf?ext=.pdf

Moorfield, J. C. (2000). Ngā kupu me ngā tikanga. Auckland: Pearson Education New Zealand.

Mutu, M. (2010). Ngati Kahu kaitiakitanga. In R. Selby, P. Moore, & M. Mulholland (Eds.), Māori and the environment: Kaitiaki (13-35). Wellington: Huia Publishers.

Neill, L., Williamson, D., & Berno, T. (2015). Manaakitanga and Māori food: Theoretical perspectives of advancement. Locale: The Australasian-Pacific Journal of Regional Food Studies, 5, 84-101.

Ngāi Tahu Whairawa. Available at: https://whairawa.com/what-is-whai-rawa/

New Zealand Institute of Economic Research. (2003). Māori economic development: Te Ōhanga Whanaketanga Māori. Wellington.

O'Carroll, A. D. (2013). Virtual whanaungatanga: Māori utilizing social networking sites to attain and maintain relationships. AlterNative: An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples, 9(3), 1177-1801.

Oetzel, J., Scott, N., Hudson, M., Masters-Awatere, B., Rarere, M., Foote, J., Beaton, A., & Ehau, T. (2017). Implementation framework for chronic disease intervention effectiveness in Māori and other indigenous communities. Globalization and Health, 13(69), 1-13.

Roberts, M., Norman, W., Minhinnick, N., Wihongi, D., & Kirkwood, C. (1995). Kaitiakitanga: Māori perspectives on conservation. Pacific Conservation Biology, 2(1), 7-20.

Selby, R., Moore, P., & Mulholland, M. (2010). Introduction. In R. Selby, P. Moore, & M. Mulholland (Eds.), Māori and the environment: Kaitiaki (pp. 1-9). Wellington: Huia Publishers.

Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Spiller, C., Erakovic, L., Henare, M., & Pio, E. (2011). Relational well-being and wealth: Māori businesses and an ethic of care. Journal of Business Ethics, 98(1), 153-169.

Sutton, G. (2015). Extracurricular engagement and the effects on teacher-student educational relationship. Journal of Initial Teacher Inquiry, 1, 51-53.

Tau, T. M., Goodall, A., Palmer, D., & Tau, R. (1992). Te whakatau kaupapa: Ngai Tahu Resource Management Strategy for the Canterbury Region. Wellington: Aoraki Press.

Tupara, H. (2012). Ethics and health research: Decision making in Aotearoa New Zealand. AJOB Primary Research, 3(4), 40-52.

Waitangi Tribunal. (2011). Ko Aotearoa tēnei: A report into claims concerning New Zealand law and policy affecting Māori culture and identity. Wellington.

Warren, T. R. (2010). Nga pae o Rangitikei - a model for collective hapu/iwi action? In R. Selby, P. Moore, & M. Mulholland (Eds.), Māori and the environment: Kaitiaki (pp. 185-198). Wellington: Huia Publishers.

Warren, T. R., Webster, J., & Kiriona, D. (2006). Thru the looking glass - Rangatahi research traditions. In J. S. Te Rito (Ed.), Mātauranga taketake: Traditional knowledge indigenous indicators of well-being: Perspectives, practices, solutions (pp. 191-198). Wellington: Ngā Pae o te Māramatanga: The National Institute of Research Excellence for Māori Development and Advancement.

Warriner, V. (2007). The importance of traditional Māori values for necessity and opportunity: Māori entrepreneurs - iwi-based and individually owned. In L. Dana, R. B. Anderson (Eds.), International handbook of research on indigenous entrepreneurship (pp. 558-564). Cheltenham, U.K. and Northampton, Mass, Elgar.

Williams, J. (2012). Ngāi Tahu kaitiakitanga. MAI Journal, 1(2), 89-102.

Wright, S. D., Nugent, G., & Parata, H. G. (1995). Customary management of indigenous species: A Māori perspective. New Zealand Journal of Ecology, 19(1), 83-86.