From the very end of the first research session, I walked in on the middle of:
Liz Wilkinson, Penny Bardenheier, Hēmi Dale, Tauwehe Tamati
Me whakarongo ki te kōrero: let the conversations be heard
New call number structure with the Framework-Kete Sublevel Series-Letters Title-Letters eg K-HAa PUR KAI
Used Ngā Ūpoko Tukutuku - still remains gaps for subjects in Māori language readers. Sometimes a feeling of indecision about whether a term can be used. Would support workshops.
User-centred access lets users browse by difficulty level, or search by difficulty or topic. Supports language and literacy development, and supports relationship building. Have made some great connections between library and Te Puna Wānanga.
---
Showing posts with label mātauranga māori. Show all posts
Showing posts with label mātauranga māori. Show all posts
Tuesday, 1 November 2011
Monday, 31 October 2011
The WAI-262 claim #lianza11 #keynote3
Aroha Te Pareaka Mead (Speaker notes)
The WAI-262 Taonga Claim
Treaty of Waitangi claim - WAI# is the chronological number, so 262 is a fairly old claim. The WAI-262 claim has big implications for people working with Māori knowledge.
Six original claimants: Ngāti Kuri, Ngāti Wai, Te Rarawa, Ngāti Porou, Ngāti Kahungunu asserted that Crown had
Claim lodged in 1991; hearings began 1998; 2001 other evidence; 2006 statement of issues and 2nd round of hearings; 2007 end of hearings; 2011 Ko Aotearoa Tēnei report (very long but you should either read all or nothing - can't just read a bit - but very good and recommended). Only one of the six original claimants still alive to hear the report, and has since passed on.
Report created new definitions of taonga species (significant to culture or identity of iwi), taonga works (significant because there's inherited body of knowledge associated with it and iwi or hapu obliged to act as kaitiaki), taonga derived works (works with a Māori element but generalised or adapted and combined with other non-Māori influences - eg new artform by Ta Moko experts for non-Māori requesting moko).
Report decided that:
Intellectual Property in taonga works
Should be able to protect against offensive or derogatory use. Kaitiaki should be able to object to commercial uses of taonga works. Should develop a register of cultural works such as haka, moteatea so kaitiaki can be identified. Should be a new commission to hear objections to commercial uses.
Basically tinkering with existing system. Claimants had wanted an indigenous system.
Māori and the environment
Three levels of protection:
Text in legal situations re Māori issues tend to be very waffly eg "give consideration to". Tribunal says we need to be more specific.
Wildlife Act should be amended to give Māori and Crown shared management - rather than Crown ownership. (This is the only act where the Tribunal comes straight out about.)
Taonga and the Conservation Estate
"For Māori [this is about] the survival of their own identity. Without the mātauranga Māori that lives in the DOC estate, kaitiakitanga is lost." Less than 4% of land is left in Māori ownership. Everything other than land has been given to Māori - have actually lost more land. 33% is held in the conservation estate.
So much land is 'hands off' - ideally to protect species, but it's not working. All frogs threatened, 5 of 6 species of bat endangered, 2420 species threatened, 180 species on brink of extinction. The best conservation outcomes come from communities living alongside and working with nature. "Nature without people" doesn't work - need connection between people and land.
Tongariro National Park was first park in the world to be created by a gift of land by an indigenous people.
When the Crown controls mātauranga Māori
Report points out Crown is in control of funding/managing education/arts, etc, so is basically controlling mātauranga Māori whether it knows it or not.
Distinction between kaitiaki relationship (when taonga legitimately sold/transferred) and rangatiratanga relationship (when taonga lost or wrongfully taken or newly discovered). When held in libraries/archives, Māori have a strong interest in it - but important to maintain relatively free public access. Recommend managing use through objection-based approach. Should be free access for private research but commercial use should consult/gain consent.
Recommendation to establish viable partnerships to support mātauranga māori. Real proactivity required.
Questions
Q: Thanks for speech - media never gives balanced picture and bad for everyone.
A: When report promoted, attempt by someone else to make it as racially divisive as possible - often a challenge to turn around media's challenges.
Q: Please explain more about where rangatiratanga would apply to objects acquired wrongly - is this objects overseas or within NZ?
A: Tribunal makes distinction between items wrongfully taken (especially through Antiquities Act), where Māori interests weren't identified; now you can go through Land Court to establish your interest. Gisbourne just got their wharenui returned from Te Papa. Need to be discussions - kaitiaki might decide to let the items remain. But other situations where Māori just have 'an interest'.
Q: Might a commission be set up for libraries and archives (to monitor use of IP etc)?
A: Good question - but commission the Tribunal's recommending has a specific legal and commercial reason to exist. In case of libraries probably less of an imperative. But still sitting on collections where people might access info for commercial purposes and we need to work out how we manage that access.
Q: Process around how to access information - weren't asked who they were or why they wanted, and might have been easier to access if it had been known that it was the iwi representatives.
A: Need to delegate the care of taonga to iwi, who are the people who can/should give access decisions.
The WAI-262 Taonga Claim
Treaty of Waitangi claim - WAI# is the chronological number, so 262 is a fairly old claim. The WAI-262 claim has big implications for people working with Māori knowledge.
Six original claimants: Ngāti Kuri, Ngāti Wai, Te Rarawa, Ngāti Porou, Ngāti Kahungunu asserted that Crown had
- failed to actively protected exercise of tino rangatiratanga and kaitiakitanga by claimants over indigenous flora and fauna and other taonga and also over mātauranga Māori
- failted to protect the taonga
- usurped tino rangatiratanga and kaitiakitanga
- breached Treaty of Waitangi by agreeing to various international agreements/obligations that affect these.
Claim lodged in 1991; hearings began 1998; 2001 other evidence; 2006 statement of issues and 2nd round of hearings; 2007 end of hearings; 2011 Ko Aotearoa Tēnei report (very long but you should either read all or nothing - can't just read a bit - but very good and recommended). Only one of the six original claimants still alive to hear the report, and has since passed on.
Report created new definitions of taonga species (significant to culture or identity of iwi), taonga works (significant because there's inherited body of knowledge associated with it and iwi or hapu obliged to act as kaitiaki), taonga derived works (works with a Māori element but generalised or adapted and combined with other non-Māori influences - eg new artform by Ta Moko experts for non-Māori requesting moko).
Report decided that:
- Treaty entitles kaitiaki relationships and a reasonable degree of control but not ownership or veto over uses of IP in all cases.
- Māori are not 'the other' - the Treaty partnership requires the Crown to be both Pākeha/Māori. Crown has often acted in a hostile way towards mātauranga Māori issues. Treaty principles must be read collectively, not cherrypicked.
- Crown has a right to govern but Māori interests vital.
- Can't do business as usual - need a more sophisticated Treaty partnership.
Intellectual Property in taonga works
Should be able to protect against offensive or derogatory use. Kaitiaki should be able to object to commercial uses of taonga works. Should develop a register of cultural works such as haka, moteatea so kaitiaki can be identified. Should be a new commission to hear objections to commercial uses.
Basically tinkering with existing system. Claimants had wanted an indigenous system.
Māori and the environment
Three levels of protection:
- full decision-making authority to kaitiaki
- partnership with crown - shared decision-making
- influence over decisions
Text in legal situations re Māori issues tend to be very waffly eg "give consideration to". Tribunal says we need to be more specific.
Wildlife Act should be amended to give Māori and Crown shared management - rather than Crown ownership. (This is the only act where the Tribunal comes straight out about.)
Taonga and the Conservation Estate
"For Māori [this is about] the survival of their own identity. Without the mātauranga Māori that lives in the DOC estate, kaitiakitanga is lost." Less than 4% of land is left in Māori ownership. Everything other than land has been given to Māori - have actually lost more land. 33% is held in the conservation estate.
So much land is 'hands off' - ideally to protect species, but it's not working. All frogs threatened, 5 of 6 species of bat endangered, 2420 species threatened, 180 species on brink of extinction. The best conservation outcomes come from communities living alongside and working with nature. "Nature without people" doesn't work - need connection between people and land.
Tongariro National Park was first park in the world to be created by a gift of land by an indigenous people.
When the Crown controls mātauranga Māori
Report points out Crown is in control of funding/managing education/arts, etc, so is basically controlling mātauranga Māori whether it knows it or not.
Distinction between kaitiaki relationship (when taonga legitimately sold/transferred) and rangatiratanga relationship (when taonga lost or wrongfully taken or newly discovered). When held in libraries/archives, Māori have a strong interest in it - but important to maintain relatively free public access. Recommend managing use through objection-based approach. Should be free access for private research but commercial use should consult/gain consent.
Recommendation to establish viable partnerships to support mātauranga māori. Real proactivity required.
Questions
Q: Thanks for speech - media never gives balanced picture and bad for everyone.
A: When report promoted, attempt by someone else to make it as racially divisive as possible - often a challenge to turn around media's challenges.
Q: Please explain more about where rangatiratanga would apply to objects acquired wrongly - is this objects overseas or within NZ?
A: Tribunal makes distinction between items wrongfully taken (especially through Antiquities Act), where Māori interests weren't identified; now you can go through Land Court to establish your interest. Gisbourne just got their wharenui returned from Te Papa. Need to be discussions - kaitiaki might decide to let the items remain. But other situations where Māori just have 'an interest'.
Q: Might a commission be set up for libraries and archives (to monitor use of IP etc)?
A: Good question - but commission the Tribunal's recommending has a specific legal and commercial reason to exist. In case of libraries probably less of an imperative. But still sitting on collections where people might access info for commercial purposes and we need to work out how we manage that access.
Q: Process around how to access information - weren't asked who they were or why they wanted, and might have been easier to access if it had been known that it was the iwi representatives.
A: Need to delegate the care of taonga to iwi, who are the people who can/should give access decisions.
Monday, 12 October 2009
Kei hea te taunga mai o aku kupu?
(Where will my words rest?)
Terehia Biddle
abstract (pdf)
Archives NZ is official repository for Treaty of Waitangi and other historical documents.
Relationship objectives with Māori
Obligations
Building blocks
It's hard to build a relationship with Māori if internal infrastructure isn't set up to support it.
In last 5 years has been an increase in the number of iwi requests seeking assistance to support their efforts to access information; increase in number of iwi/hapū organisations seeking solutions in management of iwi records and information. Recognise that there's an ongoing expense attached to maintaining records. Looking at working collaboratively. Some movement from full repatriation to virtual repatriation.
Important to have conversation first rather than make assumptions about where conversation is to go. Easy to forget the large population group you're serving when you're dealing with just a few people face-to-face.
Opportunities
Projects they've worked with:
Kai Tahu - pilot project selecting items that local hapū Ngāti Tūahuriri had. Turned out they had a system set up so ArchivesNZ only needed to create hyperlinks and they could make sure that information that was only for their people would remain secure; whereas information that could be shared with the public could be made public. Was some concern about how much information should be shared. Some didn't feel comfortable sharing it; others pointed out that their people lived across the globe. So now have mechanisms in place for those who can prove whakapapa.
Currently Taranaki Reo revitalisation Project. -Language identified as being in state of decline. Identifying and digitising records.
Tūhoe project to identify historical records re land area now known as Te Urewera National Park.
Common themes:
Guiding principles
Questions
Q re breakdowns in relationship
A: it occurs mostly when we let our ego get in the way and aren't willing to say we're wrong. Need to keep focus not on ourselves / our department, but on people we're wanting to encourage.
Q re records that might be borderline on what should and shouldn't be accessible
A: records will always be controversial, it's a matter of interpretation, fortunately iwi-nominated researchers pull out only records that they believe are of significance to them, so it helps that they're the ones making the decision.
Q re pay of researchers
A: Up to recently salary came from ArchivesNZ baseline budget. The researchers come in and learn all the jobs there so leave with good experience too.
Q re whether there's any homogenisation of Māori viewpoint vs iwi differences in a national organisation
A: Not their job to make judgement, it's about each iwi. Each iwi have their own mana.
Q re Māori-intuitive finding aids
A: Have been working on this since the Tainui project - this became the platform on which they can improve so they now have a template. 16 fields to complay with professional standards, now have added to this fields to include names of people and places mentioned in the records. Have tried to keep it simple as are looking to the database being usable by pākehā colleagues.
Terehia Biddle
abstract (pdf)
Archives NZ is official repository for Treaty of Waitangi and other historical documents.
Relationship objectives with Māori
- Can act with respect but question is whether Māori feel respected.
- Trust and have confidence
- [missed two]
Obligations
- Treaty obligations
- legislative requirement under Public Records Act 2005
- Waitangi 262 claim (flora and fauna) with respect to cultural and intellectual property issues - brought against Crown by 6 iwi asserting Crown breach of Treaty by agreeing to international agreements that affect indigenous flora and fauna and intellectual property rights, eg commercialising sacred knowledge
Building blocks
- Statement of intent - responsiveness to Māori as a strategic priority
- business planning documents and performance measures have sections covering responsiveness to Māori
- Individual performance-based reviews from the general manager down
It's hard to build a relationship with Māori if internal infrastructure isn't set up to support it.
In last 5 years has been an increase in the number of iwi requests seeking assistance to support their efforts to access information; increase in number of iwi/hapū organisations seeking solutions in management of iwi records and information. Recognise that there's an ongoing expense attached to maintaining records. Looking at working collaboratively. Some movement from full repatriation to virtual repatriation.
Important to have conversation first rather than make assumptions about where conversation is to go. Easy to forget the large population group you're serving when you're dealing with just a few people face-to-face.
Opportunities
- establish precedent for future Māori-ArchivesNZ relationships
- create win-win situations between ArchivesNZ and Māori
- Hands-on cultural awareness training for staff
- ...
Projects they've worked with:
Kai Tahu - pilot project selecting items that local hapū Ngāti Tūahuriri had. Turned out they had a system set up so ArchivesNZ only needed to create hyperlinks and they could make sure that information that was only for their people would remain secure; whereas information that could be shared with the public could be made public. Was some concern about how much information should be shared. Some didn't feel comfortable sharing it; others pointed out that their people lived across the globe. So now have mechanisms in place for those who can prove whakapapa.
Currently Taranaki Reo revitalisation Project. -Language identified as being in state of decline. Identifying and digitising records.
Tūhoe project to identify historical records re land area now known as Te Urewera National Park.
Common themes:
- one size doesn't fit all
- Māori are clear of where they want to be positioned in the work, discussions and decision-making process
- aware of significant role ArchivesNZ can play in Treaty claims
- want to be part of solution
Guiding principles
- build a strong relationship with māori
- competency in te reo and (local) tikanga adds to credibility
- kaumātua provide guidance and advice - to get into communities, and talk to people, kaumātua open the door
- iwi determine the scope for the research
- iwi determine the criteria for quality of data - needs to be Māori-intuitive
- involved in all phases of project, determining milestones, etc
- iwi-nominated kairangahau (researchers) are appointed to do the work.
- protocols re distribution of product rests with iwi
- work conducted in a culturally appropriate way
- database that identifies items of significance needs to comply with ArchivesNZ standards and meet needs of iwi
- don't compromise originals
- be clear about what is possible
- when necessary, say no - gently
- manage expectations and relationships well
Questions
Q re breakdowns in relationship
A: it occurs mostly when we let our ego get in the way and aren't willing to say we're wrong. Need to keep focus not on ourselves / our department, but on people we're wanting to encourage.
Q re records that might be borderline on what should and shouldn't be accessible
A: records will always be controversial, it's a matter of interpretation, fortunately iwi-nominated researchers pull out only records that they believe are of significance to them, so it helps that they're the ones making the decision.
Q re pay of researchers
A: Up to recently salary came from ArchivesNZ baseline budget. The researchers come in and learn all the jobs there so leave with good experience too.
Q re whether there's any homogenisation of Māori viewpoint vs iwi differences in a national organisation
A: Not their job to make judgement, it's about each iwi. Each iwi have their own mana.
Q re Māori-intuitive finding aids
A: Have been working on this since the Tainui project - this became the platform on which they can improve so they now have a template. 16 fields to complay with professional standards, now have added to this fields to include names of people and places mentioned in the records. Have tried to keep it simple as are looking to the database being usable by pākehā colleagues.
Generation Ngai Tahu
The Whare Mahara - The House of Memories
The house is an acknowledgement of the past; embraces the present, providing a place to gather and collect; and is about future as a legacy to be there for the next generation.
Intergenerational transmission of knowledge - will look at tools, systems etc that have been used transmitting knowledge in Ngai Tahu.
Transmitting knowledge also means loss of knowledge. With the arrival of the potato, the whare arohe, the knowledge, poetry, references of fernroot disappeared. With the arrival of iron saws, the time-consuming process of grinding pounamu was lost. The knowledge of those who lost wars - their poems and stories - is gone. "History always forgets the losers." -- Tā Tipene
Hana says she and her father have very different perspectives. (Her father interrupts to correct "focuses" to "foci". :-) ) Each generation influenced by events and values of their time. Tipene says older generation may have longer view.
Hana defends "she waits for the movie to come out" by pointing out that it's higher quality than old reels, and in colour, and she has access to a wider range of technologies than older generations had.
Tipene's father had benefit of his father's library; his uncle read Gibbons' Decline and Fall 20 or so times and also a fisherman, but belonged to "an aristocracy of knowledge". Tipene was exposed to Dickens before he read it as father read it to him when a child. Father: "What's the use of Latin? None, thank God. Lord preserve us from the tyranny of relevance!" Tipene: "We all handle knowledge differently."
Structural questions: - selection, determining what we want to know and preserve; loss - do we want to lose it and not-know just because we're no longer using it.
Pre-European
- Priorities: maintaining tribal boundaries, survival, whakapapa, mahinga kai
- Tools: mōteatea, karakia, kōrero o nehe, pūrākau, whakairo
Early settlement
- Priorities: adaptation (fish hooks and axes, steel replaced stone), globalised knowledge, new worldviews and worlds (sealskins going to China and Māori travelling in those ships), new commerce/production
- the written word, books, Christianity
Post Ngāi Tahu Deeds/Treaty
- Priorities: survival, diseases, introduction of an abstract legal code, retaining land, economic sustainability
- Tools - petitions, letters, presentations to commissioners
Ngāi Tahu Claim
- Priorities: documenting the Middle Island land claims and securing fulfilment of South Island Purchase contracts
- Tools: private journals, whakapapa records, manuscripts, petitions, legal documents
Waitangi Tribunal
- Priorities: collection of information to prove traditional use rights and mana whenua, establishing the tribal base, political organisation, economic sustainability
- Tools: secondary and primary research, records of oral traditions, oral accounts of sustained practices and traditions, specialist analysis of mahika kai resources
Ngāi Tahu settlement
- Priorities: commercial viability, maintaining tribal boundaries, understanding development, redevelopment of tribal resources, moving from claim-mode to looking to future
- Tools: radio, tv, digital media, websites, print, books, magazines (Te Karaka, Te Panui Runaka) - new tools but still missing something.
Move away from process of repetition to transmit knowledge - can now be recorded and stored and retrieved in other ways - print and video. Don't have to retain knowledge as parents and grandparents did - can Google it.
Knowledge as entertainment - takes it back to the fireside.
Te Reo as an example - language was neglected for a long time. Why did so many generations raised in the language not transmit it to their children? Sir Apirana Ngata argued that the first priorities of education for Māori should be English, English, English. They felt that the community spoke Māori and it couldn't possibly be lost, so focused on English. This happened to Gaelic in Ireland too, and elsewhere. Hindsight is 20/20....
Languages (47% endangered, threatened or extinct) are far more threatened than birds (11%), mammals (18%), fish (5%), plants (8%). Particularly low statistics of Ngāi Tahu language proficiency among Ngāi Tahu speakers. Hana's frustrated that language doesn't feature on the tribal wish-list; Tipene interrupts to say it features on the wish-list all the time - just not on the "must do" list. It's a systemic problem: you can't understand place names unless you have Te Reo.
Hana comments on the "PC-ing" of knowledge that is being transmitted. Lullabies used to include quite graphic depictions of past wars and necessary revenge - what it might look like ("or taste like"). Now sanitising a whole body of knowledge by omitting this.
How will Ngāi Tahu decide what knowledge to transmit to their mokopuna? What will they need to know to be Ngāi Tahu, to survive, and prosper? What songs will they sing?
Call back to conference theme - He aha te mea nui o te ao? He tāngata, he tāngata, he tāngata. (What's the most important thing in the world? It's people, people, people.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)