Gotowa bibliografia na temat „Maori research paradigm”

A recent innovation in early childhood care and education in Aotearoa/New Zealand has been the new curriculum, Te Whäriki (Ministry of Education, 1996), which has a strong bicultural emphasis. This means that early childhood educators and teacher educators are attempting to address the challenges posed by a document which requires them to move outside the mono cultural dominant paradigm. Most early childhood teachers and teacher educators are not speakers of the Maori language, and lack Maori cultural knowledge. This paper discusses some of the strategies identified in research which addresses these issues. The role of teacher education in preparing non-Maori students to deliver a bicultural curriculum, and ‘indicators’ of bicultural development in early childhood centres are also discussed.

INTRODUCTION: The prevalence of gout among Maori is one of the highest in the world. This study explores the perceptions, understanding and treatment of gout among Maori. METHODS: A qualitative general inductive approach was used, guided by kaupapa Maori principles. Participants included 12 Maori aged 48–79 years with gout. Semi-structured interviews were undertaken, taped and transcribed. Themes were identified from transcripts. FINDINGS: Participants described overwhelming sufferance due to gout, which was sometimes considered inevitable. All participants believed or had been informed that gout is caused by food and/or drink. This led to feelings of self-blame and blame from partners and employers. Whanau (family) were a resource for information and a support when independence was limited. Rongoa (traditional medicine) played a role in the lives of rural but not urban participants. Many reported stoicism, putting up with pain and putting others before themselves, as the ‘Maori way’. Medicines used for gout management were predominantly non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, colchicine and prednisone, with allopurinol only playing a role late in the disease. Medications were often poorly understood and consequently improperly used. Relationships with health professionals were important, but cultural, financial and time barriers impaired access and understanding. Gout had a huge, negative impact on the lives of participants. CONCLUSION: The quality of lives of many people with gout could be improved by better understanding through educational campaigns for health professionals and the community. Culturally sensitive health care systems and a paradigm shift in gout management and early preventive treatment are needed. KEYWORDS: Drug therapy; ethnic groups; gout; health status disparities; primary health care; qualitative research

It is only relatively recently that Aboriginal peoples in Australia are represented in the academe, creating knowledges that speak for, and not of us. Internationally renowned Maori scholar, Professor Linda Tuhiwai Smith, was groundbreaking in her use of critical discourses needed for indigenous peoples globally to reclaim our knowledges and experiences through research. The emergence of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander scholars in Australia presents hope and opportunities for our communities to utilise the possibilities that ethical, Indigenous-driven research can have in interrogating complex and ongoing issues created by colonialism.Research that theorises Aboriginal epistemic and ontological research paradigms in Australia are still developing. Moreover, discipline-specific theoretical frameworks and methodologies are still emerging. This paper outlines my experience as an Aboriginal researcher in utilising Indigenist theoretical principles and methodological approaches. Using autobiographical reflections from my doctoral research, I present a range of practical implications that arise when the 'researched' shifts to the researcher in Western-dominated spaces such as schools. I will critically analyse the question, are Aboriginal researchers able to conduct research that is motivated by our agendas, ideas and aspirations in a discipline that perpetuates imperialism, racism and exclusion?

Kaupapa Māori methodologies in Aotearoa New Zealand have often been applied to content of immediate and direct relevance to Māori communities. Some of these include research about aspects of cultural revitalisation or examinations of the position Māori occupy within broader ethnic disparities, particularly in health and social outcomes. This article seeks to expand the application of Kaupapa Māori paradigms to research topics outside ‘te ao Maori’ (the Māori world). We argue that the Kaupapa Māori theorising of a Māori visual arts and culture scholar can provide crucial insights on white privilege in Aotearoa New Zealand with a view to addressing disparities and creating more embracing and equitable perspectives of belonging, citizenship and nationhood.

The progress of science is discontinuous. However, accepting the dynamic nature of science, most of us have experienced the point of research crossroads when it was hard to choose the correct path. In 1962 Thomas Samuel Kuhn published his controversial book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions introducing the term “paradigm shift” raising the idea that progress isn't a continuous accumulation, but rather a revolutionary process where brand new ideas are adopted and old ideas are abandoned. Without trying to accept or argue philosphical aspects, today we experience a rapidly growing amount of research in ophthalmology. The goal of the current evidence-based approach in medicine is to optimize everyday clinical practice based on comprehensive research. However, results coming from the basic sciences sometimes may not be directly applicableto an individual patient. The latest developments, scientific achievements and research in ophthalmology steer to the exciting new perspective based on a multidisciplinary approach. Bringing together scientists whose expertise encompasses ophthalmology, physiology, mathematics, physics and engineering and who explore different aspects of the same problems empowering to make scientific progress. Can ophthalmologists think mathematically? Is it possible to provide a quantitative representation of the biophysical processes in the eye? Application of objective scientific methods and subjective perspectives can open up a wide range of educational and professional opportunities leading to a better understanding of the pathogenesis and the natural course of the disease, progression and new ways of treatment. Introducing the 2nd issue of Journal for Modeling in Ophthalmology, we hope the reader will enjoy both clinical and theoretical insights on glaucoma in short papers that followed the International Congress on Advanced Technologies and Treatments for Glaucoma (ICATTG15) held in Milan (Italy), October 29-31, 2015 (http://www.icatto.com/archive/icattg2015/). Normal tension glaucoma is a particularly difficult type of glaucoma both in terms of diagnosis and treatment. M. Iester pointed out that different types of glaucoma exist and are probably based on the presence of different risk factors. The cut-off value of 21 mmHg is not used anymore to differentiate healthy subjects from glaucoma patients. The paper by L. Quaranta et al analyses the rationale for IOP measurements throughout the 24-hour cycle. IOP is not a static number; rather, it exhibits time-dependent variations that can reach up to 6 mmHg over a 24-hour period in healthy eyes, and even more in eyes with glaucoma2-5. Regarding 24-hour IOP characteristics, only IOP peak was correlated to visual field progression, while 24-hour IOP fluctuation was not an independent risk factor6. Indeed, 24-hour mean, peak and fluctuation were all associated and a strong correlation was found between mean and peak IOP, and between fluctuation and peak IOP. Mean IOP is a strong predictor of glaucomatous damage. A desired therapeutic target is therefore a uniform reduction of IOP throughout the 24 hours. A reliable method of continuous IOP measurement would be desirable, making 24-hour IOP phasing easier and opening new pathways for research. Interestingly, the papers by M. Szopos M et al and A. Mauri et al lead to new perspectives of mathematical modeling of aqueous humor flow and intraocular pressure towards individualized glaucoma management. M. Szopos et al aimed to provide both a qualitative description and a quantitative assessment of how variations in aqueous humor flow parameters influence IOP and the outcome of IOP lowering medications. They developed a mathematical model that described the steady state value of IOP as the result of the balance between aqueous humor production and drainage and performing stochastic simulations to assess the influence of different factors on the IOP distribution in ocular normotensive and ocular hypertensive subjects and also on the IOP reduction following medications. This model may help identify patient specific factors that influence the efficacy of IOP lowering medications and aid the development of novel, effective, and individualized therapeutic approaches to glaucoma management. A. Mauri et al. theoretically analyzed new aspects of electro-fluid dynamics of aqueous humor production. The connection between HCO3, Na+ and topical medications in the regulation of aqueous humor production is still controversial and difficult to study experimentally by trying to isolate the role of a single electrolyte in regulating aqueous humor production. The use of a mathematical model appeared to be a promising approach to help unravel such a connection through simulation and comparison of different predicted scenarios. Groups of authors from Indianapolis and Milan universities contributed to glaucoma progression analysis. K. Hutchins et al paper on clinical evaluation of baseline characteristics predictive of structural and functional progression in open angle glaucoma patients with different demographic characteristics aimed to examine ocular blood flow parameters that may predict structural and functional disease progression in open angle glaucoma patients of different diabetic status, gender, ethnicity, and body mass index. D. Messenio et al. evaluated the variations of IOP, morphometric papillary characteristics, perimetric indices and electrophysiological parameters before and after topical IOP lowering therapy in patients with suspect normal tension glaucoma. They showed that electrophysiological tests could provide a more sensitive measure of retinal ganglion cell integrity and help distinguish between suspect normal-pressure glaucoma patients before perimetric alterations are evident and normal subjects with apparent larger disc cupping. Over the past decades, color Doppler imaging (CDI) has gained popularity as a reliable tool to measure blood flow in a variety of vascular beds throughout the body. The use of CDI to measure blood flow parameters in retrobulbar vessels has become very common. L. Carichino et al introduced a computer-aided identification of novel ophthalmic artery waveform parameters. The computed-aided analysis of ophthalmic artery velocity waveforms obtained via CDI were able to distinguish arterial waveform parameters values between healthy subjects and glaucoma patients, as well as between gender. Authors foresee further studies investigating the potential to predict severity and progression of glaucoma. An interesting contribution by S. Cassani et al on theoretical predictions of metabolic flow regulation in the retina aims to better understand the regulating mechanisms in health and disease. This study used a theoretical model to investigate the response of retinal blood flow to changes in tissue oxygen demand. The increase in blood flow predicted by the model due to an increase in oxygen demand was not in the same proportion as the change in blood flow observed with the same decrease in oxygen demand, suggesting that vascular regulatory mechanisms may respond differently to different levels of oxygen demand. Several studies have suggested an association between vascular factors and glaucoma7-11. Several epidemiological studies demonstrated the influence of ocular perfusion pressure on the prevalence, incidence and progression of glaucoma12. Ocular perfusion pressure refers to the pressure available to drive blood through the intraocular vasculature, with the degree of perfusion being influenced by the resistance to flow, which is a function of the vessel caliber or the vessel tone 13. While it seems a very complex parameter, A. Guglielmi et al utilized statistical techniques and analysis to show that it is the joint effect of IOP, ocular perfusion pressure and blood pressure, or, more precisely, of all the covariates in the selected logistic model, that determines the probability of disease, rather than the value of an individual covariate. Importantly, the main statistical interest should be the prediction of disease probabilities for new patients entering the study, presenting specific values of the covariates included in the model, rather than the estimated individual effect of a single predictor. It has been shown that glaucoma, proliferative vitreoretinopathy, posterior capsule opacification, diabetic retinopathy, age-related macular degeneration, pterygium and keratoconus have been associated with modulation of Transforming Growth Factor beta (TGF-β) protein expression14-20. Therapeutic intervention targeting TGF-β2 protein expression may have multifold effects on relevant intraocular tissues such as trabecular meshwork (cell invasion/migration), retina (scarring and wound-healing processes) and/or optic nerve head (neuroprotection), and warrant further evaluation in patients suffering advanced glaucoma and undergoing trabeculectomy. Hasenbach K et al. used a murine model of glaucoma filtration surgery to evaluate the effect of intraocular ISTH0036 administration. They showed that treatment with ISTH0036 resulted in prolonged bleb survival and decreased scarring (downregulation of collagen 1 and 3 fibers) in a murine glaucoma filtration surgery model. Initial results rose a strong rationale that patients with glaucoma or other ocular diseases may benefit from treatment with TGF-β2 antisense oligonucleotides. D.Paulaviciute-Baikstiene et al. performed a prospective 12 month study aiming to find the correlation between anterior segment OCT and functional outcomes of trabeculectomy by describing morphological features of successful and limited success filtering blebs. The detection of early postoperative scarring and the continuing development of surgical measures to reduce this risk represent a major challenge of filtering surgery. Authors suggest that larger internal fluid filled cavity, total bleb height, bigger bleb wall thickness and multiform bleb wall reflectivity are good indicators of successful bleb function. The 2nd Issue of the Journal for Modeling in Ophthalmology uniquely combines and balances clinical and mathematical aspects in the study of glaucoma and we believe that both ophthalmologists and modeling experts will find in it interesting aspects and new information on glaucoma and its risk factors. Enjoy your reading!

La critique de l’anthropologie contemporaine porte de plus en plus sur le caractère hégémonique qui a marqué son développement au plan des savoirs et des pratiques, reléguant à la périphérie ou dans la marginalité l’expression de problématiques, de théories et de méthodologies de recherche qui s’écartent des normes dominantes. Cette emprise est remise en question non seulement par les milieux anthropologiques académiques et non académiques qui proposent de nouvelles perspectives, mais aussi par les populations sur lesquelles les recherches portent. Celles-ci s’opposent aux approches en vigueur dont elles remettent en question les fondements occidentalocentriques. Les chercheurs issus de ces groupes proposent ainsi une « décolonisation des méthodologies », comme l’avance Smith (1998). Cette critique repose, entre autres, sur une dénonciation des concepts, des normes et des pratiques qui sous-tendent les recherches, des rapports de pouvoir fondés sur l’impérialisme et le colonialisme, des constructions des identités problématiques, des modes d’écriture et des reconstructions historiques qui remettent en question les visions du monde autochtones. Les objectifs de cette remise en question sont de redonner une voix à des populations privées de reconnaissance, de contribuer à la renaissance des cultures méconnues, en s’appuyant sur des contre-pratiques fondées sur des perspectives fondées sur une critique du positivisme, sur le féminisme, enfin sur le soutien aux mouvements autochtones locaux et internationaux. Les chercheurs issus de ces groupes revendiquent de nouvelles approches théoriques et de nouvelles pratiques pour définir un agenda de recherches qui correspondent aux préoccupations politiques, culturelles et sociales et dans lesquelles les principes d’autodétermination, de décolonisation, de justice sociale et de mobilisation sont revendiqués. Smith (1998) propose ainsi un « agenda pour la recherche autochtone » qui s’inscrit dans une perspective à la fois globale et locale. S’attachant à en décrire le contenu dans le cadre du développement des recherches maori en Nouvelle Zélande, elle définit les principes, les concepts et les valeurs issus de la vision du monde maorie sur lesquels les recherches doivent se fonder pour permettre la réalisation du programme, la formation de chercheurs autochtones et leur réflexivité. Cette volonté de déshégémonisation est aussi énoncée dans l’établissement des énoncés et des codes régissant l’éthique de la recherche avec les groupes autochtones. Ceux-ci établissent explicitement les principes qui doivent fonder les ententes de recherche qui dépassent les règles de protection des participants et de leur bien?être généralement acceptées, celles de l’obtention d’un consentement libre et éclairé ou celles entourant la confidentialité et l’anonymat. Ces principes sont élargis pour incorporer des enjeux plus larges touchant les objectifs de la recherche, la collecte des données et leur interprétation, la propriété intellectuelle et des artefacts matériels, des savoirs et des savoir?faire locaux et insistent sur les valeurs de participation, de collaboration, de réciprocité, de respect et d’égalité. Cet enchâssement se retrouve dans plusieurs chartes internationales comme, par exemple, « La charte des peuples tribaux autochtones des forêts tropicales » (1993), la « Déclaration de Maatatua sur les droits de propriété culturelle et intellectuelle des peuples autochtones » (1993). Les codes éthiques de la recherche dans différents pays incluent clairement la référence aux principes régissant la recherche auprès des groupes autochtones. C’est ainsi le cas de l’Australie qui a établi les « Guidelines for Ethical Research in Australian Indigenous Studies » couvrant à la fois les groupes autochtones d’Australie et des Insulaires du détroit de Torrès ; du Canada dont l’« Énoncé de Politique des Trois Conseils sur l’Éthique de la recherche avec des êtres humains » (2010) inclut un chapitre uniquement dédié à la recherche auprès des Premières Nations, des Inuit et des Métis (chapitre 9) ; de la Nouvelle Zélande avec les « Te Ara Tika-Guidelines for Maori research ethics » (s.d.) auxquels s’ajoutent des règles prescriptives basées sur des concepts culturels pour les chercheurs Maori (Smith, 1998, p. 119-120). La recherche anthropologique semble donc être entrée dans une phase critique de son développement en conceptualisant le renouvellement de ses paradigmes disciplinaires suite aux tensions générées par la recherche et les demandes des populations locales plus exigeantes et plus jalouses de leurs prérogatives culturelles et des enjeux éthiques liés à la reconnaissance et au respect de leurs spécificités.

Australia in Maps is a compilation of cartography taken from the collection of over 600,000 maps held at the Australian National Library. Included in this collection are military maps, coastal maps and modern-day maps for tourists. The map of the eastern coast of ‘New Holland’ drawn by James Cook when he ‘discovered’ Australia in 1770 is included. Also published is Eddie Koiki Mabo’s map drawn on a hole-punched piece of paper showing traditional land holdings in the Murray Islands in the Torres Strait. This map became a key document in Eddie Mabo’s fight for native title recognition, a fight which became the precursor to native title rights as they are known today. The inclusion of these two drawings in a collection of maps defining Australia as a country illustrates the dichotomies and contradictions which exist in a colonial nation. It is now fifteen years since the Native Title Act 1994 (Commonwealth) was developed in response to the Mabo cases in order to recognise Indigenous customary law and traditional relationships to the land over certain (restricted) parts of Australia. It is 220 years since the First Fleet arrived and Indigenous land was (and remains) illegally possessed through the process of colonisation (Moreton-Robinson Australia). Questions surrounding ‘country’ – who owns it, has rights to use it, to live on it, to develop or protect it – are still contested and contentious today. In part, this contention arises out of the radically different conceptions of ‘country’ held by, in its simplest sense, Indigenous nations and colonisers. For Indigenous Australians the land has a spiritual significance that I, as a non-Indigenous person, cannot properly understand as a result of the different ways in which relationships to land are made available. The ways of understanding the world through which my identity as a non-Indigenous person are made intelligible, by contrast, see ‘country’ as there to be ‘developed’ and exploited. Within colonial logic, discourses of development and the productive use of resources function as what Wetherell and Potter term “rhetorically self-sufficient” in that they are principles which are considered to be beyond question (177). As Vincent Tucker states; “The myth of development is elevated to the status of natural law, objective reality and evolutionary necessity. In the process all other world views are devalued and dismissed as ‘primitive’, ‘backward’, ‘irrational’ or ‘naïve’” (1). It was this precise way of thinking which was able to justify colonisation in the first place. Australia was seen as terra nullius; an empty and un-developed land not recognized as inhabited. Indigenous people were incorrectly perceived as individuals who did not use the land in an efficient manner, rather than as individual nations who engaged with the land in ways that were not intelligible to the colonial eye. This paper considers the tensions inherent in definitions of ‘country’ and the way these tensions are played out through native title claims as white, colonial Australia attempts to recognise (and limit) Indigenous rights to land. It examines such tensions as they appear in the media as an example of how native title issues are made intelligible to the non-Indigenous general public who may otherwise have little knowledge or experience of native title issues. It has been well-documented that the news media play an important role in further disseminating those discourses which dominate in a society, and therefore frequently supports the interests of those in positions of power (Fowler; Hall et. al.). As Stuart Hall argues, this means that the media often reproduces a conservative status quo which in many cases is simply reflective of the positions held by other powerful institutions in society, in this case government, and mining and other commercial interests. This has been found to be the case in past analysis of media coverage of native title, such as work completed by Meadows (which found that media coverage of native title issues focused largely on non-Indigenous perspectives) and Hartley and McKee (who found that media coverage of native title negotiations frequently focused on bureaucratic issues rather than the rights of Indigenous peoples to oppose ‘developments’ on their land). This paper aims to build on this work, and to map the way in which native title, an ongoing issue for many Indigenous groups, figures in a mainstream newspaper at a time when there has not been much mainstream public interest in the process. In order to do this, this paper considered articles which appeared in Australia’s only national newspaper – The Australian – over the six months preceding the start of July 2008. Several main themes ran through these articles, examples of which are provided in the relevant sections. These included: economic interests in native title issues, discourses of white ownership and control of the land, and rhetorical devices which reinforced the battle-like nature of native title negotiations rather than emphasised the rights of Indigenous Australians to their lands. Native Title: Some Definitions and Some Problems The concept of native title itself can be a difficult one to grasp and therefore a brief definition is called for here. According to the National Native Title Tribunal (NNTT) website (www.nntt.gov.au), native title is the recognition by Australian law that some Indigenous people have rights and interests to their land that come from their traditional laws and customs. The native title rights and interests held by particular Indigenous people will depend on both their traditional laws and customs and what interests are held by others in the area concerned. Generally speaking, native title must give way to the rights held by others. Native title is therefore recognised as existing on the basis of certain laws and customs which have been maintained over an area of land despite the disruption caused by colonisation. As such, if native title is to be recognised over an area of country, Indigenous communities have to argue that their cultures and connection with the land have survived colonisation. As the Maori Land Court Chief Judge Joe Williams argues: In Australia the surviving title approach […] requires the Indigenous community to prove in a court or tribunal that colonisation caused them no material injury. This is necessary because, the greater the injury, the smaller the surviving bundle of rights. Communities who were forced off their land lose it. Those whose traditions and languages were beaten out of them at state sponsored mission schools lose all of the resources owned within the matrix of that language and those traditions. This is a perverse result. In reality, of course, colonisation was the greatest calamity in the history of these people on this land. Surviving title asks aboriginal people to pretend that it was not. To prove in court that colonisation caused them no material injury. Communities who were forced off their land are the same communities who are more likely to lose it. As found in previous research (Meadows), these inherent difficulties of the native title process were widely overlooked in recent media reports of native title issues published in The Australian. Due to recent suggestions made by Indigenous Affairs Minister Jenny Macklin for changes to be made to the native title system, The Australian did include reports on the need to ensure that traditional owners share the economic profits of the mining boom. This was seen in an article by Karvelas and Murphy entitled “Labor to Overhaul Native Title Law”. The article states that: Fifteen years after the passage of the historic Mabo legislation, the Rudd Government has flagged sweeping changes to native title to ensure the benefits of the mining boom flow to Aboriginal communities and are not locked up in trusts or frittered away. Indigenous Affairs Minister Jenny Macklin, delivering the third annual Eddie Mabo Lecture in Townsville, said yesterday that native title legislation was too complex and had failed to deliver money to remote Aboriginal communities, despite lucrative agreements with mining companies. (1) Whilst this passage appears supportive of Indigenous Australians in that it argues for their right to share in economic gains made through ‘developments’ on their country, the use of phrases such as ‘frittered away’ imply that Indigenous Australians have made poor use of their ‘lucrative agreements’, and therefore require further intervention in their lives in order to better manage their financial situations. Such an argument further implies that the fact that many remote Indigenous communities continue to live in poverty is the fault of Indigenous Australians’ mismanagement of funds from native title agreements rather than from governmental neglect, thereby locating the blame once more in the hands of Indigenous people rather than in a colonial system of dispossession and regulation. Whilst the extract does continue to state that native title legislation is too complex and has ‘failed to deliver money to remote Aboriginal communities’, the article does not go on to consider other areas in which native title is failing Indigenous people, such as reporting the protection of sacred and ceremonial sites, and provisions for Indigenous peoples to be consulted about developments on their land to which they may be opposed. Whilst native title agreements with companies may contain provisions for these issues, it is rare that there is any regulation for whether or not these provisions are met after an agreement is made (Faircheallaigh). These issues almost never appeared in the media which instead focused on the economic benefits (or lack thereof) stemming from the land rather than the sovereign rights of traditional owners to their country. There are many other difficulties inherent in the native title legislation for Indigenous peoples. It is worth discussing some of these difficulties as they provide an image of the ways in which ‘country’ is conceived of at the intersection of a Western legal system attempting to encompass Indigenous relations to land. The first of these difficulties relates to the way in which Indigenous people are required to delineate the boundaries of the country which they are claiming. Applications for native title over an area of land require strict outlining of boundaries for land under consideration, in accordance with a Western system of mapping country. The creation of such boundaries requires Indigenous peoples to define their country in Western terms rather than Indigenous ones, and in many cases proves quite difficult as areas of traditional lands may be unavailable to claim (Neate). Such differences in understandings of country mean that “for Indigenous peoples, the recognition of their indigenous title, should it be afforded, may bear little resemblance to, or reflect minimally on, their own conceptualisation of their relations to country” (Glaskin 67). Instead, existing as it does within a Western legal system and subject to Western determinations, native title forces Indigenous people to define themselves and their land within white conceptions of country (Moreton-Robinson Possessive). In fact, the entire concept of native title has been criticized by many Indigenous commentators as a denial of Indigenous sovereignty over the land, with the result of the Mabo case meaning that “Indigenous people did not lose their native title rights but were stripped of their sovereign rights to manage their own affairs, to live according to their own laws, and to own and control the resources on their lands” (Falk and Martin 38). As such, Falk and Martin argue that The Native Title Act amounts to a complete denial of Aboriginal sovereignty so that Indigenous people are forced to live under a colonial regime which is able to control and regulate their lives and access to country. This is commented upon by Aileen Moreton-Robinson, who writes that: What Indigenous people have been given, by way of white benevolence, is a white-constructed from of ‘Indigenous’ proprietary rights that are not epistemologically and ontologically grounded in Indigenous conceptions of sovereignty. Indigenous land ownership, under these legislative regimes, amounts to little more than a mode of land tenure that enables a circumscribed form of autonomy and governance with minimum control and ownership of resources, on or below the ground, thus entrenching economic dependence on the nation state. (Moreton-Robinson Sovereign Subjects 4) The native title laws in place in Australia restrict Indigenous peoples to existing within white frameworks of knowledge. Within the space of The Native Title Act there is no room for recognition of Indigenous sovereignty whereby Indigenous peoples can make decisions for themselves and control their own lands (Falk and Martin). These tensions within definitions of ‘country’ and sovereignty over land were reflected in the media articles examined, primarily in terms of the way in which ‘country’ was related to and used. This was evident in an article entitled “An Economic Vision” with a tag-line “Native Title Reforms offer Communities a Fresh Start”: Central to such a success story is the determination of indigenous people to help themselves. Such a business-like, forward-thinking approach is also evident in Kimberley Land Council executive director Wayne Bergmann's negotiations with some of the world's biggest resource companies […] With at least 45 per cent of Kimberley land subject to native title, Mr Bergmann, a qualified lawyer, is acutely aware of the royalties and employment potential. Communities are also benefitting from the largesse of Australia’s richest man, miner Andrew “Twiggy” Forrest, whose job training courses and other initiatives are designed to help the local people, in his words, become “wonderful participating Australians.” (15) Again, this article focuses on the economic benefits to be made from native title agreements with mining companies rather than other concerns with the use of Indigenous areas of country. The use of the quote from Forrest serves to imply that Indigenous peoples are not “wonderful participating Australians” unless they are able to contribute in an economic sense, and overlooks many contributions made by Indigenous peoples in other areas such as environmental protection. Such definitions also measure ‘success’ in Western terms rather than Indigenous ones and force Indigenous peoples into a relationship to country based on Western notions of resource extraction and profit rather than Indigenous notions of custodianship and sustainability. This construction of Indigenous economic involvement as only rendered valid on particular terms echoes findings from previous work on constructions of Indigenous people in the media, such as that by LeCouteur, Rapley and Augoustinos. Theorising ‘Country’ The examples provided above illustrate the fact that the rhetoric and dichotomies of ‘country’ are at the very heart of the native title process. The process of recognising Indigenous rights to land through native title invites the question of how ‘country’ is conceived in the first place. Goodall writes that there are tensions within definitions of ‘country’ which indicate the ongoing presence of Indigenous people’s connections to their land despite colonisation. She writes that the word ‘country’: may seem a self-evident description of rural economy and society, with associations of middle-class gentility as well as being the antonym of the city. Yet in Australia there is another dimension altogether. Aboriginal land-owners traditionally identify themselves by the name of the land for which they were the custodians. These lands are often called, in today’s Aboriginal English, their ‘country’. This gives the word a tense and resonating echo each time it is used to describe rural-settler society and land. (162) Yet the distinctions usually drawn between those defined as ‘country’ people or ‘locals’ and the traditional Indigenous people of the area suggest that, as Schlunke states, in many cases Indigenous people are “too local to be ‘local’” (43). In other words, if white belonging and rights to an area of country are to be normalised, the prior claims of traditional owners are not able to be considered. As such, Indigenous belonging becomes too confronting as it disrupts the ways in which other ‘country’ people relate to their land as legitimately theirs. In the media, constructions of ‘country’ frequently fell within a colonial definition of country which overlooked Indigenous peoples. In many of these articles land was normatively constructed as belonging to the crown or the state. This was evidenced in phrases such as, “The proceedings [of the Noongar native title claim over the South Western corner of Australia] have been watched closely by other states in the expectation they might encounter similar claims over their capital cities” (Buckley-Carr 2). Use of the word their implies that the states (which are divisions of land created by colonisation) have prior claim to ‘their’ capital cities and that they rightfully belong to the government rather than to traditional owners. Such definitions of ‘country’ reflect European rather than Indigenous notions of boundaries and possession. This is also reflected in media reports of native title in the widespread use of European names for areas of land and landmarks as opposed to their traditional Indigenous names. When the media reported on a native title claim over an area of land the European name for the country was used rather than, for example, the Indigenous name followed by a geographical description of where that land is situated. Customs such as this reflect a country which is still bound up in European definitions of land rather than Indigenous ones (Goodall 167; Schlunke 47-48), and also indicate that the media is reporting for a white audience rather than for an Indigenous one whom it would affect the most. Native title debates have also “shown the depth of belief within much of rural and regional Australia that rural space is most rightfully agricultural space” (Lockie 27). This construction of rural Australia is reflective of the broader national imagining of the country as a nation (Anderson), in which Australia is considered rich in resources from which to derive profit. Within these discourses the future of the nation is seen as lying in the ‘development’ of natural resources. As such, native title agreements with industry have often been depicted in the media as obstacles to be overcome by companies rather than a way of allowing Indigenous people control over their own lands. This often appears in the media in the form of metaphors of ‘war’ for agreements for use of Indigenous land, such as development being “frustrated” by native title (Bromby) and companies being “embattled” by native title issues (Wilson). Such metaphors illustrate the adversarial nature of native title claims both for recognition of the land in the first place and often in subsequent dealings with resource companies. This was also seen in reports of company progress which would include native title claims in a list of other factors affecting stock prices (such as weak drilling results and the price of metals), as if Indigenous claims to land were just another hurdle to profit-making (“Pilbara Lures”). Conclusion As far as the native title process is concerned, the answers to the questions considered at the start of this paper remain within Western definitions. Native title exists firmly within a Western system of law which requires Indigenous people to define and depict their land within non-Indigenous definitions and understandings of ‘country’. These debates are also frequently played out in the media in ways which reflect colonial values of using and harvesting country rather than Indigenous ones of protecting it. The media rarely consider the complexities of a system which requires Indigenous peoples to conceive of their land through boundaries and definitions not congruent with their own understandings. The issues surrounding native title draw attention to the need for alternative definitions of ‘country’ to enter the mainstream Australian consciousness. These need to encompass Indigenous understandings of ‘country’ and to acknowledge the violence of Australia’s colonial history. Similarly, the concept of native title needs to reflect Indigenous notions of country and allow traditional owners to define their land for themselves. In order to achieve these goals and overcome some of the obstacles to recognising Indigenous sovereignty over Australia the media needs to play a part in reorienting concepts of country from only those definitions which fit within a white framework of experiencing the world and prioritise Indigenous relations and experiences of country. If discourses of resource extraction were replaced with discourses of sustainability, if discourses of economic gains were replaced with respect for the land, and if discourses of white control over Indigenous lives in the form of native title reform were replaced with discourses of Indigenous sovereignty, then perhaps some ground could be made to creating an Australia which is not still in the process of colonising and denying the rights of its First Nations peoples. The tensions which exist in definitions and understandings of ‘country’ echo the tensions which exist in Australia’s historical narratives and memories. The denied knowledge of the violence of colonisation and the rights of Indigenous peoples to remain on their land all haunt a native title system which requires Indigenous Australians to minimise the effect this violence had on their lives, their families and communities and their values and customs. As Katrina Schlunke writes when she confronts the realisation that her family’s land could be the same land on which Indigenous people were massacred: “The irony of fears of losing one’s backyard to a Native Title claim are achingly rich. Isn’t something already lost to the idea of ‘Freehold Title’ when you live over unremembered graves? What is free? What are you to hold?” (151). If the rights of Indigenous Australians to their country are truly to be recognised, mainstream Australia needs to seriously consider such questions and whether or not the concept of ‘native title’ as it exists today is able to answer them. Acknowledgments I would like to thank Damien Riggs and Andrew Gorman-Murray for all their help and support with this paper, and Braden Schiller for his encouragement and help with proof-reading. I would also like to thank the anonymous referees for their insightful comments. References Anderson, Benedict. Imagined Communities. London: Verso, 1983. “An Economic Vision.” The Australian 23 May 2008. Bromby, Robin. “Areva deal fails to lift Murchison.” The Australian 30 June 2008: 33. Buckley-Carr, Alana. “Ruling on Native Title Overturned.” The Australian 24 April 2008: 2. Faircheallaigh, Ciaran. “Native Title and Agreement Making in the Mining Industry: Focusing on Outcomes for Indigenous Peoples.” Land, Rights, Laws: Issues of Native Title 2, (2004). 20 June 2008 http://ntru.aiatsis.gov.au/ntpapers/ipv2n25.pdf Falk, Philip and Gary Martin. “Misconstruing Indigenous Sovereignty: Maintaining the Fabric of Australian Law.” Sovereign Subjects: Indigenous Sovereignty Matters. Ed. Aileen Moreton-Robinson. Allen and Unwin, 2007. 33-46. Fowler, Roger. Language in the News: Discourse and Ideology in the Press. London: Routledge, 1991. Glaskin, Katie. “Native Title and the ‘Bundle of Rights’ Model: Implications for the Recognition of Aboriginal Relations to Country.” Anthropological Forum 13.1 (2003): 67-88. Goodall, Heather. “Telling Country: Memory, Modernity and Narratives in Rural Australia.” History Workshop Journal 47 (1999): 161-190. Hall, Stuart, Critcher, C., Jefferson, T., Clarke, J. and Roberts, B. Policing the Crisis: Mugging, the state, and Law and Order. London: Macmillan, 1978. Hartley, John, and Alan McKee. The Indigenous Public Sphere: The Reporting and Reception of Aboriginal Issues in the Australian Media. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2000. Karvelas, Patricia and Padraic Murphy. “Labor to Overhaul Native Title Laws.” The Australian, 22 May 2008: 1. LeCouteur, Amanda, Mark Rapley and Martha Augoustinos. “This Very Difficult Debate about Wik: Stake, Voice and the Management of Category Membership in Race Politics.” British Journal of Social Psychology 40 (2001): 35-57. Lockie, Stewart. “Crisis and Conflict: Shifting Discourses of Rural and Regional Australia.” Land of Discontent: The Dynamics of Change in Rural and Regional Australia. Ed. Bill Pritchard and Phil McManus. Kensington: UNSW P, 2000. 14-32. Meadows, Michael. “Deals and Victories: Newspaper Coverage of Native Title in Australia and Canada.” Australian Journalism Review 22.1 (2000): 81-105. Moreton-Robinson, Aileen. “I still call Australia Home: Aboriginal Belonging and Place in a White Postcolonising Nation.” Uprooting/Regrounding: Questions of Home and Migration. Eds. S Ahmed et.al. Oxford: Berg, 2003. 23-40. Moreton-Robinson, Aileen. “The Possessive Logic of Patriarchal White Sovereignty: The High Court and the Yorta Yorta Decision.” Borderlands e-Journal 3.2 (2004). 20 June 2008. http://www.borderlands.net.au/vol3no2_2004/moreton_possessive.htm Morteton-Robinson, Aileen. Ed. Sovereign Subjects: Indigenous Sovereignty Matters. Allen and Unwin, 2007. Neate, Graham. “Mapping Landscapes of the Mind: A Cadastral Conundrum in the Native Title Era.” Conference on Land Tenure and Cadastral Infrastructures for Sustainable Development, Melbourne, Australia (1999). 20 July 2008. http://www.sli.unimelb.edu.au/UNConf99/sessions/session5/neate.pdf O’Connor, Maura. Australia in Maps: Great Maps in Australia’s History from the National Library’s Collection. Canberra: National Library of Australia, 2007. “Pilbara Lures Explorer with Promise of Metal Riches.” The Australian. 28 May 2008: Finance 2. Schlunke, Katrina. Bluff Rock: An Autobiography of a Massacre. Fremantle: Curtin U Books, 2005. “The National Native Title Tribunal.” Exactly What is Native Title? 29 July 2008. http://www.nntt.gov.au/What-Is-Native-Title/Pages/What-is-Native-Title.aspx The National Native Title Tribunal Fact Sheet. What is Native Title? 29 July 2008. http://www.nntt.gov.au Path; Publications-And-Research; Publications; Fact Sheets. Tucker, Vincent. “The Myth of Development: A Critique of Eurocentric Discourse.” Critical Development Theory: Contributions to a New Paradigm. Ed. Ronaldo Munck, Denis O'Hearn. Zed Books, 1999. 1-26. Wetherell, Margaret, and Jonathan Potter. Mapping the Language of Racism: Discourse and the Legitimation of Exploitation. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1992. Williams, Joe. “Confessions of a Native Title Judge: Reflections on the Role of Transitional Justice in the Transformation of Indigeneity.” Land, Rights, Laws: Issues of Native Title 3, (2008). 20 July 2008. http://ntru.aiatsis.gov.au/publications/issue_papers.html Wilson, Nigel. “Go with the Flow.” The Australian, 29 March 2008: 1.

Tribal traditions and practices are integral to iwi identity. From the past to the present, the biggest impact on iwi identity was colonisation and subsequent urbanisation. Urbanisation changed the foundation of identity largely due to the demographic rural-urban shift, effectively creating a distance physically and spiritually for Māori between their place of residence and their traditional tribal turangawaewae. Today a larger proportion of tribal members reside in the main urban centres of New Zealand and Australia. This phenomenon provides an ideal opportunity to explore how iwi identity is maintained in an urban setting – away from the traditional sites of cultural practice. The study, which focuses on Ngāti Awa members residing in Auckland, provided evidence that the foundation of an iwi identity is still heavily reliant on strong iwi-based whānau. The corollary is that, strengthening the tribal knowledge base of whānau residing in urban centres may require new or increased active participation in the customs and practices of their iwi. Regrettably, only three of the ten research participants had an in-depth knowledge of their whakapapa, histories and traditions. However, all the participants indicated the need to become more pro-active in creating and expanding on their knowledge base of iwitanga (including te reo). There was also acknowledgement that urban-based iwi marae and whānau wānanga can provide individuals with the opportunities to learn more about their iwi traditions (and thereby reinforce their sense of tribal identity). Encouragingly, each participant confirmed that identifying as Ngāti Awa was important to them, largely due to the sense of belonging and identity. The study concluded that the sustainability of iwi is reliant on iwi members supporting their iwi regardless of the location of their upbringing.

The aim of this research is to examine the much neglected body of writings on New Zealand and the Maori by German-speaking explorers and travellers during the colonising period of the 1840s to 1880s. To the nineteenth-century breed of visitor from Germany and Austria, 'Old' New Zealand often presented itself as an unexplored field of scientific curiosities, from botany and geology to ornithology and ethnology, at the same time as a paradise for immigrant workers. The investigation begins with an evaluation of the eighteenth-century account of Georg Forster, who accompanied Captain Cook on his second voyage to the South Pacific. Forster's account is entrenched in the early racial stereotypes and theories of the 'savage', and provides the first major primary source for all of German-speaking Europe up to the period under investigation. The second main source to be considered is the dominant 'paradise' image which evolved out of the propaganda of the New Zealand Company and continued right through the colonising era. The principal figures to be examined include Ernst Dieffenbach, the official Company naturalist, Friedrich August Krull, the first German Consul in New Zealand, Ferdinand von Hochstetter, the resident geologist on the Novara expedition, Julius von Haast, the founder and director of the Canterbury Museum, Andreas Reischek, the taxidermist and collector, as well as other notable visitors including Max Buchner, Franz Reuleaux, Otto Finsch, Alexander von Hübner and Robert von Lendenfeld. Thus, it is the goal of this investigation to analyse the perception of New Zealand and the Maori in selected works by German-speaking explorers and travellers who arrived in the colony between 1839 and 1889 through, first of all, confronting the prevailing stereotypes and images inherent in the philosophical attitudes of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries towards the 'savage' and those present in the 'paradise' rhetoric of the British campaigners of colonisation, and secondly, examining the origins, patterns and evolution of their respective perceptions, impressions and opinions in order to reveal the true extent of their non-British 'Germanic' viewpoint.

The intention of this chapter is to critically examine what happiness is, what happiness might look like, and what happiness might even feel like from the Māori perspective. It incorporates a personal record of the author's journey of resistance and transformation. It aims to discuss some realities that Māori wahine, including the author, have faced in a colonized Aotearoa. The chapter reclaims a space for Māori women defined by tikanga and kawa while investigating the physiological functions of the whare tangata, whare, hinengaro, and whare tinana and how these inform philosophical constructs. While the methodology used to bring these stories to light was auto-ethnography, qualitative, and kaupapa Māori, combining these methods allowed the validity of the voices to be heard from their own lived experiences and narratives. The chapter articulates to identify and describe “happiness” and what that could possibly look like from a Māori wahine worldview.