Executive Summary
The purpose of this study was to develop a tool to facilitate the input and participation of iwi into land and water management processes and decision making. The result is the Cultural Health Index (CHI) for streams, developed by linking Western scientific methods and cultural knowledge about stream health.
Identifying indicators
The starting point for the project was the indicators that Māori use to assess stream health. We interviewed kaumatua and iwi resource managers, from which the following indicators were derived as being important in determining whether a river is healthy:
- shape of the river
- sediment in the water
- water quality throughout the catchment
- flow characteristics
- flow variations
- flood flows
- sound of flow
- movement of water
- fish are safe to eat
- uses of the river
- natural river mouth environment
- water quality
- abundant and diverse range of mahinga kai species
- riparian vegetation
- use of river margin
- temperature
- catchment land use
- riverbank condition
- water is safe to drink
Designing the recording form
Once the list of indicators was identified, a recording form was composed for runanga members to assess the health and mahinga kai at each stream site. Because the objective was to develop a quantitative index, the recording form needed to:
- make a clear distinction between positive and negative statements
- introduce a rating scale (1-5)
- ask for an overall assessment of stream health (rated 1-5) on which to base an evaluation of the contribution each indicator makes to overall stream health.
Data collection
Each team comprised at least five members. Each runanga member used the recording form to complete a field assessment of stream health and mahinga kai at each stream site. Data were gathered for all sites in the Kakaunui ['Kakaunui' is the traditional name for what is commonly known today as the Kakanui River.] and Taieri catchments. The rating information from each of the recording sheets was collated into a spreadsheet for analysis. Compiling the mahinga kai information required access to historical as well as contemporary data. Lists of species that were traditionally harvested from the sites were compiled from interviews with runanga members and from the written records of Ngai Tahu. Electric fishing was carried out at all sites, with fish species identified and returned to the stream.
Developing the index
As the project progressed and indicators were defined, the concept of constructing the Cultural Health Index (CHI) for streams developed and became a reality. The CHI has three distinct components, each of which is made up of multiple measures. The three components are the status of the site, a mahinga kai measure and a cultural stream health measure.
Component 1: Stream sites are classified according to traditional association and intention to use in the future by asking:
- Is there a traditional association between runanga and the site?
- Would Māori come to the site in the future?
Component 2: Sites are evaluated for the following mahinga kai features.
- How many mahinga kai species are present?
- Are the mahinga kai species that were gathered in the past still there?
- Are the mahinga kai species accessible for gathering?
- Would Māori come to the site in the future?
Component 3: Sites are evaluated for cultural stream health. First, the average scores for the runanga team members are calculated for 18 indicators of stream health in each site. Then, using a set of criteria, the list of indicators is condensed to a smaller set that effectively encapsulates overall stream health (as assessed on the recording form). The average score for all included indicators provides the cultural stream health measure (1 is poor and 5 is the highest cultural stream health rating).
Overall index
The overall three-part Cultural Health Index is expressed as shown in the following example:
A-0 / 2.1 / 4.2
where:
- A identifies the site as traditional (versus B for non-traditional)
- 0 identifies that the site will not be used in the future (versus 1 for will be used)
- 2.1 is the mahinga kai score (four factors are scored on a 1-5 scale and then averaged)
- 4.2 is the stream health score (five factors are scored on a 1-5 scale and then averaged).
While resource management agencies will receive a CHI score, such as A-0/2.1/4.2, Māori will have all the data collected at a site, including an inventory of mahinga kai species (see Appendix 2). By analysing the individual scores for each of the factors that comprise the index, Māori will be able to diagnose issues, identify changes to sites over time, and identify remedial actions that are necessary to restore or enhance the site.
This CHI is based on Ngai Tahu perspectives about stream health and their assessment of hill country rain-fed rivers. Given that kaumatua and other runanga members from throughout the rohe were involved in identifying stream health indicators, we are confident that the index can be applied to other hill country rain-fed rivers throughout the rohe by Ngai Tahu runanga.
Validating the CHI for wider use
It is less certain that the CHI will be valid for very different river types and for other iwi. During development, the risk of implementing the CHI widely without validating the tool for different river types and different iwi was identified. Validation only applies to the stream health component of the index, as the traditional status of a site and the mahinga kai component are generic to iwi throughout the country. Confidence in applying the CHI more widely is critical if the tool is to be applied successfully in the longer term.
In Chapter 5 of this report, recommended processes for applying the CHI in other regions and with other iwi are set out.
Two distinct knowledge bases were combined in this study to develop a resource management tool that has the potential to significantly enhance the effectiveness of freshwater management practice. We trust that the CHI will contribute positively to enhanced freshwater management in New Zealand, thereby enabling Māori and resource management agencies to fulfil their obligations to manage our freshwater resources sustainably.
