2 An Iwi Perspective on Freshwater and Its Management
The long history of occupation and travel within New Zealand has left many sites that are of significance to Māori, and has enabled them to accumulate an extensive knowledge of natural resources within their tribal areas and to develop management practices appropriate for the sustainable use of these resources. The reason for undertaking this case study was the conviction that the knowledge Māori have, the cultural values they espouse, and their customary practices remain valid and have the potential to complement contemporary management practices to enhance the effectiveness of management overall.
In this section of the report we discuss:
- some of the Māori cultural beliefs, values and practices that underpin this project
- the significance of freshwater to Māori
- the reasons Māori have for seeking an increased role in freshwater management.
Increased participation is not without its challenges, and some of the practical difficulties facing resource managers and Māori are identified at the end of the section.
2.1 Cultural values
The discussion of cultural values in this section is not meant to be exhaustive. Rather, it seeks to provide a conceptual framework for the Cultural Health Index and its relationship to the values Māori associate with freshwater. The overriding goal when developing the CHI was to have a tool grounded in the beliefs, values, and practices of Māori. Here we attempt to explain the Māori perspective on freshwater in terms more readily understood by those resource managers that may apply the CHI, recognising that a Māori perspective is fundamentally different in its treatment of the interactions between people and nature.
At least four cultural values central to the development of this case study were identified when the study began:
- mauri
- mahinga kai
- kaitiakitanga
- ki uta ki tai.
The other concept discussed in this section is that of cultural landscapes.
2.1.1 Mauri
Mauri is the life force that ensures that within a physical entity such as the sea, that all species that it accommodates will have continual life ... The mauri is defenceless against components that are not part of the natural environment.
Mauri seems to be whatever it is in an ecosystem which conduces to the health of that ecosystem (Massey University, 1990).
Māori traditionally believe that the forests, the waters, and all the life supported by them, together with natural phenomena such as mist, wind and rocks, possess a mauri, or life force (Marsden, 1992). The primary resource management principle is, therefore, protecting the mauri of a resource from desecration.
The Ministry for the Environment recognises that the indicators proposed in the report Environmental Performance Indicators: Proposals for Air, Fresh Water and Land (Ministry for the Environment, 1997) did not address the need to monitor and report on spiritual issues, such as mauri. In Environmental Performance Indicators: Proposals for the Marine Environment (Ministry for the Environment, 1998), the Ministry outlined a number of initiatives that were implemented to incorporate Māori concepts into the EPI Programme to ensure indicators are developed that are relevant to Māori. One initiative was taking a case study approach, which involves supporting iwi in identifying approaches for indicator development. The development of the CHI is one of these case studies.
The protection of mauri has become one of the principal issues for contemporary freshwater management, because Māori are increasingly concerned with the integrity of the waterways on which their survival and their cultural identity depend. The decline in both water quantity and water quality has impacted on cultural values and, most importantly, cultural uses of the river, and threatens to put at risk the mauri of the resource, which is unable to protect itself against unnatural changes to the environment.
2.1.2 Mahinga kai
The Ngai Tahu story has at its heart their mahinga kai. The continuation of a mahinga kai culture, in the midst of historical upheaval, explains the Ngai Tahu insistence on the importance of mahinga kai to its culture and provides the centre that holds the tribe together. Without mahinga kai, Ngai Tahu would lose a key component of their cultural identity.
The term 'mahinga kai' literally means 'food works', and it is an all-inclusive term that encompasses the ability to access the resource (which depends on there being legal and physical access), the site where gathering occurs, the activity of gathering and using the resource, and the good health of the resource - it must be fit for cultural usage. Freshwater resources formed a fundamental component of traditional ways of life, and remain important to many contemporary Māori.
It must be stressed that freshwater and terrestrial resources, valued by Māori as mahinga kai continue to be "absolutely necessary" today (K. Davis, personal communication, 2001). For this reason alone, the decision was made to ensure that stage 2 resulted in the identification of mahinga kai indicators and that, if possible, mahinga kai was to be incorporated in the CHI.
2.1.3 Kaitiakitanga
Māori as kaitiaki are obligated not only to protect the interests of future generations but also stress the importance of ancestors to tribal identity. Only when you honour those who have come before you can you truly protect the interests of those yet to be. It is this continuum that makes development within the limits of sustainability more important than current economic realities:
Kaitiakitanga denotes obligations or responsibilities incumbent on the iwi, its members and appointed kaumatua, kuia or tohunga to carry out particular functions, be custodians, protectors, guardians of iwi interest, its taonga, various resources it owns. The kaitiaki approach to environmental management is holistic (Duker, 1994).
Kaitiakitanga is an inherent part of rangatiratanga. Without legal recognition of rangatiratanga, kaitiakitanga becomes difficult to put into effect (Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu, 2001). The kaitiaki exercise kaitiakitanga:
Traditionally kaitiaki are the many spiritual assistants to the gods, including spirits of deceased ancestors, who are the spiritual minders of the elements of the natural world (Mutu, 1994:17).
Today, it is for those who hold mana whenua status to exercise kaitiakitanga and protect the mauri of significant resources. To ensure this, kaitiaki want to participate in the management of significant waterbodies within their traditional area. Resource managers are required to recognise and provide for the relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, wahi tapu and other taonga. [Section 6(e) of the Resource Management Act 1991.] They also must have particular regard to kaitiakitanga. [Section 7(a) of the Resource Management Act 1991.] To achieve this, resource managers need to enable mana whenua to participate in resource management and ensure that data specific to cultural values inform decision-making. This project responded to these requirements by developing a tool that enables kaitiaki to participate in the assessment of waterbodies and the collection of data specific to cultural values that can then inform management decisions.
2.1.4 Ki uta ki tai
In the context of freshwater management it is necessary to consider a catchment in its entirety: from its source, and the passage of its waters through a network of tributaries, on to lower floodplains, to its interface with saltwater at estuaries along the coast. Monitoring regimes need to respond to this 'mountains to the sea' philosophy.
2.1.5 Cultural landscapes
To gain a full understanding and appreciation of the past lives and activities of Māori, it is necessary to view traditional sites within their wider context, and to focus on the relationships between the sites and the wider cultural landscape they inhabit.
A small-scale example of this type of relationship could include the position of a site adjacent to a tributary. The resources that are able to be gathered from the tributary would have been a significant factor in locating the site, and need to be considered as an integral part of the site's function, regardless of whether any archaeological remains lie within it.
On a wider scale, the entire landscapes of the Taieri and Kakaunui catchments are dotted with sites of significance. These sites did not function in isolation from each other, but were part of a wider cultural setting that included not only sites as defined by the presence of archaeological remains, but also the waterway itself.
The significance of cultural landscapes reinforces the need to:
- ensure that sites are selected from throughout the catchment
- develop a tool that ensures a holistic perspective on stream health assessment.
2.2 The significance of freshwater to Māori
In 1998 Ngai Tahu chose freshwater as the subject of its environmental performance indicators case study in recognition of the absolute necessity of freshwater to the lives of Māori, which made it a part of their spiritual and cultural existence. The spiritual affinity with freshwater continues.
Specific freshwater sources are valued because of their spiritual status or usage. Water may be tapu, or sacred, because of its properties in relationship to other waters, places or objects. Other water bodies may be accorded taonga status because of particular uses the waterway supports, which, unlike wai tapu, are not prohibited by tapu. In a resource management context, Māori are likely to seek the absolute protection of freshwater resources that are considered tapu, and seek the protection of sufficient quantities of high-quality waters of taonga value (Ministry for the Environment, 1997).
The CHI responds to these beliefs by enabling Māori to identify those waters of special significance, and to use an assessment tool grounded in their beliefs and values to ensure that cultural data inform management, and that the significance of sites is reflected in resource management decisions.
In summary, Māori want to sustain the mauri of significant freshwater resources. A waterbody with a healthy mauri will sustain healthy ecosystems, support a range of cultural uses (including the gathering of mahinga kai), and reinforce the cultural identity of the people (Ministry for the Environment, 1997).
2.3 Participation of iwi in resource management
As early as 1900, Māori knew that mahinga kai, and the ways of life based on mahinga kai, could die. Their action was needed to keep mahinga kai and a mahinga kai-based culture alive. However, as settlement intensified, Māori were not active participants in decision-making, and there was no statutory requirement for resource managers to consult Māori when developments were undertaken.
If freshwater managers and the wider community are to recognise cultural values and practices, and if they are to enable Māori to be active participants in the management of freshwater, it is necessary to either identify the similarities in world views, practices and values, or identify how the incorporation of a Māori perspective will enhance management.
Māori believe that contemporary environmental practices have failed to address the adverse effects of resource use and development on their cultural values. For example, in a number of forums Māori have argued that their relationship with the freshwaters of their tribal territories has been eroded (Waitangi Tribunal 1991, Waitangi Tribunal 1995). More specifically, they contend that the mauri of many waterways has been desecrated.
Māori have two main reasons for seeking the recognition of cultural values and practices in contemporary freshwater management:
- the conviction that their cultural practices have a very strong environmental basis and could enhance the management process
- an obligation, as kaitiaki, to protect the natural world.
Developing the CHI recognises that the kaitiaki system is based on whakapapa and inherited responsibility, and that the obligations of kaitiaki are inalienable. A group mandated from elsewhere, such as an environmental group or a resource management agency, cannot fulfil the obligation, as only mana whenua can be mandated as kaitiaki. The application of the CHI encourages a collaborative relationship between mana whenua and resource managers, and enables the parties to fulfil their respective inherited and statutory obligations. The CHI therefore has the potential to reduce or avoid tensions between Māori as kaitiaki, who are often divorced from an active management role, and the resource management agencies that in the absence of cultural data may make decisions that conflict with cultural beliefs and values.
This discussion of the significance of freshwater management illustrates the distinct world view that Māori would bring to the management process. It highlights that some of the effects of past and contemporary management regimes cannot be measured only in economic and ecological terms, and that in fact some losses go beyond physical health.
In contemporary society statutory resource management agencies (especially regional councils) have an integral role in protecting the mauri of freshwater, through their primary responsibility under the Resource Management Act 1991 for controlling human interaction with freshwater. Māori expect resource managers to recognise and provide for their cultural beliefs and practices given the statutory provisions in Part 2 of the Resource Management Act. [See sections 5, 6(e), 7(a) and 8 of the Resource Management Act 1991.] However, in order to protect a value, the resource management agencies must possess an appreciation of that value and an understanding of the actions necessary to protect it. The difficulty for Māori and resource management agencies is the noticeable absence of appropriate tools and processes that ensure a Māori perspective is incorporated in management. The CHI is intended to fill this void and enable resource management agencies and Māori to assess the overall health of freshwater resources and identify the necessary restorative actions.
Although Māori have sought a greater role in resource management, there are a number of practical challenges that need to be discussed and resolved in order to achieve this.
There may be uncertainty among some resource management agencies, conservationists and stakeholders over the effectiveness of traditional management systems due to the current lack of opportunities for Māori to implement cultural practices. This may result in a steep learning curve for resource managers and other stakeholders when iwi are applying or seeking to apply the CHI, or are using the data collected as a result of its application.
Another challenge facing resource management agencies is that Māori represent one of many groups with an interest in freshwater management. Freshwater is a commodity that is subject to intense competition, and the interdependency of different parts of the hydrological system creates many stakeholders. The significance and value of water to Māori and other stakeholders may conflict. Data generated by the CHI defines something of the value of particular resources to Māori. In using this data Māori can add a significant new dimension to the appreciation of such issues.
It is for resource management agencies to respond to these conflicting interests. However, statutory resource managers, such as regional councils, are bound by section 8 of the Resource Management Act 1991, which states that the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi must be taken into account. The interests of Māori, as the Treaty partner, are therefore distinct from those of other stakeholders.
Although many resource management agencies want to recognise traditional management practices, some consider that the intangible or metaphysical aspects of Māori values make it difficult to understand what they mean and how they could be recognised and provided for. The fundamental question remains: what are the practical means by which they are to recognise and provide for cultural values and practices within contemporary resource management systems? The CHI is proposed as a practical, easily implemented tool that enables the collection of data specific to cultural values.
The enunciation of resource-specific Treaty principles potentially advances the case of Māori seeking participation in management. The principles provide positive confirmation for the cultural values and practices that Māori have articulated for decades, but may not have had recognised by resource management agencies. Where resource management agencies have a statutory obligation with respect to the Treaty, they are obligated to "give effect" to or "take account" of those cultural values and practices that courts have confirmed by way of Treaty principles.
However, statements of principle, by themselves, may be insufficient to change resource management practices, and further definition of the application of these principles may be required. The Waitangi Tribunal has imposed obligations for resource management agencies and clear direction is needed as to how, in a practical sense, resource management agencies are to meet these obligations while fulfilling their other statutory responsibilities. Understanding how the Treaty principles are to be applied to a specific resource (in this case freshwater) and separate management functions and activities is crucial.
Utilising tools such as the CHI recognises that only Māori are able to provide the clarity needed by resource managers and, significantly, supports application of the Waitangi Tribunal principle that "the spiritual and cultural significance of a freshwater resource to Māori can only be determined by the tangata whenua who have traditional rights over the river" (Ministry for Environment 1987:85).
In summary, despite the obligations imposed on resource management agencies by the Treaty of Waitangi and New Zealand's resource management laws, the issue of incorporating Māori values into management practices remains largely unresolved. Māori need tools, based on their cultural values, that enable them to meaningfully express their views about the health of freshwater and to participate more fully in environmental management. Māori also need to know that contemporary resource managers support the use of tools such as the CHI, recognise the validity of the data collected, and will respond to the information provided.
