Australian Indigenous community DRR

 Much online discussion about the Australian bushfires – outpouring of sympathy etc. – and within that a growing role for First Australian knowledges on, well, survival.

And lest we lose sight of the contributions from Australian academics, let me remind colleagues and peers of a prescient paper by Dr. Heidi Ellemor who in 2005 published a work arguing for Indigenous voices to be heard in the strategies and tactics of environmental management in their territories (Ellemor, 2005). Dr. Ellemor’s work builds on that of John Campbell (J Campbell, 2006; John Campbell, 2010) who flipped ascriptions of Pacific vulnerability (a colonial hangover) to one of resilience.

In the time of takeaways, I cut and paste this from the paper:

“The recognition and inclusion of indigenous peoples’ knowledge can help to destabilise the hegemonic status that certain understandings or preferred readings of a situation have gained.”

Page four for the pedantic.

I’m sure back in the early days of the 1992 Mabo Decision, Australians of all mobs could expect to see a more environmentally just and survivable landscape, and that even the most diehard Ozzie racist (and they can be a frightening beast) would accept a collaboration (alignment? acceptance? trust?!) in any knowledge that would help the very survival of what you claim and cherish is at mortal risk?

Dr. Ellemor articulated all this very well, a generation of Australians (and geography grads) ago.

I follow Aussie politics more than most not from the Lucky Country, and for two reasons: 1) the remarkable endurance of myriad Indigenous communities (see the Uluru policy change); and 2) if the metaphor of ‘frontline’ is to mean anything in this instance, then Aussies are in the trenches again.

Now to Kiwi’s, the imagery of brutal trench warfare is closely linked to our Aussie mates and neighbours; I’m sure the ‘ANZAC spirit’ has been invoked. And with the orange haze over Aotearoa, and people goggling PM25, we realize that if we’re not in the trenches just yet, we can smell the carnage from the assembly point in godszone…

Bibliography

Barnett, J. (2017). The dilemmas of normalising losses from climate change: Towards hope for Pacific atoll countries. Asia Pacific Viewpoint, 58(1), 3-13. Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/apv.12153. doi:10.1111/apv.12153

Barnett, J., Lambert, S., & Fry, I. (2008). The hazards of indicators: insights from the the Environmental Vulnerability Index. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 98(1), 102-119.

Campbell, J. (2006). Traditional disaster reduction in Pacific Island Communities. Retrieved from Lower Hutt:

Campbell, J. (2010). An overview of natural hazard planning in the Pacific Island region. Australasian Journal of Disaster and Trauma Studies, 2010-1. Retrieved from http://www.massey.ac.nz/~trauma/issues/2010-1/campbell.htm.

Ellemor, H. (2005). Reconsidering emergency management and indigenous communities in Australia. Global Environmental Change Part B: Environmental Hazards, 6(1), 1-7. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1464286704000294. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hazards.2004.08.001

Lambert, S. (2014a). Indigenous Peoples and urban disaster: Māori responses to the 2010-12 Christchurch earthquakes. Australasian Journal of Disaster and Trauma Studies, 18(1), 39-48. Retrieved from http://www.massey.ac.nz/~trauma/issues/2014-1/AJDTS_18-1_Lambert.pdf. doi:http://www.massey.ac.nz/~trauma/issues/2014-1/AJDTS_18-1_Lambert.pdf

Lambert, S. (2014b). Maori and the Christchurch earthquakes: the interplay between Indigenous endurance and resilience through a natural disaster. MAI Journal, 3(2), 165-180. Retrieved from http://www.journal.mai.ac.nz/sites/default/files/MAI_Jrnl_V3_iss2_Lambert.pdf.

The climate crisis is also a biodiversity crisis

Important message from Dr. Andrea Byrom, Director of the Biological Heritage National Science Challenge who has been provoked into a forthright contribution to the NZ Sciblogs site.

International media outlets are full of gut-wrenching images of burned koalas, video footage of fleeing kangaroos, and firefighters sharing water with wildlife. Judging by the public outpouring of emotion (and donations) in response, intuitively we know something is very, very wrong. We care about biodiversity, and we care a lot. Indeed, we know that people experience grief in relation to biodiversity loss.

Among other points Dr. Byrom raises is this:

I’ve been surprised and disappointed at the scarcity of Indigenous voices in this crisis, at least in mainstream media. As Lorena Allam eloquently points out, Indigenous people in Australia have been connected to the land for tens of thousands of years, and they are watching in anguish as their sacred places go up in smoke. Perhaps Indigenous people can teach us a lot about disaster risk reduction, whether in New Zealand, Australia, or anywhere. That’s not to say that we should revert solely to traditional ways – these fires are unprecedented in their intensity and scale and landscapes are different now – but there is something to be said for listening to the voices of those who have deep connections with the land and its plants and animals, and working respectfully together to come up with contemporary solutions in the apocalyptic world we all find ourselves in.


Now if anyone knows anything about Aussies, they don't lack for confidence. Or they haven't until now. But I do sense a change in how Australia sees itself, both at home and in the world. I think they have lost confidence in themselves, and in their ability to manage their environment.

In the discussion on ecological tipping points we may now be witnessing a tipping point in political action down under.


link to the full blog post.

Post-disaster elections: will the Australian wildfires lead to a paradigm shift in Australian politics?

Spare a thought for our Indigenous brothers and sisters amidst the political storm raging around the wildfire response – or lack thereof – by the Australian government, personalized around the (in)actions of Prime Minister Scott Morrison.

Remarkable footage of Morrison forcing a young, distressed, woman to shake his hand, and being snubbed by a firefighter, has predictably gone viral.

But governments are not always punished in an election for actual or perceived ineffectiveness in the face of a disaster. President George W. Bush survived Katrina. NZ PM John Key survived the Christchurch earthquakes (his party’s position in the munted city improved in the next election, although anecdotally many opposition supporters may have been forced by their housing situation to relocate to other electorates).

So, what does the research say?

I did a quick Google Scholar search and pulled up some stuff.

First, a study published over 50 years ago by Abney and Hill (1966) made some interesting observations. Political scientists have traditionally assumed that political behavior is somewhat determined by their physical environment. We should not, for example, “expect a homogeneous political culture in a country sharply divided by mountains.” They go on to say that disasters have historically been considered ‘bad omens’ for sitting governments but note little empirical research on this: “political activity seems more determined by social environment than physical.” However, “such catastrophes place great stress upon the social framework and thus test the adaptive capabilities of the political system.”

Bien entendu. Since then there have been a number of studies. Summaries of just a few…

Olson and Gawronski (2010) give a very useful overview of the issues. They ask “Why is it that some authorities, governments, administrations, and even entire regimes emerge from disasters more popular and politically stronger, while most appear to emerge less popular and politically weaker, sometimes fatally so?” They argue that the “often problematic political consequences” of a disaster can be seen as ‘‘Maslowian Shocks’’ (yes, that Maslow who drew in Native American philosophy for this hierarchy of needs). A disaster rips off the scab of governance (“strong revelatory components” as they put it) as the voting public analyze government performance along six dimensions: capability, competence, compassion, correctness, credibility, and anticipation.

Bodet, Thomas, and Tessier (2016) found support for the incumbent Calgary mayor increased after the devastating 2013 floods, albeit at a lower rate in those areas of residential flooding. However, they acknowledged flooded areas differed “systematically” from those areas not flooded “in ways key to the election outcome” (p.85): “When analyzed more conservatively, results show that the flood had no effect on incumbent support or voter turnout.”

Arceneaux and Stein (2006) looked at a Houston election (November) that followed their (June) floods of 2001. Voters did punish the incumbent mayor for the flood if they believed he/the city was responsible for flood prep. This expectation of responsibility was shaped by whether a voter’s neighborhood had been hit by flood waters, and their knowledge of local politics. Sainz-Santamaria and Anderson (2013) examined U.S. disaster preparedness spending between 1985 and 2008 and found increased spending in competitive counties. They advise caution in demanding increased DRR spending as the dollars may be put to electoral ends instead of public safety.

The literature seems to be dominated by US case studies. Vanderleeuw, Liu, and Williams (2008) provide a very interesting analysis of New Orleans mayoralty election, post-Katrina (a more reasonable scale of analysis than the race for president (pun intended…). They describe a 15.8% decline in registered African-American voters and a decline of white registered voters of only 5.1%. So, while a black mayor was returned, “whites clearly were in a better position than they had been to challenge black domination in New Orleans politics.”

(Strange language when taken out of context, so please go to the original paper if you wanna argue, and take it up with the authors. I’m just cutting and pasting…)

From the US again, Reeves (2011) identified a relationship between a state’s ‘electoral competitiveness’ and the likelihood and number of presidential disaster declarations. Reeves argues that “presidents use unilateral powers for particularistic aims to gain electoral support.” His findings are based on data drawn from 1981 to 2004, with this relationship existing since the 1988 Stafford Act which expanded presidents powers in declaring a disaster. (The Stafford Act also has implications for Native Americans on reserve. More on that another time). Reeves also argues the use of presidential powers in these events do have the intended electoral benefits: voters will reward presidents for declaring a disaster in their state, more than a one point increase in support.

But what about Australia?

MacLean (2016) in one of the more entertaining papers I have read, hypothesizes the processes and transition of governmental power in a Zombie apocalypse. He argues that, at least in the initial stages, a zombie apocalypse will see coordinated emergency management from the three spheres of Australian government. But as the zombies spread across Australia, he predicts “that both the rule of law and effective communication networks will break down”. In this situation, the Commonwealth government will struggle to “project its power” and resistance will default down to the “effective use of people and resources” at the State and then regional or local government levels. And like any B movie, “[i]n the worst-case scenario, all the current recognised forms of government may fail and survival will depend on new polities created out of desperate need.”

Cold comfort indeed.

In answer the question, ‘Will the wildfires lead to a change of government In Australia?’ I’d have to kick for touch and say maybe. The next election will undoubtedly feature climate change, and many new leaders will arise, as we have seen in NZ through the Green Party. I do think PM Morrison is on shaky ground and whether he survives to lead his party into the next election is another matter, and down to the seething mass of jealousies and aspirations within his own party. I like the six dimensions provided by Olsen and Gawronski: capability, competence, compassion, correctness, credibility, and anticipation. From a distance, I’d rate the Australian government as C+, C-, C-, B-, D, and D respectively.

There's very few Indigenous voices to be heard in all this. 

Time to break out the Mad Max memes?

References

Abney, F. G., & Hill, L. B. (1966). Natural Disasters as a Political Variable: The Effect of a Hurricane on an Urban Election. American Political Science Review, 60(4), 974-981. Retrieved from https://www.cambridge.org/core/article/natural-disasters-as-a-political-variable-the-effect-of-a-hurricane-on-an-urban-election/4479BA7CDBAD24786136A3869F606E28. doi:10.2307/1953770

Arceneaux, K., & Stein, R. M. (2006). Who Is Held Responsible When Disaster Strikes? the Attribution of Responsibility for a Natural Disaster in an Urban Election. Journal of Urban Affairs, 28(1), 43-53. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0735-2166.2006.00258.x. doi:10.1111/j.0735-2166.2006.00258.x

Bodet, M. A., Thomas, M., & Tessier, C. (2016). Come hell or high water: An investigation of the effects of a natural disaster on a local election. Electoral Studies, 43, 85-94. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026137941630213X. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2016.06.003

MacLean, R. (2016). Unnatural Disasters: Emergency Management in a Time of Zombies Part I: Refereed Articles. Canberra Law Review(1), 47-62. Retrieved from https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/canbera14&i=47.

Olson, R. S., & Gawronski, V. T. (2010). From Disaster Event to Political Crisis: A “5C+A” Framework for Analysis. International Studies Perspectives, 11(3), 205-221. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1528-3585.2010.00404.x. doi:10.1111/j.1528-3585.2010.00404.x

Sainz-Santamaria, J., & Anderson, S. E. (2013). The Electoral Politics of Disaster Preparedness. Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy, 4(4), 234-249. Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/rhc3.12044. doi:10.1002/rhc3.12044

Vanderleeuw, J., Liu, B., & Williams, E. (2008). The 2006 New Orleans Mayoral Election: The Political Ramifications of a Large-Scale Natural Disaster. PS: Political Science & Politics, 41(4), 795-801. Retrieved from https://www.cambridge.org/core/article/2006-new-orleans-mayoral-election-the-political-ramifications-of-a-largescale-natural-disaster/8BA8FBF1A33A5F80A6E7C1B3B74E5AF4. doi:10.1017/S1049096508081018

Crossing Arizona: the perils of colonial forces on Indigenous land...

Re-posting this map of reported bodies crossing into Arizona from Mexico, 1999-2009. Total over this decade: 1,755. [sparked by recent blog posting on The Standard

Mike Wilson narrates a powerful film, 'Crossing Arizona', on the undermining of Tohono O'odham sovereignty and the destruction of water stations which he and others tried to maintain. Mike's beef was with the Tohono O'odham Nation who he argues were complicit in these murderous acts.

See also http://bsnorrell.tripod.com/id61.html

Data, data everywhere, nor any a datum to think...

Data runs through everything I do, or am meant to do, as a researcher.

Data are pieces of the world, and they are people. We have a relationship with data that is, or should be, intimate.

Data have whakapapa.

Tahu Kukutai and friends have just published a free (!) book on the issues for us as Maori: Indigenous Data Sovereignty. Tahu has also been interviewed by Dale Husband on Waatea news, here.

"...if my data been linked up all over the show how do I know that that data is going to be used for my benefit or the benefit of my whanau or iwi. I think without having Maori right at the forefront of those conversations it's not going to benefit us."

Colleague Karaitiana Taiuru (blogging at http://www.taiuru.maori.nz/ ) has worked tirelessly in forging more space - and safer space - for Maori in the digital world. Check out his digital whakapapa thoughts here.

"It is/was common to hide and preserve whakapapa so that outsiders could not make claims to mana and land. Yet Māori in the digital area do not have the same concerns."

I'm always tussling with data: how to store it, who to show it to, what I can do with it at the end of a project. A timely reminder of the importance of proper data control in times of crises (and when are Indigenous peoples not in a crisis?!) has come from Nathaniel A. Raymond and Ziad Al Achkar of the Signal Program on Human Security and Technology, Harvard.

Nate and Ziad are that data are a central component of humanitarian response. Too often, however, "there is a disconnect between data, decision-making and response." The pressures on decision makers to make informed decisions in the first hours and days of an emergency are extreme,

"and if the elements to effectively gather, manage and analyse data are not in place before a crisis, then the evidence needed to inform response will not be available quickly enough to matter. What's more, a lack of readiness to use data can even cause 'big data disasters'".

There thoughts are available here, also free!

Water, water everywhere, nor any a drop to drink...

Two cases highlight how governance of our water is struggling for credibility.

First, in Hawkes Bay where over 5,000 residents of Havelock North (pop. 14,000) were struck by gastroenteritis after drinking the local water. The cause of the outbreak was E. coli but the source of the E. coli is not yet confirmed, though the intensification of farming (and particularly dairying) is thought by many commentators to be the problem.

Minister for the Environment Nick Smith in his recent State of the Environment speech at Lincoln University acknowledges Maori have an integral role in ensuring water quality:

Water issues often come down to a clash of values between environmentalists and land owners. Maori have a foot in both camps and are proving to be valuable bridge builders over these troubled waters.

Initial data from GNS shows water in the Havelock aquifer was less than a year old when it should have been 50, which suggests an infrastructure problem which ultimately links back to governance and, dare I say, ownership.

Havelock North residents walking for water right now! (Sept 3rd).

Now we all now the NZ government's position: no one owns the water. Well, that's working out great for sales of toilet paper in Havelock North but most of us forsee only more costs and risks. Des Ratima of the Takitimu District Maori Council is quite explicit about the fault:

"The aquifier sits below recognised polluted river called the Tukituki which comes down from central Hawkes Bay full of faeces, both human and animal. That's how central Hawkes Bay disposes of its sewage. It's been told by regional council to sort that out and so they've gone from river to land based sewerage dispersal. Well, that's just arrogant again because that's finding its way back into the water system,"

Maori are not alone in thinking human and industry waste need to be separated from the land and water we source our sustenance from. Papatuanuku is being maltreated and like any mother, when she is sick, we are not well.

Another example is from Canada where oil leaking into the North Saskatchewan River has exposed local governance - private and public -as not being up to the task of protecting the most basic resource, namely clean water.

I visited Saskatoon in the second week of August and, by chance, met two First Nations activists working to draw attention to the disaster (languaging is important; 'spill' doesn't describe the catastrophe that oil brings to socio-ecological systems).

Emil Bell and Tyrone Tootootsis have established the Kisiskatchewan Water Alliance Network. Several organisations have endorsed KWAN, including Idle No More, the Saskatchewan Environmental Society and the North Saskatchewan River Basin Council.

Emil Bell (l) and Tyrone Tootootsis (r).

Emil staged a hunger strike to protest the oil spill.


A collaboration between Idle No More, the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs, the Council of Canadians, the National Aboriginal People’s Circle, the Public Service Alliance of Canada (Prairie Region) led to a report on the disaster. One of the findings is that the James Smith Cree Nation need to be supported in its effort to mitigate and monitor the damage to their traditional territory.

We might hope that Ngati Kahungunu will also be supported to ensure water improves within their territory. 

A significant advance in both Hawkes Bay and Saskatchewan would be the formal incorporation of Indigenous voices into the governance of water. Disasters such as the poisoning of Havelock North and North Saskatchewan River provide the opportunity to reinsert Indigenous voices where they should never have been excluded.

'Too much weights...'

Jake: Gee, where did you get those muscles from? Bro, you've been lifting those weights, huh?

Thug: …

Jake: What, you've done lag? Am I right?

Thug: You want to fuck with me?

Jake beats thug

Jake: You should learn to pay your respects. In case you want to know, it's Jake... Jake the Muss.

Cheers

Jake: I was right... too much weights, not enough speed work. Useless prick.
                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                    ('Once Were Warriors, 1994)

I'm reminded of Mr. Muss' warning of too much weights, not enough speed work by a Radio NZ report on the strength of the Maori economy...

The Māori economy is doing well. It's estimated to have a shared wealth of $40 billion, with the biggest investments in the fishing, forestry and farming industries.

Yeah yeah, whateva.

The source of this is a financial firm TBD Advisory. In the words of Phil Barry

"Six of the seven iwi are doing really well in terms of their financial investments performance. Ngai Tahu and Ngati Whatua ki Orakei stand out in the last couple of years, but generally it's been a good solid performance."

My Barry has some self-interested advice:

"For any individual it's really important that they look at more independent advice around issues: what are their investment goals, what are their time horizons and what is their appetite for risk? So it will really be a question about tailoring that to each iwi's position."

And I don't disagree. The issue is the default use of Western frameworks for interpreting iwi (authority) 'success': it's a number. A number preceded by a dollar sign, associated with a number followed by a percentage sign which is how much you should 'grow'.

If this system worked, the West would be a marvelous refuge of wealth and stability, rich people would not feel scared (and hide behind barbed wire walls with armed security), and poor people wouldn't sit around the streets of the world's 'richest' cities asking for coins to feed themselves.

 Dr. Shaun Awatere along with Craig Pauling talk about this in our video on Indigenous frameworks for managing collective assets:

"The challenge for Māori carrying out development is to determine how to balance the drivers of a neo-liberal economic approach with the very ideals and principles that define us as Māori to ensure quality social and environmental outcomes for future generations."

Link to the short video here: Whakatipu Rawa Mā Ngā Uri Whakatipu | Media Centre

National Statement of Science Investment 2015–2025

The government has launched a new science strategy in its efforts to harness our national intelligences and curiousities to the yoke of economic growth.

Matauranga Maori features, as it has done for several strategic statements now, dating back to the original Vision Matauranga strategy, 'To unlock the innovation potential of Maori et cetera, et cetera...



Couple of interesting points in the latest government interpretations of Maori practices and knowledge:

Kaitiakitanga – an emerging approach to environmental management based on traditional Māori principles, concepts, values and views of the environment.

I agree Kaitiakitanga is evolving but to say it is emerging is only true in the sense that the government is increasingly willing to incorporate Kaitiakitanga into its wider environmental management strategies. The risk is that funding and state support is now open to new interpretations including the thoughts and practices of Pakeha. I say this having witnessed a dramatic increase in the numbers and seniority of Pakeha researchers appropriating VM funding and therefore assuming key roles in 'unlocking our potential'.

I remain skeptical until process and personnel our within our control...

As for Matauranga, an articulated extension in its ambit is announced:

Mātauranga Māori – is a body of knowledge first brought to New Zealand by Polynesian ancestors of present-day Māori. Mātauranga Māori can exist, and be understood and applied, at various levels, including: broadly by Māori across New Zealand; or at regional, tribal, and whānau levels. Mātauranga Māori can also include the processes for acquiring, managing, applying and transferring that body of knowledge.

Yes. In other words our cultural logics are now to be explicitly included in how knowledge held by and relevant to the Indigenous People of Aotearoa New Zealand is controlled.

Lot of battles yet to come, and perhaps the Crown is naive to the implications of this statement, but as the right to decide what is true is related to the right to decide what is just, then game on. 

PS: Interesting list of submitters

Dialogues between Indigenous Peoples and Disaster Risk Reduction

Our short video-doc is done and available here:  https://vimeo.com/138904196

Produced by Simone Athayde and co-produced by Marcus Briggs-Cloud (Muskoke), it features footage from our Gainesville workshop undertaken earlier this year.

Indigenous Knowledge and Disaster Risk Reduction website launched...

This is a group I've been working with for the past year and a bit, having met three of the four key researchers at a conference in Otautahi when they were visiting as part of the International Social Science Council Risk Interpretation and Action programme...

Some exciting work and, we think, important work that will help Indigenous communities through the ongoing challenges we face in a dynamic world.

http://indigenousknowledgenetwork.org/who-we-are/

The Ohlone/Costanoan People, Indian Canyon

I'm heading to San Jose. First Nations there are the Ohlone/Costanoan people. (Many thanks to Melissa Nelson of SFU for this information :) The video above and image below are sourced through their websites and resources.

I'm speaking at the inaugural Citizen Science Conference on Indigenous Peoples and Citizen Science. My theme is to unpack the implications of 'citizenship' on CitSci with the intent to illuminate the struggle of Indigenous Peoples worldwide to be accepted as First Citizens on their own lands. Good science can only come out of good (by which I mean inclusive, ethical) politics...

International Workshop on Disaster Risk Reduction...

Cultural Law, a text and a cautionary tale...

Cambridge text on Cultural Law that has some interesting chapters on Indigenous Peoples, including Maori, on the basis that 'legal issues lead multiple lives.. they can be political, economic, social, historical, and cultural' (p. 1).

A New Zealand example is legislation to regulate against offensive marks in the Trade Marks Act of 2002 that prevents trade marks being registered if they are likely to be offensive to a significant section of the community, including Maori.

Of course, there is always a test case to rattle the cage. I recall an application for Tiki Wines being declined by the Maori Trade Marks Advisory Committee on the basis of this offense clause with 'TIki' being interpreted as an atua of humankind, generic to all Maori and thus protected by this legislation.

Permission was finally given when it was pointed out that 'Tiki' was a tipuna of Royce McKean and the whanau who owned and operated the vineyard, and they had the perfect right to use the name!

Maori and Indigenous (MAI) Review Vol. 3, (1)

Just out... five articles, one commentary and three book reviews in the MAI Review.

Tumanako Ngawhika Fa’aui and Te Kipa Kepa Brian Morgan examine the shipping disaster of the MV Rena grounding in “Restoring the mauri to the pre-MV Rena state”, discussing the significant environmental impacts upon social, economic and cultural well-being.

Fiona Cram in “Measuring Māori wellbeing: a commentary” describes developments in the culturally responsive measurement of Māori wellbeing while Annabel Ahuriri-Driscoll outlines a unique form of research, and the implications for engaging meaningfully with healing communities, in the context of the Ngā Tohu o te Ora research project and rongoā Māori.

Sheryl Lee Ferguson looks at mainstreaming E-education and Bevan Erueti traces the trajectory of mātauranga Maori into the New Zealand Olympic and Commonwealth games teams over a six-year period.
In his Commentary “Nā te hangarau tōku reo Māori i tāmi, mā te hangarau tōku reo Māori e hāpai”.

Joe Te Rito reflects on the interface between English language radio and the demise of the Māori language. He posits that over many decades the former has been instrumental in the decline of te reo. However, the advent and consolidation of Māori language radio and its associated technologies over the last 25 years has reinvigorated te reo.

The three book reviews are Helene Connor reviewing ‘Matters of the heart: A history of intermarriage in New Zealand’; Heather Came reviewing ‘Working as allies: Supporters of indigenous justice reflect’ and Margaret Wilkie reviewing the book ‘Ara mai he tētēkura—Visioning our futures: New and emerging pathways of Māori academic leadership’ in which myself and my great colleagues Jamie Ataria and Melanie Mark-Shadbolt have a chapter.

Enjoy.

Maori wellbeing post-earthquake

We've been researching the impacts of the 2010-11 earthquakes on Maori in Christchurch since May of 2011.

As well as recording the terrifying and uplifting experiences of over 80 individuals including Maori first responders, parents, teachers, and tangata whaiora (mental health clients), we have accumulated raw data on self-reported wellbeing pre- and post-disaster.

The research has been presented a couple of times now and is to be published in November in a special Issue of the MAI Review which will be launched at this years Nga Pae's International Indigenous Conference.

Our results show that Maori resilience is neither automatic or improving, with supporting evidence from the third wave of CERA's Wellbeing Survey. which show an increase in the proportion of Maori less likely to view post-disaster life positively...

CERA Wellbeing Survey, 2012-13

While various definitions are held, there seems to be a reluctance to question the assumption that we are resilient by definition, as Indigenous Peoples.

I see two poles about which we swing. The first accepts resilience is like gravity: always there, unshakable, a 'given' in the universe.

The second pole argues that resilience is like democracy, a dynamic configuration of people and institutions with individual and collective actions never quite perfecting things but committed to a process through which empowerment is at least possible.

I argue for the second. And like democracy everywhere, resilience is a fragile thing, balanced on a knife-edge, easily lost and hard to regather.

Ecuadorian issues

I rarely post or reblog more than a few of all the requests and protests I receive. This has just come through via the IPSG (Indigenous Peoples Specialty Group of the Association of American Geographers).

Brief synposis: 

• The Ecuadorian government has recently detained several environmental leaders, and is threating more with the same charges of terrorism.  
• They shut down one very well-respected environmental organization earlier this year (Pachamama Foundation) and others know their existence is in danger.  
• The lack of transparency, accountability and fair play in the process that is currently happening to (in)validate the 700,000+ signatures collected asking for a general referendum so the Ecuadorian citizens can vote on whether or not to drill for oil in Yasuni is astounding.  I have a lot of friends involved in that effort and they have witnessed first-hand how government officials have "disappeared" certain documents which will invalidate thousands of signatures, making the Consulta a no-go, when the legal process to convoke a Consulta has been followed.
• Drilling for oil in Yasuni is an issue of environmental and human rights concern as it is not only one of the most biodiverse places in the world, but there are 2 indigenous groups living in voluntary isolation there - it is their territory.  
• Many of my friends have received threatening phone calls from government or military sources. 
• Heres is up to the minute info on what´s happening around the Yasuni issue here:  https://www.facebook.com/YASunidos?ref=br_tf.  

Petition:https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/Save_Yasuni_the_Last_Wonder_of_the_Amazon

Indigenous Peoples and Disasters: opportunities and obligations of efficiency

Friday the 11th I delivered a public lecture at the School of Economics and Finance, Victoria University in Wellington/Poneke at the invitation of Professor Ilan Noy, Chair of Disaster

The paper is linked off our Lincoln University Maori Resilience webpage, here.

I also gave a lecture to Professor Noy's class in disaster economics on the Wednesday, a nice warm up.

In between I attended a seminar on Gender and Disaster.

To top it all off I got a wave from the (possible/future) king.

Latest volume of the Lincoln Planning Review: International Indigenous Disaster Planning, Diamond Harbour case study, and Aranui Street names...

After some gestation the latest edition of the Lincoln Planning Review is released! Well done to Courtney Guise and others on getting this baby out :)

My contribution is a very modest column on last years International conference scene for Indigenous disaster planning, taking in the UN 4th global platform in Geneva and Kyoto's IGU which I have mentioned in previous posts.

Su Vallance has an article on The role of communities in post-disaster recovery planning: A Diamond Harbour case study, and HoD of Lincoln's Department of Environmental Management, Roy Montgomery, writes a facsinating piece on Aranui's Street name in The Aranui/Hampshire Paradox: Planning and the politics of street naming in Christchurch, New Zealand
So, dig in. Lots to digest and muse upon!

Maori Sustainability Indicators

A report by John, Reid, Tremane Barr and myself, edited by Golda Varona, presents a comprehensive theoretical overview on ‘Indigenous Sustainability Indicators for Maori Farming and Fishing Enterprises.' Published by the Ngai Tahu Research Centre (at the University of Canterbury) and the Agricultural Research Group on Sustainability (ARGOS), the report argues "to establish a set of Indigenous sustainability indicators for Māori ... it is crucial to understand what Maori want to sustain."

We discuss the relevant literature and arrive at a series of practices that give effect to sustainability values. In sum, the sustainability of an enterprise can be assessed according to the presence or absence of practices that give effect to values.

Google erases First Nations reserves 2

Seems Google is aware of the issue of rez names in North America...this response from Mano Marks, Maps Developer Advocate

"I've run this past some folks internally who were surprised to hear that we had ever surfaced reservation names. As far as we can tell, we haven't. Turns out it is a known issue and we're working on it, hopefully will be fixed soon. You may know that last year we started sourcing our own data for the United States, we previously had relied on providers like NavTeq and Teleatlas. Now that we're getting better data, we should be able to turn these labels on.

BTW, you and anyone else can contribute to making sure that we have good data by using Google Map Maker: http://www.google.com/mapmaker "