Marewa
Glover, Pat Dudgeon, Ingrid Huygens*
Chapter Aims
1.
To show how
psychology has developed within a colonial, racist context. 2.
To
introduce decolonisation work in two societies shaped by colonisation. 3.
To
communicate the urgency of self-determination and social justice for
indigenous peoples. 4. To suggest ways in which psychologists can support decolonisation, including practical examples and student exercises. |
In this chapter an Australian Aboriginal woman and a Maori and a Pakeha New Zealander draw on their life experiences and their work as psychologists to discuss colonisation, racism and decolonisation. Concepts essential to the pursuit of well-being and liberation for communities affected by colonisation, such as self-determination and social justice, are explained and discussed. Case stories describe practical ways in which decolonisation is being pursued in Australia and New Zealand. The authors discuss emerging issues and suggest ways in which psychologists can support decolonisation and indigenous self-determination.
The emergence of European capitalism, from the 1500s onwards, depended upon systematic exploitation of environmental and human resources in other lands. Still continuing today, colonisation follows standard processes whereby control over spirituality, land, law, language and education, health and family structures, and finally culture itself pass from the indigenous people to the colonisers (Nairn, 1990). The outcome for indigenous populations has been poor health, social disruption, low educational achievement, and suppression of culture, language and spirit.
When the inevitable end is the killing of the wairua (spirit)
We are dead living.
Racism means to kill us living. Racism is death.
(Tangata whenua workshop group, Auckland College of Education, 1983, in Nairn, 2002)
Three forms of racism underpin
colonisation:
·
Personal
racism, where an individual’s negative stereotypes and attitudes towards other
racial groups cause him or her to discriminate against those groups.
·
Institutionalised
racism or structural racism, where the policies and practices of organisations
deny members from an oppressed group access to resources and power; and
·
Ethnocentrism
or cultural racism, where the values, beliefs and ideas that are embedded in
social representations endorse the superiority of one group over the other
(Howitt & Owusu-Bempah, 1994; Jones, 1972).
Institutional
and cultural racism “privileges members of the dominant group in that the whole
society is structured in ways that are familiar and natural to them” (Nairn
& National Standing Committee on Bicultural Issues, [NSCBI], 1997,
p.133). As the Australian Psychological
Society’s position paper on Racism and Prejudice: Psychological Perspectives
(1997) claims, “It creates an
atmosphere in which a group finds itself in a devalued position…” and this in
turn leads to personal racism so that “those who are assumed to be inferior are
treated differently and less favourably in multiple ways” (p. 10). Through a combination of these forms of
racism, European colonists ensured that their own ethnic group was the primary
beneficiary of colonial capitalism, leading to a dominant culture in Australia,
New Zealand and elsewhere often called ‘Western.’
European
Ethnocentrism and Assumed Universality
Because of its origins, colonisation is deeply intertwined with European worldviews. The institutions of the colonising culture, which uphold and promote European worldviews, intentionally replace indigenous systems and come to dominate colonial society. Europeans have downplayed the role of disease, violence and treachery in this process and instead have attributed their cultural and economic dominance in other lands to their cultural “superiority”. Western science has been used to construct the notion of race, which was used to construct the notion of the Aboriginal (including Maori) as inferior (McKinley, 1995). Thus, racism and colonisation have been supported by Western scientific theories of human evolution, eugenics, biological inferiority and cultural deficit models.
However,
Western science went one step further than cultural racism to assume
universality for its worldviews. As a standard part of colonisation, the
European scientific paradigm was introduced as the only valid system of
knowledge. Howitt and Owusu-Bempah (1994) describe the orientation of European
social sciences as more than ethnocentric or culturally racist. They propose
the term Eurocentric to capture the universality assumed by European
worldviews.
Decolonisation
attempts to address the impacts of colonial capitalism, racism and
Eurocentrism, in particular by making visible how colonisation privileges the
colonisers and exploits and disadvantages all others. It can refer to
structural as well as psychological work, and usually begins with making
visible the processes and outcomes of colonisation. Used in a psychological
sense, it has links to processes such as ‘conscientization’ (Freire, 1972) and
the ‘liberation of consciousness’ described by other practitioners such as
Ivey, Ivey and Simek-Morgan (1993) or liberation psychology (Comas-Diaz, Lykes
& Alarcon, 1998). Both indigenous
and coloniser people have a part to play in effective decolonisation work.
Decolonisation
is a process that assists indigenous people to identify as members of a racial
group that has been systematically oppressed by a dominant culture; it enables
them to take action towards social transformation. Facilitating an understanding
of oppressive processes and affirming the legitimacy of a people’s ancestral
culture encourages cultural renewal (Dudgeon & Williams, 2000).
Members
of coloniser groups working on decolonisation come to acknowledge their
personal participation in the structural and cultural racism that maintains
their group’s economic and cultural dominance (Nairn, 2000) and to join others
in collective work for change.
To
understand the contemporary culture(s) of indigenous Australians and New
Zealanders, both pre-contact and contact history needs to be considered. The
indigenous people of Australia consist of two different cultural groups:
mainland Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islander people. Aboriginal people
have been in Australia for 50,000 or even 150,000 years (Broome, 1994;
Commonwealth of Australia, 1998). For Aboriginal people land was not only a
source of sustenance but also the materialisation of the journeys of the
ancestors from the time of creation. Land was not owned but one belonged to
certain areas. Groups and individuals had rights and obligations to their
‘country.’ These obligations included looking after the country and maintaining
sacred sites and performing ceremonies to ensure the country’s wellbeing.
Attachment to land is very powerful for Aboriginal people today. Even for those
not living in their country, there are still spiritual, psychological and
familial bonds with places of origin (For a brief history of the impact of
colonisation in Australia, see Dudgeon, Garvey and Pickett, 2000).
Deeply entrenched cultural
myths about Australia as ‘terra nullius’ (empty land), about Aboriginal people
bowing submissively to white ‘settlers,’ and about Aboriginal people inevitably
‘dying off’ still inform many people’s understanding of history in Australia.
These myths, and this historical perspective, function to legitimise
colonisation and naturalise white interests. Over the past three decades or so,
a history is emerging that challenges such Eurocentric myths and narratives
and, from an indigenous Australian standpoint, identifies the genocide, denial
of human rights, alienation from land, and assimilation to European models of
society.
Former Prime Minister Paul Keating was the first national leader to publicly acknowledge the devastation of Australia’s colonial past that has been masked beneath triumphal nationalist accounts of ‘discovery,’ pioneering spirit, and Christian civility. In his launch of the International Year for the World’s Indigenous People, Keating (1993) declared that European Australians had dispossessed indigenous people: murdered them, taken their land and smashed the culture, removed children from their parents in the assimilation process, and practised discrimination and exclusion.
Amidst a fluctuating political climate in which more conservative forces describe such ‘revisionist’ histories as ‘black-armband’ accounts, cultural renaissance has emerged as a key goal for indigenous people – celebrating survival, taking pride and joy in culture and identity, and revitalising language and cultural practices. Since citizenship was secured in the 1967 Referendum, there has been considerable social and political change marked by such milestones as the goal of self-determination for indigenous Australians; Aboriginal land rights legislation; the formation of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC); the 1990 Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody’s focus on underlying social, cultural and legal issues; the establishment of the 1991 Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation; and the Mabo case and resultant Native Title Act of 1993.
In this wider context
of change, constructions of mental health informed by indigenous people began
to emerge. There was a move away from the disease model towards a focus on
wellness, concepts of holistic health and culturally informed and appropriate
approaches (Hunter, 1997). An increasing number of indigenous mental health
professionals began to contribute, participate and reclaim the authority to
speak for, contextualise and determine indigenous mental health. As a result, a
national consultation report, Ways
Forward: National Consultancy on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Mental Health
(1995) emphasised a philosophical
approach of empowerment and self-determination in the provision of mental
health services for indigenous people (Swan & Raphael, 1995). Mental health
training courses for indigenous people were initiated, and mental health
professionals were required to conceptualise mental health in different ways.
Terms such as ‘self–determination,’ ‘quality of life’ and ‘well-being’ have
recently entered the vocabulary of mental health professionals working in
indigenous settings (Hunter, 1997).
The
Maori migrated from Eastern Polynesia around AD 1000 or 1100 (Te Awekotuku,
Neich, Pendergrast, Davidson, Hakiwai & Starzecka, 1996). Ancient Maori
society was essentially tribal, with each iwi
(tribe) being a nation unto itself (Te Awekotuku, 1991) and holding political
authority as tangata whenua (people
of the land) in their region. Colonisation began in earnest in 1840, after The
Treaty of Waitangi was signed by over five hundred tribal leaders. The Treaty
allowed for the establishment of a settler government, guaranteed that iwi
would maintain their tino rangatiratanga
(sovereignty) and guaranteed protection over property rights and taonga (cultural and social properties)
(Durie, 1996). The Treaty promised that Maori would have equal citizenship
rights to other New Zealanders, implying equal opportunity and access as well
as spiritual and cultural freedom.
An
account of the impact of colonisation from a Maori perspective can be found in
Walker (1990) and from a Pakeha (white settler) perspective in Nairn and
McCreanor (1991). In contravention of the Treaty, white settlers established a
national government excluding Maori and used the British army to force land
sales and seize land. Overt legislation and policy destroyed the economic base
and undermined the Maori spirit and culture. For example, the Tohunga
Suppression Act of 1907 forbade the role of tohunga
(people with superior knowledge in a particular area) and enabled Christianity
to supplant the ancestral gods or spiritual guardians (Roberts, Norman,
Minhinnick, Wihongi, & Kirkwood, 1995). Following the Maori rural to urban
shift in the 1950s and 1960s, tribal structures were discouraged on the grounds
that they obstructed the assimilative process. As a result third or fourth
generation urban migrants were effectively cut off from any tribal links
(Ratima, Durie, Potaka & Ratima, 1993). Today, Maori are over-represented
among the unemployed, the poor, the ill and imprisoned.
Maori have been undergoing a
process of decolonisation. Past damage is being documented and acknowledged.
Maori knowledge that has been submerged, hidden or driven underground is being
revived (Smith, 1999). Different interpretations of the Treaty are still being
debated, but the process of token reparation is underway. “Principles” (that
is, of partnership, protection and equity) have been drawn from the Treaty and
promoted as essential to the relationship between Crown agencies and Maori.
Three developments have accelerated the move towards Maori sovereignty (Durie,
1996a):
· The world-wide move by indigenous people towards self-determination and greater autonomy;
· New Zealand’s reaffirmed commitment to the Treaty of Waitangi in the 1980s and the subsequent inclusion of the Treaty in the obligations (if not legislation) of Government; and
· Recognition, by 1980, that Maori worldviews and Maori understandings of knowledge were themselves distinctive.
There is a higher level of
awareness and debate of Maori rights in New Zealand now than in the 1970s. In
this context, most professional associations (including the NZ Psychological
Society) include in their ethical guidelines the rights of Maori people to
culturally appropriate service; and many public services have attempted some form
of organisational change to provide for Maori aspirations and needs.
The following concepts have
their base in the activism of indigenous groups and their supporters, rather
than in the Western academy.
Indigenous
Authority and Self-Determination - Tino
Rangatiratanga
A
central concept around which change efforts have clustered in New Zealand has
been tino rangatiratanga or the ‘unqualified authority’ of the indigenous
people. Guaranteed in the Treaty of Waitangi, this means that Maori tribes have
self-determined political power to define and resource their priorities. It
means that the indigenous peoples are not just another minority group with
special needs (Te Pumanawa Hauora ki Te Whanganui-A-Tara, Nov, 1993).
Australia,
New Zealand and most Western countries are signatories to the UN Charter that
defines the collective rights of all peoples as the inherent “right of
self-determination” by which “they freely determine their political status and
freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.” Thus, indigenous peoples have the full
right to self-determination that all other peoples of the world have under
international law, including all rights to decolonisation and permanent
sovereignty, as expressed in U.N. General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) of 1960.
[Insert Case Story: Kaupapa
Maori Research about here]
‘True’ Histories for
Colonised and Coloniser
Another founding concept of
decolonisation and anti-racism work in Australia and New Zealand has been the
re-telling of history. In the process of moving towards self-determination,
indigenous people need to focus on an appreciation of themselves, prior to
colonisation, and an understanding of what happened during the time of
colonisation. Rethinking history is an important part of the process, as Smith
states:
Coming to know the past has
been part of the critical pedagogy of decolonisation. To hold alternative
histories is to hold alternative knowledges. The pedagogical implication of
this access to alternative knowledges is that they can form the basis of
alternative ways of doing things. Transforming our colonial views of our own
history (as written by the west), however, requires us to revisit site by site,
our history under western eyes... Telling our stories from the past, reclaiming
the past, giving testimony to the injustices of the past are all strategies
which are commonly employed by indigenous peoples struggling for justice.
(1999, pp. 34-35)
[Insert
Case Story: Decolonisation in Australia about here]
Re-learning history is a key process for the colonising group also. Treaty education for Pakeha in New Zealand re-tells the process of colonisation from a less self-serving perspective than the standard story of a ‘fair fight’ ‘won’ by the colonisers and resulting in the ‘best race relations in the world’ (Nairn & McCreanor, 1991). As coloniser people learn, for example, of the relentless array of legislation passed by their settler governments to break down indigenous education, health and community support systems, they may experience critical shifts in their beliefs and feelings about local social justice.
Social Justice and the Role
of Power in Colonisation
Social justice is a
core concept in any process to redress colonial injustice. There cannot be any
reconciliation or decolonisation to a position of injustice, that is, to accept
and collaborate in an ongoing state of inequality, oppression, marginalisation,
poverty, and powerlessness (Dudgeon & Pickett, 2000). Michael Dodson, former Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner (Council for Reconciliation, 1995)
says:
Social justice must always be considered from a
perspective which is grounded in the daily lives of indigenous Australians. Social
justice is what faces you in the morning. It is awaking in a house with an
adequate water supply, cooking facilities and sanitation. It is the ability to
nourish your children and send them to a school where their education not only
equips them for employment but reinforces their knowledge and appreciation of
their cultural inheritance. It is the prospect of genuine employment and good
health; a life of choices and opportunities, free from discrimination (p. 22).
Social justice means that the history of
our nations is recognised and, within this, the political and cultural
oppression of indigenous people is acknowledged.
The
Australian Council for Reconciliation endorses the following principles in the
achievement of social justice for indigenous Australians:
·
Equality not
just before the law, but in the processes of living together at all levels.
·
Respect for
differences, without imposition and interference.
·
The right to
live as the cultural group chooses.
·
Control of
indigenous destinies and over social processes insofar as indigenous people
wish to engage in them.
·
Empowerment
and self-determination and the resources to put this into effect (Council for
Reconciliation, 1995).
In New Zealand, the Waitangi
Tribunal hears any claim by a Maori group (including land claims) that some
action of the Crown has been prejudicial to them and is in conflict with the
principles of the Treaty (Temm, 1990), thus providing a process for redress for
injustice.
Addressing Structural and
Institutional Racism
In
New Zealand, there has been a focus on structural and institutional racism
rather than on personal racism or prejudice. Maori activism and the terms of
the Treaty encouraged Pakeha anti-racism groups to address structural racism in
the 1970s. As Pakeha Treaty worker Humphries puts it: “overt personal racism is
well understood. Despite its potential for hurt, this is not the form of racism
that undermines the very essence of Maori existence. Rather, it is the denial of difference in ways of being human –
imposed by Pakeha, over and at the expense of those Maori…” (Kirton, 1997,
p.3). Making structural racism visible
usually involves analysing the power structures in an institution, and
attending to which cultural group is making the decisions. Comparing the
intentions of an institution (such as ‘education for all’) with its outcomes
(Maori student achievement falling behind other groups and Maori students
dropping out) reveals social injustice. Placing the responsibility for the
disparity on the institution itself (“Education system fails Maori”) helps to
highlight how our institutions benefit the cultural group who designed them and
imposed them on indigenous people.
[Insert Case Story Pakeha
Debate the Treaty about here]
EMERGING CONCEPTS AND
ISSUES
The concepts and themes in decolonisation work by indigenous people have remained constant, since most features of colonisation have continued. However, the exploitation of indigenous resources and denial of the legitimacy of indigenous worldviews have taken new forms, as follows.
Continuing
Colonisation
“We are still being colonised (and know
it), and ... we are still searching for justice” (Smith, 1999, p.34). One
example of continued exploitation is ‘genetic mapping projects’ which attempt
to map the genetic diversity of isolated and threatened indigenous communities.
Research of this type has deep implications in terms of Maori beliefs about the
sacredness and inherent power of whakapapa (genealogy). Indigenous beliefs
continue to be overlooked as in another example, where blood from the umbilical
cord and the afterbirth is ‘farmed’ to be used in treatments for certain sorts
of diseases. Blood and the placenta are regarded by Maori as highly sacred and
subject to protocols to ensure the well-being of the concerned family is
protected (Smith, 1999, p.100). This ongoing exploitation of intellectual and
genetic property, as well as the continued exploitation of land and peoples is
sometimes termed ‘re-colonisation’ and, when applicable to vulnerable people in
all countries of the world, “globalisation.”
The commercialising and commodification of culture is another ongoing colonising practice, whereby the indigenous culture comes to exist as an exotic commodity to sell, and indigenous activities are practised on terms controlled by the colonising culture, such as for tourism (Nairn, 1990).
The New
Assimilationists
When
working in collaborative ways and working for indigenous people to establish
indigenous paradigms, non-indigenous professionals need to be careful not to
engage in disempowering practices. Their well-intended help and theories are
sometimes elevated as “The Indigenous Way.” Although it appears positive and
supportive to the indigenous community, it may be a form of new assimilation
whereby indigenous people serve as the vehicle for having the non-indigenous
person’s intellectual, emotional and political needs fulfilled. As Cram (1995)
says "many Pakeha researchers have built their careers on the back of
Maori - their research satisfying the criteria set by Pakeha institutions but
offering nothing back to the Maori community in return" (p.7).
Non-Maori
control over and involvement in the conduct of Maori research remains a
contentious issue (Smith, 1999). Some Maori are absolutely opposed to Pakeha
conducting research on Maori (Cram, 1995), believing non-Maori involvement is
unnecessary and counter-productive. It is not only because of their poor
record, or because their different historical, social and cultural view
inhibits an accurate understanding of Maori, but also because their work can
prevent Maori researchers from gaining access to the same funds and data
(Glover, 2001).
Indigenous
people themselves must remain vigilant as they are still co-opted to continue
colonisation. Maori have a word - ‘kupapa’,
which means traitor, to refer to Maori people working for the Crown in a way
that continues rather than deconstructs colonisation.
Endorsing the
Unique Status of Indigenous People
As a result of colonial capitalism’s disruption to population groups over the past 500 years, including the creation of widespread economic refugeedom, colonial societies are composed of many cultural groups. However, the racism of Eurocentric societies creates a sense of competition for ‘cultural space.’ This situation is often used and manipulated by dominant as well as minority cultural groups to deny indigenous rights. Typical arguments are that “multiculturalism leaves no room for biculturalism (or indigenous rights)” and that “indigenous people are just another minority group.” In decolonisation work, it is crucial to endorse the unique status of indigenous peoples while working with the complex histories and rightful claims of numerous cultural groups.
Individuality
and Collectivity in Framing Human Rights and Responsibilities
In working towards social justice, a focus on both collective and individual rights is important because, although people are unique individuals, their humanity depends on their social and cultural context. Western democracy reinforces the notion that human rights are held by individuals and that one’s political power is derived from individual citizenship granted by a nation state. Indigenous and tribal peoples are struggling to retain a basis for their rights as collectives, as well as to retain a non-derivative notion of political authority – the notion that their political authority is self-determined, collectively, by them. For example, the Western process for obtaining informed consent to participate in research is highly individualised. Some information, such as genetic information is collective. Mead (1995) asserts that where the outcomes of research affect families and communities, they should have a role in determining consent.
Addressing Cultural and Constitutional Racism
Developments
in European philosophy and science, such as feminism and post-modern social
science have helped the Western academy to embrace the notion that all human
knowledge and social interaction relies on language and cultural understandings
about the world, and that all people have a ‘culture’ – the dominant group
included. However, typical terms used for the culture of the dominant group are
‘mainstream’ and ‘public.’ Such usage
renders invisible the Eurocentric basis of the dominant culture while pointing
to everyone else as “ethnic” or “diverse.”
Dominant group members can
contribute to reducing their cultural dominance by negotiating (rather than
assuming) the legitimacy and authority of institutions and processes. In
structural terms, this involves ‘depowering’ themselves (Huygens, 1997), and
re-negotiating with indigenous people the constitutions of societal structures,
such as governments, organisations and services. New processes of
accountability may be agreed upon whereby practitioners are monitored by
indigenous supervisors and authorities (e.g. Huygens, 1999). The affirmation of
indigenous authority has implications for all aspects of colonial life – for
the status and methodologies of colonial law, philosophy and science as well as
for constitutional, economic and social systems. In cultural terms, reducing
Eurocentrism involves revealing and questioning the cultural values of the
colonisers (e.g. Black, 1997; Kirton, 1997) so that the dominant group can
learn to ‘other’ themselves and their culture (e.g. Huygens & Sonn, 2000).
The role of psychology/ists in DECOLONISATION
The
discipline and practice of psychology has emerged and grown within a colonial
framework and has played a role in legitimising European dominance and assumed
universality in colonial settings worldwide. Many authors such as Fox and
Prilletensky (1997) and Dudgeon and Pickett (2000) describe psychology as an
example of a practice grounded in Eurocentric culture that purports to be
objective and apolitical. Two fundamental assumptions underlying the discipline
have particularly excluded indigenous people and indigenous realities. These
are the assumption of universal applicability and a preoccupation with
individualism.
Psychology
has underlying assumptions of ‘truth’ based on collecting facts about human
nature, without regard for cultural, historical and political contexts. This
notion of universal truths supports the notion of “progress” that, as time goes
on, we will move closer to the “truth.” Furthermore, the image of humankind is
a homogenised one, with the differences between peoples as individuals and
groups regarded as peripheral. Thus psychology proceeds to focus primarily upon
the individual rather than the interactions between individuals, and makes
little reference to the cultural and historical context of individuals and
groups. This decontextualised image of humanity has assimilationist
implications as diversity, particularly cultural diversity is ignored. As a
result, there is inherent racism in all aspects of psychology: in its
philosophical foundations, practices, training, and in the mindsets of the
professionals that collectively make up the profession. At times, psychology
has directly collaborated with racist ideology and practice. As Howitt and
Owusu-Bempah (1994) point out, academic discussions of race have frequently
been incorporated into adverse and oppressive policies for those of other
races.
Psychologists
can progress the decolonisation of psychology or at least work to minimise the
harmful impact of a colonising psychology at a number of levels. Below we suggest ways in which psychology
can be decolonised at a fundamental theoretical level, at the levels of
individual and community practice and within the broader political arena.
Deconstructing
and Critiquing Dominance and Injustice
A range of psychological perspectives and
approaches provide critiques and alternatives to the approaches used in
dominant mainstream psychology. Some of these include critical psychology,
community psychology, narrative and discursive psychology, feminist psychology
and liberation psychology. Dudgeon and Pickett (2000) propose that these
approaches can be inclusive of indigenous realities and endorse indigenous
rights, because they challenge the dominant mainstream, they work towards
social change and value the marginalised in their own cultural and political
right.
Learning to
Practise “In the Presence of History”
Nairn
and NSCBI (1997) propose that psychologists “must be aware of the cultural
preconceptions, both those of the discipline and their own, that shape their
practice. They must be able to practise ‘in the presence of history’ (Awatere,
1993; Tamasese, 1993) with a strong awareness of the social context” (Nairn
& NSCBI, 1997, p.134). They should be aware of the socio-political systems
in society and how these affect the client’s cultural group (Sue & Sue,
1990). Psychologists need to be aware of their own assumptions, values and
biases and have a critical awareness that acknowledges that they have grown up
in a racist society.
Similarly indigenous people need to be supported to identify positively with their own culture. For example, to support decolonisation Maori researchers need to “have some form of historical and critical analysis of the role of research in the indigenous world” (Smith, 1999, p.5).
Affirming
Indigenous Authority, Expertise and Self-Determination
Dudgeon and Pickett (2000) urge that psychologists be prepared to engage with the indigenous client and community as novices on cultural matters, with a willingness to take and heed advice. Mechanisms need to be developed for collaboration and direction from the client groups, so that indigenous people themselves direct the engagement, whether in interaction between a psychologist and a client, or in establishing services and developing policy. The aim is to enable “culturally just encounters” within which there is “an active balancing of the (cultural) needs and rights of those involved that appropriately includes their peoples” (Nairn & NSCBI, 1997, p.134).
The Maori Nursing
Council's work on cultural safety recognises inequalities within professional
interactions as representing in microcosm the inequalities that have prevailed
through history (Ramsden, 1991). The cultural safety approach enables safe
service to be defined by those who receive the service through accountability
structures that put non-dominant groups in the position of monitoring the
outcomes of cultural safety training and practice (Nursing Council of New
Zealand, 1996).
Further along a
perceived continuum of attendance to indigenous needs is the Bicultural Therapy
Project. In this example, a Department of Justice Psychological Service
developed a relationship with local tribes and enlisted their participation in
extending the range of practitioners to include Maori experts in healing. Maori
clients could work with a Department psychologist, a Maori expert or both. The
psychologists did not become experts in Maori psychology, but rather learned to
recognise the limits of their own expertise and to refer appropriately (Glover
& Robertson, 1997; McFarlane-Nathan, 1996; Roger & White, 1997).
Nyoongar elder Wilkes (2000), patron of the Centre
for Aboriginal Studies at Curtin University in Western Australia, recommends
that mental health professionals should never be afraid to approach Aboriginal
clients to give them the option of seeing a cultural healer, thus demonstrating
respect for the status of such people; and that Aboriginal healing experts need
to be recognised with appropriate remuneration equivalent to that paid to white
mental health professionals. As he asserts, “the wellbeing of Aboriginal
clients depends upon the use of Aboriginal healers” (p522).
Listening,
Protesting and Advocating
Indigenous people and their
allies have used a variety of strategies and tools to facilitate change.
Advocacy groups have formed and reformed to organise rallies, marches,
petitions, sit-ins and land occupations. Arts, crafts, song, dance,
story-telling and theatre have been utilised to educate and motivate change.
Political lobbying, upskilling and infiltrating ‘the system’ to work from
within are popular modern-day tactics. Whether tribal elders meet with
Government officials to negotiate across the boardroom table, or Maori protestors
cut down flagpoles or behead statues of colonisers, all of these actions are
legitimate social change avenues. They have succeeded at gaining attention for
desperate and urgent injustices, such as black deaths in custody. Psychologists
can make an important contribution by aligning themselves with indigenous goals
and becoming advocates for change.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, although there
are promising examples of psychology used in the service of indigenous rights,
it remains to be seen whether the decolonising approaches described in this
chapter become part of a psychology agenda for well-being and liberation. We conclude with the words of Wilkes (2000)
to psychologists in Australia:
Reconciliation cannot take
place until the mean spiritedness of the nation is itself healed….All healers
know that it is no good just treating the symptoms. Together we must deal with
the cause … As healers together, black and white, we are responsible for
healing the mind, body and soul. (p.
522)
Resources
1.
The Canadian Labour Congress has an extensive website with resources on human
rights, racism, and aboriginal issues. Visit at http://www.clc-ctc.ca/human-rights
2.
The Australian Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission has extensive
information on the plight of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island people in
Australia. Visit http://www.hreoc.gov.au/social_justice/
3.
Native Web Resources contains links to many useful sites dealing with
colonization and aboriginal issues around the world. Their website is at http://www.nativeweb.org/resources/
4.
There is a very interesting world wide web for Maori organizations in Aoteroa
New Zealand. http://www.maori.org.nz/
Participant
exercises
With
all participatory work to raise awareness of racism and colonisation, it is
important to create contexts in which indigenous people are not exposed to
further racism. You may want to
consider the most appropriate groupings or caucuses in which to undertake these
exercises so that participants can speak and share safely with others in their
group.
·
Using
a self-reflective process, consider how you personally, professionally and
politically, on a daily basis, contribute to, support or undermine: colonizing
acts, redress of disparity and re-establishment of the centrality of indigenous
life to indigenous peoples. Are you an ally? (See Dudgeon & Pickett, 2000;
Dudgeon & Williams, 2000).
·
Plan
a programme evaluation which attends to and critiques the disparity between
universal intentions for all and differential outcomes for indigenous and
coloniser service users. Show how your
plan is an example of “practising in the presence of history” and takes account
of historical processes and social context.
·
Create a
research design that validates indigenous epistemologies and methodologies.
Show how you have incorporated your own role in a way that is appropriate for
your cultural background, and how you would ensure your accountability and
safety.
·
Design a
multi-level intervention to achieve constitutional and cultural changes in a
service as well as improving service delivery to indigenous service users. Show how your intervention would support
self-determination for indigenous people, and contribute to “right” relationships and “culturally just”
encounters.
Awatere-Huata, D. (1993).
Challenges to psychology in Aotearoa. In L. W. Nikora (Ed.), Cultural Justice and Ethics. (pp 13-20).
Waikato: National Standing Committee on Bicultural Issues, New Zealand
Psychological Society.
Australian Psychological
Society. (1997). Racism and Prejudice:
Psychological perspectives. Melbourne: Australian Psychological Society.
Black, R. (1997). Beyond the
pale: an exploration of Pakeha cultural awareness. Unpublished Master's Thesis, Psychology Department, University of
Waikato, Hamilton.
Campbell, B. (2000). Kawanatanga: a Tauiwi
perspective. In Proceedings of Treaty Conference 2000. (pp 58-61).Tamaki Makaurau/Auckland: Treaty Conference Publications
Group.
Comas-Diaz, L., Lykes, M. B., & Alarcon, R. D.
(1998). Ethnic conflict and the psychology of liberation in Guatemala, Peru and
Puerto Rico. American Psychologist, 53,
778-792.
Council for Reconciliation. (1995). Going forward: Social justice for the first
Australians – a submission to the Commonwealth Government. Canberra: AGPS.
Cram, F. (1995). Ethics and cross-cultural research. [A draft paper.] Auckland: University of Auckland.
Dudgeon, P. & Pickett, H. (2000). Psychology and
reconciliation: Australian perspectives. Australian Psychologist, 35, 82-87.
Dudgeon, P. & Williams, R. (2000). Culturally appropriate therapies, models and services. In P. Dudgeon, D. Garvey & H. Pickett (Eds.), Working with Indigenous Australians: A handbook for psychologists. (pp. 389- 394). Perth: Gunada Press.
Durie, M.H. (1996). Characteristics of Maori health research. Paper presented at Hui Whakapiripiri, Hongoeka Marae.
Freire, P. (1972). Pedagogy
of the oppressed. London: Penguin Books.
Glover, M. (1996). Evidence and health practice Health Research Council consultative conference: A hui report. [Unpublished report available from the author.]
Glover, M. (2001). The effectiveness of a Maori noho marae smoking cessation intervention utilising a kaupapa Maori methodology. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Auckland.
Glover, M. & Robertson, P.
Facilitating development of Maori Psychology. (1997). In. Love, H. &
Whittaker, W. (Eds.). Practice issues for
clinical and applied psychologists in New Zealand. (pp 136-146).Wellington:
The New Zealand Psychological Society.
Howitt, D., & Owusu,-Bempah, J. (1994). The racism of psychology: Time for a change.
London: Harvester and Wheatsheaf.
Huygens, I. (1997). Towards social change partnerships: responding to empowerment of oppressed groups with voluntary depowerment of dominant groups. Paper presented at 6th Biennial conference of Society for Community Research and Action, Columbia, SC, U.S.A.
Huygens, I. (1999). An
accountability model for Pakeha practitioners. In Proceedings of Maori and
Psychology Research seminar, University of Waikato: Maori and Psychology
Research Unit.
Huygens, I. (2001). Feminist
Attempts at power-sharing in Aotearoa: embarrassing herstory or significant
learning towards Treaty-based structures? Feminism
& Psychology, 11(3), 393-400.
Huygens, I. (2001a). Journeys
Away from Dominance: dissonance, struggle and right relationships - the journey
to accepting indigenous authority. Paper presented at the 8th Biennial
Conference of the Society for Community Research and Action, Atlanta, GA.
Huygens, I. & Sonn, C. (2000). Stories about Reflection and
Transformation in the Pursuit of Social Justice. The Community Psychologist, 33 (2), 24-25.
Ivey, A. E., Ivey, M. B., & Simek-Morgan, L.
(1993). Counselling and psychotherapy: A
multicultural perspective (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Jackson, M. (1996). Maori health research and the Treaty of Waitangi. In Te Ropu Rangahau Hauora a Eru Pomare. (Ed.). Hui whakapiripiri: A hui to discuss strategic directions for Maori health research (pp. 8-10). Wellington: Wellington School of Medicine.
Keating, P. (1993). International year for the world’s
Indigenous peoples: Launch speech. Aboriginal
Law Bulletin, 3 (64), 4-6.
Kilgour, R. & Keefe, V. (1992). Kia piki te ora: The collection of Maori health statistics. Wellington: Department of Health.
Kirton, J. D. (1997). Paakeha/Tauiwi: seeing the unseen: critical
analysis of links between discourse, identity, 'blindness' and encultured
racism. Kirikiriroa/ Hamilton: Waikato Antiracism Coalition.
McFarlane-Nathan, G. H. (1996}. The bicultural therapy project: Developing a
psychological model for working with Maori. Paper presented to the annual
conference of the New Zealand Psychological Society, Christchurch.
McNamara, M. & Moore, P.
(2000). Tino Rangatiratanga in the Performing Arts: The Story of Magdalena
Aotearoa.. In Proceedings
of Treaty Conference 2000.
p116-121. Tamaki Makaurau/Auckland:
Treaty Conference Publications Group.
Mead, A.T. (1995, July). The integrity of the human gene, genes and whakapapa. Paper presented to the New Zealand Health Research Council Consensus Development Workshop ‘Whose genes are they anyway? The use and misuse of human genetic information’. Wellington.
Nairn, M. (1990). Understanding
colonisation. Auckland: Workshop material distributed by CCANZ Programme on
Racism.
Nairn, M. (2000). Decolonisation
for Pakeha. Auckland: Workshop material distributed by CCANZ Programme on
Racism.
Nairn, M. (2002). Director’s
Overview of Programme to Overcome Racism. Presented to Conference of Churches
in Aotearoa New Zealand, August, 2002.
Nairn, R. & McCreanor, T.
(1991). Race Talk and commonsense: patterns in Pakeha discourse on Maori/Pakeha
relation in New Zealand. Journal of
Language and Social Psychology, 10 (4), 245-262.
Nairn, R. & The National
Standing Committee on Bicultural Issues (NSCBI). (1997). Cultural justice and
ethics in psychological practice. In Love, H. & Whittaker, W. (Eds.). Practice issues for clinical and applied
psychologists in New Zealand. (pp. 127-135). Wellington: The New Zealand Psychological Society.
Ngawhika, N. (1996). Te Awa a Te Atua: Traditional and contemporary practices of menstruation in the lives of Ngati Awa women. [Unpublished Summer Studentship report prepared for the Health Research Council.]
Nursing Council of New Zealand.
(1996). Guidelines for the Cultural
Safety Component in Nursing Education. Wellington: Ministry of Education.
Parata, H. (1996). Treaty implications for Crown information, collection, dissemination and ownership. In. Statistics New Zealand. (Ed.). Proceedings of the Maori users of statistics conference, 20-21 November 1996, Hamilton, New Zealand. (pp. 57-66). Wellington: Statistics New Zealand.
Pihama, L. In Smith, L.T. (1996). Kaupapa Maori health research. In Te Ropu Rangahau Hauora a Eru Pomare. (Ed.). Hui whakapiripiri: A hui to discuss strategic directions for Maori health research (pp. 14-30). Wellington: Wellington School of Medicine.
Pomare, E. (1992). Te Manawa Hauora: Background information for HRC site visit Friday 24th April 1992. Wellington: Wellington School of Medicine.
Prilletensky, I. & Fox, D. (1997). Introducing
critical psychology: Values, assumptions, and status quo. In D. Fox & I.
Prilleltensky (Eds.), Critical
psychology: an introduction. (pp. 3-20) London: Sage Publications.
Proceedings of Treaty Conference 2000: Tauiwi
communities come together to affirm the Treaty of Waitangi and explore the
future of Aotearoa.. (2000). Tamaki Makaurau/Auckland: Treaty Conference
Publications Group.
Ramsden, I. (1991). Kawa Whakaruruhau: Cultural Safety in
Nursing Education in Aotearoa. Wellington: Ministry of Education.
Ratima, K.H., Durie, M.H., Potaka, U. & Ratima, M.M. (1993). Cervical screening in Maori women: Knowledge and service factors. Palmerston North: Massey University, Te Pumanawa Hauora.
Roberts, M., Norman, W., Minhinnick, N., Wihongi, D. & Kirkwood, C. (1995). Kaitiakitanga: Maori perspectives on conservation. Pacific Conservation Biology, 2, 7-20.
Roger, M. & White, B.
(1997). Pakeha Process in the Bicultural Therapy Project . Paper presented at
Psychological Services Annual Conference, Department of Corrections, Rotorua.
Smith, L.T. (1995, February). Toward kaupapa Maori research. Paper presented at Matawhanui Conference (Maori University Teachers Conference), Massey University.
Smith, L.T. (1996). Kaupapa Maori health research. In Te Ropu Rangahau Hauora a Eru Pomare. (Ed.). Hui whakapiripiri: A hui to discuss strategic directions for Maori health research (pp. 14-30). Wellington: Wellington School of Medicine.
Smith, L.T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. London: Zed Books and Dunedin: University of Otago Press.
Sue, D. W. & Sue, D.
(1990). Counselling the culturally
different: Theory and practice. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Tamasese,
K. (1993). Interface of gender and culture. In L.W. Nikora (Ed.). Cultural Justice and Ethics. Waikato: National
Standing Committee on Bicultural Issues, New Zealand Psychological Society.
Te Awekotuku, N. (1991). He tikanga whakaaro: Research ethics in the Mäori community. Wellington: Manatu Maori.
Te Awekotuku, N., Neich, R.,
Pendergrast, M., Davidson, J., Hakiwai, A. & Starzecka, D.C. (Ed.). (1996).
Maori art and culture. Auckland:
David Bateman.
Te Pumanawa Hauora ki Te Whanganui-A-Tara. (1993). Report to the Te Runanga O Toa Rangatira on the Whanau Wellbeing Project of the Ora Toa Health Unit: First evaluation report. Wellington: School of Medicine.
Watene-Haydon, N., Keefe-Ormsby, V., Reid P. & Robson, B. (n.d.). Issues of research and evaluation by indigenous peoples. Paper presented at the Australasian Evaluation Society Conference on Evaluation: Are you being served? Sydney.
Wilkes, R. (2000). The Last Word. In P. Dudgeon, D. Garvey & H. Pickett (Eds.) Working with Indigenous Australians: A handbook for psychologists. (pp 519-522). Perth: Gunada Press.
Bios
Dr Marewa Glover is a Maori woman of Nga Puhi, Irish and English descent. She has majored in Psychology from her undergraduate years at the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia, through to Masters at the University of Waikato, where she concurrently studied for a Diploma in Community Psychology. Since 1995, she has worked as a Maori health consultant/contract researcher undertaking a range of evaluation research, advisory roles and training jobs, particularly in public health and more specifically in the area of tobacco control. Her Doctorate research was on Maori smoking cessation behaviour. She is currently a Hohua Tutengaehe Postdoctoral Research Fellow in Applied Behavioural Science at the University of Auckland.
Pat Dudgeon was born in Darwin, Northern
Territory. Her people are Bardi, from the Kimberley on the north-west coast of
Australia. She is a psychologist and current head of the Centre for Aboriginal
Studies at Curtin University. For several years she has been active in the
discipline of psychology particularly with the Australian Psychological
Society, serving as convenor of the Interest Group Aboriginal Issues,
Aboriginal People and Psychology.
Ingrid Huygens was born in Auckland, New
Zealand, to Dutch immigrants. Her
Master's thesis concerned attitudes by New Zealanders to the accents of Dutch,
English and Maori speakers. She has been working as a Community Psychologist
since 1983 and as a Pakeha anti-racism educator since 1989. She is currently
undertaking Doctoral research at University of Waikato into processes of
conscientisation for Pakeha about Maori self-determination.
By
Marewa Glover
In the New Zealand context, traditional and new Maori paradigms and theoretical frameworks compete for recognition in a research environment dominated by Western knowledges. Kaupapa Maori research is an emerging methodology that seeks to facilitate and support decolonisation and Maori development. The term kaupapa means to lay down the philosophy, thus kaupapa Maori establishes Maori epistemology and culture as that foundation. This case study outlines the key principles by which a growing number of Maori researchers are choosing to work.
Kaupapa Maori research
is distinguished by Maori control and is frequently described as research by Maori,
for Maori and with Maori. Kaupapa Maori research takes for granted the validity
and legitimacy of Maori, the importance of Maori language and culture (Smith,
1999, p.185). Emancipatory aims are a significant component: “Intrinsic to kaupapa Maori theory is an
analysis of existing power structures and societal inequalities. Kaupapa Maori
theory therefore aligns with critical theory in the act of exposing underlying
assumptions” (Pihama, 1996, p.16). However, there are differing views on the
value of critical theory. Bishop (cited in Smith, 1999) disagrees, saying
instead that critical approaches to research have “failed” to address the
issues of communities such as Maori and that the development of alternative
approaches by Maori reflects a form of resistance to critical theory. Smith
argues that kaupapa Maori is a “local” theoretical positioning (p.186).
Maori control over the research extends to “control over the agenda for research” (Smith, 1996, p.25). Priorities for research are most often defined by Pakeha professionals rather than by the communities being studied. “As a result, the key issues (as seen by the community) have often not been addressed, and the research has often been primarily of academic value” (Pomare, 1992, p. 8). Further, most of this research on Maori has been “obsessed with describing various modes of cultural decay” (Smith, 1999, p.87) and the common practice has been to measure Maori by comparing Maori with non-Maori (Kilgour & Keefe, 1992). There is an expectation “that Maori outcomes will be the same as non-Maori outcomes and that non-Maori strategies can achieve the same level of effective outcomes for Maori as non-Maori” (Watene-Haydon et al., no date, p.492). This is an assumption that is rejected by some Maori. For example, Durie (1996) said this goal implies that “…the same measuring rod can be used for all people or that similar outcomes are desirable. That would be an assimilative device, totally unacceptable to Maori and, more to the point inconsistent with the finding that health and culture are inseparable” (p.7).
Research, instead, should focus on and celebrate progress (Glover, 1996). It should benefit Maori (Te Awekotuku, 1991). Research offers an opportunity to set right past impacts. Research can support social change, particularly kaupapa Maori research that, located within the wider struggle for tino rangatiratanga, openly “addresses the prevailing ideologies of cultural superiority which pervade our social, economic and political institutions” (Smith, 1995).
Kaupapa Maori research is noted for its commitment to the involvement of Maori research participants and their communities throughout the various stages of the research (Ngawhika, 1996). Attending to ethics and accountability is a key requirement of researchers. Consultation with iwi authority structures may be conducted to determine research needs and priorities, and to negotiate permission and access to communities.
Kaupapa Maori research is conducted
in accordance with Maori tikanga
(protocols) and upholds the mana (power
and dignity) of all involved. Different relationships or interactions have
specific cultural protocols that apply to them. For instance, “there are
cultural protocols that relate to the integrity of whakapapa (geneaology), which we see inextricably linked to the
physical gene” (Mead, 1995, p.3). For
Maori, knowledge itself is tapu (sacred).
This tapu is put at risk when knowledge is shared, especially if the result is
commercialisation. If this happens the “sacredness” and “fertility” is lost,
and the knowledge becomes “common” (Roberts, 1995).
For the reasons listed above, Maori regularly express concerns relating to the use of research data, security, control and ownership of data. The concept of kaitiaki (guardianship), rather than ownership, is important to Maori. As Jackson (1996) explains “ownership which is a very Pakeha capitalist view” is designed to protect commercial interests (p.10).
How information is analysed is as important as the other issues already discussed. Analysis done in accordance with a Maori worldview uses a broad, holistic approach. The re-emergence of traditional Maori frameworks for assessing, monitoring and promoting evaluation has been paralleled by the development of new and appropriate models from which Maori may work.
Case Story:
Decolonisation in Australia
by
Pat Dudgeon
Indigenous people have been actively
discouraged from education. The first official indigenous graduate from an
Australian university was in 1968. Hence, participation in higher education is
extremely challenging but empowering in a number of different aspects.
Curtin
University has a twelve month course that prepares Aboriginal students for
tertiary studies. Called the Aboriginal Bridging Course, it has been operating
for about 20 years. Hundreds of people have undertaken the course. Of those who
complete, some have gone on to mainstream degrees, while others have gone into
employment. For all, participation in the course has been a signpost in their
lives. Like the birth of a child the experience is one that changes their
lives.
Until recently, the true history of
our people was not available to us. There were stories told by the elders of
families and cultural ways that were practised and spoken about privately, but
the dominant society did not acknowledge these. Many of us grew up being taught
a history at school that ignored the presence in Australia, or worse painted a
negative picture, of our culture and people. We were told we were savage,
uncivilised and that we did not deserve the country as we did not put it to
‘good use.’ We were told that our people did not fight for the land, so even
the pride of defiance was denied to us.
The Aboriginal Bridging Course
teaches Aboriginal Studies from an indigenous perspective. For many students
this is the first time they are offered a different view of their history and
culture. The colonial past is close for Australians. Most families have living
members that grew up on missions and reserves, were forcibly removed and lived
under the various Aborigines Acts where standard human rights were denied and
one had to seek permission from authorities to move location, work, and marry.
Many older people still have their exemption papers that gave them conditional
Australian citizenship. Until the 1960’s, assimilationist policies towards
Aboriginal people prevailed, hence many students grew up in hostile and racist
environments, where cultural ways were hidden and not celebrated.
At the beginning of the course, students are sometimes hostile towards
our approach and resist the process. They say that they do not want to be
‘political’ or become ‘radical blacks.’ However, in the process of learning
about their history and identity, they often reframe life experiences they may
not have previously defined as outcomes of racism or segregation. Some have an
identity crisis causing them to rethink who they are, what happened in their
families, and how they have been ‘lied’ to by white society. The process of
understanding their positioning in White society clarifies and explains why
they have been feeling negative, angry, inadequate, disillusioned, marginalised
and uncomfortable identifying as an Aboriginal.
After this introspective period,
students go through a radical stage of anger and fierce pride in their cultural
history and identity. During this period some students dislike white people as
they are symbolic of the oppressive history and current inequity that our
people have suffered. They often make negative comments about White society and
White people, which can be difficult for non-Aboriginal lecturers. One of our
indigenous lecturers decided not to come to the defence of White people and
recommends that non-Aboriginal lecturers do not take these comments personally
or become defensive. As she explains it, this is part of the decolonisation
process for students. Becoming aware of their history and how they and their
people have been oppressed assists in their healing and affirms the positives
of their cultural identity.
Case
Story: Pakeha Debate the Treaty
By
Ingrid Huygens
In response to Maori calls for
dialogue about colonisation, Pakeha anti-racism groups in New Zealand launched
a national campaign in 1986 to educate our own cultural group. The aim of
Project Waitangi was for Pakeha ‘to study and debate the Treaty of Waitangi in
order to understand Pakeha commitments under the Treaty.’ Targeting government,
community and other public service organisations, Pakeha educators used adult
education methodology to present a more critical view of colonial history, and
to encourage participants to consider the complicity of their organisations in
ongoing structural and cultural racism. Wherever possible, we would facilitate
a sense of collective responsibility among staff for the racist outcomes of
their institutions’ services and support actions for institutional change.
Maori monitors observed and guided our workshops and led separate indigenous
caucuses when they deemed necessary.
Evaluating the contribution of
Treaty education to changes in institutional practices and outcomes is complex.
Government services and charitable organisations, almost without exception,
make reference to the guarantees of the Treaty in their charters, aims or
constitutions. On the other hand, only a modest number of organisations,
notably feminist and other values-based organisations (Huygens, 2001) have
attempted structural change to give expression to tino rangatiratanga, or
unqualified indigenous authority.
We
organised a national conference drawing together representatives from tertiary
educational institutions, local bodies, libraries, women’s and church
organisations to present their attempts
to implement the guarantees of the Treaty in their organisations (Proceedings
of Treaty Conference 2000). Their accounts covered time-spans of three to 16
years, during which all the workplaces had been exposed to education about the
Treaty, and some had restructured to give expression to indigenous authority.
The following discursive themes arose from an analysis of the accounts:
·
All
the Pakeha organisational representatives involved in Treaty implementation
accepted and affirmed indigenous political authority - they used language that
implied a sense of accountability to this authority, and a sense of commitment
in relation to it.
·
Many
described dissonance, tension, and struggle in the process of organisational
change.
·
Most had
adopted a collective or team approach on the journey of attempting change.
·
In those few
organisations where constitutional changes had given rise to Maori authority
co-existing with Pakeha structures, Pakeha described a sense of ‘right’
relationship with Maori people (Huygens, 2001a).
Reflecting
on these themes, it may be that affirming indigenous authority is a crucial
shift in the thinking and practice of coloniser peoples who become active in
decolonisation work. As the constitution of NZ Women’s Refuge states, “we
consensually affirm the right of approval by Maori caucus… [in all
organisational decisions]” (Campbell, 2000, p. 61). Experiencing the new
relationship arising from dual and co-existing authority held by coloniser and
indigenous groups may also be significant:
“…a relationship between Pakeha/tauiwi
(non-indigenous) and Tangata Whenua… is based on the two groups maintaining
their individual sovereignty” (McNamara and Moore, 2000, p.119). Finally,
adopting a collective approach among the coloniser group may be critical, since
the target of change is shared cultural institutions and practices in colonial
settings.