of 212 1)The Principle of self-determination or relative autonomy

2) The Principle of validating and legitimating cultural aspirations and identity 3) The Principle of incorporating culturally preferred pedagogy

4) The Principle of mediating socio-economic and home difficulties 5) The Principle of incorporating cultural structures

6) The Principle of a shared and collective vision / philosophy (pp. 8-11)

These principles resonate with Māori researchers who use Kaupapa Māori theory. They point to a holistic collective approach to research rather than as an individualistic activity; the ability to enable their lived culture within their research. In addition to the principles above, other researchers have attempted to identify important aspects of culture. The following is a list of values regarding Māori tourism, based on Smiths classification as well and other sources,

1) Wairuatanga [Spirituality] 2) Whānaungatanga [Kinship]

3) Ngā Matatini Māori [Māori diversity] 4) Kaitiakitanga [Guardianship]

5) Manākitanga [Hospitality]

6) Tino Rangatiratanga [Sovereignty] 7) Kotahitanga [Unity]

8) Tūhono [Alignment]

9) Pūrotu [Transparency] (Zygadlo, McIntosh, Matunga, Fairweather, & Simmons, 2003, p. 23)

Zygadlo et al (2003) also contemplate the term Ngā Matatini Māori [Māori Diversity], as a cultural value. A literal translation of this term is “The many faces of Māori”. This highlights the extant diversity within Māori society, providing a cautionary note that Māori society is complex and textured, not singular. Continual attempts to lump Māori into singular notional groups are highlighted where “ethnicity has replaced traditional whakapapa” (Carter, 2003, p. 6). Humans tend to view in terms of binary (opposite) relationships (L. T. Smith, 1999) and western scholarship seeks to define by classification, separation and demarcation. Contrarily, Māori culture defines by inclusion rather than by separation and reductionalism. Kaupapa Māori theory therefore provides a more relevant methodology better aligned to lived reality.

2. (4)(b) The content and context of Kaupapa Māori theory in this research

Kaupapa Māori theory is often used as a tool enabling critical analysis, resistance and emancipation to enable positive outcomes for Māori. However, whilst its utility to help facilitate positive change for Māori should not be undervalued, its usage for emancipative reasons should logically decrease over time as imbalances reduce. Māori are however a long way from being in that position. In this thesis, Kaupapa Māori theory methodology is not purposely used to create resistance, provide critical analysis of a hegemonic other, or even to privilege indigenous voice. This is because doing so acknowledges a conflicting, opposing and antagonistic relationship with a significant other that does not adequately reflect the complex interlinked nature of actual lived relationships. Furthermore, the use of

Page 65 of 212

the word “privileging” draws us into the very dialectic binary dichotomies disparaged in this thesis. The question of the form of methodology for this research becomes thus a vexing question.

Kaupapa Māori theory is therefore used in this research to enable a naturalistic state, allowing focus on the connective nature of whakapapa and development of understanding. This stance may represent a slight shift from how others have used Kaupapa Māori theory previously. Ideas in this thesis are as much as possible, expressed in considered, natural and respectful ways, actively acknowledging the basis on which this research is undertaken. Through engaging whakapapa, relationships cease to be viewed as simple, binary and linear, instead transforming into complex, layered and fundamentally interconnected mechanisms enabling active interaction within theoretical and practical space. The conceptual entity that is the significant hegemonic other disappears and transforms, entering into a larger connecting space which actively acknowledges and respects the whakapapa and mana of everyone and thing within it. Inter and intra-relationships are considered and vitally important within the overarching schema of fundamental interconnection that is whakapapa. Significantly, whakapapa does not ignore or subjugate history or conflict. It furthermore also acknowledges and fully reflects any divergent viewpoints.

2. (4)(c) Mātauranga Māori

Nepe (1991) locates Mātauranga Māori in the metaphysical world, distinct to Māori, and differentiated from other knowledge through the way Māori conceptualize and understand relationships such as the past, present and future, the dead and the living. Breaking down these thoughts the metaphysical world, refers to the nature of human belief that deals with the principles of knowing, existence and being (Marsden, 1989) in order to understand the “ultimate reality” (p. 11). Māori view the universe as process, interconnected and “bound together by spirit.”, (p. 9).

Those principles are encapsulated in creation stories that describe a Māori perspective on the origins of life. An example of this perspective is contained within the following karakia [prayer] which describes how Ngāi Tahu is connected to the land that is Te Wai Pounamu

1718

,

17 _{This Karakia refers to Tū te Rakiwhānoa. This demigod is noted as being from Waitaha tribal traditions, not}

Ngāti Māmoe nor Ngāi Tahu and is further reflective of how the collective body known as Ngāi Tahu is based on the whakapapa of the earliest inhabitants to the South Island and from which all Ngāi Tahu claim descent and mana whenua status, even though notably they are not specifically mentioned in section 2 of the ("Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu Act," 1996) which describes the meaning of Ngāi Tahu.

18 _{Note that the Ngāi Tahu version of creation differs to other tribes in that Rakinui’s (Ranginui in the North}

Island dialect) first liaison is with Pohārua ō te Pō and from which children included Aoraki, Rakiroa, Rāraki and Rārakiroa, which thus makes Papatūānuku the mother in law of Aoraki.

Page 66 of 212