| Summary: | Indigenous self-determination is primarily a question of control over our own bodies, communities, resources and land. Most Indigenous peoples in North and South America as well as the South Pacific today find themselves dominated by nation-states which are governed by the descendants of settlers: removed from traditional lands, resources and cultural patrimony. Often this domination has brought Indigenous peoples into political and even armed conflict with settler controlled nation-states. This domination of Indigenous populations and separation from their resources and lands has severed Indigenous self-determination, disrupting their autonomy over their customary lands and its resources. Biculturalism has been one answer proposed to reverse the trend of dispossession faced by Indigenous communities. In Aotearoa/New Zealand, biculturalism has become government policy, incorporated into legislation in an effort to substantiate the partnership between Maori and the Crown first proposed by the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840. This dissertation's primary focus is on evaluating biculturalism as a model for Indigenous self-determination. One component of biculturalism in Aotearoa/New Zealand is the inclusion of Maori conceptual regulators within the legislative acts of the nation. This pluralistic turn within New Zealand law is transforming not only the legal, but also the physical and cultural landscapes of the nation. The comprehensive Resource Management Act of 1991 (RMA) is one example of the incorporation of the government's bicultural discourse within the legal framework of New Zealand. The inclusion of Maori concepts such as kaitiakitanga has altered the framework within which resource management is practiced and adjudicated in New Zealand. In an effort to explore how the inclusion of Maori concepts within the RMA has furthered or hindered Maori self-determination this work focuses on telling the stories of several Maori who act as kaitiaki within their own communities. The exercise of self-determination by Maori, or any other Indigenous people, does not happen against an inert backdrop but is grounded in the local politics and history of the place. These stories provide evidence of the successes and failures of the RMA in furthering biculturalism and providing Maori with a full sharing in the processes of government and the exercising of power. === xii, 290 leaves
|
|---|
