How mātauranga, te reo, tikanga and other taonga is protected and uplifted
This snippet comes from the submission of the Indigenous Genomics Institute. Ko wai mātou? The Indigenous Genomics Institute (IGI) (currently an LLC in the process of transferring to a charitable trust) began coalescing in 2020 in recognition that a gap existed in the RSI ecosystem in “for Māori, by Māori” guidance and leadership around genomics. We aim to be a resource and a voice for Māori communities, hapū, and iwi when it comes to educating whānau about genomics, empowering them to utilise genomics for their own kaupapa, and engaging with genomics researchers.
Embedding Te Tiriti in a reimagined RSI system will require greater protection for the various taonga of Māori of interest to the RSI system, including taonga species, their data, and mātauranga. There have been relatively recent examples where taonga species have had their genomes sequenced, and the data has been placed on overseas data repositories, extinguishing any rights to benefits under Te Tiriti. When a conversation with free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC; “United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples,” 2007) for uploading data offshore occurs with local communities in language that is “reMāorified”/Indigenised (“reMāorification”, a term coined by Moana Jackson: Cairns, 2020) so that Māori communities thoroughly understand the risks, and they exercise their tino rangatiratanga to make a decision to upload the data offshore, kei te pai. However, in many of these cases, such conversations are not documented in the methods, nor are the Māori communities with kaitiakitanga responsibilities for the samples mentioned in the acknowledgements, suggesting these conversations have not taken place. Museums seem to be particularly represented in “overseas lending” practices, which allows colonisation to cut twice – once when the samples were taken historically without consulting with kaitiaki, and again when this lack of engagement cuts once more. Full, prior and informed consent as a model would facilitate the “reMāorification” of science, assisting tikanga experts working with scientists.
All research with Māori communities should be compliant with the concerns raised in WAI262 and any re-imagining of the RSI sector needs to include the ability for Māori communities to have sovereignty over data collected from within their takiwā/rohe. Despite institutions having over two decades since WAI262 to implement responsiveness to Māori and mātauranga within institutional policy, some seem resistant to change. One way to incentivize change would be to provision public funds only to institutions that have a comprehensive policy on Te Tiriti and Māori responsiveness i.e., institutions that have signalled that they are ready to move forward working constructively with whānau, hapū, and iwi Māori, and have all the policies and practices in place to do this in a mutually beneficial way.
Furthermore, tikanga experts should be involved in discussions of data repositories to ensure data is stored safely (e.g. considerations about where the data of the dead are stored relative to that of the living), as well as appropriate protocols (e.g. karakia) being implemented when data is collected/samples taken. In addition, education is again key, to ensure that RSI practitioners are aware of their obligations to taonga under WAI262, and to ensure that any work with Māori communities does not rely on extractive use of mātauranga. In addition, an RSI system that funds “non-traditional outputs” related to mātauranga, and the safe guarding of mātauranga is important (e.g. it may not be appropriate for mātauranga to be recorded, but instead passed down to the next kaitiaki of this knowledge). In short, there are strong opportunities for New Zealand to lead the world in data collection/management/storage protocols that enshrine the values and priorities of Indigenous Peoples.
The role for te reo Māori and tikanga Māori in a newly envisioned RSI system has not yet been adequately signalled within the green paper. This is despite the strong projections of te reo Māori and tikanga through research conducted at kura kaupapa and PhD theses presented at wānanga. In te reo Māori immersion spaces from kōhanga reo all the way through to wānanga and whare wānanga, te reo Māori and tikanga are at the heart of research through the act of heritage deliberation, discussion, cooperation, and the dissemination of knowledge. The underpinning te reo and tikanga Māori facilitate active and rich collaboration, participatory learning, and sharing. While we identify the gap in acknowledgement of te reo and tikanga within the green paper, we also emphasize that ensuring academic research integrity when it comes to researching te reo Māori and tikanga Māori should also be of the highest priority.
References:
Cairns, P. (2020). Decolonise or indigenise: moving towards sovereign spaces and the Māorification of New Zealand museology. Https://Blog.Tepapa.Govt.Nz/2020/02/10/Decolonise-or-Indigenise-Moving-towards-Sovereign-Spaces-and-the-Maorification-of-New-Zealand-Museology/?Cn-Reloaded=1.
United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. (2007). International Journal of Cultural Property, 14(04).
Hash Tags:
#CC0- #SubmissionSnippet
