Achieving �justice� is the overriding aim of the Treaty settlement process. This process was established to resolve Maori historical grievances against the New Zealand Crown for alleged breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi. Because historical injustices involve the interactions of cultures over time, justice in the Treaty settlement process is shaped, and constrained, by two main factors: �culture� and �time�. The settlement of Ngai Tahu�s historical grievances, and in particular the return of pounamu as part of the settlement, achieved a large measure of this limited kind of justice. The Ngai Tahu settlement and the return of pounamu suggest that Treaty settlements are achieving, and may continue to achieve, a large measure of the justice available in the Treaty settlement process. Examination of the return of pounamu to Ngai Tahu reveals, however, that new injustices may have been created in the Ngai Tahu settlement. These new injustices are critically analysed, and recommendations for maximising justice in the Treaty settlement process are suggested. If Treaty settlements are to achieve the maximum justice available in the Treaty settlement process, the Treaty partners must heed the warning signs arising from the possible creation of new injustices in the Ngai Tahu settlement.

This study is an attempt to interrogate the shared terrain of academic Maori Studies, Treaty of Waitangi praxis (where �praxis� is defined as the practical use of reason and the resonable use of practice - in contrast to purely theoretical activity) and the University system in this country. In this wide ranging �interrogation�, I will employ a dialectical method of analysis where each of the major Articles of the Treaty are assigned a particular �role� in the Thesis because it represents the central �University� or Kawanatanga Problematic; that Article 2 (Tino Rangatiratanga-Chieftainship) is the Antithesis because it represents the �Maori� contradiction or the Tino Rangatiratanga Mandate; and that Article 3 (Kotahitanga-Unity and Association) is the Synthesis because it represents Treaty Praxis� or the Kotahitanga Solution. This study (like the Treaty) has been organised into five appropriate Parts: Part A (The Preamble) provides the overture for the study, and, as such, contextualises the methodological framework and theoretical paradigms in, on and around which the rest of the study is located. Part B (The Kawanatanga Problematic) will attempt to articulate the struggle of Maori Studies in academia by problematising Kawanatanga (as is the case in most of the scholarship on this critical aspect of the Treaty). Part C (The Tino Rangatiratanga Mandate) will outline three major neglected areas of Tino Rangatiratanga in academia: such as the agency of Maori staff, students and communities; and the status of language and of knowledge taonga (treasures). Part D (The Kotahitanga Solution) will attempt to synthesise Treaty praxis within the debate by outlining and evaluating a number of Treaty principles and examples. Part E (Post-Script) will summarise the personified (signatory) aspects of the study and will also attempt to articulate a possible future for Maori Studies. It is hoped that the analytical framework employed in this study and will also attempt to articulate a possible future for Maori Studies. It is hoped that the analytical framework employed in this study will assist in clarfying (i) the nature of the struggle of a �minority-culture� subject (Maori Studies) within (ii) a �majority-culture� institution (the University), and (iii) the promise of bicultural synthesis (or Treaty praxis) as a means of mediating this struggle. It is also hoped that this thesis will be a contribution to that ongoing debate.

Planning, specifically resource management, is an activity of the state which should seek to reflect the values of the people. However, in New Zealand, only the values of the dominant Pakeha culture have traditionally been considered by decision makers. As a result, resource management in New Zealand has developed as a monocultural institution. This thesis addresses the issue of monoculturalism in New Zealand�s planning regime. The aims of this thesis are twofold: (1) to examine the argument that New Zealand�s planning is monocultural, and has traditionally ignored the needs and aspirations of Maori; and (2) to examine the current resource management system in New Zealand in order to establish the basis for a bicultural approach to planning. These aims were addressed in two principal ways. First, a critical review of literature provided comprehensive background on the relationship between Western and non-Western cultures. Second, in depth interviews were held with both Maori and non-Maori involved in resource management structures. Data from these interviews illustrate Maori opinion on the current resource management system in New Zealand. The thesis concludes that biculturalism is the only legitimate structure for state policy in New Zealand. This conclusion is based primarily on the relationship established between the indigenous Maori and the Pakeha settlers through the Treaty of Waitangi. This study also found that the current resource management regime in New Zealand is incapable of supporting a bicultural resource management approach. Radical reforms are needed in order to facilitate bicultural planning. The thesis concludes by proposing changes to the current regime which will facilitate a bicultural approach to New Zealand planning.

The Treaty of Waitangi specifically recognises the rights of Maori to control and manage their fisheries resources. However, since the imposition of fisheries legislation in New Zealand, this right has been consistently eroded. It is only recently that Maori customary fisheries rights have been given a degree of recognition in New Zealand�s fisheries management regime. The taiapure provisions of the Fisheries Act 1996 are one of the few policy initiatives available for Maori to manage their fisheries resources in accordance with their customary tikanga. This study examines the effectiveness of the taiapure legislation in providing for Maori customary fisheries management. The Maketu taiapure in the Bay of Plenty is studied to analyse the implementation of the initiative at the local level. The study has found that there are limitations inherent in the legislation and that these are further complicated by inadequacies in its implementation. Recommendations regarding the size, management and establishment process, are made at the conclusion of the study to highlight the amendments needed for the taiapure provisions to properly recognise and provide for the role of Maori, as Treaty partners, in the management of their local fisheries.

The process dealing with the resolution of Treaty claims considers a lot of information pertaining to real-world resources - spatial information. This study seeks to identify and suggest solutions for spatial information problems within the present claims process. This leads to a formal systems model of the present claims process emphasising the use of spatial information. An informal understanding of the claims process is then formed by analysing perceptions of actors within the claims process, thus allowing spatial information problems to be identified. Further analysis of the spatial information problems identifies causes, enabling possible solutions to be developed. Lastly, a solution is proposed and discussed as a means of highlighting other possible solutions to the spatial information problems identified by the study.

That a Maori problem existed in the North Island in the 1850�s and 1860�s, the inhabitants, both Maori and Pakeha agreed, but beyond that point there was very little agreement. What was the nature of the problem? Definitions were conflicting. Most Maoris saw the problem as one of survival, political and cultural, in their encounter with a foreign civilization determined upon their subjugation. They looked to the King Movement to prevent the European takeover which they apprehended would destroy their, independence and way of life. To the average colonist, on the other hand, the problem represented the Maoris themselves: their very existence in the country which he had come to settle; their claimed ownership of the land which he wanted to farm; their inconvenient (to him) system of land tenure, which rendered purchase difficult; their ignorance and disregard of the laws and customs which governed his society. The solution, in his view, was to detribalize the Maoris, make them obedient to his rule, and individualize or partition their communally owned land in order to facilitate his gaining possession of it. He desired colonial control of native affairs so that such a policy might be put into effect, but was unwilling to assume full responsibility lest Britain should leave the colony to bear the entire burden of its own defence against the potentially hostile tribes. The Ministers of the Imperial Government were concerned with yet other aspects of the same problem - observing the Treaty of Waitangi and protecting the Queen�s Maori subjects from injustice without obstructing the progress of colonization; keeping the peace between two cultural groups whose interests were often antagonistic; upholding British law and sovereignty. A difficult enough task, but one rendered still more difficult by the growing reluctance of the British taxpayer to foot the bill. Finally, the Governor, the man who had to find some way to resolve these conflicting aims and desires, faced his own particular dilemmas. How much responsibility should he accept for native affairs? How much control should he allow the Colonial Ministry to arrogate to itself. What interpretation should he place on the Treaty of Waitangi with respect to the rights of chiefs and the sovereignty of the Queen? By what means could he "civilize" the Maoris and bring about their assimilation into colonial society? Should he impose or persuade, legislate, educate, or conquer by force of arms? How was he to obtain the finance and power necessary to carry out any policy successfully? This thesis is an attempt to survey the many facets of a cultural and political relationship under stress and to examine, explain and comment upon the plans and attempts of various groups and individual leaders to adjust that relationship to coincide with their own conception of what was necessary and right -- Preface.

Planning, specifically resource management, is an activity of the state which should seek to reflect the values of the people. However, in New Zealand, only the values of the dominant Pakeha culture have traditionally been considered by decision makers. As a result, resource management in New Zealand has developed as a monocultural institution. This thesis addresses the issue of monoculturalism in New Zealand�s planning regime. The aims of this thesis are twofold: (1) to examine the argument that New Zealand�s planning is monocultural, and has traditionally ignored the needs and aspirations of Maori; and (2) to examine the current resource management system in New Zealand in order to establish the basis for a bicultural approach to planning. These aims were addressed in two principal ways. First, a critical review of literature provided comprehensive background on the relationship between Western and non-Western cultures. Second, in depth interviews were held with both Maori and non-Maori involved in resource management structures. Data from these interviews illustrate Maori opinion on the current resource management system in New Zealand. The thesis concludes that biculturalism is the only legitimate structure for state policy in New Zealand. This conclusion is based primarily on the relationship established between the indigenous Maori and the Pakeha settlers through the Treaty of Waitangi. This study also found that the current resource management regime in New Zealand is incapable of supporting a bicultural resource management approach. Radical reforms are needed in order to facilitate bicultural planning. The thesis concludes by proposing changes to the current regime which will facilitate a bicultural approach to New Zealand planning.

That a Maori problem existed in the North Island in the 1850�s and 1860�s, the inhabitants, both Maori and Pakeha agreed, but beyond that point there was very little agreement. What was the nature of the problem? Definitions were conflicting. Most Maoris saw the problem as one of survival, political and cultural, in their encounter with a foreign civilization determined upon their subjugation. They looked to the King Movement to prevent the European takeover which they apprehended would destroy their, independence and way of life. To the average colonist, on the other hand, the problem represented the Maoris themselves: their very existence in the country which he had come to settle; their claimed ownership of the land which he wanted to farm; their inconvenient (to him) system of land tenure, which rendered purchase difficult; their ignorance and disregard of the laws and customs which governed his society. The solution, in his view, was to detribalize the Maoris, make them obedient to his rule, and individualize or partition their communally owned land in order to facilitate his gaining possession of it. He desired colonial control of native affairs so that such a policy might be put into effect, but was unwilling to assume full responsibility lest Britain should leave the colony to bear the entire burden of its own defence against the potentially hostile tribes. The Ministers of the Imperial Government were concerned with yet other aspects of the same problem - observing the Treaty of Waitangi and protecting the Queen�s Maori subjects from injustice without obstructing the progress of colonization; keeping the peace between two cultural groups whose interests were often antagonistic; upholding British law and sovereignty. A difficult enough task, but one rendered still more difficult by the growing reluctance of the British taxpayer to foot the bill. Finally, the Governor, the man who had to find some way to resolve these conflicting aims and desires, faced his own particular dilemmas. How much responsibility should he accept for native affairs? How much control should he allow the Colonial Ministry to arrogate to itself. What interpretation should he place on the Treaty of Waitangi with respect to the rights of chiefs and the sovereignty of the Queen? By what means could he "civilize" the Maoris and bring about their assimilation into colonial society? Should he impose or persuade, legislate, educate, or conquer by force of arms? How was he to obtain the finance and power necessary to carry out any policy successfully? This thesis is an attempt to survey the many facets of a cultural and political relationship under stress and to examine, explain and comment upon the plans and attempts of various groups and individual leaders to adjust that relationship to coincide with their own conception of what was necessary and right -- Preface.

Achieving �justice� is the overriding aim of the Treaty settlement process. This process was established to resolve Maori historical grievances against the New Zealand Crown for alleged breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi. Because historical injustices involve the interactions of cultures over time, justice in the Treaty settlement process is shaped, and constrained, by two main factors: �culture� and �time�. The settlement of Ngai Tahu�s historical grievances, and in particular the return of pounamu as part of the settlement, achieved a large measure of this limited kind of justice. The Ngai Tahu settlement and the return of pounamu suggest that Treaty settlements are achieving, and may continue to achieve, a large measure of the justice available in the Treaty settlement process. Examination of the return of pounamu to Ngai Tahu reveals, however, that new injustices may have been created in the Ngai Tahu settlement. These new injustices are critically analysed, and recommendations for maximising justice in the Treaty settlement process are suggested. If Treaty settlements are to achieve the maximum justice available in the Treaty settlement process, the Treaty partners must heed the warning signs arising from the possible creation of new injustices in the Ngai Tahu settlement.

The Treaty of Waitangi specifically recognises the rights of Maori to control and manage their fisheries resources. However, since the imposition of fisheries legislation in New Zealand, this right has been consistently eroded. It is only recently that Maori customary fisheries rights have been given a degree of recognition in New Zealand�s fisheries management regime. The taiapure provisions of the Fisheries Act 1996 are one of the few policy initiatives available for Maori to manage their fisheries resources in accordance with their customary tikanga. This study examines the effectiveness of the taiapure legislation in providing for Maori customary fisheries management. The Maketu taiapure in the Bay of Plenty is studied to analyse the implementation of the initiative at the local level. The study has found that there are limitations inherent in the legislation and that these are further complicated by inadequacies in its implementation. Recommendations regarding the size, management and establishment process, are made at the conclusion of the study to highlight the amendments needed for the taiapure provisions to properly recognise and provide for the role of Maori, as Treaty partners, in the management of their local fisheries.