Agree to Differ

69 / 176

[ ] 67
Image: Ng
ā
Pae o te M
āramatanga
Following the protocol of the home people, Australian Universities are welcomed to discuss and further research collaborations
contextualized so that competing explanations are not lost.
There is a need to devise definitions that can be appropriate
cross-culturally, and for this act of defining to be consciously
done, consciously revisited and consciously revised. Cultures
are not static; rather they change and evolve. It is important
to acknowledge that culture is partially shaped by contempo-
rary and historical contextual realities including oppression
and discrimination. If culture undergirds the behaviour under
study, then ample contextual information must be provided so
the group differences can be understood properly.
Judge Eddie Durie’s paper on Ethics and Values delivered at the
Te Oru Rangahau Māori Research and Development Conference
nearly 20 years ago spoke of the perception of Māori in history.
He noted that most histories, including those appearing before
the Waitangi Tribunal,1 assessed Māori from a Western stand-
point. He argued that the cultural interaction was subsumed by
an assumption of a stronger and weaker society and that Māori
were judged by European contexts rather than on their own
terms. He demanded that a better balance be sought.
That balance has been actively sought by established and
emerging academics who are critiquing, expanding, develop-
ing and offering competing insights. In the field there is now
much research that is Māori-led from the design through to
implementation. There is also much evidence of cross-cultural
research where Mā ori-led research projects have non-Māori
researchers as vital parts of their team. This is of course not
new, as there has been some outstandingly good research done
by non-Mā ori with M āori. That much of the most recent work
has non-Mā ori involved in Māori research who are willing
to forgo traditional research control and work within M ā ori-
determined contexts is significant.
It also needs to be noted that most of the research done on
Māori issues today is not cross-cultural. Given historical experi-
ence, many M āori will prefer to do Mā ori research with Māori
for M āori. There is a place, however, for Māori and non-Māori
researchers to work together because of the very real gains that
can be made by a reflective engaged research endeavour. There
are some real advantages in cross-cultural research and it is
multi-directional. Members of oppressed groups have studied
dominant groups informally all of their lives in order to learn
how to get by and to navigate the dominant space and have
insight that comes from their condition of marginality.
As noted earlier, research has largely been seen as a site
of exploitation and loss for Mā ori. For Mā ori, research has
been understood as advancing dominant interests while nega-
tive stereotypes have been further embedded. The majority
of research has viewed Māori through a deficit lens that has
reinforced divisions between sections of society rather than
fostering mutual understanding and the ability to collec-
tively work for transformative social change. However, while
there is much more work to be done, Mā ori-led changes in
the research environment emerging out of the Māori protest
movement and associated Mā ori Renaissance have meant
that researchers, both Māori and non-M āori, are better placed
to work in partnership to address the real social issues that
confront New Zealand society.
A gree to Differ