In response to the global climate crisis, Te Herenga Waka—Victoria University of Wellington embarked on an ambitious Living Pā building project to construct a 3,000-square-metre three-storey learning, teaching, research and engagement space as part of Te Herenga Waka Marae on its Kelburn Campus. While preparing to move into the new building, a research team investigated how the International Living Future Institute’s Living Building Challenge™ sustainability principles that underpin the Living Pā project could complement the tikanga Māori that regulate the marae community.

Abstract

This research explores the experiences of some kaiako at an Aotearoa tertiary provider during the COVID- 19 pandemic. Each kaiako drew inspiration from the pūrākau of Ranginui and Papatūānuku to write a personal narrative with a particular focus on the national rāhui. The objective was to better understand kaiako well- being and bicultural practice to prepare for future events with uncertain and shifting circumstances. The lived experiences of these kaiako were analysed through two lenses across two phases of analysis. The first lens used was kōrero pūrākau, using the pūrākau and context of the separation of Ranginui and Papatūānuku by their tamariki.

Exploitation of geothermal taonga at Ohaki has resulted in irreparable damage to whānau land, tribal land and the marae reservation, including major land subsidence, devastation of wāhi tapu, and groundwater impacts. The whānau, determined to shift from grievance mode to (eco)development mode, are committed to caring for and regenerating their whenua. This article outlines a whānau journey of re-establishing papakāinga. Their narratives provide insights and key eco-development factors which provide a blueprint for resilient whānau-based living, based on the practice wisdom of their tūpuna.

Giving voice to kaumātua perspectives and experiences, and those of older people in general, during the COVID-19 pandemic has been rare because older people are more often spoken about than provided with opportunities to speak for themselves. When they have been spoken about, the focus has been on their vulnerability. While such vulnerabilities are a critical concern, this focus ignored their active participation in and contributions to their communities.

Tapu and noa are often cited as fundamentals by which we enact tikanga, promote well-being and divide labour. However, exactly how tapu informed precolonial gender divisions of labour is difficult to examine, mostly because of the pervasive influence Christianity has had on cosmological narratives, from which tapu derives (Mikaere, 2017; Rewi, 2010; Te Awekotuku, 1994). This article outlines some commentary on the relationship between tapu, gender roles and colonisation, and tries to extend that scholarship.

The removal of a Māori child in May 2019 led to widespread protest and the launch of four inquiries into the Ministry for Children, plus an urgent inquiry through the Waitangi Tribunal. Tamariki Māori are over-represented in the child welfare system, but the issues are not just about the system itself. The legacy of colonisation continues to have an impact, not just on individual whānau, but also on the loss of tikanga in relation to whānau. It is the tikanga of whānau that many protesters seek to protect.

A discussion about the decreasing proficiency levels of one of the official languages in New Zealand, te reo Māori, would not be complete without understanding teacher trainees’ attitudes and motivations towards taking an optional Māori language course. This is because teacher trainees can provide significant opportunities within the classroom to promote learning of te reo and understanding their perspectives on learning the language to inform future revitalisation efforts.

Last year the New Zealand Government’s announcement of a “Predator Free NZ 2050” was accompanied by a target for a significant scientific breakthrough capable of eradicating at least one small mammalian predator by 2025. Strong responses and consolidation and repositioning activity ensued. A commonly agreed gap in our understanding is whether we, as a society, would allow the use of such a control, if it existed. Does a “social licence to operate” exist for the NZ scientific establishment? For the New Zealand Government, for that matter?