@TheUnited Nations Universíty, 1979 Printedin Japan tsBN92-808-0081-7 rssN0379-57M

HSDRGPID-l9/UNUP-81

THENATURE AND FUTUREOF DEVELOPMENTIN NEWZEALAND

DavidC. Pitt

TheUniversity of Auckland,

-M-""Xg paper This wasfirst presented at the GplD lll meeting,Geneva,2-g october 197g.

Geneva,September 1979 JohanGaltung

This paperis being circulatedin a pre-publicationform to elicitcomments from readersand generate dialogueon thissubject at this stageof the research. In this paper an attempt is madeto critically evaluate the nature of developmentin NewZealand. A main object is to suggest that there are, internal ly and externally, manymisconceptions about the level and bases of l',lewZealand development. The perpetuation of these myths is one reason why planning has been so ineffective. A numberof points are stressedparticularly. First, that in many,if not most, social structures, developmentpatterns are muchmore complex (in terms of goals and process) than most overseas simpìistic models suggest. There is diversity and volati I ity. Additional ly, however, manyaspects of the social structure are unknowneither becauseof the myopiaof the observers or becausethey see simply what they are looking for. As a consequenceof the lack of simplicity and comprehension,much change is unexpe.t"dl and unaccepted. DevelopmentC is often chaotic and confl ict is implicit.

!/e do not u/ant to spend too muchtime in definition (the basic para- metersof the GPIDproject are broadly accepted) nor in defining what NewZealand 2 society is. \'Jesimply accept the official geonomenclature,G even though this excludes manyNew Zealanders (those overseas) and those international ly part of the NewZeaìand network (economic, political, social, kinship, friendship, enemy,etc.) and includes those who do not call themselvesllew Zealanders - notably those Polynesianswho regard themselvesas inhabitants of pre-European Aotea Roa (Land of the Long \'/hite Cloud) or more latter-day ? republics- and those from outlying physical islands or internaì social islands, whether Poìynesianor Europ""n./l However,we do insist that NewZealand should be regardednot as a monolithic concept but as a plural ist assortmentof different social groups whoseboundaries are

I

L-- constantly changingin spaceand time.) \nt"are nìost interested in the "coì i dea of l ect i ve mental i t i es" as proposed by l''larcBloch and the Annaìes School of French social historians. ldeare not realìy looking for ideal types in the senseof Max f"Jeber- rather more for down-to- earth, grass-roots, everyday (tnthe senseof Schutzian lebenswelt) imagesand models. lf we begin by looking at goals of development,we can see someof the probìemsthat structure-space-timeplural ism raises. In terms of structurerthe dividing I ines maybe ethnicity, rel igion, age, sex, class (strata of power,wealth, or status), party, or other forms of subcultural affil iation. Eachgroup or individual may belong in varying degreesof intensity to none, one, or manyplural ist segments, and the numberand intensity varies over time. There is muchevidence pointing to a nomadicstructure in I'lewZeaìand society, obvious from such indicators as a 30-40 per cent annual houseoccupancy turnover in someareas, a history of ten or more jobs by the time a man reaches

30, five schoolsS per annumfor someyoung children, more than ten foster famiI ies for other abandonedchi ldren, the highest ex-nuptial birth rate in the world, very high air mileageand other travel per capita, and a net outflow migration at present higher than the birth rate. Considerabìesocial movementand boundarycrossing may also be indicated in the large numberof cars, calories consumed,even high blood pressure I evels, etc.

In terms of goals, developmentmay be defined by manyNew Zealanders not in terms of goods but as being place- and even time-oriented and -associated, particularly with status factors. The key aspiration may be a return to a euphoric homeland(the Pacific lslands for the lslanders, the maraefor the Maori, Englandor Europefor the Europeans,the bright lights of Sydneyfor the young, the El Dorado of Aucklandfor the upwardlymobile workers, the retirement havens of , Nelson, l/hangarei , etc. , for the el derl y) . The t ime dimensionfeatures a return to the good old days, or to a future millennium. This explains in the former case why overseasobservers have said NewZealand is 30 years behind the times. why the radio

2 stations, even the jazziest, continuaìly play "golden oldies." The searchfor a miI lenniumexplains the enormouspopularity of lotteries, punting in general, and of charismaticpol itical figures I ike the late NormanKirk or the present PrimeMinister, RobertMuldoon. One novelist, C.K. Stead, has suggestedthat a possible f uture I'lewZea I and state would in fact be fascist. 0thers have talked of a I'kindly a h fasciSr,"" a bureaucraticfascism dispensing welfare-state handouts but as dictatoriaì and as repressiveas anv other fascist state.

NewZealand has, despite its democratic ideology, a powerel ite who transìate goals into what are conceivedof as needs, not necessarily nationally or monolithicalìybut still for aìl the plural segments. Even in the drawingof boundaries(and hencetheir legitimacy) and certainìy their maintenanceand crossing,7 control ìies in the hands of the bureaucracy. NewZealand then is a case not of over- development,in a senseof over-consumptionor over-production, so muchas of developmentfrom above, over-development in the sense of over-legisìatîon and over-Cemarcationof I ines and controls. This form of over-developmentshows itself in the myriad of maps, mosaics (manyconf I icting) that cover any l'JewZealand community,each drawn (and frequently redrawn) by the thousandor more statutory bodies as well as by governmentand local bodies. These"official" mosaics combinedwith the mentaì mapsof the various pìuraì ist groups become so entangled that there are no longer any paths through the thicket and muchsocial time is spent tying and untying the knots.

This kind of exercise has producedmany kinds of developmenteffects. First, it has beena major reasonfor the key institution of the committee. Becauseevery issue involves large plural segmentsand multiple mosaics,there need to be representatives,not usually as delegates so muchas token symbolsfrom important social qroups in NewZea land. Commi ttees i n l',lewZea I and a I ways have token women, token Polynesìans,token Aucklanders (Vlett ington is the committee capital). However,many, perhapsmost, plural segmentsare not represented. Committeesin NewZealand sit interminably. Moreover, they are constructed from and construct other committees. The

3 hierarchy up and downwhich informationpasses is circular in the sense that each committeepasses on or passes back decisions so that very few decisìons are made,and those that are madeare usually too late, or inapproprîate. This samestructure is not only true of the powerelite but pervadesmost sociaì groups in l'lewZealand society, with perhapsthe exceptionof rural subcultures.

The tangled weaveof committeesand boundaries is also most resistant to contact with the everydayworld of therrevery manor woman." There "closed" is a quality about NewZealand society. Governmentis secret even in mundanedetails, and communicationis habituaìly blocked. 0ther groupsare not rnuchdifferent. Again, there are many illustrative stories, sayings, and revealing vignettes. There is the overseas traveller who comesto find NewZealand closedl and indeed there are many long hol idays and short working periods, betweensmokos, ìunch breaks, rest stops, strikes, lockouts, go-slows, rain-offs, etc. There is the story, too, of a manwho rang the post Office to ask which beach was featured on a ne\irstamp - only to be told that the Post Office did not divulge without higher authorities' permission the source of information on íts stamps- and the matter supposedly almost went to the Cabinet (in NewZealand even the fate of a lavatory in a small rural school might be Iforgive the pun] a cabinet matter).

To a considerable degree the economicaspects of over-developmentare dictated by thís over-imposition. The committeesfix the numbersof cars, televisions, etc., not really through pricing so muchas through suppìy. There are demographiccontrols throughmigration and cultural controls through censorship. ln NewZealand even the richest are frustrated in purchasinggoods becauseof unavailabi I ity, both local ly and particularly from abroad, controlled through the I icensing system.

Over-developmenthowever is resisted or ignored by somegroups in which deveìopmentprocesses are qui te d i fferent. To someextent Poìynes ian communitiesinvolve different paradigrr8- traditional extendedand large famil ies, flexibil ity, social as opposedto economicvalues -

4 though ín aìl this there are manywho are Poìynesians,as defined by Pakehas(Europeans) at least, who have crossed the boundaryand reclassified themselves. There is, too, in the Europeanworld of commíttees,much of the Polynesiandistaste for publicly exposed confl ict. Poìynesianmeetings are simply ritual and symbolic expressionsof decisions already taken or n'ìorepreciseìy of certain inevitabiI ities, of which the Europeanhabit of procrastinationmight even be one examole.

A strongly independentgroup who have aìways preferred development from below to developmentfrom above are the f"rrurs.9 Their goals are muchmore orthodox, an increase in free trade in which their efficiency (andthe inherentfertil ity of the soiì and cl imate)will be rewarded. But the farming industry is in manysenses more urban than rural. It is hiqhly capitaì ized, and increasinglycontrol ìed, if not by stock and station agents and urban investment, then by processinginterests (e.g., freezing works vi rtual ly controlled by mil itant labour), by transport (again there are strong unions- it costs more to ship a bale of wool from one end of NewZealand to the other than from NewZealand to Europe), or by the governmentrs compulsoryacquisition of the wool cì ip or dairy or meat products.

Development-from-belowgroups are then in a rninority,and deveìopment from above has resulted, we might argue, not so much in over- developmentin the terms of world society as in a form of under- development. lt is easy enoughto showhow llewZealand has slipped from 3rd or 4th in GNPper capita in the sixties to a place below ln 20th,'" and this is echoedin other quantitative indicators (suchas ì ì the UNRISDseri"r). The lowest place currently would seemto be 43ra in the world for popuìationper physi.i"n.l2

0n these indicators alone one miqht classify NewZealand as a third- world rather than a first-world country, or perhaps,with the omni- presenceof the state bureaucracy,as a second-worldcountry. There are certainly, at least historical ly, other indicators of presumed inferiority, socio-moraìif not socio-economic. In the nineteenth

5 century I'JewZea land had a bad reputation as a most undesirabìe pìace to which to migrate, inhabited by cannibaìistic f,laorisand brawling, criminal Europeansin a drunkenstupor. Researchcarried out recently at the university of Aucklandhas shownthat imagesof Polynesian violence (one radicar even talked of reîntroducing cannibalism) and the high rates of drinking and alcohol-related deviance .|arge were a major reason for the nurnberof migrants wishing to leave the country. There is currently an outflow (i.e., excessof permanent departuresover permanentarrivals) or l.l per cent per ì3 annumof the population. poìitically, too, llewZealand has become somewhat i solated in worìd assemblies, I umpedtogether wi th Rhodesia and SouthAfrica, and somehave predicted African-type instabil ities at ìeast in the surroundingpacific region.

But the main probìemhas been economic. llewZealand has had during its recent history a dependenteconomy, with a brittìe base, consisting of a smalI numberof agricuìtural export products. certainly these products have been producedefficientìy enough. The NewZealand environment has been described as nearly perfect for pastoral production, although becausethe labour force has oeen concentrated in (over urban areas 80 per cent of the population), the ruraì sector has beenvery capital intensive, which has increasedvulnerabi I ity and dependence. The problemsof this dependencehave not, as many assume,been soleì y associated with the i ncreasedprotect ioni sm that has resulted from the tradit ional market, Great Britain, joining the EEC. l4uchof NewZealand's economichistory is characterized by "booms a successionof and busts" reìated to prices on world markets for protein and wool and, in the case of the booms,to the shortages causedby the world wars. This seemsto be related to the nomadism and high rates of mobility that we have talked about. Somehave ,r4 argued that a newprotein price boomis ì ikely just as there has .l973 been since a wheatas well as an oil-pri.u boor.l5 But the recession may not be turned into a boombecause a run-down farminq sector' a depopulatedcountry, and a slow-movinginflexibìe bureaucracyis not ready to take advantaqeof it. The h i stor ical boom-bustpattern has created part i cular patterns of poverty associated with debt. In the bust periods the country borrowsheaviìy overseas, and these running debts are never really extinguished. At the momentthe external debt is somethingI ike Nz$400per head, with interest and service chargeson top, or about one-fourth of total wagesand salaries. External trade related to external debt has led to high levels of importsand with it an almost Latin Americanstyle inflation stil ì runningat l2-14 per cent per annum. To a large extent internal ly, debt and credit have created lines of poverty which we have argued elsewheret6"." a major feature of contemporaryNew Zealand. Manyl,lew Zealanders are deeply in debt, with mortgageson houses, repaymentson hire purchase, back tax, etc. It is often a 14icawber-typesituation where outgoings run over incomes, and there is a major problem therefore when there is unemployment (running,officially, at about 2-l/2 per cent of the work force and l1 increasing''), sickness (accidentsonly are ful ly coveredby the welfare state), marital breakup (also increasing - present l,lew Zealandmatrimonial legislation spl its the estate equally between spouses),business losses (tiquidations, etc., are also increasing amongstthe large pet it-bourgeois small-bus iness community,which has historical ly been the most important group in NewZealand). The cash pressure has had other major consequenceson the social structu:-e, forcing womenout to work, forcing al I into overtime, shiftwork, moonlighting(second or third jobs); and somehave argued this lies behindproblems in the home,particularly juvenile crime (mainry youngstersbored with empty homes),the increase in anxiety- and stress-relateddiseases, or indeedwhat are defined as social IA'" oroblems.

In this situation off icial action has not rel ievedthe situation at allrand somehave argued that manyproblems may be created or at least maíntainedby a series of self-fulfi I I ing prophecies. lf we leave aside the external debt question,it might be argued that the whole ethos of the welfare state is basedon a supposition that the "people' needand want assistance with I ifers problemsfrom the cradle to the grave. The population then is compulsorily locked into the system

7 and, as in other countries, the welfare agenciesseek out clients, ì9 customers,patients, pupils, "a.. R"tes of disease begin to look suspíciouslylike numbersof hospital beds:crirninals and police numbersare in tandem;schools are of the kind that lvan lììich, Bourdieu,and others condemn,concerned with cìassifying, examinations, oF, paradoxically and equaìly numbing,rituaì ized imposedpermissive- ness; and so on. Since the searchand the cìassification rather than the del ivery of the goods is paramount,the welfare systernbecomes very inefficient. Since the systemis bendingover backwardsto incorporatecì ients it is prey to the "rip-off," the ski I led, almost professional, unemployed-benefitseekers who are becominga feature of the sociaì structure.

At the outset one might argue that there is not necessarily a widespreaddesire for compulsorywelfarism, that in l'lewZealanci as eìsewherepìural ist subcultures,and even individuals,want to do their own thing in their ownway. Manyof the "poorest," therrproblem cases," will not def ine thenrselvesin thís way; it is rather a label attached to them. This may lead to apathy, especially affecting productionor productivity since llewZealanders are very heaviìy taxed, and manycertainly nowdo not vote or vote willy-niìly. But it has also stimuìateda variety of attempts by groups to get a greater share of the cake. The trade unions have beenmost significant here, and now the cívi I servants, professional groups, even farmers, are becomingunionized. Professionalization is part of this process and has buiìt walls roundmany groups. Theseunions and pressure groups cannot real ly be described as development-from-belowrnovements. They are not cooperative and are run by a narrow powerel ite and try to insist on compulsion. Theyoperate in parl iamentarylobbies, not in the constituencies. In manysectors the sumresult has beento lessen incomeby paralyzing key industries, loureringproductivity and increasingconfl ict and confrontation situations.

Onemight in fact argue that the major reason for l'lewZealandrs under-deveìopment i s rel ated to the difficulties that exist in crossing boundaries- betweenpluraì ist subcuìtui'esand classes,

a acrossthe bureaucracy-clientdivide, as well as internationally, etc. Becauseboundaries cannot easi ly be crossed,there cannot easi ly be rational planning or a free trade in goods, services, icleas,etc. Becauseboundaries are drawn in a deterministic Euclidian fashion. without topological flexibil ities and transition zones.there is inevitably confìict. The existentîalist flow of the lebenswelt,the commonsense, and perhaps the creativity inherent in it is contained and stifled. under-developmentbecomes culturaì as weìI as social " economicrandpol it ical. Governmentand official act ion to solve probìemshas been singuìarly unsuccessful. Borrowingwas seen as the answerto the trade deficit, as we have pointed out. but there were aìso very significant shortcomingsin internal poìicies as well. The attempt to redistribute wealth through taxation did not work: someof the wealthy were able to avoíd tax becausethere were no capitaì gains or value addedtaxes. For thoseonlesser incomesthe relatively steep rates of tax, which continual general wageorders and wage rises soon reached,acted as a real disincentive to extra work. The large numberof benefits lagged behind general wage levels, and this served to create categories of personswho were socially stigmatized if not economically disadvantaged. Largely becauseof bureaucratic inefficiencies, the provision of social services was inadequate. Efforts to provide equality of opportunity for minority groups, particularly through education,were not highly successfuleither. Amongstsome Polynesian groups there lvas the famil iar low-income/ inadequate-education/low-incomevicious circle, fuel led by the need in an inflationary recession for young people to get into the work force. As jobs dwindled, those who had better education found themselvesunemployed anyb/ay or on governmentunemployment rel ief l schemes,which simply stuffed more under-usedhands into an already over-staffed bureaucracv.

More recently conf I ict has entered the l,lewZea land pattern of I development. lt seemsto have emergedmore clearly as socio-economic I conditions havedeteriorated and is finding a numberof areas of expressionwhich are tending to paralyse the economy. Take, for instance, industrial confìict. l',lewZealand is hiqh on the

9 international strike league. Someelements of industrial confl ict maybe beneficial. status competition is significant in increasing productivity. VJhatis of course damagingare the confrontations and inflexibilîties that we knowonly too weil, and worsestill violence, with its legacy of vendetta. The solutions to these problemsare - complex again, status elevation may be one element. NewZealandrs strike-prone industries (waterfront, freezing industries, etc.) are those which are rated generally as least desirable, r'lowestclass," even if well paid. lt is interesting to note howsome countries have "upgraded. such occupations- e.g., by buirding in honoursand rank systems, offering workers I imited time periods in an industry, many fringe benefits, professionalizing the occupation,emphasizing communityservice functions, etc.

Lying behind social confl icts are the broader problemsof class. Although there has been muchdebate over whether l{ewZealand is developing a class system (howeverdefined) or not, there is increasing evidence of d if ferences in wealth, por^/er,and status.20 Oneof the problemsof a decentrarized nation where there is additionally not a great deal of taxation incomefor redistrîbution is that inequalities may be accentuated. However,if there are adequateopportunities for mobility this danger is lessened. Education has a key role here. Dore2ì h", recentry argued that eìite groups tend to try to protect themselvesby restricting entry to their circle, particularly througheducat ional qualifications, producingwhat he rrdiploma calls the disease." Sucha situation mil itates against the most able people from all groupsof society (ability is not usually confined to one group) having wealthr pob/er,and status. In a decentralized system somelocal choice might be exercised over those who might have access to higher education (and through it, wealtn, powerror status) so that these people would be in a sense representatives,rather than the productsof an artificial examination system. There must remainrtoo, adequateprovision for deprived groups, for genuine cases of need, and for ensuring that even when these functions are delegated, these people are taken care of in a human rather than an efficient way. l0 Any conflict situatíon is exacerbatedby economicproblems. Despite someslowing down, l,lewZealand has a chronic, almost Latin American- style inf lat ion.22 Apart from imported inf lation, much is due to the inappropriate wagecontext in which socíal competition is placed. Rising prices also refìect considerableinefficiencies - unnecessarily long chains of distributors that perhapsa decentralized socio- economywould minimize, unnecessarydupl ication of consumeritems (the ''57 variet ies" syndrome),premature obsoìescence, etc. I t is widely assumedhere that such consumerdemand reflects somebasic consumermot i ves. The ev idence, however, as J. K. GaI bra i th has recently argued,.points rather to a demanddictated by companies, particularìy the big companiesand the multi-nation"lr.23 Encouragementis possibly neededthen for the smalI local businesses carrying perhapsa more limited range of goods. Even here there may be possibiI ities for more participation, €.g. , co-operatives.

Another factor contributiong to inflation maywell be what has been cal ìed "over-Droduction.rr lt is assumedin western market economies that consumerdemand is expansiveand there is a continuous push for increased production to provide more and more goods. The kinds of things Galbraith taìked about in the sixties - built in obsolescence, ubiquitouswastage - \^/ereand are stil I part of this pattern. In manycases it is not proved whether the consumereither u/ants or needsthese products and the whole process certainly raises prices.

Underlyingmany of NewZealand's part icular problems is undoubtedly the systemof communication,or rather the lack of it. Part of this is related to the transmission of values through the education systemand the massmedia. Despite someimprovements (e.g., ethnic time in broadcasting) the minorities are not heard or' more precisel y, are nei ther I i stened to nor understood, and sometimes speakonly rhetorically. As we have said, a dangerof a plural society is a breakdownin communication. Throughout, ways need to be soughtof finding institutions which promotedialogue and mixing, esPecially in the vital youth (and courtship) period during which attitudes and, more importantly, kinship I inks are formed. This means

il

I h f' iL- that schoors havea vitar rore and may meanthat chirdren, at t""rt teenagers, need to go to school outside their rocarities _ eitner through busing' encouragementof private or special-function schools, or simply the widespreaduse of exchange schemes,visits, etc. 0ther youth leisure institutionsr €.g., sports, needmaximum encouragement, but to be successfuì they need to be run by the youths themserves.

There is also the problemwhich causes muchconfrict and communication difficulties, of the increasinggap between porynesian the peopresand the majority Europeanpopulation. By 1973in l,tewZealand those officiaty defined as r4aori24"nd pacific rsrandersaccounted for somethinglike r0 per cent of the total populationor nearly 300'000 people. The proportion of polynesians to Europeanswas much higher in certain areas (or parts of the social structure), both in traditional l4aori residences(".g., ) anOparticularly in the major cities of Auckrandand r^/eilington. 0rigínarìy riving in serf_ sufficient rural farming communities, the Maoris have becomean urban proretariat. The drift to the cities gatheredpace in the fifties' and arthoughby the seventies it had begunto slow off, it was stilr muchfaster than the European rate of urban mígration. At the l97l census 50.7 per cent of the Maori popuration rived in the cities as did the vast majority of the pacific lsland population. somesuburbs had becomemarkedry polynesian. In rgTr in Manukaucity 22 per cent of the population \^,ere either Maori or pacif ic tstanaers,25 and in somesuburbs a majority were polynesian. Simirar comments could be madeabout other urban areas. In addition, the porynesían population was growing at a muchfaster rate than the EuroDean population. In the rate fifties and the earry sixties the average annual increase of the Maori population was near 4 per cent per year, one of the highest ín the world.26 Although by the l97l Censusit had dropped to 2.5 per cent, this was stilr nearly doubre the European rate.

The Pacific lslandersr rate of increase was al so very high and swollen further by immigration. ln both cases the age structure of the population was very young. At the 1966 Censusthe medianMaori aqe l2 was 14.! years comparedto the overall medianage of 26 years, As a consequence,projections for the Polynesian population assumeda greater and greater proport ion of ÌrlewZealandrs people.

The reasons for this population growth were cultural in essence. In traditional Polynesiansociety, ferti I ity was a prime valuu;27 th" larger the family, the more productive the labour force and the more prestige the family or village achieved. The extendedfamily, based on a large numberof children, provided a warmand secure environment. It is hardly surprising that, given the addedtensions of city I îfe, the famiìy remaineda keystoneof the social structu ru.'B In addition, as we will see later, the efforts of outside agencies,especially in the family sphere, were weakly deveìoped.

0n almost all socio-demographicindicators (cf. tabìe l) the Polynesians showedwhat is regardedas an inferíor developmentprofi let high ferti I ity, and a shorter I ife expectancy. Secondly, a much higher proportion of Polynesianswere unemployedthan were the general population. In an unofficial survey conductedin 1968,nearly one- third of all those unempìoyedwere t4aoris.29

In addition, the Polynesiansfound themselvesin the less prestigious, less ski I led, less secure, lower paid jobs. Manywere involved in labouring in the roads, the construction gangs, and the busesor working long hours in the factories. Despite some improvementsnthe rate of Polynesianinvolvement in technical or professional positions was under 50 per cent of the Europeanrate for males and about 15 per cent of the fernale rate. ln one recent ruru"y30 of the destination of Maori school leavers, over 40 per cent went înto unskilled or factory work. Agai nrdespi te improvementin Polynes ian incomes, these were still well below the Europeanmean wages, somethingof the order of l5 per cent according to the l,lewZealand Populations Census, i 1966(lncomes, A6), and in general the Polynesianhad a muchlarger t: householdto support with this smaller wagepacket. Vicious circles werecreated by low wages, particularly a heavy involvementin hire purchaseand debt, and low levels of savings.

t3 TABLEI. Selected Indicators Amongstthe NewZealand llaori

Population increase 2.gza Population structure by age: under 2l 21-64 61.BZ 36.42 over 64 t.8z Fertility rate 2.OZc Li fe expectancyat bi rth:a male 61 femaI e 1966onwards - .4t+ 64.t9 I nfant death ra te 2.722 Death rate A 0.6,"r"" Urban proport ion 70.2Ze High-income group E 8.02', Education proport ions 13.5"/"9 .h Educational quaI i f icat ion rat to 86.gz Unemployment ratioi \8.22 Apprenticeshipratio 5.62j Crimeratiok 5.7%

- a. Source tfZ Departmentof Health Trends/1972/46ff. b. Source- NZDS/OY/1972/1038(Estimate December 1970). lbid. - Numberof births per (tgzo). r00 marriedwomen in age group r6-44 - d. lbid./65 Deaths in proportion to total population. - e. | 97| NZDS/0Y / | 972/ 63. r Proportion with incomesouer 92,599 (cf . 2l .32 total population) _ see NZDS/l966 Census/V.5/6. a Proportion of under-2r. Maori popuration in secondaryschool s (cf. t4.lZ total population) - r,rzo!/ov/tglztzoOtlólg. h. Proportionof r4aoris with ress than schoorcertificate r969 (cr. 52'72 non-fiaori) - pprn, Inter im Reporton f{aori Education r970. Proportionof totar emproyedin an unofficiar sampresurvey Auckìand,\r/hangarei,.Hamiiton, r96g in Rotorua,Gisborne - seeA.c. l,/aìsh, 1972,op. cit., p. 14. 1970-7I - Numberof t4aoriapprentices to totaì apprentices- Departmentof Maoriand tslandAffa irs t4t|ijZ,-' k. ln proportion to the population(1969; cf. 1.0 for non_Maori population) - Reporton Crime in t{ew2eatand tg6g/HZOG,ù;iiing,on GovernmentPrinter, p. 21. r4 Incomesand jobs were also intimately related to educationrandonce again the Polynesianpopulation was in manysenses depriu"d.3l la is true that in the late sixties and early seventies the numbersattending secondaryschools had climbed steadily, so that by 1972almost all Polynesianchi ldren had somesecondary school ing. But relative ly f"*32 Polynesianchildren gained the school certificate, the major measure in l'lewZealand of school attainment, and there were only a handful in the universiti"r.33 Polynesianchildren droppedout of school at the minimumleaving age. 0nly sl ightly better rates of academic successwere achieved by the llaori private schools. fhe reasonsfor the relatively poor performanceof Polynesian students were complex. Basicalìy (and this would explain the greater success of the Maori private schools) the tlewZealand school was a Eurooean environment. Languageand curriculum were basedon modelsclosely linked to Europeanl''lew Zealand society and values. very few schools taught Polynesian languagesrwhichvery few teachers understood. Little attention was paid to the aspirations and identity of the polynesian .1. people.)t Althoughmany tests had indicated that the innate abil ity of the Polynesian student35was no less than the European,there was a basic lack of outside assistance, particularly pre-school facil ities. At higher levels too, educationfor the Polynesian populationwas both quantitatively and qualitatively inadequate. In particular the technical bias in both rural and urban schoolscreated manyof the probìemsit was intended to solve, at least pushing the Polynesianpopulation away from the higher echelonsof the occupati onaI st ructu re.

Another important contributing factor to the reìatively low socio- economicposition was poor Polynesian housing. \,Jhilst the Polynesiansì ived in rural villages aroundtraditional maraes,there wasusually adequateaccess to land, despite the fact that most land had beenal ienated by the Europeans,particularly in the nineteenth century. Rural housing, though not aìways of a good standard was at least available. The situation in the cities36 was radicalìy different. Land and housing were scarce and expensive, and as we l5 shaI I see I ater, the government'shousi ng schemeswere not very effective. As a consequence,the Polynes i ans congregated i n crowded, unsanitary tenementsin what were becomingslum areas in Auckìandand \'Jeìlíngton particularìy. As morepeoplecame to the cities and the pressure on housi ng încreased, so too did the problems.

Bad housingcontributed also to relatively poor levels of health amongstthe Polynesianpopuìation. Admittedly the crude Maori death rate was lower than the Europeandeath rate by \971, was steadily .|960. decìlning, and had been lower since But this reflected the youngerMaori age structure, and the adjusted rate showsthe Maori death rate to be nearìy 50 per cent higher than the Europeanrate. Maori deaths under one year totaìled l3 per cent of aìl flaori deaths in 1970and 20 per cent of all infant mortality deaths. The llaori expectancyof I ife was approximatelyeight years less than the EuroDean. Ratesfor certain diseases (tuberculosis, heart disease, pneumonia,schizophrenia) were higher for Polynesiansthan for Europeansin 1971.

Another correìate of the lower socio-economicposition was the increasingnumber of social problems,especÎal ly crime in the growing ?-7 urban ghettos.'' In the late 1960sand early 1970s,the Maori crime rate, for example,was growing at about five times the Europeanrate. In interpreting this rate overall, we have to rememberthat the l4aori population in the cities is basically youthful and that generaìly youth crime îs increasing. 0lder-age Polynesiancrime was less than comparableEuropean rates. Polynesiancrimes were also onìy higher in certain categoriesof crimes, notably those relating to law and order and property. In manycases the gangsand their activities vuererelated to high spirits, boredom,and frustration at a lower ?R socio-economi c posi t i on.'" There were other reasons for the apparently high rate. 0ffenderswere classified as llaori, even if this was not a legal description (i.e., in terms of the !0 per cent criteria). ManyMaoris were undefendedin the courts and often unawareof their rights in what was consideredto be an alien Eurooean envi ronment.

t6 The reasonsfor the ìower levels of attainment in jobs, wages, education,housing, and health were al I inter-rerated and it is difficult to pick out the critical area. ln manyways, hornrever,the causeswere not simply withín the Polynesiancommunities themselves. l,/ewi I I commentlater on the reasons why governmentpol ic ies were not moreeffective; it is important to note here the influence of cultural barriers on the greater socio-economicsuccess of the polynesian people. NewZealanders both privately and official ly havealways deniedthat prejudice and discrimination exists in llewZeaìand. But muchrecent evidence and surveys indicate that prejudice is considerableand probably increasing. Studies have shownfor example that many Europeansprefer not to I ive next door to polynesians, nor marry them, and often hold derogatory stereotypes of them and wish to restrict immiqration.39Despite legisìation on discrimination,there is muchevidence that Polynesiansfind it difficult to rent or buy housing in manyareas, and when they are able to rent, the price is loadedto include the damagesand failure to keep up paymentswhich Europeanlandlords assumeto be characteristic of Polynesian tennants. There is evidencetoo of discrimination, consciousor unconscious, in jobs, in promotion, in school, and in mortgageand loan facilities, in I ife insurancepremiums, in ìegal proceedings,etc.

Prejudice and discrimination, however,went both ways across the ethnic barrier. Therewere growing signs of anti-Europeanfeel ings by Polynesians(including someviolence) and a renewedinterest in Polynesian ident i ty and ethnocentri sm. Anti -Europeanfeer i ngs dominated,but the different Polynesiangroups were also prejudiced against one another. Therewas relatively I ittle intra-polynesian marriage,usual ly residential segregationrandsometimes violence.

Thesedifferences resulted in a confl ict situation. This is not new. since the wars of the nineteenth century there have always been Maori-Pakehaconfl icts. For manyyears, after miI itary defeat, Maori depopulation,and the deprivation of Maori land. there was l ittle strife. To somedegree this was a loss of spirit. But also Maori people I ived and worked in rural areas, in somecases retreatinq into t7 (and recreating) traditional Maoritanga(tradition) or messianic rel igions, native or Christian. Maoridomwas latent rather than Iost.

The new industrial NewZealand which emergedafter World V/ar | | changed all this. The political leaders, presumablylulled into a false security by the tranquil imagethat the bucolic Maori generated, encouragedurban migration to provide labour for industries which were intended to diversify away from a purely rural farming economy. Although taking someyears to crystal I ize, a llaori identity emerged in the cities, which saw the revival of culture (notabìy through the establishment of urban maraes)and more significantly, pol itical activism. Encouragedfurther by the exampleof militant blacks in the United States and swollen by Polynesian immigration both from the countrysideand the Pacific lslands, the Polynesianfactor has now becomevital to future harmonyand development.

The solutions to l'lewZealand's developmentprobìems may be seen in two b/ays. First there are the possibil ities of developmentfrom above. There are grave problems here in first recommendingsuch a programme becauseof the easy sl ip into dictatorial or commandplanning. Perhapsfortunately, becauseof basic deficiencies in the pol itical process, effective planning is unlikely. lt is to be hopedthat, as nrore information becomesavailable and as there is more experience with the planning process, there may be greater co-ordination, concertizat ion, if not orchestration. International developmentsmay aid this process, includingthe possibiI ities of close Australasian I inks or even a Pacific commonmarket.

But the great hope for l'lewZea land , as f or manyother countr ies i s for a variety of social, economic,and pol itical forms reflecting the essential plural istic social structure. This multÌple development from below is already emerging in a numberof different forms. There are strong regional, even irredentist tendencies. A good example is the demandby South lslanders for independence,a demandwhich has little to do with ethnicity or class, but reflects rather resentment

t8 of one regi on to cent ra I i zed contro I . The Polynesianrevival is wel documented,turning in the Maori case, 3t least, on a neuridentity with the land and culminatingin the symbolic proclamationof a republic at BastionPoint.40

Lesswell known, but perhapsof more fundamentalimportance at least in the economy, i s what we have caI I ed the rural renai ssance. Thi s is somethingquite new in l{ewZeaìand and gathering momentum,drawing on the dynamics of both ethni c i ty and regiona I i sm.

Since the war there has been a markedurban, particuìarìy northward _a urbandrift. l4ost of the rural Polynesianl4aori people and most of the migrants from the Pacific lslands havegone to the big cities and especialìy to Auckland. In rural areas communityfaci I ities have declined; schools, shops, and hospitals haveclosed; and the farming communityhas imported expensive machinery and technoìogy to make up for the vanishedlabour. But this situation is changing. The farmerscan no longer afford to capital ize with machinery. The costs of these overseas imports and operating costs are ri sing rapidly, reflecting overseas inflation, escalation of energyprices, and worseningexchange rates. There is a growing concern in the bict cities with social problems- indeed somemigrants from Europecame to NewZealand to escape big city pollution and are not happy to find they have jumpedfrom the Northern frying pan into a South Pacific fire. There is increasingunemployment which is affecting particularìy Maori and other Polynesianwork"rr.I*l Certainly there is migration abroadand increasingnumbers are using this exit. Traditionally has beena havenin hard times, and Sydneyis the fourth largest NewZealand city. But the Austral ians have even higher unemploymentthan the l',lewZealanders,- and there is al so a growingprejudice against NewZealand miqrants, who are blamedrightly or wronglyfor escalating crime rates in Australia.

The rural alternative has begunto appearas a truly feasible one. ln the Maori case the return to the marae(traditional village green) has becomea major rite de passage in the re-emergenceof Maori

l9 identity. Linkedwith this has beena renaissanceof f4aorîculture and Maoritanga(traditionaì waysof I ife) generally. There is nowa strong movementto demandthe return of l4aori land acquired, in some cases confiscated by successive Europeangovernments, since the Maori Warsof the last centurr.4' Somepoì iticians are not necessarily sorry to see a ruraì return for the Maori population and one conservativepol itician has even hinted that Polynesianoffenders should be sent away from the cities to be rehabilitated by the virtues of country life or, in the case of migrants from the Pacific lslands, returned permanentlyto thei r tropical vi I lages. The Pacific lslanders,many of whomcome originally from villages, are firmly urban based, but someSamoan extended famil ies for instance have purchasedlO-acre blocks of land (which surround the cities) to establish a traditional nu'u (villaSe). Somepeopl" (p"rticularly young people) have also established communesin the country, and in someareas joined long-established, mainly rel igious groups who have I ived and farmed in the countryside. Newblood is also being provided by wealthy urban famil ies (the so-called QueenStreet farmers - from the nameof the main street of Auckland) movingout onto small holdings or organizing companiesto run farms. This has meant rnore capital in the countryside, new productive agr icuì tural farms (e.g. , viticulture, breeding, pines, etc.), new ideas, and keen young farmers as sons often stay on and farm.

The pol iticians have also been influencing the ruraì movementin other ways. One way of keeping down the apparent rate of unemployment has been the panacea,dating back to the Keynesianprinciples of the Depression,of providing work, particularly in planting or working in the forests. This howeverhas not really led to the formation of real communitiesrasmost of the workers are single menwho live in colonies of huts in and around the forestr.43 There have also been incentives to urban youth to encouragethem into farming by providing training schemes,etc. The third Labour Government 0972-75) establ ished ohu (kibbutz-style communes)by giving Crown I and to appl i cant groups.

20 In future planning, rural relocation is playing an important role. TheCommission for the Future is suggestinga policy of decentraliza- tion and devolution and the encouragementof small villages and the resurrection of the country town.44 The agriculturaì experts are looking for new crops and products. There is muchtalk of cottage industriesrandSwitzerland is being heìd up as a modeìof a modern country which is peaceful and prosperouson the basis of small- scale, vi I lage-style units.

Already someconsequences of these changesare making themselves obvious. The tradit ional pol it ical systemis beinq chalìenged and not only by |1aori nationalists, someof whornsooner or later want to see an independentl4aori state ()or even tribal independence. There is also a resurgenceof the rural-based Social Credit party, which in Februarv1978 had its first memberof Parliamentelected for the seat of Ranqitikei.

The rural renaissance in NewZealand is not a particuarìy new phenomenonand it differs in different parts of the country. The rural environmentcontains manydifferent kinds of social groups not basicalìy divided by ethnicity at al I but morefundamental ly by Ic'' social and economicfactors. Function is signif icant, e.9., dairy versus sheepor beef farming, or cropping, or, more usually, a predominanceof one or another of forest farming,46 or.h"rdr, viticulture, pigs, deer. Within each type there are other importantd i vi s ions: wi th i n the sheepgroup, accordi ng to whether farmersare wool-, I amb-, fatten i ng-, or breeding-or iented, and whetherthe farms are in the hard or easy hill country of the North lslandor the high country or foothills of the South lsland or the plains. Reflecting these functionai divisions are rnoreimportant social divisions, for example,in the dairy industry whetheror not the farm uses family labour only or hires handsor operates on a metayage(sharemilker) system, or the de5lreeto which a farm (notably dairy) is geared to providing producefor a rural factory. Size of farms is important, as farms can vary from an acre or two around the cities to the huqe runs of the SouthernAlps. Historical factors are 2l L importanttoo. FamiI ies are differentiated by the stratigraphics of dates and modesof taking up land. There is a social hierarchy, at the top of which there may be original squatters or graziers from the nineteenth century who have ìong had I iterary and cultural activities. There are farmers settled on rehabilitation land after the war, or young farmers under post-war land developmentschemes, or doctors or lawyers or businessmenwho run the farms as a prof i tabl e business or as a hedgeaga i nst i nfl at ion or taxat ion as urban areas expandand land prices rise in a country where there is no capital gains tax. This latter group is also muchinterested in promotingcuìtural activities. There is a good deal of I iterature nowwhich claims thal the farming industry as a whole is not resurgentbut recesriu"4Twíth declining incomeand ì iving standards and increasinganxiety, to use ProfessorFranklin's phrase. Certainly there has beenan overall fall in farm incomerelative to IA other incomes-'and alrchasing power in real terms, mostly caused by inflation beyondthe farm gate.'r Facilities, schools, hospitals, shops, etc., have beenclosing in manycountry areas. Certainly there is anxiety, though this is not proved by one recent study which purports to showa greater use of tranquil izers in rural as 5o opposed to urban "."", .

In manyareas howeverthere is reaì progress. The High country sheep farmers for example, for manyyears on insecure crown leases, have nowat least a firmer tenurerandthere are nowmore realistic arazing lands which will protect a mountainenvironment ravaged by erosion.5l Farmersgenerally, and particularly in the dairy industry, have nowa guaranteed incomeunder governmentequaì ization schemes. l4ost export produceis being sold; there are no gluts or dumping. There are somegrowth types of farming- viticulture, and sub-tropical fruits, forestry, and cervid culture, for example. There are growth areas - e.9., the businessmenfarms aroundAuckland, which have the best stocking and productivity rates in llew Zealand. l4oresignificantìy, and probablyanxiety has beena positive factor here, there is a new senseof unity that farmers did not have

22 previouslyand a newdetermination to take action as industrial workers have done. The older official bodies such as the national FederatedFarmers are st i I I conservative pressure groups but other groupsof farmersare moreaggressive, withholding stock, driving flocks into town, etc. There are new groups I ike TREC(Towards Rural Equality of citizenship) r,vhichcombine both populist and professional philosophiesalong with elementsbelonging to the women'sI iberation \, movement.-- clearly there is muchmore to successful deveìopmentthan simply recognizing or encouraging developmentfrom belorv. There has to be. at least in NewZealand, and probablymore widely, a recognition that the changethat is least destructive and most wanted by peopìe is evolutionaryrather than revolutionary. ln this change,existing traditicns persist and the job of planning agenciesmay be to control any exploitative tendenciesand to humanizeinstitutions, whether public or private. The welfare inst itut ions part icularly have suffered rnost at the hands of the Dureaucracyand need many reforms whichwould involve again the replacementof large central hospitals, schools,prisons, etc., with smaller units more intimately connected with families and communities. Encouragementneeds to be given to modesof contact, diaìogue, etc. somertnativer! institutions already exist, notably in sport, and there are sometraditional mechanisms in I'lewZealand which might help in the process of humanizat ion and communication.Picking out the valuable traditional I'lewZealand insti tut ions which might be encouragedi s perhapsa debatable exercise, but certainly the short I ist would include: (a) The Polynesianinstitutions of the extendedfarnily and the value of mutual self-help and respect for worthwhile traditions. (b) The tradition of sport as a meansof uniting in friendly combat opposedsocial groups. (c) The ubiquity of voluntary associationson every conceivabìefacet of social I ife, manyof whoseactivities lead to future welfare and development. (a) Thevalue of f lexibil ity, ingenuity,etc. in solving problems (the Taranaki Gate syndrome?)and the emphasison do-it-yourself.

23

Èd However,these mechanismsmay well need specific action by the researchers. the planners,and the legislators to provide an appropriate environmentfor chanqe.

Becausel',lew Zeaìand is a fragmentedsociety, the question of dialogue is important, for both research and praxis. Researchis not, or should not be any longer, part of a process of knowledge-imperialism, or the exploiting of people's views for gain, or pol itical or other advantages. lt is, or should be, an egalitarian relationship. There should be a free flow of information and new synthesesshould emerge. The outside researcher is not, or should not be, a spy, perhapsnot even a heìper or animateur,but a discussant.

The demerits, at least from the NewZealand situation, are considerable and present formidable obstacles. First there is a gap betweenthe theory of d ialogues and the real ity. l4anydialogues intend communication,synthetic development,confl ict resolution, etc., but degenerate. Secondly,and perhapsmore significantìy, the conceptof dialogue is rather woolly, a portmanteauconcept which contains some diaìogues (or elementsof them) which are useful and somewhich are not, and which in fact may be most counter-productive or exploitative. l/hat, we woulciargue, is now neededis to break downthese different types of dai I ogues.

To classify dialogues the following factors need to be taken into account: the strength of the parties (or their voices), whetherthe I ibretto is harmonicor discordant, the degreeof ritual ization and of the pìay/serious dichotomy (cf . J. Huizinga in HonroLudens), the relationship to the locii of powerand decision making, the degreeof trust, the degree of mutual comprehensionof languageand/or concepts, the degreeof sociaì distanceand ability or willingness to cross social boundaries, the nature of backgroundnoise, the pace of dialogues, the extent of outside manipulation,the degreeof publicity, the extent of propagandaand preaching, the nature of order, national and international, and the social, economic,and pol itical ramifications, etc. There are undoubtedlyother factors,

2l+ but perhapsthese are the most important.

Usingthese kinds of criteria, we can comeup with a rough typology of dialogues (not in order of priority, importance,etc.) and their usefulness,covering some (not all) situations (table 2).

In conclusion, future developmentin NewZealand may be said to depend on two processes. First, that there is developmentfrom below. VJithoutrecognition and encouragement,the social structure wi I I not havethe vital îty that comeswhen the constituents are real-l ife communities. This meansthat there cannot be a single mouldor consensus.To establish priorities to adjudicate fairly on the inevitable dissensionsmeans a need for appropriatemechanisms of consultation and communication. Even before this, there needs to be an atmosphereof cooperation. At the momentin NlewZealand, this primummobile, the cooperativespirit, is sadly lacking.

25 P

(n O') ro () -

o .J ; (,r)C) !, ^ 91^ r0) {J >- ts 0) L co () :l> p o.- () U{J t+- L ,U tf LfJ t- {JO 0) tL t- z co-

()o) c >u tì - .9 (n 0) IJ >- +J U E^ 3 cO 0) - O >.o è q) -t-EE o.- .o U]J +r ). +J -C P U l, c! c+JE o 0,) EI o o.- c o 0)L - l'o E = o.- 0) gQ o ! O+J O CD.- >- tn O q) o- 3 Lf0-lrOE >o || L L.- tn O o.- 3 J r0 > (,> -O -oo(, 0J >. o >.o o-.- 0)F r0 ooc) t= L(J+JU !F o ctF u oi+- t, {, t.f).- >uJ o o r- o < L!.1 +J --o

o(, o -Oll-{.rl (h P CE -c .^O O..: I O t/t U -O - t^ -V F ox c+Jo.-or_:topL(,r) r,/) c!-.u.-OOa-.-cOC - oE O {J!F-o u O 3 O := ! (D E . X q) r0 . c . O.- t/) . 0.) ".; CeOCO-! (nOoo-. UEO- (nè .ì -, o+J.-o t, >{,> u(/) .-c= >o ^O poo L LrJ l, EO-.-t+- > J -(/)t-F.- CNL.JO|,(,o(n{'r)L co L O O.- è . C E 1J !- t, {J - l- O) qJ olo- a c = a o o o o > c o c.) F- ì-; >v o o o o-^ O -C O-E L O U C (n E +J L (, u) O)(, U)O-tn Oì .^ll f L O >O f oo !:l O O lJ .tJ L O.-O cr) Lf) l'3 o u o _v +r_c p .- o o _y o cc ú >.o ct E.- r- . O (/) cr)C --c: L! L C .- U q) --Y o!-c t, o-.-.- o op J c o o o o L Oo (ro+J>(/)ELE o-OOotsÉ =Oè

c- Ctl .. , A;.YY ).- OEIFf+r+rLol a ..OCDO+J f, L c) 3 cn u c o À! ! c o r- c-o_c o) O O O J O- . c 0) o) :l (t) .- Oì O .^t+- -'O c} O O C') ..8 -! L . o O o O . (') O (/) q) o OLOLO o o o u u-o .- LET.- oE +J o !- +J -OOo', .- E o(n+J.- E+r c c O o :l o- Òo o-o3 E:J (|)O.|J - C(I,O -r+-L oìE î t./)(nl- t/| O f t./lo\.rJ.- u)orf I O O '+3 !- s O -(, +t o (no(no I -L) ov roco o o c o (/)'o +J I o l- (/)- (It c UJO ! () .-- 0) c O @ = C O C')- CD- (n 0) .--oEpc) '- l/) O t, O:l F- t, O)> C- C- O ! p'- |/} f +, !- L ú,.- f cr)cD f, (,f) f .- +-, t,>ooo o o oE t- o o o-t,.- o o o-(, L V| o F o F .-.- J _C C) p 3o o è- .- r, L u o (n L (/|-o o f, {J'C' o +J U cJ t, o og o o c rotf-c.- o o o o o -o +J f c o-.- u -c c-c c u r-.- o- o +J >-Y--c-! o f, <'- ú 3 r0 do(n.-vè-o =u u o coE

26 lO)lFl t') +J E o-o o c o .: & P ;fi .=; .elb !! +J O r- p +J O c +r +J O E CC OOOLr) .-ú .-O Ot/l^f OO ! .-OF Fc EO COOE q- .- L J l- +J C.u O f J! -o O c t, o o _c (I- è c >. L | >- +J o_ cr tr oLlJ€oOCl-rJLl-ot,(n .- o u1- (0 !.- è o o o o lJ o ll (,-o +Jt' Lq- o c') c > 3 (, .p > o r- J o o c o c > 'r- c c o >- o o c è.- o c P L:loo(ooo)o.-+Jct,r)f.^.-pooo-o +J (, E O -c O) rr'- . O O OÍ t, 1-.-.P O o.- O O 3 O t- cr+--C L} > t,.- O-.lJ t.f| fE {JO Oo)-oOo.OOOp .-cC O O L .{J p O C-.-_C.- C >,+J o.- >.Ot{-.- tf F t, +r O O p +r O >. - U.- E - O p OOt,t/tc.À'-f'-Ut,-a+lu-OO-o ,! f (nE o o o +J o-o c o-(- o o o c c J U+J.-Oc:>CULOOCtIfO-lJfO-O 3a o o o-o o c o c l--c c (, !'- o o tn ll.- o EE É.- FOpr0èO{JU.- =O-l-! =-+J!-

-o:^ !n A C |, -q- m E E o o o orÈ c 0) () U- r0 F o.-.- .-.- n,- (, .u .u --dt L 'F E >-_o 0) O.-'- (/) t/)'- 3-O+Jq) = Q) C -_O-_o O c JUC q) '^3O o o: ^Er 0) (, .- -crr-:l o.- E c0).u o)ú.pOt,oupE O F "-c +J cOU+)=OOO .-FUP '= .t o r, (^ o-o E o {J(D0) E: +J.-LfC+JLO(.r) f,>N E +J o|lJQ oo. o(,/lco P.-.- P o cociJf.-Eoo- .-{JLC u O- ÉOC (]+rOUUT .^'--O pooq) o tn trt.- î E E.- f c c c o-- E L ooroopoo.--Oco c()0ro o .- L O_.- +, 0) +J +r {J o C f }.- L {J L -O L.- t/} Ctt- r0 C- O >o-o t- o :too ccq)0)+Jooq) -.- (/| o- o-o--o E L- Eo- L < o oo- c o a) :,"-9 E -o 1 o ^ O o ^ O O c'- a o r,F .afI,LOrrCEO(o|/| (n L.- ol - . o o L o o +J-.p (c OL .{J O E O_C ^ O (/.) .-+J O f -C +J OC+J.q-U(n.-.p^o.-OO (, +)(n . O O rr.- O) L C E c E EN E o I E > r.- c c f O ' O': O O E ! > o>. o - O.-(oc.-U EE .-.rJO3cU -c .>+r (,.- (n t, O p O O (n r- O {, t, (J O O r0 U}L O-- c= O E (n 0J ^l- {, >. = l- 3 .- r-.- O ^.- r, +J O {, >r O O >(no .o O O a O U'-'O E/"n-E ' c X (F c O! f = úo oo-crJc (,Etn oO O>.o-.-O (n L .. q) ^-O- r_LEf,(,r)q) u _ovfUOq) L .-ul/| C O Ctra'- U (II O ^ CL O L E l- q) E:+r O - O Uq- -O (n U c .- O t, O .- f, (l)rIc -o O-.C l-- O C- J {l- - l--C-C -O rooo - '- (0 +J (J o E O >--C O O :t O ! O O .-q-c)0) o L.- L-vp.p-c.-oo>.'- -o o')> E U l- t/| o o.-.-rJ >- o o L o o C)!t+--c.--c oo o U_ o_ U 3 O- O_v t_ +r A_ a J O O 3 - .p 3 î c) p ^p ,, , 3 ^ o) \-:fCO-cQ) ! o ! {J I f o -.- c = c r.t-.- >,c Uo o f cr){) +r l- o c o O O-o o p o O E +rr+- O r, c) 3 O) .= E ..cno) .-o .-o(n -OlJ-c o-!- O ..po úc.-+tP- +) O o-cOp|,O0) ol ac o'-L(noÈ t,o):l o .-pcoo -q) P O O O O t, J N O c'-'- C C t/l u ! C-E -o 3 f .- !- 0) C').- > t- L! O.- (, O ^ ^y) O (0"- cÎt c')Lo! of -trJo u-.- -c -+r-ooo E(n cu' ooc:J -=î > | (, o 3 c'-'-Ot,c 0) O+J - ) 3 u o .- - -U - O- O +J l; : O 6 C ! t, o)vlJ'- O O -o -c O .-OOc T, -+,> O cQ , O c--C rÈU .tJ ó.- O-c-F+r O:J c-cOroSEl: c -l r- f o r- tr|) rI] e (I, O c q) :t O OF .-c.-oo(,!o o >!ao o(/)0)l'/)ur.notncoJo q) c() l, tt J(,f)èlU)oúo(/}oo- ul- l/|l0|nc.--.-t{- t- O .- >.P.- P $u>l o t, o c o.- E o o t/) ln-c.p- q) .-L -(D-+r.- OOIO.-F fClpooct, -c o o z. ea c d u Q u o co€ ú QÉ o cr o.-

t \o f\ @ rI,

27 , € .h@ | | c c .-.- c) ttl xt/lo '(' -F O c >.t, O.-O c:O) O.u.u -o o o >.o L c |, +J O f O .E.- E .-- (u q) 0 o +JL(DU-cO +rO-OC O a = c ú!-- f(l)>co)ct-opo(/)p uEOool/) (, o -o > o o f .- o L o oro (, f.- o r, t,q) !-C f O E-tr- O-L O O) po(nul,E+r(!) O< F r-.- O c I O() c o+r- O I O t- .- c o L (D è(^ oo oc+roo =oL.-.c +J.- Cl{J r^O I- E O +J J C O o-+J U O o c:t o o.-E .-o o (l) c >.t, o .< c u o +r O OO- 0 0 ) O 0- O)t, O.- (, O O! +J (n+r o-p >.t, u} u! ir-.- o_-- )x o f .J|| L q) +r ot-.Eo-:J o t+-P E-o o c c! E >.1o'rL o-+J >-L O'tf .- L - O-C taL O O O rO.- o O J LI.- O r- F Foo(n:loo+J rf +J O L U E +J >.(UIor) c C) -cO0 U LcO LU oo-o-c>u f,o-o LOOt'Oè'O(|)+JO-ú.lrCL f,olEC-Ooì+Jt- O- C.- th C = +J +, (/r)O Oq- O 0) tn q,, f.-- C C O l- C > O-.- Cn O rO O O O.- d - O U =E.-O-O.-.- Z.AO

(/)-O (no) +JC q)c Llo c)- .-Uî E o 1- o-! +r- )..- o o L o Q+J oo o > f .- o q) oL c o o . o)oq- E0) +l .-.- Tt (/)^ (/) O fI, o +J Cv O F I +J (, o >..- O o- O t/} = >0) ln.- o .- (, o .9.D F(J O O ^+J 3 O E Cr{_ ^U.) -oÀm(,L +J O o(,o oc) Ul'- O C +r.- .-F_c .-L ^C+J_COC (/')+rUî uoo 3 q) u0) -c,.- o.- c +J.- o o o ooL OtÈ +J O O C E !f f c 6E = èc (u'o o.- .- E +J o |, o-c (,o t, O O U r- OO c.--

t^

-- a .t-, O N -o |, OrrEZ! OO Ú)q) c c crf tn c o u|n o . O Or+ O O- O oo L l.--c O- G.- o (/) E .' q) o.Lr o o +J! L ^C E c)(,r)> E'- tnO+J'^OCC) -o (n Q) o !po O +J >- O-l\ rO- U llt E (, - E ^E o(/) o.-- f, L_o f E L!.- |/) {n u.- >. L-- O 3 r, 1C rn O o c oo c oLc o-o ro L (D.c c (|) c () (/| I o =-v o ú :lo .co tn o-.- o)Z cÎro O q) L O-O .- -OE - c \J 'OOO(l)O U C.-.^(n O è oo r, +r |/l -C.lJ.-.1-J(n.- 3t, Àtn (, .--c (N o o-L > ro J o L L +JU Of,q) I +r O f +r >.- C +r -C O_ - O +r U t,.- .- o! o |n Q L u o.- u L OC c.- .-+J uf L .- O O c .*J.- (5 L- +J O U > (, E ur f +r U O.-C OF rfuu o c f L o t/| o cc c OO-+r +JO tt- t, c > o-o otn o o u.- u c) apo o oo- o o.-

q)

O) ..oo (./) o o t/)-c+J (I) >' q) JCTOUJ CJ q) (0 o).- r- fu E ol oC') o coo o EA ! -GÀ +J o O:l |,O O oo .|-, 'lt'(t- (r' ú) - o U1 o o E PE' O q) O-L\.o ! lEo) E .. oF c OE+rolu ^ q) |.,)l-O rts o +, f O c .u"\ ooL o 0, u (n=.-= rf q) o o -vL _v0)E q) - e C - (l)-$ !)(nq) o tÈ tn o o-c o .- o-c L QOOp+J - J F- À ó4-: oN ct c/ +J (t)

qr c;- (\,1

28 \o t\ 3

Oa =9r\ _v l-E

3-v 0)u

>'l tr- {/) +Jl O .-lvl .; ol p ol .- À+J alo o c> ol q) cl ol .- |/tP Fl c oul rol = o(^ ol - U^P Nl Oof l- >l - O-o ol o o.- o zl- .- U}J o U o- O'- o ON oE3 {J +J3 oc) z

c) Ul (uo U)E |, o 3L (|)0) oo z> L o _oÀ L otn o- L ur 0) L1C ..; oc -)O +JO V, oo 'o .- c) >N ^,4 (^l Ll I OI L cl o ! .-l = c o> )l - -t/ìu} lo o L orc ol .- -OcO -cl u o F.- .- Ft o '- J! +'J U) uuco .- .-.- ! +) r|- +,i|- C +) +J l|L 0) +J OOLE o- o.- E -c (l)0 u o-c u .- +r +J 0) .cL L o 3oq) oo o-úr! o cxoc q,) O (l)-o o oc tt1

-ou

29 NOTES

These kinds of conceptionsare part of a ner{ attack on the sociaì sciencesor determinism. Cf. Elias i'Jorbert, (London:Hutch inson , 1979); J. Goudsblon,Soc (0xford: Bìackwelì s, 1977); E. Ions , Agai nst (Oxford: Blackwel I s, 197il . 2. Cf. Eurostat, Geqnomenclature(Brussel s, 1978, Code804) 3. For examplethe recently estabìished Bastion point Repubìic, establ ished on former l,laori land ín Auckland. For the backqround on Maori land disputes see D.c. pitt,'Te Roopuo te |,latakite." Journal de Société des Océanistes, flo. 4 (Paris, 1976). 4. There are several categories here: i. Polynesianoutl iers include the tropical "colonies" urhere there is still l,JerryZealand citizenship - notabìy the Tokelausand the Cooks; i i. Europeanoutl iers - notably the chathams,incidental ly also the last resting place of the ancient aboriginal type people, the , probabìydecimated by Maori colonization; i i i. faunal/floral outl iers - habitats of non-humanspecies with attendantscientists (includingAntarctica), often part of international teams (e.g., NZ-USin the RossSea, even sometimesNZ-ussR co-operation in oceanographicresearch) : iv. the internaì islands includepolynesian spl inter groups, Europeanfarmers - e.g., high-country kingdoms- etc. The generaì structure of flewZeaìand society is discussed in D.C..Pitt, ed., Sociaì Class in (London:Longmans, "So !=[]Sg_]"n4 1977); Pitt, f{ewZealand.,l Internationallnrernatronat Reviewof CommunitCommunityDevelopment, nos, 37_39(1977). nà oeveìopmentpment ini n ContemporaryLonremporary New Zealand,,'zea tandr" JournalJourna I of EconomiEconomic Development and SocialJveror Changeurdrgs inril Asiafl5rd \rorfncomtng/;(fort 5. FranKItn, lrade, lìrowth and Anxiety (London: Methuen, 1978). See the AppeiTlies ToFsome- m'TtTonal-materialfrom pitt, sociaì Arternati;.; i"-N;* zearand's t-uture, (t/el I ington:llew Zealand commission for the ffidPitt,iociaìBoundariesandEducation(Paris: oEcD/cERt,t978). 5. 0n pluralismin I'lewZealand see D.c. pitt and c. l,lacpherson, EmergingPlural ism (London:Longmans, 1975).

30 (and The phrase belongs to Si r GuyPowl es, former f i rst) ombudsman- Listener, 29 Apr. 1978. (Paris: 0ECD/CERl, 7. SeeD.C. Pitt, SocialBoundariesand Education I 978). (oxford Univers i ty 8. See D.C. Pi tt, Tradi t ion and Ecqlgtis-Itogre:: ;;;';, igzoi;'p (rheHasue: M.;i;;, igtai; Piti, Soci@elt (oxford: Pergamon, 1976), the ISA q SeeD.C. Pitt,,|A Rural Renaissance,.'paperpresented to f,lorldCongress, Uppsala, Sweden,1978' 10. See IBPD,lJorld BankAtlas (Washington,D'C', 1966, 1978)' (Geneva, ll. UNRISD,Research Data Bankof Developmentlndicators 1976). Nations, 1977), lZ, Statistical- Yearbook, 1976 (flewYork: United t-836. - NewZealand t3. The outflow figure has increasedsixfold since 1975 Departmentof itatistics InformationBuì-l-etin, 1978' Section of r4. E.g., GordonStephenson, former Chairman' Dairy FederatedFarmers, of Putaruru. (Oxford, 1977)' t5. Cf. L. Brown in E. Stamp, Gror4|g out of Poverty (London:Longmans' r6. SeeD.C. Pitt, ed., Social Class in llewZealand 1977). figures of t7. The Aucklandcommittee on unemploymenthas estimated rate (see 130,000-l50,000, three or four times the official UlemploymentNews, August 1978, pp' l-2)' Soc t8. SeeD. C. Pitt, ed. , !9c ia l Vlork=9nd Zealand, (London:Longmans, l97E)' (0xford: Pergamon, r9. cf. D.c. Pitt social Dynamicsof Developm_ent 1916). (London:Longmans' 20. SeeD.C. Pitt, ed., Social Class in NewZeaìand 1977). 21. R. Dore. The DiplomaDisease (London:Unwin, 1976)' in 1977-78' 22, The oECDrated it fifth worst amongits members (Boston:Houghton-Miffl in; 23. J.K. Galbraith, The Ageof Uncertainty 1977). is extremely Z\, The definition of l4aori (NewZealand Polynesian) complicated.Ingeneralitisapersonwho-claimshalformore 1975' a Maorì is Maoridescent. l; new ìegislation plannedin statistics (e'g', a personwho cal I s him/heiself a Maori. Some evaluation educationand pol icy) are basedon usually European Maori s (t'tett ington: of Maoriness. See A. C. \laI sh, More and More hlhitcombe6 TombsLtd. , l96l ) . 25.P.Curson,',PoìynesiansandResidentialConcentrateSinAuckland,'' (1970), \Zl-\32; Journal of the iolynesian Society, vol. 79 PP.

3l D.l. Rowland, rrProcessesof Maori Urbanisation,rr New Zealand Geographer, vol . 28 (lglz), pp. l-22; r..VJ.Thomsoi-ii?-TlDJrl in, lmmigrantsin NewZealand (Palmerston: Massey University Press, T370'I; D-C. Pitt and CJlacpherson, EmergingPlural ism (Auckland: Longmans,1975);A.C.Ualshandn.o.ffiration,'' Journal of the PolynesianSociety, vo1. 82 (tgZl), pp. 470-486; A. f"r (Auckland:Hicks Smith, l97l). 26, See\^/.D. Borrie in K.W.Thompson and A.D. Trlin, ContemporaryNew Zeaìand(tlettington: Hicks Smith, 1973). -

27. See D.C. Pitt, Tradition and EconomicProgress - (London:Oxford Uni vers i ty Prut 28. SeeD.C. Pitt and C.M.Ilacphersoo, op. cit., 1975. 29. A.C.\'/aìsh, op.cit., 1971. 30. rbid. 3l Seeparticularly D. Brayand C. Hill, eds., Polynesiansand Pakeha in llew Zealand Education (Auckland:Heinemann-, 1973)', also llationaì Advisory Committeeon l4aori Education, Maori Education (Vett ington: Departmentof Education, 1971, mirnefrl-L-ewiig-ai-d J. Shaìlcrass, lntroduction to Mgo1-[l5gl15l!, -"Maori(Uett ington: l.lew ZealandUnivers Education and Research,"Austral ian and l.lewZealand Journal of Sociology, vol. 7 l97l), 32. Post PrimaryTeachers'Association, Reporton Maori Education (lglo, cyclostyled),gives 13.ì p.. 47.3 per cent European. "Maor 33. R.K. Harker, i Enrolment at l'lewZealand Universitiesr" l'lew ZealandJournal of Educationaì Studi es, vol . 5 (1970), pp. \ry: lq?

34. R.K. Harker, "Socio-economicand Cultural Factors ìn llaori AcademicAttainment,t' Journal of the PolynesianSociety, vol. B0 (i gzt), pp. l\2-152; D d the Maori People," Journal of the PolynesianSociety, vol. 79 (1970). pp.20l-218. "Language L.Y. , M.il. Clay, SkiI l s: A Compari son of l4aori , Samoan and PakehaChildren," l,lewZealand Journal of Educational Studies, voì. 5 0970), pp. tfi:I-6T. 36, See Housing in l,ler,rZealand - The Report of the Commissionof tnqu 37. SeeA.D. Trl in, "lmmigrantsand Crime," in l/ebband Collette, l,lewZealand Society; P.T. 0rMalley, "The Inf luenceof Cultural Fffiime Rates,rribidem; Departmentof Justice, Crime in NewZealand (Wett ington: GovernmentPrinter, 1969); J.R. t4ccrett,-ì'Gnsiderations on SomeStatistics on Maori Offending," f'lewZealand Social V/orker,April 1969, p. 4O; D.C. Pitt, e l Problemsin NewZealand (university of Anaklana,lg7g) 38. SeeD.C. Pitt and C. Macpherson,op. cit., 1975.

32 "Attitudes 39. A.D. Trl in, towards lllest Samoanlmmigrants i Auckland,"Australian Quarterly, vol. 44, no. 3 0972), pp. \9-57; Heyt@he Heylenpott (HeytenResearch Centre, Auckland, 1972); A.D. TITTn, Tnrmlgrants in the Cities," in R.J. Johnson,ed., Urbanisationin NewZealand (Wetl i ngton: Reed, 1972).

40. The backgroundto the Maori land protest is describedin D.C. Pitt rrTeRoopu o te Matakiter" Journaì de Soci été des Océani stes (Paris, 1976). 41. cf. D.c.Pitt andC. Macpherson,Emerging Plural ism (London: Longmans, 1975) . \2. See for exampleD.C. Pitt, "Te Roopuo te f4atakite," Journal de Société des Océanistes,Do. 4 (Paris: 1976). \3. See D.C. Chappl"r (London:Longmans, 1975). 44. SeeD.C. Pitt, Social Alternatives in NewZealandrs Future (tlett ington: Commiss io l+5. Seethe following table,taken from Franklin, op. cit., 1978, p. 139. Statistics are very poor and confusedin this area.

Farm Types in l'lewZea land (l.lumbersof Farms- 1973)

Princípallydairy 15,932 Principally sheep 13,731 Principally beef 5,852 Sheep and beef 6,331 Dai ry wi th sheep or beef 2,210 Sheepwi th dai ry 152 Beef with dairy or sheep 1,519 Mixed I ivestock 5,215 Sheepand cropping | ,71+l Principally cropping I,170 Generalmixed farminq 1,623 Market garden i ng | ,623 0rchards 2,051+

\6, 1.e., two-tiered farming with sheepor cattle usually under Pinus radiata. \7. Seefor exampleS.H. Franklin, Trade Growthand Anxiety (Methuen, 1978). 48. ln 1973, according to a Federated Farmer study, sheep farmers earnedabout half of top salaries (u.g., doctors); bV 1975 it v',asa third. 49. About !0 per cent is value addedafter the farm gate. rrRural 50. S.D. lJebband J. Coìlette, Urban Differences in the Use of Stress-Alleviate Drugs," AmericanJournal of Sociology, l'lov. tr

1977. This study, however,used only a survey of prescriptions, and somedrugs studied are al so used for non-psychotropic condi t ions, e. g. , for gastroenteri t i s. Another survey basecion respondentshas showna very low rate of drug usage. See T. Gill The RuraI \,romenof lllewZea I and (Univers ity of Canterbury: 1975). 5.l. Cf. K.F. 0rConnor,Introduction to the ljaitaki (ttettinqton: UNESC0/MAB,t976). 52. Frankìin, op. cit., 1978,p. 177.

3\