scholarly journals Introducing Critical Tiriti Policy Analysis: A new tool for anti-racism from Aotearoa New Zealand

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
H Came ◽  
D O'Sullivan ◽  
T McCreanor

Abstract Issue/problem Te Tiriti o Waitangi (te Tiriti) was negotiated between the British Crown and Indigenous Māori in 1840. Māori understood the agreement as an affirmation of political authority and a guarantee of British protection. The Crown understood it as a cession of sovereignty. Te Tiriti places a mandatory obligation on the Crown to protect and promote Māori health that has not been upheld. Description of the problem Ethnic inequities in health outcomes have been allowed to flourish in Aotearoa. We explored to what extend te Tiriti could be a anti-racism tool that health policy could be usefully evaluated against? Results We introduce Critical Tiriti Analysis (CTA) a new form of critical policy analysis. CTA involves reviewing policy documents against the Preamble and the Articles of the Māori text of te Tiriti o Waitangi. The review process has five defined phases: i) orientation; ii) close reading; iii) determination; iv) strengthening practice; and v) Māori final word. We present a working example of CTA using the New Zealand Government’s Primary Health Care Strategy. This policy analysis found poor alignment with te Tiriti overall and the indicators of its implementation that we propose. Lessons This paper provides direction to public health practitioners wanting to improve Māori health outcomes and ensure Indigenous engagement, leadership and substantive authority in the policy process. It offers an approach to analysing policy that is simple to use and, inherently, a tool for advancing social justice. Key messages CTA is an anti-racism tool for holding the Crown accountable for Māori health. CTA could be adapted and applied in other colonial contexts to advance Indigenous health.

Ethnicities ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 434-456 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heather Came ◽  
D O’Sullivan ◽  
T McCreanor

Background Te Tiriti o Waitangi was negotiated between the British Crown and Indigenous Māori leaders of Aotearoa New Zealand in 1840. Māori understood the agreement as an affirmation of political authority and a guarantee of British protection of their lands and resources. The Crown understood it as a cession of sovereignty. The tension remains, though legal and political developments in the last 35 years, have established that the agreement places a mandatory obligation on the Crown to protect and promote Māori health. It also requires that Māori may exercise rangatiratanga, or responsibility and authority, in relation to health policy development and implementation. Methods Te Tiriti is, then, an instrument against which health policy is justly and efficaciously evaluated. This paper introduces critical Tiriti analysis as such an evaluative method. Critical Tiriti analysis involves reviewing policy documents against the Preamble and the Articles of te Tiriti o Waitangi. The review process has five defined phases: (i) orientation; (ii) close reading; (iii) determination; (iv) strengthening practice and (v) Māori final word. Results We present a working example of critical Tiriti analysis using the New Zealand Government’s Primary Health Care Strategy published in 2001. This policy analysis found poor alignment with te Tiriti overall and the indicators of its implementation that we propose. Conclusion This paper provides direction to policy makers wanting to improve Māori health outcomes and ensure Māori engagement, leadership and substantive authority in the policy process. It offers an approach to analysing policy that is simple to use and, inherently, a tool for advancing social justice.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Starkey ◽  
Bronwyn Wood

The Ministry of Education is funding a significant building programme for primary and secondary classrooms across Aotearoa, New Zealand. In New Zealand there is an expectation that new or refurbished classrooms will be innovative, modern or flexible learning environments. This paper reports findings from a critical policy analysis of the discourse within Ministry of Education documents focusing on the design of learning environments published 2010-2019. Using a ‘what’s the problem’ approach (Bacchi, 1999), we examine the representation of the ‘problems’ which the policy documents relating to modern learning environments intend to address. We use an eight-stage process of analysis of these documents in order to identify policy priorities, ideologies, assumptions and potential outcomes in order to see how these are used to justify authority and action. This analysis revealed two larger ‘problems’ and a number of subthemes underpinning these documents. We suggest that the construction of these problems has conflated many aspects of both space and teaching and learning and relied on unquestioned assumptions about ‘modern’ learning and collaborative teaching. We conclude by considering the implications of this policy direction for New Zealand’s education system.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Starkey ◽  
Bronwyn Wood

The Ministry of Education is funding a significant building programme for primary and secondary classrooms across Aotearoa, New Zealand. In New Zealand there is an expectation that new or refurbished classrooms will be innovative, modern or flexible learning environments. This paper reports findings from a critical policy analysis of the discourse within Ministry of Education documents focusing on the design of learning environments published 2010-2019. Using a ‘what’s the problem’ approach (Bacchi, 1999), we examine the representation of the ‘problems’ which the policy documents relating to modern learning environments intend to address. We use an eight-stage process of analysis of these documents in order to identify policy priorities, ideologies, assumptions and potential outcomes in order to see how these are used to justify authority and action. This analysis revealed two larger ‘problems’ and a number of subthemes underpinning these documents. We suggest that the construction of these problems has conflated many aspects of both space and teaching and learning and relied on unquestioned assumptions about ‘modern’ learning and collaborative teaching. We conclude by considering the implications of this policy direction for New Zealand’s education system.


2021 ◽  
pp. 0310057X2198971
Author(s):  
M Atif Mohd Slim ◽  
Hamish M Lala ◽  
Nicholas Barnes ◽  
Robert A Martynoga

Māori are the indigenous people of New Zealand, and suffer disparate health outcomes compared to non-Māori. Waikato District Health Board provides level III intensive care unit services to New Zealand’s Midland region. In 2016, our institution formalised a corporate strategy to eliminate health inequities for Māori. Our study aimed to describe Māori health outcomes in our intensive care unit and identify inequities. We performed a retrospective audit of prospectively entered data in the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society database for all general intensive care unit admissions over 15 years of age to Waikato Hospital from 2014 to 2018 ( n = 3009). Primary outcomes were in–intensive care unit and in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcome was one-year mortality. In our study, Māori were over-represented relative to the general population. Compared to non-Māori, Māori patients were younger (51 versus 61 years, P < 0.001), and were more likely to reside outside of the Waikato region (37.2% versus 28.0%, P < 0.001) and in areas of higher deprivation ( P < 0.001). Māori had higher admission rates for trauma and sepsis ( P < 0.001 overall) and required more renal replacement therapy ( P < 0.001). There was no difference in crude and adjusted mortality in–intensive care unit (16.8% versus 16.5%, P = 0.853; adjusted odds ratio 0.98 (95% confidence interval 0.68 to 1.40)) or in-hospital (23.7% versus 25.7%, P = 0.269; adjusted odds ratio 0.84 (95% confidence interval 0.60 to 1.18)). One-year mortality was similar (26.1% versus 27.1%, P=0.6823). Our study found significant ethnic inequity in the intensive care unit for Māori, who require more renal replacement therapy and are over-represented in admissions, especially for trauma and sepsis. These findings suggest upstream factors increasing Māori risk for critical illness. There was no difference in mortality outcomes.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document