Te Pā Auroa nā Te Awa Tupua: the new (but old) consciousness needed to implement Indigenous frameworks in non-Indigenous organisations

Abstract

The Te Awa Tupua (Whanganui River Claims Settlement) Act 2017 formalised a new way to view, use and understand Te Awa Tupua—the Whanganui River. While giving legal personhood to a river is relatively recent, the paradigm shift towards a new consciousness of natural phenomena having physical and spiritual identities originates from Indigenous knowledge, values and practices. The framework that will implement this new change, Te Pā Auroa nā Te Awa Tupua, is values-based, appoints positions and governance groups, includes a whole-of-river strategy, is supported with funding and applies legal recognition to the Whanganui River and its intrinsic values. This article seeks to build a bridge of understanding to facilitate non-Indigenous engagement with implementing Te Pā Auroa nā Te Awa Tupua as an organising framework for human action and relations with human and nonhuman entities.

Keywords

Indigenous paradigms Māori worldview non-Indigenous organisations Te Awa Tupua Whanganui River

Introduction

For millennia, the world’s Indigenous peoples have successfully managed complex reciprocal relationships between biological and cultural diversity as guardians of the web of life (Nelson, 2008). This relationship is based on what Nelson (2008) considers original instructions on how to live in peace with the earth and with one another—a template for living that examines global human systems from Indigenous perspectives (Yukanporta, 2019). Today though, we live in a purported anthropocene, an age in which human beings arguably have a deciding say about the fate of nature and humanity (Perra, 2020). From an Indigenous perspective, avoiding anthropogenic destruction requires respect for nature and cohabitation in harmony with it (Perra, 2020; Trosper, 2009), if we are to save the planet from global ecological and social collapse (Nelson, 2008; Perra, 2020). Indigenous worldviews, knowledges and frameworks for mutually beneficial human and nonhuman relationships amid anthropogenic calamity are finding their way into the discourses of economics (Rout et al., 2021), management (Mika et al., 2020) and business (Macpherson et al., 2021).

In Aotearoa New Zealand, Indigenous frameworks as alternative ways of knowing, being, and doing are being reintroduced to managerial discourse through treaty settlements. Treaty settlements are legislative attempts to place a postscript on past injustices the Crown has perpetrated against Māori as the Indigenous people by offering forms of financial, cultural and symbolic redress (Wheen & Hayward, 2012). Of greater importance to Māori, however, is what lies ahead—envisaging and enacting a fair, just, peaceful and prosperous future for one and all, grounded in Māori knowledge (Mika & Scheyvens, 2021). An unresolved challenge in this development is how non-Indigenous organisations can implement Indigenous frameworks instituted by treaty settlements, particularly in organisations that have legal, fiduciary and moral responsibilities to Indigenous peoples and places. The article contributes to existing decolonising management literature (Jammulamadaka et al., 2021; Ruggunan, 2016; Woods et al., 2022) by focusing on what is needed to decolonise a river (Hsiao, 2012). Such proposition seeks to understand how non-Indigenous organisations might support breaking down colonial systems of administration that disrupted traditional and customary forms of governance and management (Hsiao, 2012) while acknowledging the transformative power of Indigenous knowledge and practice (Smith, 2012).

The purpose of this article is to help non-Indigenous organisations that have a relationship with Te Awa Tupua, commonly known as the Whanganui River, understand and apply an Indigenous framework—Te Pā Auroa nā Te Awa Tupua (Te Pā Auroa)—an organising framework for human action and relations with human and nonhuman entities—enacted within and through Te Awa Tupua (Whanganui River Claims Settlement) Act 2017. We argue that meaningfully applying Te Pā Auroa requires a paradigm shift in the way humans relate to the earth and to each other. We suggest that viewing Te Awa Tupua from an Indigenous perspective can help unlock the consciousness needed to comprehend and operationalise Te Pā Auroa in non-Indigenous organisations. While the article focuses on Te Awa Tupua, we argue there are important lessons for non-Indigenous organisations in other jurisdictions who are obliged to understand and apply Indigenous frameworks. The article addresses the problems highlighted by Whanganui iwi (tribes affiliated with the Whanganui River) negotiators, and that is one of prescriptive water management systems, fragmented policies, adversarial relationships and failings of current legislation to reflect the values shared by the community, namely Whanganui iwi (Talbot-Jones & Bennett, 2022).

This article has two key components. First, we conceptualise what Te Pā Auroa means from the perspective of Whanganui uri (descendants of the Whanganui tribes) as a basis for facilitating non-Indigenous organisations’ engagement with this Indigenous framework. Second, we discuss the re-emergence of Indigenous knowledge as a paradigm shift and how Treaty of Waitangi settlement processes have been used to give impetus to this transition. In this article, Whanganui iwi refers to the collective group of every individual, hapū (subtribe), tūpuna rohe (ancestral regional grouping) and iwi (tribe), who descend from Ruatipua or Paerangi (the two primary ancestors of Whanganui iwi) and Haunui-ā-Pāpārangi (Whanganui Iwi & The Crown, 2014b). Whanganui uri are persons descended from birth, legal adoption or whāngai (Māori customary adoption) from any individual of Whanganui iwi.

Context

Positionality

This is a conceptual article drawing on Indigenous research methods, kaupapa Māori (Māori research methods), uri (descendant) perspectives and the analysis of relevant literature. The first coauthor is Whanganui uri, whose knowledge, experience, education and upbringing by and on the Whanganui River are interwoven throughout this article. The second coauthor identifies as Mātaatua uri (descendants of Mātaatua, tribes of the Eastern Bay of Plenty) and is an Indigenous Māori scholar with an affinity for Te Awa Tupua and its iwi. The third coauthor identifies as Ngāi Tiriti (a descendant of European settlers enabled by the Treaty of Waitangi), having chosen to migrate to Aotearoa, with ancestors from Russia, Poland, Scotland and England.

Treaty settlements

In Aotearoa New Zealand, the Treaty of Waitangi was signed in good faith between the British Crown and Māori rangatira (chiefs) in 1840 (Hayward & Wheen, 2004). In 1975, the Treaty of Waitangi Act was passed, establishing the Waitangi Tribunal whose role is to investigate Crown breaches of the treaty which resulted in prejudicial treatment and ongoing loss for Māori (Waitangi Tribunal, 2020). Crown breaches against the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi include Māori seeking return of stolen and alienated lands, waters and other resources, protection of the natural environment, recognition and restoration of language and culture, equitable access to government resources and recognition of Māori sovereignty (Mutu, 2018). The Waitangi Tribunal is a standing commission of inquiry, and treaty claims follow four main steps—pre-negotiation, negotiation, ratification and implementation (Andrew, 2008). The negotiation of a claim culminates in a deed of settlement, which signals the resolution of all historical grievances between a Māori claimant group and the Crown (Crocker, 2014). The Māori fight for autonomy and a fair say in the country’s decision-making over natural resources have kept the treaty alive more than any other single factor (Orange, 2015).

The Treaty of Waitangi settlement process is a vehicle Māori use to both validate and execute Indigenous knowledge as part of a shift in paradigm. An inherent part of that Indigenous knowledge is the application of tikanga, which is defined as rule, plan, method, custom, habit, anything normal or usual, reason, meaning, authority, control, correct or right (Williams, 2001). Tikanga is also defined in legislation as Māori customary values and practices (Mead, 2003). The application of tikanga acknowledges a natural order to the universe, a dynamic system built around living and non-living entities (Harmsworth & Awatere, 2013). Māori have always been well-attuned to their environment and understand that life is based around nature’s cycle rather than forcing nature to respond to human intent (Davis, 2006). After the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi, however, tikanga was eclipsed by the introduction of British law and settler policies, resulting in the suppression of tikanga (Gallagher, 2008). As a result, tikanga was seen as mere custom to be accommodated by Crown law as convenient (Mikaere, 2011), despite a Māori system of law already existing which was fully integrated into everyday life (Brittain & Tuffin, 2017).

Te Pā Auroa

The treaty settlement pertaining to the Whanganui River was the culmination of negotiations between Whanganui iwi and the Crown stretching back over 150 years (Whanganui River Maori Trust Board, 2015). The narrative of Te Awa Tupua had been muted by adverse legislation and prejudicial Crown action following the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi. Yet, Whanganui iwi steadfastly maintained that they retained and exercised rights and responsibilities in relation to Te Awa Tupua in accordance with their tikanga. Moreover, the iwi maintain that their rights and interests were never relinquished knowingly or willingly (Ngā Tāngata Tiaki o Whanganui, 2014). The Whanganui River settlement returns the definitive voice of the river and its iwi for the wellbeing of Te Awa Tupua (Ngā Tāngata Tiaki o Whanganui, 2015). This position is outlined in Te Awa Tupua (Whanganui River Claims Settlement) Act 2017. The purpose of this act from an uri perspective is to revert to a pre-1840 lens through which to view and interact with the river (Hawira, 2019).

An outcome and key component of the Te Awa Tupua legislation is Te Pā Auroa. This framework symbolises an extensive set of principles, practices and institutions for Te Awa Tupua that are designed to be fit-for-purpose, enduring and the responsibility of all those who have an interest in Te Awa Tupua—both Māori and non-Māori (Ngā Tāngata Tiaki o Whanganui, 2020c). There are seven key elements, and for ease of reference, the Te Pā Auroa framework is presented as a diagram (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Te Pā Auroa nā Te Awa Tupua = the Te Awa Tupua framework; Te Awa Tupua = the Whanganui River and its legal status; Tupua Te Kawa = the Te Awa Tupua intrinsic values; Te Pou Tupua = the human face of Te Awa Tupua; Te Kōpuka nā Te Awa Tupua = the Te Awa Tupua strategy group; Te Heke Ngahuru ki Te Awa Tupua = the Te Awa Tupua strategy; Te Korotete o Te Awa Tupua = the Te Awa Tupua fund; Kia Mataara Rawa = the vesting of the Crown-owned parts of the bed of the Whanganui River in Te Awa Tupua.

Reasserting an Indigenous framework

Conceptualising Te Pā Auroa

In this article, we articulate a conceptualisation of Te Pā Auroa as an Indigenous framework that privileges the knowledge of uri as tangata whenua (people of the land). Elevating tangata whenua narratives ensures that the paradigm shift enabling application of this Indigenous framework in non-Indigenous organisations is grounded in Whanganui iwi perspectives. We discuss three of the seven components of Te Pā Auroa as the basis for rethinking human to nature relationships and the managerial implications of this for non-Indigenous organisations. They are (1) the legal recognition of Te Awa Tupua as an indivisible and living whole; (2) the legal recognition of Tupua te Kawa—the intrinsic values; and (3) Te Pou Tupua—the human face.

Te Awa Tupua—legal recognition

The legal recognition of Te Awa Tupua as an indivisible and living whole comprises the Whanganui River from its mountain source to the sea, incorporating its tributaries and all its physical and metaphysical elements. This enduring concept of Te Awa Tupua underpins the desire of Whanganui iwi to care for, protect, manage and use the Whanganui River through the kawa (customs, values) and tikanga maintained by uri overtime (Ngā Tāngata Tiaki o Whanganui, 2014). Although treaty settlements are full and final according to the law, they are not full and final for Māori (Mutu, 2018) in that they could never fully compensate for what was lost (Mutu, 2019; Te Aho, 2017). However, Whanganui iwi have devised a legal structure in the form of a framework that incorporates tikanga and kawa.

Hawira (2019) explains that Te Awa Tupua is recognised first and foremost within its statute as a living and indivisible whole, comprising all its metaphysical and physical elements from Tongariro, its mountain source, to the sea. It is only after the totality of Te Awa Tupua is established within the statute that the river is then deemed to be a legal person. Legal personhood is the vehicle to carry the new status, nothing more (Hawira, 2019). This means that, although the legal personhood of Te Awa Tupua is described as pioneering (Salmond, 2020) and a significant legal development (O’Donnell & Talbot-Jones, 2018), it is fundamentally a Crown institution used to better understand and apply Indigenous paradigms. New laws such as legal personhood are an attempt to reset human relationships with nature and are there not to manage the land itself, but to manage how people interact with the land (Ruru, 2017).

Part of resetting the human–nature relationship is necessary because the current view of Te Awa Tupua held by non-Indigenous organisations tends to separate and compartmentalise physical and nonphysical elements and prioritise the former over the latter. As the Waitangi Tribunal (1999) found,

the river is to be seen as an indivisible whole, not something to be analysed by the constituent parts of water, bed, and banks, or of tidal and non-tidal, navigable and non-navigable portions, as may be necessary for the purposes of English law. (p. 39)

Legal personhood, therefore, effects a Māori worldview that regards rivers as tūpuna (ancestors), who must be viewed holistically rather than thought of in fragments (Morris, 2009).

Tupua te Kawa—intrinsic values

Te Pā Auroa legally recognises a set of Indigenous values that reflect the intrinsic relationship between the river and uri as guardians and sovereign partners in protecting the mana (prestige and authority) of the river (Ngā Tāngata Tiaki o Whanganui, 2020d). The four intrinsic values are called Tupua te Kawa (Table 1) (Whanganui Iwi & The Crown, 2014a).

Table 1.

Tupua te Kawa—intrinsic values.

1.	Ko te awa te mātāpuna o te ora The river is the source of spiritual and physical sustenance.
2.	E rere kau mai te awa nui mai i te Kāhui Maunga ki Tangaroa The great river flows from the mountains to the sea.
3.	Ko au te awa, ko te awa ko au I am the river and the river is me.
4.	Ngā manga iti, ngā manga nui e honohono kau ana, ka tupu hei awa tupua The small and large streams that flow into one another form one river.

Source. Te Awa Tupua (Whanganui River Claims Settlement) Act 2017.

The intrinsic values of Tupua te Kawa are ideally understood as protocols or norms. They not only act as tribal markers identifying who Whanganui uri are, but are metaphors for instructions on how to live with the river and each other. Kawagley and Barnhardt (1999) argue that Indigenous knowledge of nature is rooted in the long inhabitation of a particular place. For Māori, the notion of place is ritualised in pepeha, formulaic tribal expressions which indicate a deep sense of belonging to a place, and whakapapa, genealogical ties to an eponymous ancestor (Carter, 2005). A sense of place is also ritualised in whakataukī, proverbs that capture ancestral knowledge about their world and how it can be aligned to present-day existence (Pihama, 2020).

The first value of Tupua te Kawa

Uri accounts of what the river means both spiritually and physically have been extensively covered in the Whanganui River tribunal report (Waitangi Tribunal, 1999). Clearly, uri endure in the belief that the awa (river) is the source of their spiritual and physical sustenance (Tinirau et al., 2020). The awa is a healer, a kāpata kai (food store), a highway and a protector (Turia, 2001):

Our [Whanganui uri] association with our tūpuna awa [ancestral river] goes back to the beginning of time . . . and of all the elements, water is the first because without it there can be no life sustenance of Papatūānuku [Earth Mother]. If we disturb that, then we have upset the balance, and if we upset the balance then there is retribution. (Richards, 2009, p. 15)

An example of disrupting this balance is the diversion of the river’s headwaters for power generation. Physically, this resulted in increased algae, scraping down rapids due to low water, and a downturn in or complete demise of fish supplies. Spiritually, power generators “have severed the cord of our unity” (Mareikura, 2009, p. 36) because diverting the water is cutting the spiritual cord which is sacrilege. Therefore, we must acknowledge the need to restore the mauri (life force) of Te Awa Tupua (Tinirau et al., 2020). The physical and spiritual sustenance of the river also features in tribal development, including education plans and developing tribal graduates (Te Puna Mātauranga o Whanganui, 2000), in language and health strategies, and in performing arts.

The second value of Tupua te Kawa

The whakataukī “E rere kau mai te awa nui mai i te Kāhui Maunga ki Tangaroa” (The great river flows from the mountains to the sea) was encapsulated by iwi leader Rangitihi Tahupārae during Te Tira Hoe Waka, a Whanganui iwi wānanga (tribal forum) (Wilson, 2010). Te Tira Hoe Waka is an annual 2-week wānanga, which sees uri take to the river on a tribal journey. The wānanga starts at a marae (place of gathering) nearest to te Kāhui Maunga, the cluster of mountains where Te Awa Tupua begins. The paddling begins in Taumarunui, a town near the upper reaches where the river is accessible. The river continues 290 km into Whanganui city, where the journey ends at one of two marae in the city.

While the philosophy of the Tira Hoe Waka is based on the intergenerational transmission of Whanganui tribal knowledge and history, it is also a manifestation of the proclamation that the river flows from the mountain to the sea. Whanganui iwi leader, Matiu Mareikura, maintained that the ties between people remained strong all throughout the river (Waitangi Tribunal, 1999). In te ao Māori (Māori society), this unity is best identified as whakapapa, and beyond a simple retelling of genealogical ties, it also speaks of what Whanganui elders called te rau kotahi, meaning the multiple-self (Simon, 2013). Raukotahi—which means come and go, not as a singular identity, but as one who is a culmination of all those who come before you, all those that stand at your side and all those who will follow you—was renewed as an iwi kaupapa (tribal philosophy) in 2013 as a catalyst for the preparation of the Te Awa Tupua Act 2017 through iwi wānanga.

The third value of Tupua te Kawa

While stories of Whanganui are portrayed by non-uri authors such as Downes (1976) and Young (1998), we intentionally sought Whanganui uri perceptions of Te Awa Tupua. The occupation of Pakaitore, a site of significance in Whanganui, was a turning point in the history of Whanganui iwi. On February 28, 1995, Whanganui iwi marched on to Pakaitore, to protest against the injustices of the Crown (Pākaitore Historic Reserve Board, 2020). During that time, a Whanganui Declaration of Nationhood was drafted. The articles in the declaration describe the supreme absolute authority of Whanganui iwi over all our rivers, lakes, streams, mountains, lands and all other taonga (treasures)—tangible and intangible. The declaration signals the inherent rights of uri to utilise and exercise full control, decision-making, participation, enhancement and protection over the use of their rivers, lakes, streams, mountains, lands and taonga. Furthermore, it expresses the inherent right of uri to all physical, emotional and intellectual development for the collective wellbeing of the people as a tribal nation.

In a survey noting the aspirations and priorities of uri, iwi members were asked why is the awa important to you? (Allen & Tinirau, 2021). The responses were formatted according to the four values Tupua Te Kawa. Ko au te awa, ko te awa ko au was the most commonly referenced value and speaks to the inalienable connection and responsibility Whanganui iwi have to Te Awa Tupua. In short, uri defined this particular value as meaning, we—the river and the people—are one (Allen & Tinirau, 2021).

The fourth value of Tupua te Kawa

This value stresses that Te Awa Tupua is a singular entity comprising many elements and communities, working collaboratively for the common purpose of Te Awa Tupua (Whanganui Iwi & The Crown, 2014a). Considered a newly contextualised kawa, its similarities are reflected in older Whanganui whakataukī, such as “He muka au na te taurawhiri a Hinengākau,” meaning, I am a strand of the woven cord of Hinengākau. Whanganui iwi leader Che Wilson explains that it is a whakataukī to remind uri that they are from the same lineage of the one woven cord from Whanganui tupuna kuia (female ancestor), Hinengākau (Pihama, 2020).

This kawa also speaks metaphorically to the interwoven facets of life and how Te Awa Tupua lives through uri. Many Whanganui women, including Honey Winter, tied the awa to their living experiences, day-to-day activities and tribal participation. “I jumped at the opportunity to come home and contribute to our social, cultural, political and economic development. . . . I know that I belong and understand how I fit into the bigger picture of iwi development” (Takiari, 2002, p. 51).

Te Awa Tupua is not only woven through our history, proverbs and past life experiences—it is also our future. This particular kawa will see the social, cultural, educational and political coming together of not only whānau (families), hapū and iwi along the Whanganui River, but all Whanganui River communities including non-Māori to partner, engage and invest in opportunities to advance Te Awa Tupua (Tinirau et al., 2020).

Te Pou Tupua—the human face

Te Pou Tupua is the embodiment of Te Awa Tupua. Te Pou Tupua acts as the human face who speaks on behalf of the river. Te Pou Tupua is a singular role filled by two people, one representative of Whanganui iwi, presently Turama Hawira, and one Crown representative, presently Keria Ponga. The key functions of Te Pou Tupua are to act for and speak on behalf of Te Awa Tupua and to uphold the status of Te Awa Tupua and Tupua te Kawa (Office of Te Pou Tupua, 2019). Whanganui iwi wanted a high level pou (post) as the focal point for the new consciousness non-Indigenous people would need to shift from imported legal and philosophical constructs (Hawira, 2019).

Discussion

Indigenous paradigms

Indigenous paradigms have emerged from Indigenous peoples’ struggle for self-determination and decolonisation processes (Koukkanen, 2000). The resurgence of Indigenous knowledge as a paradigm shift applies here in two contexts—nature and organisations. Western paradigms see nature as property, available for ownership, possession and wealth for citizens (Suzuki & Knudtson, 1993), and is often inclined towards commercial and economic activity, amassed in forms of capital (Kēpa, 2008; Pistor, 2019). The Whanganui River report, which inquired into claims against the Crown for breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi (Waitangi Tribunal, 1999), discusses settler constructs of the river comprising rights, ownership and tenure. Many European New Zealanders have a deep understanding of their property rights, but regard Māori property rights as either illegitimate or incidental, and find the relationship between Māori people and nature bizarre even animist (Finlayson, 2019). Yet, Te Awa Tupua settlement that followed successful prosecution of the claim not only accepted a Māori perspective of nature, but vested legal personhood in the Whanganui River as a manifestation of this Indigenous paradigm of nature.

Indigenous worldviews on nature are premised on connection, reciprocity and ethical relationships (Muller et al., 2019), with substance that has sacred meanings (Davis, 1993). While legal personhood provides western legal precedent, recognising a river as an ancestral being better aligns with a Māori worldview (Morris & Ruru, 2010). This Indigenous worldview should not be characterised as simply nonmaterial or spiritual (Kēpa, 2008) or treated as an add-on, afterthought or as a grudging concession to a dominant mainstream paradigm—instead, it is a view that is integral to te ao Māori (Joseph et al., 2019). A Māori worldview regards water, along with its host—ponds, rivers, lakes, streams, as the bloodways of Papatūānuku (Te Aho, 2019), and as such, water is life (Douglas, 1984; Durie et al., 2017). Preserving water and humanity’s relationships with it are essential to human survival and wellbeing (Mika, 2021; Ruru, 2018). Human societies, however, are greatly confused. Powerful state and nonstate actors are struggling for the control of this life-giving resource, where conflicting ideologies and needs are determining the future of people and environmental resources (Hook & Raumati, 2011).

What uri learn about the river and the knowledge gained from practising the values and beliefs of the river helps to understand life itself (Rawiri, 2005). Uri learn, practice and apply six cultural imperatives: (1) reciprocity, by ensuring the physical and spiritual wellbeing of the river is upheld; (2) responsibility, by ensuring the right protocols are sustained; (3) tiakitanga or guardianship, by taking care of the river, as our ancestors have done; (4) advocacy, by speaking up against those who mistreat the river; (5) honour, by continuing the fight for the river’s effective management for generations past and to come; and (6), praise, by transmitting intergenerational knowledge about the river through our songs and our stories. From the perspective of uri, the knowledge, learnings, teachings and practices which have informed the development of Te Pā Auroa are not new ideas that emerged at the passing of Te Awa Tupua legislation. This knowledge has been with Whanganui uri since time immemorial; are embedded in pepeha, whakapapa, whakataukī and tikanga, and are maintained and actioned through tribal wānanga and kaupapa, strategies, plans and programmes.

Consciousness is the term Hawira (2019) uses to encourage non-uri to emphasise the new way in which to view Te Awa Tupua and to remind the Crown, local government and communities of the changed lens. If this is what is required to understand and meaningfully apply Te Pā Auroa, non-Indigenous organisations must also be supported with access to education and cultural infrastructure to achieve the requisite paradigm shift. More importantly, who this paradigm shift is for and how this is facilitated is a critical consideration.

Shifting paradigms

A paradigm shift in the way non-Indigenous currently relate to the earth and to each other is only the start of what is required to meaningfully apply Te Pā Auroa. Conferring legal personhood in nature requires ontological adjustments (Winter, 2019), which is further complicated by the absence of Indigenous knowledges in modern forms of organising and managing (Love, 2019). As a result, this absence adds pressure for Māori to have their ideologies recognised. For Māori to have their cultural, social and economic philosophies recognised requires a critical perspective (Henry & Pene, 2001) that highlights the inadequacies of western paradigms and theories to accurately explain Indigenous business and management phenomena (Dell, 2017). There is a strong call for non-Indigenous organisations—both commercial and noncommercial—to see an alternative world, to experience another way of knowing and to consider holistic and multidimensional approaches to business (Spiller et al., 2011). This requires a shift in paradigm, one that includes decolonial conversations that both critique dominant Eurocentric models (Dutta, 2015) and imaginaries of what alternative models could look like (Mbembe, 2016). A shift in paradigm is not just about decolonising western paradigms, but it is about the placement of Indigenous peoples and their knowledges into dominant, mainstream discourses (Koukkanen, 2000).

Decolonising management practice is not about substituting one—non-Indigenous—model of knowledge production with control by another—Indigenous. Instead, it is the emancipation from colonial and postcolonial accounts of managerialism (Ruggunan, 2016) while allowing Indigenous peoples to reconnect and engage with their own knowledge systems and ways of knowing (Woods et al., 2022). Colonisation was created through European ideas about how things should be (Thomas, 2020). Transformative praxis, therefore, is about non-Indigenous organisations taking action (Jammulamadaka et al., 2021), to allow Whanganui iwi to assert their rights and responsibilities while removing barriers and predetermined orders historically imposed through political, socio-cultural, legal and economic life (Hsiao, 2012). As previously stated, access to a degree of tribal and Indigenous education and cultural infrastructure is needed for non-Indigenous organisation to proceed with the paradigm shift. This shift should be supported with appropriate methodologies, pedagogy and learning with a focus on indigenising spaces (Woods et al., 2022), a reconceptualisation of rivers (Winter, 2019), capacity development work and critical mass building work, as well as individualistic reflexivity about one’s positionality (Jammulamadaka et al., 2021).

Conclusion

In Aotearoa New Zealand, since the passing of treaty settlement legislation pertaining to the Whanganui River in 2017, there has been an overwhelming national and international reaction, with intrigue centring on Te Awa Tupua as the first river in the world to be granted legal personhood (O’Donnell & Talbot-Jones, 2018). What is written about Te Awa Tupua, however, seldom comes from the Indigenous people who live within its catchment. Moreover, much of the discourse centres on the legal and environmental implications of Te Awa Tupua, rather than giving effect to the settlement through management theory. For instance, embedded within the settlement legislation is an Indigenous framework for relating to Te Awa Tupua—called Te Pā Auroa nā Te Awa Tupua. While Te Pā Auroa privileges Whanganui uri ways of knowing, being and doing on the river, it also creates obligations for non-Indigenous organisations that have responsibilities to the river and its peoples.

We set out to initiate a conversation about how Indigenous frameworks can be understood and applied in non-Indigenous organisations in ways that are culturally appropriate and effective. To contemplate the paradigm shift that is implied by an Indigenous framework like Te Pā Auroa requires a new consciousness preceded by an understanding of Te Awa Tupua, which accords with a Māori worldview. We acknowledge that a spectrum of views to Indigenous paradigms will exist in non-Indigenous organisations. Yet, managers and employees must find ways to comprehend and operationalise Indigenous frameworks because of the legislative mandate of treaty settlements, evidence of anthropogenic harm, and policy shifts towards sustainable, equitable and inclusive development.

We found that a paradigm shift is necessary for non-Indigenous organisations to view human–nature relationships through an Indigenous lens. The shift in paradigm will require decolonising management practices, which involve a critical examination of what may hinder or enable such organisations to effectively implement Te Pā Auroa. An example of an enabler is the ongoing need to socialise and educate all, uri and non-uri, in Te Pā Auroa (Tinirau et al., 2020). This has started through the development of multimedia aids by uri (Ngā Tāngata Tiaki o Whanganui, 2020a, 2020b; Paora Joseph Productions, 2014) and non-uri (MEL Films, 2019). Moreover, we suggest future research should focus on critical factors for operationalising Indigenous frameworks in non-Indigenous organisations and whether or not and how non-Indigenous organisations are able to advance the aspirations of Whanganui uri. We hope that this research may move such organisations beyond a paradigm that simply sees the river in functional or aesthetic terms towards a new consciousness of natural phenomena as having physical and spiritual identities deserving of their care, respect and responsible use in partnership with tangata whenua.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Te Pou Tupua, Turama Hawira for the use of the title of this article which has been adapted from his presentation made at the Second Annual Assembly of First Nations National Water Symposium, 2019, Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada.

Authors’ note

Miriama Cribb is Te Ātihaunui-ā-Pāpārangi, Ngāti Pikiao, Ngāti Porou and Ngāti Tama. Cribb is completing a PhD in Management at Massey University, looking at implementing Indigenous frameworks in non-Indigenous organisations while also working part-time at Te Atawhai o Te Ao Research Institute. Her research interests are in Māori management, organisational studies and social, governance structures that advance hapū and iwi aspirations.

Jason Paul Mika is Tūhoe, Ngāti Awa, Whakatōhea and Ngāti Kahungunu. Mika is an Associate Professor of Māori business at Te Raupapa Waikato Management School and Te Kotahi Research Institute, University of Waikato, where his research centres on Indigenous business philosophy in entrepreneurship, agribusiness, marine economies, tourism and trade. Mika’s research has influenced Māori public policy, in trade, tax, statistics and the environment. Mika is a Fulbright-Ngā Pae o te Māramatanga and a member of the Academy of Management and the Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management.

Sarah Leberman is Tangata Tiriti, with whakapapa to Poland, Russia, Scotland and England. Leberman is a Professor of Leadership, in te kura o Te Kāhui Kahurangi (School of Management), at Massey University, where her research focusses on women in sport and academia, and allyship. Leberman is a Fulbright Senior Scholar, co-founder of Women in Sport Aotearoa and a member of the North American Society for Sport Management.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship and publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Miriama Cribb

Jason Paul Mika

Glossary

awa river

hapū subtribe(s)

Haunui-ā-Pāpārangi ancestor of Whanganui iwi

Hinengākau a Whanganui iwi female ancestor

iwi tribe(s)

kāpata kai food store

kaupapa philosophy

kaupapa Māori Māori research methods

kawa customs, values

Kia Mataara Rawa vesting of the Crown-owned parts of the bed of the Whanganui River in Te Awa Tupua

kuia female ancestor

mana prestige and authority

Māori Indigenous people of New Zealand

marae place of gathering

Mātaatua uri descendants of Mātaatua, tribes of the Eastern Bay of Plenty

mauri life force

Ngāi Tiriti descendants of European settlers enabled by the Treaty of Waitangi

Paerangi one of two primary ancestors of the Whanganui tribes

Pakaitore a site of significance in Whanganui

Papatūānuku Earth Mother

pepeha formulaic tribal expressions that indicate a deep sense of belonging to a place and whakapapa, genealogical ties to an eponymous ancestor

pou post, pillar

rangatira chief(s)

raukotahi come and go, not as a singular identity, but as one who is a culmination of all those who come before you, all those who stand at your side and all those who will follow you

Ruatipua one of two primary ancestors of the Whanganui tribes

tangata whenua people of the land; Indigenous people

taonga treasure(s)

te āo Māori Māori society

Te Awa Tupua the Whanganui River, Whanganui River legal status

te kāhui maunga cluster of mountains where Te Awa Tupua begins

Te Heke Ngahuru ki Te Awa Tupua

Te Kōpuka nā Te Awa Tupua

Te Korotete o Te Awa Tupua

Te Pā Auroa nā Te Awa Tupua

Te Pou Tupua the human face of Te Awa Tupua

te rau kotahi the multiple-self

Te Tira Hoe Waka a tribal forum that includes a 290-km journey on the Whanganui River

tiakitanga guardianship, (the action of) taking care (of natural resources)

tikanga rule, plan, method, custom, habit, anything normal or usual, reason, meaning, authority, control, correct or right, Māori customary values and practices

Tongariro the mountain source of Te Awa Tupua

Tupua Te Kawa the Te Awa Tupua intrinsic values

tūpuna ancestor(s)

tūpuna awa ancestral river

tupuna kuia female ancestor

tūpuna rohe ancestral regional groupings

uri descendant(s)

wānanga tribal forum

whakapapa genealogies and descent from an eponymous ancestor

whakataukī proverbs

whānau families

whāngai Māori customary adoption

Whanganui iwi tribes affiliated with the Whanganui River

Whanganui uri descendants of the Whanganui tribes

References

Allen

Tinirau

(2021). Te oranga o Te Awa Tupua: Supplementary report —Aspirations and priorities of Te Awa Tupua uri. Te Atawhai o Te Ao.

Andrew

(2008). Administrative review of the Treaty of Waitangi settlement process. Victoria University of Wellington Law Review, 39, 225–264.

Brittain

Tuffin

(2017). Ko tehea te ara tika? A discourse analysis of Maori experience in the criminal justice system. New Zealand Journal of Psychology, 46, 99–107.

Carter

(2005). Naming to own: Place names as indicators of human interaction with the environment. Alternative International Journal of Indigenous Scholarship, 1(1), 6–25.

Crocker

(2014). History and the Treaty of Waitangi settlement process. Journal of New Zealand Studies, 18, 106–117.

Davis

(2006). Ka whakaoho ake i nga tangata nunui: Māori economic development—Awakening the sleeping giant. In Mulholland

(Ed.), State of the Māori nation: Twenty-first century issues in Aotearoa (pp. 53–65). Reed Publishing.

Davis

, (Ed.). (1993). Indigenous views of land and the environment. The World Bank.

Dell

(2017). Stimulating creativity with the Indigenous-effect for developing novel organizational theories. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2017(1), Article 11970.

Douglas

E. T. K.

(1984). Waiora, waimaori, waikino, waimate, waitai: Māori perceptions of water and the environment. Centre of Māori Studies and Research, The University of Waikato.

10.

Downes

T. W.

(1976). Old Whanganui. Capper Press.

11.

Durie

E. T.

Joseph

Erueti

Toki

Ruru

Jones

Hook

G. R.

(2017). The waters of the Maori: Maori law and state law. https://researchcommons.waikato.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10289/11811/Report%20-%20The%20Water%20of%20the%20Maori.pdf?sequence=2

12.

Dutta

M. J.

(2015). Decolonizing communication for social change: A culture-centered approach. Communication Theory, 25(2), 123–143.

13.

Finlayson

(2019). A river is born: New Zealand confers legal personhood on the Whanganui River to protect it and its native people. In Follette

C. L.

Maser

(Eds.), Sustainability and the rights of nature in practise (pp. 259–278). CRC Press.

14.

Gallagher

(2008). Tikanga Māori pre-1840. Te Kāhui Kura Māori, 0(1). https://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-Bid001Kahu-t1-g1-t1.html

15.

Harmsworth

Awatere

(2013). Indigenous Māori knowledge and perspectives of ecosystems. In Dymond

J. R.

(Ed.), Ecosystem services in New Zealand: Conditions and trends (pp. 274–286). Manaaki Whenua Press.

16.

Hawira

(2019, February 26). Part two: Paper presented at the Second Annual Assembly of First Nations National Water Symposium, Niagara Falls, Ontario. https://eee-cec-db-ad-caaae.filesusr.com/ugd/afed_cdbebdacaecaebc.pdf812842408567989288939226449422865883

17.

Hayward

Wheen

(2004). The Waitangi Tribunal: Te Roopu Whakamana i te Tiriti o Waitangi [The Waitangi Tribunal: The Treaty of Waitangi Enforcement Body]. Bridget Williams Books.

18.

Henry

Pene

(2001). Kaupapa Maori: Locating Indigenous ontology, epistemology and methodology in the academy. Organization, 8(2), 234–242.

19.

Hook

G. R.

Raumati

L. P.

(2011). A validation of Māori social principles and the global fresh water crisis. MAI Review, 2011(1). http://www.review.mai.ac.nz/mrindex/MR/article/download/394/394-3085-1-PB.pdf

20.

Hsiao

(2012). Whanganui River agreement: Indigenous rights and rights of nature. Environmental Policy and Law, 42, 371–375.

21.

Jammulamadaka

Faria

Jack

Ruggunan

(2021). Decolonising management and organisational knowledge (MOK): Praxistical theorising for potential worlds. Organization, 28(5), 717–740.

22.

Joseph

Rakena

Jones

M. T. K.

Sterling

Rakena

(2019). The treaty, tikanga Māori, ecosystem-based management, mainstream law and power sharing for environmental integrity in Aotearoa New Zealand: Possible ways forward. https://www.sustainableseaschallenge.co.nz/assets/dms/Reports/The-Treaty-tikanga-Maori-ecosystem-based-management-mainstream-law-and-power-sharing-for-environmental-integrity-in-Aotearoa-New-Zealand-possible-ways-forward/MAIN20TuhonohonoSSeas20Final20Report20Nov202019.pdf

23.

Kawagley

A. O.

Barnhardt

(1999). Education Indigenous to place: Western science meets native reality. In Smith

Williams

D. R.

(Eds.), Ecological education in action: On weaving education, culture, and the environment (pp. 117–140). State University of New York Press.

24.

Kēpa

(2008). Discussion of Ormond: Who determines what story is told? Silenced voices and narratives of marginalisation. Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology, 2(1), 43–45.

25.

Koukkanen

(2000). Towards an “Indigenous paradigm” from a Sami perspective. Canadian Journal of Native Studies, 20(2), 411–436.

26.

Love

T. R.

(2019). Indigenous knowledges, priorities and processes in qualitative organization and management research: State of the field. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management, 15(1), 6–20.

27.

Macpherson

W. G.

Tretiakov

Mika

J. P.

Felzensztein

(2021). Indigenous entrepreneurship: Insights from Chile and New Zealand. Journal of Business Research, 127, 77–84.

28.

Mareikura

(2009). Te Awa Tupua Whanganui: Our sacred cord of unity. In Rawiri

(Ed.), Mouri tū, mouri ora: Water for wisdom and life (pp. 35–40). Te Atawhai o Te Ao.

29.

Mbembe

A. J.

(2016). Decolonizing the university: New directions. Arts & Humanities in Higher Education, 15(1), 29–45.

30.

Mead

H. M.

(2003). Tikanga Māori: Living by Māori values. Huia Publishers.

31.

MEL Films (Producer). (2019). The river is me. https://vimeo.com/288119812

32.

Mika

J. P.

(2021). Māori perspectives on the environment and wellbeing. https://www.pce.parliament.nz/media/197165/mika-m%C4%81ori-perspectives-on-the-environment-and-wellbeing-pdf-21mb.pdf

33.

Mika

J. P.

Colbourne

Almeida

(2020). Responsible management: An Indigenous perspective. In Laasch

Suddaby

Freeman

Jamali

(Eds.), Research handbook of responsible management (pp. 260–276). Edward Elgar.

34.

Mika

J. P.

Scheyvens

R. A.

(2021). Te Awa Tupua: Peace, justice and sustainability through Indigenous tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 30(2-3), 637–657.

35.

Mikaere

(2011). Colonising myths—Māori realities: He rukuruku whakaaro. Huia Publishers & Te Wānanga o Raukawa.

36.

Morris

(2009). Affording New Zealand rivers legal personality: A new vehicle for achieving Maori aspirations in co-management? [Master’s thesis]. University of Otago. https://ourarchive.otago.ac.nz/handle/10523/191

37.

Morris

Ruru

(2010). Giving voice to rivers: Legal personality as a vehicle for recognising Indigenous peoples’ relationship to water? Australian Indigenous Law Review, 14(2), 49–62.

38.

Muller

Hemming

Rigney

(2019). Indigenous sovereignties: Relational ontologies and environmental management. Geographical Research, 57(4), 399–410.

39.

Mutu

(2018). Behind the smoke and mirrors of the Treaty of Waitangi claims settlement process in New Zealand: No prospect for justice and reconciliation for Māori without constitutional transformation. Journal of Global Ethics, 14(2), 208–221.

40.

Mutu

(2019). “To honour the treaty, we must first settle colonisation” (Moana Jackson 2015): The long road from colonial devastation to balance, peace and harmony. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand, 49(Suppl. 1), 4–18.

41.

Nelson

M. K.

(2008). Original instructions: Indigenous teachings for a sustainable future. Bear.

42.

Ngā Tāngata Tiaki o Whanganui. (2014). Deed of trust.

43.

Ngā Tāngata Tiaki o Whanganui. (2015). Annual report.

44.

Ngā Tāngata Tiaki o Whanganui (Producer). (2020a). Ko au te Awa. https://vimeo.com/396330489

45.

Ngā Tāngata Tiaki o Whanganui (Producer). (2020b). Ruruku Whakatupua HD (Premiere Version). https://vimeo.com/364203710

46.

Ngā Tāngata Tiaki o Whanganui. (2020c). Te Pā Auroa nā Te Awa Tupua. https://www.ngatangatatiaki.co.nz/our-story/ruruku-whakatupua/te-pa-auroa-na-te-awa-tupua/

47.

Ngā Tāngata Tiaki o Whanganui. (2020d). Tupua te Kawa. https://www.ngatangatatiaki.co.nz/our-story/tupua-te-kawa/

48.

O’Donnell

E. L.

Talbot-Jones

(2018). Creating legal rights for rivers lessons from Australia, New Zealand, and India. Ecology and Society, 23(1), Article 7.

49.

Office of Te Pou Tupua. (2019). Te Pou Tupua. https://www.tepoutupua.nz/te-pou-tupua

50.

Orange

(2015). An illustrated history of the Treaty of Waitangi. Bridget Williams Books.

51.

Pākaitore Historic Reserve Board. (2020). Pākaitore: A history. H & A Print.

52.

Paora Joseph Productions (Producer). (2014). Te Awa Tupua: Voices from the river. https://www.nzonscreen.com/title/te-awa-tupua-voices-from-the-river-2014

53.

Perra

(2020). Tradition can save the future of nature. In Dobbins

E. G.

Piga

M. L.

Manca

(Eds.), Environment, social justice, and the media in the age of the Anthropocene (pp. 339–354). Lexington Books.

54.

Pihama

(Director) (2020). Whakataukī [Proverbs][Television series episode]. In Mohi, H. (Executive producer). Māori Television.

55.

Pistor

(2019). The code of capital: How the law creates wealth and inequality. Princeton University Press.

56.

Rawiri

(2005, June 22–25). Literacy cultural continuity and dynamism for Indigenous communities [Conference session]. Indigenous Knowledges Conference, Wellington, New Zealand.

57.

Richards

(2009). Water for wisdom and life. In Rawiri

(Ed.), Mouri tū, mouri ora: Water for wisdom and life (pp. 15–20). Te Atawhai o Te Ao.

58.

Rout

Awatere

Mika

J. P.

Reid

Roskruge

(2021). A Māori approach to environmental economics: Te ao tūroa, te ao hurihuri, te ao mārama—The old world, a changing world, a world of light. In Oxford research encyclopedia of environmental science. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199389414.013.715

59.

Ruggunan

S. D.

(2016). Decolonising management studies: A love story. Acta Commercii, 16(2), 103–138.

60.

Ruru

(2017, November). In New Zealand, this river and park are legal persons [Video]: TED Conferences. https://www.ted.com/talks/jacinta_ruru_in_new_zealand_this_river_and_park_are_legal_persons

61.

Ruru

(2018). Listening to Papatūānuku: A call to reform water law. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand, 48(2-3), 215–224.

62.

Salmond

(2020). Afterword: “I am the river, and the river is me.” The Contemporary Pacific, 32(1), 164–171.

63.

Simon

(2013). Taku Whare E: Kaiwhāiki Marae me ōku mahara (Vol. 3). Moku Whanau Trust.

64.

Smith

L. T.

(2012). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and Indigenous peoples (2nd ed.). Zed Books Ltd & University of Otago Press.

65.

Spiller

Erakovic

Henare

Pio

(2011). Relational well-being and wealth: Māori businesses and an ethic of care. Journal of Business Ethics, 98(1), 153–169.

66.

Suzuki

Knudtson

(1993). Wisdom of the elders: Sacred native stories of nature. Bantam Books.

67.

Takiari

(2002). Women of the river: Part one. ICT Whanganui Charitable Trust.

68.

Talbot-Jones

Bennett

(2022). Implementing bottom-up governance through granting legal rights to rivers: A case study of the Whanganui River, Aotearoa New Zealand. Australasian Journal of Environmental Management, 29(1), 64–80.

69.

Te Aho

. (2017). The “false generosity” of treaty settlements: Innovation and contortion. In Erueti

(Ed.), International Indigenous rights in Aotearoa New Zealand (pp. 99–117). Victoria University Press.

70.

Te Aho

. (2019). Te mana o te wai: An Indigenous perspective on rivers and river management. River Research and Applications, 35(10), 1615–1621.

71.

Te Awa Tupua (Whanganui River Claims Settlement) Act. (2017). https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2017/0007/latest/whole.html

72.

Te Puna Mātauranga o Whanganui. (2000). Ngā kai o te puku tūpuna: The Whanganui Iwi education plan. Te Puna Mātauranga o Whanganui.

73.

Thomas

(2020). Pākehā and doing the work of decolonisation. In Elkington

Jackson

Kiddle

Mercier

O. R.

Ross

Smeaton

Thomas

(Eds.), Imagining decolonisation (pp. 42–54). Bridget Williams Books.

74.

Tinirau

Smith

Haami

Rattray-Te Mana

(2020). Te oranga o Te Awa Tupua: A report prepared for Ngā Tangata Tiaki o Whanganui Trust. Te Atawhai o Te Ao.

75.

Trosper

(2009). Resilience, reciprocity and ecological economics: Northwest Coast sustainability (1st ed.). Routledge.

76.

Turia

(2001). The Whanganui River Claim: The cultural and spiritual significance to the iwi of the awa [Speech]. https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA0110/S00149.htm

77.

Waitangi Tribunal. (1999). The Whanganui River Report. GP Publications.

78.

Waitangi Tribunal. (2020). Claims process. https://waitangitribunal.govt.nz/claims-process/

79.

Whanganui Iwi, & The Crown. (2014a). Ruruku Whakatupua: Te mana o te Awa Tupua: Whanganui River deed of settlement. https://www.govt.nz/assets/Documents/OTS/Whanganui-Iwi/Whanganui-River-Deed-of-Settlement-Ruruku-Whakatupua-Te-Mana-o-Te-Awa-Tupua-5-Aug-2014.pdf

80.

Whanganui Iwi, & The Crown. (2014b). Ruruku Whakatupua: Te mana o te Iwi o Whanganui: Whanganui River deed of settlement. https://www.govt.nz/assets/Documents/OTS/Whanganui-Iwi/Whanganui-River-Deed-of-Settlement-Ruruku-Whakatupua-Te-Mana-o-Te-Iwi-o-Whanganui-5-Aug-2014.pdf

81.

Whanganui River Maori Trust Board. (2015). Annual report.

82.

Wheen

N. R.

Hayward

, (Eds.). (2012). Treaty of Waitangi settlements (1st ed.). Bridget Williams.

83.

Williams

H. W.

(2001). Dictionary of the Maori language (7th ed.). New Zealand Legislation Direct.

84.

Wilson

(2010). Nga hau o tua, nga ia o uta, nga rere o tai (1st ed.). Te Puna Matauranga o Whanganui.

85.

Winter

(2019). Decolonising dignity for inclusive democracy. Environmental Values, 28(1), 9–30.

86.

Woods

Dell

Carroll

(2022). Decolonizing the business school: Reconstructing the entrepreneurship classroom through Indigenous pedagogy and learning. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 21(1), 82–100.

87.

Young

(1998). Woven by water: Histories from the Whanganui River. Huia Publishers.

88.

Yukanporta

(2019). Sand talk: How Indigenous thinking can save the world. HarperCollins.