Colonisation, hauora and whenua in Aotearoa – Comprehensive Study Notes
Introduction
Topic: Colonisation, hauora (health/wellbeing) and whenua (land/place) in Aotearoa (New Zealand).
Authors: Helen Moewaka Barnes & Tim McCreanor; Whariki Research Group, SHORE & Whariki Research Centre, Massey University.
Core argument: Colonisation has profoundly harmed Maori health and wellbeing, sustaining inequities across generations; a relational Maori concept of health centered on whenua could offer healing pathways and contribute to health equity for all New Zealanders.
Key aim: Outline indicators of relational health and wellbeing, discuss how Maori thinking about whenua, hauora, and wellbeing can lead to healing, and propose a Maori-driven framework where whenua is the determinant of health.
Policy relevance: To strengthen prevention, protection and promotion approaches and move toward just, sustainable futures; foregrounds matauranga Maori (Maori knowledge) in health policy and practice.
Historical trauma
Historical trauma framework (Reid et al. 2014): Links devastating change with population-level shocks, losses, and multi-generational transmission.
Purpose of the framework: Make sense of entrenched disparities and guide forward-looking strategies for Maori and society.
Conceptualization used: “Historical trauma” to frame the Maori experience of colonisation as not only event-based but transgenerational.
Purpose here: Ground the need to reconceptualise health and wellbeing within a sovereign Maori paradigm through a narrative that connects commence-ment of colonisation to contemporary health disparities.
Data points used to ground the trajectory include population change, life expectancy, land alienation, and racism/privilege as ideological cores of colonisation.
Colonising hauora
The Cook expeditions (1769 onward) as trigger points for imperial domination, white supremacy, and racism in Aotearoa.
Turanga landfall on 9 October 1769 marks the start of sustained colonial relations that reshaped fortunes for both peoples.
The Endeavour voyage: strategic military, political and commercial aims; knowledge returned to England used to further exploration and colonisation (Salmond, Belich, Ward).
Cook’s brief health appraisal of Maori: “The Natives of this Country are a Strong, rawboned, well made, Active People… very dark brown colour, with very good features. They seem to enjoy a good state of Health, and many of them live to a good old Age.” (Cook 1770; Wharton 1893).
This early ethnography framed Maori health in ways that could both resource and threaten imperial interests.
Early health trajectory: Benign first-contact health for Maori vs. Europeans was debated; Salmond’s ethnography suggests Maori health and longevity comparable to Europeans at first contact, despite differences in technology and exposure to disease.
Population dynamics following contact:
Estimated Maori population at contact: 10^5 (approx. 100,000) (Cook’s estimate referenced in the literature).
1769–1810: Maori population around 95{,}000; gradual decline begins as infectious diseases rise and economic changes occur.
1810–1825: Maori population declines toward about 90{,}000 with infectious diseases taking a toll.
1825–1840: further decline to about 80{,}000; European population starts to grow though still small overall.
1840: European population around 2{,}000}; English life expectancy around 40 years (Roser 2019).
1840s–1890s: continuous trauma and land dispossession; Maori population falls to about 42{,}000 by 1890; life expectancy disparities widen.
1860–1890: extreme trauma due to war, land confiscations and colonial expansion; Maori land ownership falls to about 60 ext{%} by 1890.
1944: Maori population recovers slowly to about 100{,}870; settler population reaches 1{,}539{,}978; land ownership hovers below 10% for Maori.
1970: settler population ≈ 2{,}820{,}814; Maori population ≈ 225{,}435; life expectancy disparity narrowed to around 10 years.
2013: Maori population ≈ 598{,}605 within total national population of 4{,}242{,}048; median age of Maori ≈ 23.9 years; health disparities persist.
Life expectancy disparities as a measure of health inequity:
1880s: disparity around 30 years (Maori vs non-Maori).
1940s: disparity reduced but still substantial; by 1944, disparity about 15 years.
1970: gap around 10 years.
1990s–2010s: roughly 7 year gap, though persistent inequalities remain.
Structural processes contributing to health harms:
Land alienation, warfare, forced social change, and multi-level racism.
Economic impoverishment and forced migration fueling disparities across health, education, and livelihoods.
The ongoing relational nature of colonisation:
Population-level changes interact with land dispossession and cultural degradation to sustain health inequities.
Colonial state-building created a dominant settler hegemony with ongoing impacts on Maori sovereignty and rights.
Widespread indicators come from various sources (Ministry of Health life expectancy data, Pool & Kukutai demography, Stats NZ historical data) to illustrate the long arc of colonisation’s health effects.
Whenua and hauora
Land as property was codified in English Laws Act (1840), predating te Tiriti o Waitangi, enabling settler economic power via land and resources (Reid et al. 2014, 2016; O’Malley 2016).
This act represents one of the earliest breaches of te Tiriti and a key lever for colonial economic expansion, entwined with Eurocentric capitalist logics.
Ecocultural transformation of whenua: large-scale land conversion, deforestation, drainage of wetlands, and pastoralization disrupted the ecological and cultural base of hauora for Maori.
Whenua-hauora linkage: two complementary perspectives on whenua:
Whenua as determinant of wealth (land as capital/resource for exploitation).
Whenua as determinant of health (land as source of mauri, mana, identity, and well-being).
Two core processes accompanying land loss:
Destabilisation of place-based whanau, hapu, and iwi identities.
Disruption of traditional knowledge-practices around land use, undermining the fabric of Maori society.
Emotional and cultural consequences:
Lived sadness, grief, anger, identity damage, and cultural erosion linked to land losses.
Notable legal/personhood developments that emphasize whenua’s relational status:
Te Urewera granted legal personhood (2013) with rights, powers, duties, liabilities of a legal entity.
Whanganui River declared a legal person as Te Awa Tupua (2017).
Moves to grant personhood to other land bodies (e.g., Taranaki Maunga) to enable protective lawsuits.
Conceptual shifts and implications:
Exton (2017) argues that legal personhood for land offers a compromise between Crown and Maori, representing a revolutionary shift away from traditional Western property models.
Table 1: Conceptual relationships with whenua (Moewaka Barnes 2019) contrasts two framings:
Whenua as determinant of wealth vs Whenua as determinant of health;
Core questions and priorities:
Mauri: life force linking people to whenua; how to protect mauri and maintain integrity.
Kaitiakitanga: guardianship and stewardship for healing and sustenance; how to work with whenua for healing.
Manaakitanga: relational respect with whenua; how to uphold respectful relationships.
Extraction/Profit/Property: orientation toward exploitation and monetary gain; how much can be extracted or owned.
The contrasting frames show how land use decisions shape health, social justice, and cultural integrity.
Table 2: Maori conceptualisations for the social determinants of health (SDH), using WHO CSDH framework (Moewaka Barnes 2019) to organize determinants across the life sphere.
Mauri as life force; Tangata Whenua Tangata Ora as a relational framework where land, people, and environment are inseparable.
Emphasizes integrated, values-based approaches rather than siloed public health domains.
Indigenous concepts and health models:
Te Whare Tapa Whā (Durie, 1998): physical, mental, spiritual, and family dimensions of health, forming a holistic house metaphor.
Te Wheke (Pere, 1997): octopus metaphor with multiple tentacles representing factors like whanau, waiora, whatumanawa, and other dimensions.
Te Pae Mahutonga (Durie, 1999): constellation model with four pillars; Waiora (environmental protection) as one pou among others.
Royal Commission on Social Policy: proposed four pou to support health and wellbeing (four pillars) including te taiao (environment).
Durie’s articulation (2003a, p. 36): Maori health platforms constructed from land, language, and whānau; marae and hapū; Rangi and Papa; post-colonial legacies; opportunity for cultural expression; full participation in society.
The central argument: tangata whenua and whenua form a unified ecosystem; health is inseparable from land integrity and ecological health; this relational view challenges Western dichotomies of land as merely property or a means of extraction.
Extending beyond environment: the health of people requires restoring mauri and integrity of Papatuanuku (Earth Mother) and fostering relational responsibilities (kaitiakitanga, manaakitanga).
Contemporary applications:
Maori activism and governance increasingly embed te Tiriti in legislation and jurisprudence, though Crown application remains inconsistent.
Te Tiriti-based approaches in health policy are developing since 2000 but often lacking depth in decolonisation and full Matauranga Maori integration.
Waitangi Tribunal and Health System Review findings (WAI 2575, 2019; Health and Disability System Review, 2019):
Crown acknowledged Maori health inequities as unacceptable and noted that care must respect Maori sociocultural paradigms.
Calls for greater integration of matauranga Maori in health systems and attention to equity and access; but cautions that without decolonisation, reforms may be superficial.
Matike Mai Aotearoa (2016) Independent Working Group on Constitutional Transformation:
Proposes recognition of a social order with distinct Maori and Tauiwi domains linked by shared relational space.
Implications for health systems:
A decolonising approach in public health is needed to address historical trauma and cultural paradigms; taiora/hauora is best promoted through whenua-centered strategies.
Hauora Maori models and the social determinants of health (SDH) – a relational framework
Indigenous health models outline multiple determinants that are interrelated and inseparable:
Te Whare Tapa Whā: four dimensions (physical, mental, spiritual, whānau) forming a house with interconnected walls.
Te Wheke: eight dimensions, including whānau, waiora, whatumanawa (emotional vitality), and more.
Te Pae Mahutonga: four pillars; includes waiora (environmental protection) as one of the components (pou).
Durie’s four pou (support posts) model: positions te taiao (physical environment) and waiora (environmental protection) among others as essential for health.
Tangata Whenua Tangata Ora: emphasizes an Indigenous ethical framework where humans and the environment are an integrated ecosystem.
Western SDH frameworks referenced:
WHO Commission on Social Determinants of Health (CSDH, 2008): organizes determinants of health across social, economic, and political determinants; the paper aligns Maori concepts with this framework to illustrate determinants as interconnected and relational.
Conceptual tools and indicators used to relate whenua to health:
Mauri: life force that binds people to whenua; central to Tangata Whenua Tangata Ora.
Kaitiakitanga: guardienship and guardianship; ethical obligation toward whenua and mauri; guides health protection and healing.
Manaakitanga: hospitality and mutual regard; fosters respectful relationships with whenua.
Rangi and Papa (sky father and earth mother): origin stories linking humans to the land and environment.
The role of iwi governance and environmental stewardship:
Mana whenua actively engaged in protection, rahui (temporary prohibition), restoration projects, organic production, eco-forestry, sustainable harvest, and mauri restoration.
These activities are seen as healing processes for both people and whenua and contribute to healing trauma and rebuilding cultural integrity.
The broader planetary health discourse:
Planetary Health, One Health, Ecohealth frameworks cited as global contexts for understanding the interdependence of human health and environmental health.
Maori scholars offer te ao Maori-grounded approaches to health, emphasizing whenua as the determinant of health and the need for integrative, place-based models.
Practical implications for public health research and policy:
Promotes a shift from land-as-property to land-as-relational-entity with rights and mana (Aroha-based governance).
Calls for investment in matauranga Maori within public health, including research programmes that support Tangata Whenua Tangata Ora.
Table 2: Maori conceptualisations for the social determinants of health (SDH) mapped to CSDH schema:
Includes determinants such as Mauri, Kaitiakitanga, Manaakitanga, Te Ao Turoa (environment), Waiora (environmental protection), Whānau, Culture, etc.
Demonstrates an integrated, non-siloed approach to health determinants, grounded in relational ethics and whenua-driven health.
Tangata Whenua Tangata Ora – a relational, eco-centric health framework
Core idea: The health of Maori is inseparable from the health of the land; the two are a single ecosystem.
The framework emphasizes:
The unity of people (tangata) with the wider ecosphere (taiao).
A holistic, integrated approach to health that cannot be separated into discrete domains.
The democratic, communitarian basis for well-being, recognizing diverse roles—from highly trained professionals to lay community knowledge.
Implications for research and practice:
Encourages inclusive research methods, where lay knowledge and professional expertise co-create solutions.
Supports restorative justice in health equity through culturally grounded strategies.
The role of mana and whakapapa in health:
Mana whenua and manaakitanga are central values guiding health promotion and safety.
Waiora (environmental protection) is a key dimension of public health, consistent with the broader SDH approach but rooted in Indigenous ethics.
Applications in contemporary public health:
Public health approaches should integrate te ao Maori (Maori worldview) into policy design and service delivery.
Emphasis on decolonising methodologies and governance to ensure indigenous epistemologies inform health outcomes.
Policy, decolonisation and implications for practice
Crown recognition and limitations:
Health te Tiriti principles have been inscribed in legislation since 2000, but application remains weak and inconsistent, diluting potential health equity gains.
The WAI 2575 interim report (2019) critiques Crown conduct in health services and policies since the mid-1980s, arguing that care must respect Maori sociocultural paradigms.
The Health and Disability System Review (2019) notes that the system evolved within a strong Western medical tradition and that inequities for Maori cannot be fully addressed without embracing Maori worldviews.
Decolonisation as a core aim:
The authors argue for decolonising as a central impetus in moves toward health equity and social justice, not merely reformist tweaks.
They point to Matike Mai Aotearoa (2016) as a blueprint for constitutional transformation and relational space between distinct domains.
Implementing a whenua-centered public health approach:
Reframe land from property to a living entity with rights (e.g., Te Urewera, Te Awa Tupua, National Park proposals).
Promote matauranga Maori in policy design, implementation, and evaluation.
Invest in research and development of decolonised concepts like Tangata Whenua Tangata Ora as policy platforms.
Implications for health services:
Health systems must address access and equity by incorporating Maori sociocultural paradigms into care delivery.
There is a need for structural reform to align health services with Maori worldviews, including holistic assessments and care pathways that reflect Te Whare Tapa Whā and related models.
Ethical and practical implications:
Recognition of land rights and relational responsibilities as essential to health, rather than mere natural resources.
A shift toward collaborative governance with Maori leadership in health policy and service provision.
Decolonising research practices to ensure matauranga Maori is not tokenised but integrally informs study design and outcomes.
Funding and research directions:
Acknowledges a 5-year public health research programme (Health Research Council of New Zealand, HRC 19/694) to advance these ideas.
Emphasizes the need for robust, community-engaged research that centers whenua and Hauora Māori in health equity work.
Conclusion
Summary of the historical arc: Colonisation has produced sustained historical trauma with lasting health disparities for Maori, rooted in land dispossession, racism, and political marginalisation.
The central proposition: Reorient public health toward a whenua-centered, relational framework (Tangata Whenua Tangata Ora) to heal people, whenua, and the planet.
Path forward:
Decolonisation is essential for achieving health equity and sustainable shared futures.
The health sector should elevate matauranga Maori and embrace decolonising praxis as core to reform.
A relational approach to whenua as determinant of health has broad implications for prevention, protection, and promotion across New Zealand.
Final note: Despite significant work and some policy recognitions, substantial commitment, investment, and societal transformation are required to realise the vision of health equity anchored in whenua and tangata whenua tino rangatiratanga.
References and context for further study (highlights from the article’s references)
Foundational sovereignty and treaty debates (He Wakaputanga, te Tiriti o Waitangi).
Historical demography and health inequalities literature (Pool & Kukutai; Reid & Robson; Ajwani et al.; Durie).
Maori health models: Te Whare Tapa Whā; Te Wheke; Te Pae Mahutonga; Durie’s health platforms.
Legal personhood for ecosystems: Te Urewera; Te Awa Tupua (Whanganui River); debates around land rights and environmental personhood.
Contemporary policy reviews and justice processes: WAI 2575; Health and Disability System Review; Matike Mai Aotearoa.
Theoretical frames: CSDH (World Health Organization); Planetary Health; One Health; Ecohealth; Mauri-based models (Morgan); Cultural Health Index (TIPA & Teirney); Maori Environmental Performance Indicators (Harmsworth et al.).
Ongoing commitments and funding: HRC 19/694 (5-year programme) to support further development of these approaches.
This note develops a robust and compelling argument through several key features:
Clear and Explicit Core Argument:
The central thesis is unequivocally stated early on: Colonisation has profoundly harmed Maori health, sustaining inequities across generations; a relational Maori concept of health centered on whenua could offer healing pathways and contribute to health equity for all New Zealanders.
The note outlines clear aims: to define relational health indicators, explore healing through Maori thinking, and propose a Maori-driven framework where whenua acts as a primary determinant of health.
Comprehensive Historical and Empirical Grounding:
Historical Causality: The argument meticulously traces the origins of harm, identifying specific trigger points such as the Cook expeditions (1769 onward), the Turanga landfall, and the English Laws Act (1840) to establish a direct link between colonial practices and sustained health decline for Maori.
Data-Driven Evidence: Extensive quantitative data is provided across centuries to substantiate the historical claims, including:
Dramatic Maori population decline from an estimated $10^5$ (at contact) to about $42,000$ by 1890.
Pronounced life expectancy disparities, reaching around $30$ years between Maori and non-Maori in the 1880s, gradually narrowing but persisting.
Extensive land dispossession, with Maori land ownership falling to approximately $60\%$ by 1890 and further below $10\%$ by 1944.
Systemic Analysis: The note identifies "structural processes" such as land alienation, warfare, forced social change, and multi-level racism as fundamental drivers of health harms, fostering a deep understanding of systemic inequality rather than isolated incidents.
Credibility through Diverse Sources: The use of widespread indicators from varied and reputable sources (e.g., Ministry of Health life expectancy data, Pool & Kukutai demography, Stats NZ historical data) enhances the factual accuracy and reliability of the evidence presented.
Integration of Established and Indigenous Theoretical Frameworks:
Utilisation of Recognized Frameworks: The Historical Trauma framework (Reid et al. 2014) is employed to contextualize the multi-generational transmission of colonial impact, lending academic rigor to the analysis of entrenched disparities.
Maori Conceptual Models: The argument rigorously integrates core matauranga Maori (Maori knowledge) concepts such as Mauri (life force), Kaitiakitanga (guardianship), Manaakitanga (relational respect), and the unifying ecosystem of Tangata Whenua Tangata Ora. Established Maori health models like Te Whare Tapa Whā, Te Wheke, and Te Pae Mahutonga are central to the proposed framework, demonstrating a deep engagement with Indigenous scholarship.
Bridging Knowledge Systems: The note explicitly aligns Maori conceptualisations (e.g., in Table 2) with the World Health Organization's Commission on Social Determinants of Health (CSDH) framework, illustrating how Indigenous perspectives can enrich and refine global health models.
Innovative Legal Conceptions: The discussion of legal personhood for ecosystems (e.g., Te Urewera, Whanganui River) provides strong, concrete legal precedents for reframing whenua as a relational entity with inherent rights, rather than merely property, thereby strengthening the argument for a radical paradigm shift.
Actionable Policy Relevance and Decolonisation as an Imperative:
Policy Focus: The note consistently emphasizes its policy relevance, aiming to strengthen prevention, protection, and promotion approaches while foregrounding matauranga Maori in health policy and practice.
Critical Policy Assessment: It offers a critical assessment of the Crown's inconsistent and often weak application of Te Tiriti o Waitangi principles in health legislation since 2000, supported by authoritative findings from WAI 2575 (2019) and the Health and Disability System Review (2019).
Explicit Call for Decolonisation: Decolonisation is posited not merely as a reformist tweak but as a core impetus for achieving health equity and social justice, referencing the Matike Mai Aotearoa (2016) report as a blueprint for constitutional transformation.
Specific Recommendations: The note translates its theoretical arguments into practical policy implications, advocating for reframing land from property to a living entity, promoting matauranga Maori in policy design, and investing in decolonised health research programs like Tangata Whenua Tangata Ora.
Future-Oriented and Realistic: While proposing a transformative vision for public health, the conclusion realistically acknowledges that realizing this vision requires "substantial commitment, investment, and societal transformation," highlighting the scope and magnitude of the change advocated for.
The paper acknowledges and addresses areas of opposition, existing limitations, or alternative viewpoints in several ways, which ultimately strengthens its argument by demonstrating a nuanced understanding of the challenges and existing frameworks:
Acknowledging Inconsistent Crown Application: The note explicitly states, "Crown recognition and limitations: Health te Tiriti principles have been inscribed in legislation since 2000, but application remains weak and inconsistent, diluting potential health equity gains." This addresses the reality that while there's some policy recognition, its implementation often falls short, acknowledging a current failing in the system.
Highlighting Superficial Reforms: The Waitangi Tribunal and Health System Review findings are cited, noting calls for greater integration of matauranga Maori but cautioning "that without decolonisation, reforms may be superficial." This directly addresses the potential inadequacy of less radical or surface-level reforms.
Contrasting Western Property Models with Maori Conceptions: The paper presents an clear contrast between "Whenua as determinant of wealth" (land as capital/resource for exploitation, typical of Western views) and "Whenua as determinant of health" (land as source of mauri, mana, identity, and well-being). Table 1 specifically outlines these opposing frameworks, showing how the paper engages with and critiques a dominant, economically driven perspective.
Recognizing the Difficulty of Shift: The discussion around legal personhood for land (e.g., Te Urewera, Whanganui River) is framed as a "revolutionary shift away from traditional Western property models" (Exton 2017). By describing it as 'revolutionary,' the paper implicitly acknowledges the deeply entrenched nature of the status quo that it seeks to change.
Addressing the Scale of Transformation Required: In its conclusion, the paper realistically states, "Despite significant work and some policy recognitions, substantial commitment, investment, and societal transformation are required to realise the vision…" This acknowledges that current efforts are insufficient and that the path forward is not easy or universally accepted, tacitly addressing the inertia or resistance that its proposed radical changes would face. It avoids presenting an overly optimistic or uncritical view of immediate transformation.