©NIDEA * Dr Tahu KukutaiProfessor Maggie Walter National Institute of Demographic and Economic AnalysisSchool of Social Science The University of WaikatoUniversity of Tasmania New ZealandAustralia Recognition and Indigenizing Official Statistics: Reflections from Aotearoa NZ and Australia IAOS 2014, Da Nang, Vietnam, 8 October 2014

©NIDEA * Problem: From non-recognition of Indigenous peoples in OS to misrecognition Different ontological understandings of functionality Significance: power of the data as ‘evidence’ and ‘truth’ Our argument: NSOs to transform their practices to recognise Indigenous peoples on their own terms (UNDRIP); in so doing, mutual benefits can be realised. Misrecognition and Indigenous Statistics

©NIDEA * Expanding the ‘Recognition Space’ Source: Taylor, 2008, p 116 Translation in the recognition space: from ‘culture’ and ‘well-being’ to appropriate ‘social indicators’ The recognition space for indicators of Indigenous well-being

©NIDEA * Recognition Framework for Indigenizing Official Statistics 1.Recognising Geographic Diversity 2.Recognising Cultural Diversity 3.Recognising Other Ways to Know Us 4.Recognising the Need for Mutual Capability Building 5.Recognising Indigenous Decision Making

©NIDEA * 1.Recognising geographic diversity Importance of identity + place for Indigenous peoples Disconnect btw OS spatial units and Indigenous spaciality Australia: Default to national or state level aggregate data - across country boundaries Aotearoa NZ: Invisibility of customary tribal boundaries (tribes as key social, political, economic institutions)

©NIDEA * 2.Recognising cultural diversity Recognising the enduring significance of place-based & customary identities Recognising internal heterogeneity: differences in access to culture and expressions of Indigenous identity Australia Peoples not People: 500 nations Aotearoa NZ: Iwi cultural profiles and Te Kupenga: 2013 Māori Social Survey – a step in the right direction

©NIDEA * ● Rights bearing Indigenous Peoples VERSUS Disadvantaged Ethnic/Racial Minority ● Strengths Based Approach VERSUS Deficit Defined Approach ● Peoples in our own right VERSUS half of Indigenous/Non-Indigenous comparison ● Data of Disadvantage situated in its structural context VERSUS Data of Disadvantage per se 3.Recognising other ways to know us

©NIDEA * Statistics emerge from cultural and ethnic/racial milieu of their commissioners, producers and analysts. Therefore: ●Non-Indigenous OS staff need capability building in how their own norms affect how Indigenous statistical functionality ●Cultural awareness useful but constrained by positioning as the Indigenous ‘Other’ ●Statistical capability in Indigenous communities key – the evolving role of NSOs in co-creation and support 4.Recognising the need for *mutual* capability

©NIDEA * ●Indigenous statistical self-determination as part of data sovereignty; not passive survey respondents ●Consultation is not autonomy, nor it is active ●Partnership means sharing power on decision making ●Mutual culturally appropriate responsiveness key to effective partnership 5.Recognising the need for Indigenous decision-making

©NIDEA * Indigenous Statistics Functionality Recognition Gap

©NIDEA * KIA ORA wulika THANK YOU Visit us at: dea au/