Patricia Waugh (she/her; Ngāti Pikiao, Ngāti Mākino, Ngāti Rongomai) discusses shared authority in the resource management space and the work still to be done to reach a transformed Aotearoa.

Hei tīmatanga – Introduction

This year marks ten years since He Whakaaro Here Whakaumu mō Aotearoa: The Report of Matike Mai Aotearoa (Matike Mai Aotearoa) was released with a vision for a transformed Aotearoa. Carwyn Jones rightly recognises that “the question is no longer whether constitutional transformation is imaginable, it is whether Aotearoa is any closer to it”.^[1] In accordance with te Tiriti o Waitangi, Matike Mai Aotearoa promotes the notion of shared authority. Aspects of our institutions currently contemplate this, particularly in the resource management space. However, recent Government announcements pose a threat. In light of these announcements, I discuss Māori participation mechanisms with a focus on Mana Whakahono ā-Rohe (Mana Whakahono) and how work towards constitutional transformation is needed now more than ever. A transformed Aotearoa becomes attainable when we strengthen our institutions and nourish our whakapapa.

Kōrerorero – Discussion

Matike Mai Aotearoa

At the National Iwi Chairs Forum in 2010, the Independent Working Group on Constitutional Transformation was formed. Margaret Mutu was appointed Chair with the late Moana Jackson as Convenor. The terms of reference were:^[2]

to develop and implement a model for an inclusive Constitution for Aotearoa based on tikanga and kawa, He Whakaputanga o te Rangatiratanga o Niu Tireni of 1835, Te Tiriti o Waitangi of 1840, and other indigenous human rights instruments which enjoy a wide degree of international recognition.

Emerging from the views, knowledge, and insights of participants were recurring themes. These themes spoke of a future with whakapapa at the core. A future that involves a recentering and restoration of relationships.

While hapū and iwi operated independently and exercised their own mana in accordance with tikanga Māori, there was an interdependence that stemmed from whakapapa.^[3] Something similar is what was envisaged by Māori with the signing of te Tiriti o Waitangi. Kāwanatanga was offered to the Crown on the premise that iwi and hapū would continue with the unencumbered exercise of authority. This action itself was in recognition of whakapapa and the need to foster good relationships.

According to the Working Group, constitutional transformation must be rooted in values. Discussions were centered around, and emphasised the need for, clear constitutional values before any model or structure could be developed. The seven main values are: tikanga, community, belonging, place, balance, conciliation, and structure. In the Report, these are defined as whakapapa values which overlap and influence each other.^[4] Additionally, the rōpū Rangatahi identified five values they believe should be provided for: health and wellbeing of Ranginui and Papatūānuku; mana motuhake of tāngata whenua; traditional knowledges and institutions; peace and mutual respect – kotahi aroha; and education, health and well-being.

These values encapsulate a constitutional vision that is ‘conciliatory and consensual’.^[5]

A prominent aspect of Matike Mai Aotearoa are the suggestive indicative models, most notably the three spheres of influence adapted from the Waitangi Tribunal: the tino rangatiratanga sphere, where Māori make decisions for Māori; the kāwanatanga sphere, where decisions by the Crown are for its people; and the relational sphere, where both Crown and Māori decide jointly. On the whole, these models address the power imbalance through the redistribution of power in a way that upholds tino rangatiratanga and gives effect to He Whakaputanga and Te Tiriti.

Simply put, Matike Mai Aotearoa supports the notion of shared authority. Veronica Tawhai explains that what is required is restoration of tino rangatiratanga while simultaneously rolling back kāwanatanga.^[6] This involves restoring a balance in relationships between each other and with Papatūānuku. Developments in the resource management space have enabled to some extent the rebalancing of such relationships.

Māori participation mechanisms

When enacted, the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) was seen as a ‘beacon of hope’ by Māori.^[7] Nonetheless, these hopes were not realised. Māori influence and participation has remained inconsistent and minimal.

Currently, there are few Māori participation mechanisms available under the RMA. These are a transfer of powers through s 33, joint management agreements under s 36B, and Mana Whakahono. Section 33 was included as part of the original resource management scheme. It enables a local authority to transfer any of its functions to another public authority, including an iwi authority. In 35 years there has only been one successful transfer of powers from a local government to an iwi authority; Waikato Regional Council delegated water quality monitoring functions around Lake Taupō to Ngāti Tūwharetoa after years of collaboration. Joint management agreements became another Māori participation mechanism when an amendment to s 36B of the RMA provided that an iwi authority could be a party to these agreements.^[8] Unlike s 33 which allows for complete delegation, these agreements are akin to shared decision-making since the parties jointly manage matters within their purview.

Accordingly, there are more joint management agreements in place throughout the country.

Mana Whakahono ā Rohe

A year after Matike Mai Aotearoa was released, Mana Whakahono, also called iwi partnership agreements, were introduced to the RMA.^[9] This is a binding statutory arrangement with the aim of addressing inconsistent Māori participation by improving working relationships between tangata whenua and local authorities.^[10] Subpart 2 of the Act prescribes how they are entered into, what is to be included, and sets the scene for the relationship of the parties. Development of Mana Whakahono is guided by a set of principles that ensure a streamlined, effective, and respectful process.^[11] Matters that could be included in an agreement are clearly outlined in s 58R. This includes participation in plan-making processes, the development of monitoring methodologies, and notification or consultation on certain resource consents. A distinct feature of Mana Whakahono is that they can be initiated by either tangata whenua or local authorities.^[12] Consequently, hapū and iwi do not need to wait to be consulted; if they have the capacity and means to, they can initiate conversations with their respective local authority. In this instance, the invitation must be received and discussions need to follow about developing an agreement.

Mana Whakahono are an expression of shared authority. Māori are able to meaningfully participate in resource management matters affecting their rohe and actively fulfil their obligations as required by whakapapa. They have been a means for hapū and iwi to instigate conversations with their local authority and feel confident knowing that they must be received. Whakapapa relationships of tāngata whenua to Papatūānuku and te taiao are acknowledged as Māori are able to nurture them through meaningful input in planning, resource consents, and monitoring. Iwi partnership agreements support a better future for all—tāngata whenua, tāngata Tiriti, Pākehā, and tauiwi.

Recent developments

Recently, the Government announced it does not intend to carry Mana Whakahono into the new proposed resource management system.^[13] Initially, existing agreements and those that have been recently initiated were supposed to be honoured and carried over. This is no longer the case. A related document claims these changes are about “greater certainty” in relation to Māori interests.^[14] But what is certain is the disregard for Māori rights and obligations. The suggested changes are deliberate, harmful, and act to disrupt the ability of Māori to practice whakapapa, a right that under te Tiriti was to remain unencumbered. Furthermore, the persistent framing of these relationships as mere interests, rather than as rights and obligations, continues to be harmful. If we cannot nurture and care for these relationships, degradation will only get worse.

By removing Mana Whakahono from the resource management system, the Government has unveiled the illusory protection of tino rangatiratanga via the RMA. While these mechanisms have enabled greater provision for Māori rights and interests, these changes are a reminder that these processes and institutions are occurring within the kāwanatanga sphere. Almost every element of the process has been decided by the Government and the terms upon which Māori can engage with authorities is pre-determined. This is a reminder that tino rangatiratanga cannot be fully realised from within the kāwanatanga sphere as we remain subject to the ‘stroke of the legislative pen’.^[15] Changes like this reinforce the narrative that recognition of the interests of Māori is a privilege granted by the Government.^[16] The late Moana Jackson once said, “equality under the new law was an illusory protection from the oppression of the law itself”.^[17] Words that remain apt today.

For the safety of the environment and for communities now and in the future, Mana Whakahono need to be strengthened instead of removed. Local authorities need to instigate these conversations and not wait for initiation by tāngata whenua. Where necessary, local authorities should resource and fund hapū and iwi to overcome barriers that hinder any progress. Lastly, acknowledge that the relationship is more than a mere interest. Rather it is part of a complex interconnected web that carries with it obligations of collective responsibility.

Looking forward

So how can we move forward? Take this as a sign to pick up the challenge and build on the vision from Matike Mai Aotearoa. A reality of a transformed Aotearoa becomes more attainable when we strengthen our institutions. Moana Jackson tells us to nourish the soul.^[18] Start a māra and be guided by the maramataka, join the next wānanga of your hapū that you have been too shy to join, or watch kapa haka to further your reo Māori. For tauira and koutou mā who are unapologetically Māori, your presence is what builds confidence amongst those who are on their journey. Engaging in acts such as these validates our institutions and in doing so, challenges the status quo. As long as you nourish your whakapapa and are proud of your Māoritanga, positive changes will follow.

Ngā kupu āpiti – Notes

[1] Carwyn Jones “A decade of Matike Mai Aotearoa: How far have we come?” The Spinoff (online ed, 23 April 2026).

[2] He Whakaaro Here Whakaumu Mō Aotearoa: The Report of Matike Mai Aotearoa – The Independent Working Group on Constitutional Transformation (2016) at 14.

[3] At 35.

[4] The Report of Matike Mai Aotearoa, above n 2, at 69.

[5] At 101.

[6] Interview with Dr Veronica Tawhai, Jarrod Telford, Rachel Dibble (Rhonda Paku, Te Tiriti Based Futures & Anti Racism, YouTube, 23 May 2026).

[7] Waitangi Tribunal Ko Aotearoa Tenei: A Report into Claims Concerning New Zealand Law and Policy Affecting Māori Culture and Identity (Wai 262, 2011) vol 2 at 705.

[8] Section 36B.

[9] Subpart 2.

[10] Ministry for the Environment Mana Whakahono ā Rohe guidance (April 2018) at 10.

[11] Section 58N.

[12] Section 58O.

[13] Chris Bishop and Simon Court “Better planning for growth and environment” (press release, 20 July 2026) New Zealand Government – Te Kāwanatanga o Aotearoa <www.beehive.govt.nz>.

[14] Chris Bishop and Simon Court “Key features of the new planning system” (fact sheet, 20 July 2026) New Zealand Government – Te Kāwanatanga o Aotearoa <www.beehive.govt.nz>.

[15] Ani Mikaere “The Treaty of Waitangi and Recognition of Tikanga Māori” in Michael Belgrave, Merata Kawharu and David Williams (eds) Waitangi Revisited: Perspective on the Treaty of Waitangi (Oxford University Press, Auckland, 2005) 330 at 342.

[16] At 343.

[17] Moana Jackson “The Treaty and the word: The Colonisation of Māori Philosophy” in Graham Oddie and Roy W Perrett (eds) Justice, Ethics, and New Zealand Society (Oxford University Press, Auckland, 1992) at 3.

[18] Jackson, above n 17, at 9–10.

Author: Guest Author

View all posts by Guest Author