000			03096nam a22003017a 4500
650			_9179 _aCULTURE
999			_c5491 _d5491
005			20250625151433.0
008			170705t2006 -nz||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
040			_aAFVC
100			_aMason, Durie _96788
245			_aMeasuring Māori wellbeing _cMason Durie
260			_aWellington, New Zealand : _bNew Zealand Treasury, _b2006
500			_aNew Zealand Treasury Guest Lecture Series
520			_a"Universal perspectives are premised on the notion that all people have common views about being well and therefore their wellbei ng can be measured in similar ways. Mortality rates are universal because they a dopt an indicator (dea th) that transcends differentiated populations. The presence or ab sence of disease, and the attainment of tertiary education qua lifications are also largely rele vant across the total population, although there may be differences about th eir relative importance and the way in which they are understood. Standards of housing, health status and educational achievement often use measures that are applicable to all people regardless of ethnicity or age, though are not always sufficiently sensitive to capture population-specific perspectives. Although universal indicators and measures can be applied to Mäori as they can to other populations, there are also unique characteristics of Māori that require specific measurement.[1] Mäori specific measures are attuned to Mäori realities and to Mäori worldviews. A Mäori-specific measure of adequate housing might take into account the level of provision for extended families and for manuhiri, while a measure of educational attainment might include measures that relate to the use and knowledge of Māori language. In addition to the universal-specific dimension, the individual-group dimension needs to be considered. Measures of wellbeing can be applied to individuals, groups and whole populations. Measures for individual wellbeing are not necessarily applicable to family and whänau wellbeing, while measures of tribal wellbeing are not always the measures that are appropriate to generic Māori communities. A framework for quantifying hapü and iwi resources developed by Winiata in 1988, placed emphasis on cultural capital and tribal histories, as well as human and economic considerations. [2] At a population level, overall measures of the wellbeing of Māori require the use of indicators that go beyond sub-groups to encompass all Māori." (Opening paragraphs). Record #5491
650			_aHEALTH _9283
650			_aMĀORI _9357
650		0	_96538 _aSOCIOECONOMIC CONDITIONS
650		0	_aWELLBEING _96275
650			_aĀHUATANGA PĀPORI _92932
650			_2reo _aHAUORA _9281
650			_2reo _aORA _95716
650			_2reo _aRANGAHAU MĀORI _95532
650		0	_aTIKANGA TUKU IHO _95542
651		4	_aNEW ZEALAND _92588
830			_aNew Zealand Treasury Guest Lecture Series _96790
856			_uhttp://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/media-speeches/guestlectures/pdfs/tgls-durie.pdf
942			_2ddc _cBRIEFING