In 2014, LIANZA was asked by LIAC to prepare a report on the future of libraries in New Zealand. With the support of Tregaskis Brown we consulted with the sector to draft this informative document as a starting point for discussion.

The best part about this project was this: the research shows us just how important libraries are to society. This comes as no surprise to us, but it's still great to hear!

Special Libraries Survey 2016
The value of special libraries has been clearly articulated, with special library information specialists saving considerable time in completing
research queries, and producing higher quality research with greater success than their colleagues (LIANZA 2014).

In addition special library staff are able to negotiate significantly reduced pricing for access to key resources than if information were purchased on an as needed basis – returning as much as $5.43 for every dollar invested. However, the value of special libraries is not always understood by the organisations within which they sit.

In 2009 Gillian Ralph and Julie Sibthorpe analysed the emerging trends of special libraries in New Zealand, in response to a number
of closures. This survey acts as a follow-up to this work, to understand what has changed for special libraries in the intervening 7 years.


For each of the topics listed below, it is assumed:

  1. that to possess a skill in that area is to have an ability to understand and apply these topics in the Library and Information environment and/or have the ability to create, use, develop, implement, manage that information tool, program etc. as appropriate
  2. that different levels and sectors of Library and Information worker may understand/use that skill differently. It is also assumed that a general understanding and awareness of the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi underpin everything we do, and that cultural competency is essential to providing a high quality library and information service.


Colleagues and friends, Warm Greetings, Fakaalofa lahi atu, Fakatalofa atu, Halo, Kia ora, Kia orana, Malo e lelei, Malo ni, Mauri, Ni sa bula, Talofa!

As Pasifika/Pacific librarians we are often asked how to make libraries and information management services more user friendly and engaging places for Pasifika peoples/learners. What is helpful to know? What are the important ideas? What can we actually do? You may also find these ideas helpful in working with other community groups.

Here are a few ideas for you to explore…

Some examples of key research based principles & understandings

  • Libraries are structured, organised and operated on values and principles derived from western European/Palagi cultural and literary traditions. Literacy and libraries for many Pacific families still do not play a primary role in their lives. Pacific cultures are traditionally oral societies with information coming from families and friends (and now often uncritically from social media and Google), not books or libraries.
  • A key goal for libraries in Aotearoa New Zealand is to assist individuals and families to add the world of texts to these traditional and new sources of knowledge. Many libraries, archives, galleries, and museums in New Zealand hold histories, stories, photographs and information relevant to Pacific families, who may not be aware they exist. These resources are good starting points to interest families and communities. To achieve these goals libraries need to build the capacity and capability of Pasifika library and information staff to work with Pasifika communities (see Pasifika librarians & information managers: catching the Pacific wave research report).
  • Pasifika peoples’ lives are often governed by values, many of which have significant differences and priorities from western European/Palagi. Tautua/service, fa’aaloalo/faka’apa’apa/respect, alofa/ofa/care and love, fetokoniaki/reciprocity underpin relationships for instance for Samoans and Tongans. The wellbeing and interests of the group/family come before the individual. Often we refer to the “we” not “I”. The success of the individual is the success of the group/family.
  • The term Pasifika refers to New Zealand residents of Pacific Island ethnicity. However Pasifika is not a homogeneous group. Many people want to be personally known as Tongans, Samoans, Niue or Cook Island Maori, rather than being called or referred to as Pasifika. Librarians need to know about specific ethnic groups and cultural, traditions, and language differences.
  • All Pacific peoples do share a strong sense of spirituality, and connection with culture, place and extended families/communities.
  • Families matter. Students are always members of their families and extended families no matter what age they are. Church and church activities are very important to many. Family obligations and church obligations are part of Pacific people’s lives.
  • Establishing, nurturing, and sustaining reciprocal relationships with communities, families and individuals is the key to effective Library practice. These processes cannot be rushed as it takes time to build reciprocal and trusting relationships. In Samoa and Tonga this is known as the va, or tauhi va in Tongan, and teu le va in Samoan. The quality of these relationships is of utmost importance. (Readings on the va are available at http://www.library.auckland.ac.nz/guides/arts/pacific-studies#=2)
  • Diversity is the new norm, not an extra or add on. Therefore the way we work with all diverse communities needs to be modified. There are many overlapping issues and needs to consider with Māori and Pasifika and migrant groups.

Specific strategies in working with Pasifika learners and students

  • Work with, and host groups in the first instances, e.g. church, communities, families, early childhood centres, schools, homework centres, clubs and associations, student support services, mentoring and bridging programmes, tertiary institutes, companies…Individuals are much more likely to return on their own if they have first visited or worked with library staff as a group. Start a session with the Pacific collections.
  • Language and cultures are important markers of identity and belonging, and valuable resources for learning. Pacific language weeks and significant Pasifika events are opportunities many libraries use to hold events in libraries, and exhibit Pacific materials. They also encourage the learning of a few Pacific languages greetings, and basic phrases that acknowledge people, to network and find out more about communities and their needs.
  • Diversity of experience, expertise, learning preferences, communication skills and confidence to approach library staff varies widely among Pasifika peoples/students. There are many who are already very knowledgeable and skilled but they should not be taken as the norm and beginning point in your sessions/workshops/tutorials.
  • Begin at the beginning and provide an alternative pathway, perhaps called Extra for Experts people can choose to follow but move in and out of without feeling shamed. Many people, both mature and young, are still reluctant to ask questions, ask for help, ask for clarification, ask … When asked yes /no questions such as- Do you understand? Do you have any questions? Do you know what to do? How to find …? No-one wants to stand out, be a bother, or be shamed so the answer is often yes or silence.
  • Learning is also very visual and by observation, by listening and by example, not questioning. In my Samoan culture and Tongan culture we have great respect or fa’aaloalo/faka’apa’apa, for our elders and those of authority and knowledge and often we do not question. Respect for authority and of one who is knowledgeable often transmits to the classroom. Not questioning or silence is often misinterpreted to mean agreement, understanding, or nothing to contribute. Likewise just telling people about something does not necessarily mean they understand or follow. In fact, they often do not understand and need your direct and careful help, clear explanations, and demonstrations to learn how to do it. Show people how to do something, and then provide them the opportunity to demonstrate they can do it themselves.
  • We need to build culturally and linguistically responsive teaching and learning through using Pacific content; concepts, examples, case studies, simulations, stories, and group tasks… Stories are really engaging – Use stories about your own and others experiences to convey ideas, knowledge and learning…
  • Working in close consultation and partnership with teaching and key support staff enables learners academic and information literacy skills and knowledge to be effectively developed around their interests, curriculum requirements and assessments. Research shows teaching with contextualised examples is far more engaging.
  • We should not assume. Begin from where the students actually are: not where you think they should be. They are NOT going to tell you they can’t do what you ask. Library terms are not often simple to understand e.g. databases, scholarly/peer reviewed, descriptors, references, referencing styles. Understanding of terms and contexts may be different. Many New Zealand born students appear confident on first meetings in what they say about what they know and can do. However there is often a very big gap between their world knowledge, what they actually need to know about a topic/activity and ability to record, and write in academic and curriculum styles.
  • We need to set high expectations and expect high outcomes – Require students to arrive on time with their materials and readings they need for the programme. Set class or session activities that require that they take notes and can apply the ideas in the session to actual tasks they face… Set out clearly the steps and stages they will be working through so assignment tasks and expectations are clearly understood. Follow-up and reinforce.
  • Learning preferences for Pasifika students vary. Often students find working in pairs and small groups very beneficial. Find out from students what works well.

To summarise, there are no instant answers. We have to decide how important it is to engage Pasifika students and families in our libraries and information support services. Once we have some goals, however small, we can set about finding and exploring strategies that will achieve those and grow from there.

For more assistance, and to talanoa/dialogue more about strategies, approaches and scenarios, join our Pasifika Information Management Network SIG, subscribe to our listserv, facebook page, attend our professional activities. We invite you to present and share your ideas, best practice and best evidence research, engage in collaborative partnerships and developments…We benefit from learning and sharing from each other for best outcomes for our students, families and library communities.
Ia manuia and look forward to further talanoa/conversations Judy Taligalu McFall-McCaffery, PIMN SIG Past Convenor, email: j.mcfall@auckland.ac.nz

Further readings:
Airini., Anae, M., Mila-Schaaf, K., with Coxon, E., Mara, D., & Sanga, K. (2010). Teu le vā--relationships across research and policy in Pasifika education a collective approach to knowledge generation & policy development for action towards Pasifika education success : report to the Ministry of Education. Wellington, N.Z. : Ministry of Education.
Anae, M., & Sua’ali’i-Sauni, S. (1996). Pacific island Student Use of Student Services at University of Auckland. Auckland: Pacific Island Student Academic Achievement Collective.
Anae, M., Anderson, H., Benseman, J., & Coxon, E. (2002). Pacific Peoples and Tertiary Education: Issues of Participation, Final Report to the Ministry of Education. Wellington, New Zealand. http://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/publications/80898/5555
Baba, T., Māhina, O., Williams, N., & Nabobo-Baba, U. (2004). Researching Pacific and indigenous peoples : issues and perspectives. Auckland: Centre for Pacific Studies, The University of Auckland.
Benseman, J., Coxon, E., Anderson, H., & Anae, M. (2006) Retaining non‐traditional students: lessons learnt from Pasifika students in New Zealand, Higher Education Research & Development, 25(2), 147-162, DOI: 10.1080/07294360600610388
Bishop, R., Berryman, M., & Wearmouth, J. (2014). Te Kotahitanga : towards effective education reform for indigenous and other minoritised students. Wellington : NZCER Press.
Chu, C. (2012). Mentoring for leadership. In K. Sanga & J. Kidman (Eds.), Harvesting ideas: Niu generation perspectives, (pp. 115-133). Suva, Fiji: USP Press, University of the South Pacific.
Chu, C., Abella, I.S., & Paurini, S. (2010). Educational practices that benefit Pacific learners in tertiary education. Summary Report. Ako Aotearoa -The National Centre for Tertiary Teaching Excellence. Auckland: Ako Aotearoa. Retrieved from https://akoaotearoa.ac.nz/download/ng/file/group-5330/fr-educational-practices-that-benefit-pacific-learners-in-tertiary-education.pdf
Clayton, J. F., Rata-Skudder, N. & Baral, H. P. (2004). Pasifika communities online: Issues and implications. Paper presented at the third Pan-Commonwealth Forum on Open Learning, Dunedin, New Zealand. Retrieved from http://www.col.org/pcf3/papers/PDFs/Clayton_John_Skudder.pdf
Gayton, J. M. (2002). Pacific Island teens and school libraries: research study examining Pacific Island high school students in South Auckland attitudes towards school libraries. Submitted to the School of Communications and Information Management, Victoria University of Wellington in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Library and Information Studies.
Halapua, S. (2000). Tālanoa process: The case of Fiji. Honolulu: East West Centre, Hawaii.
Havea, J. (2010) Welcome to Tālanoa, in J. Havea (ed.),Tālanoa ripples: Across borders, cultures, disciplines. Albany, N.Z.: Office of the Directorate Pasifika@Massey.
Helu-Thaman, K. (1985). The defining distance: people, places and worldview. Pacific Viewpoint, 26(1), 106-115.
Helu-Thaman, K. (1993). Culture and the curriclum in the South Pacific. Comparative Education, 29(3), 249-260.
Helu-Thaman, K. (2014). Towards cultural democracy in university teaching and research with special reference to the Pacific Island region. In C. Mason & F. Rawlings-Sanaei (Eds.) , Academic migration, discipline knowledge and pedagogical practice: Voices from the Asia-Pacific (pp.53-62). Singapore; New York: Springer.
Johansson Fua, S. (2009). Ko hota fa'ungamotu'a ko hota kaha'u - A knowledge system for redesigning Tongan curriculum. In K. Sanga & K.Helu-Thaman (Eds.), Re-thinking Education
4 | L i b r a r y L i f e P a s i f i k a I s s u e M a y 2 0 1 5 J . M c F a l l - M c C a f f e r y
Curricula in the Pacific: challenges and prospects, (pp. 196-221). Wellington: He Parekeke, Victoria University.
Johansson Fua, S. (2014). Kakala Research Framework: A garland in celebration of a decade of rethinking education. In M. `Otunuku, U. Nabobo-Baba & S. Johansson Fua (Eds.), Of Waves, Winds and Wonderful Things: a decade of rethinking education, (pp.50-60). Suva: Univeristy of the South Pacific Press.
Koloto, A.H., Katoanga, A.N, & Tatila, L.U. (2006). Critical Success Factors for Effective Use of e-learning by Pacific Learners: Final Report Prepared for ITPNZ. Retrieved from http://www.educate.ece.govt.nz/sitecore/content/minedu/home/educationSectors/TertiaryEducation/PublicationsAndResources/~/media/MinEdu/Files/EducationSectors/TertiaryEducation/KolotoCriticalSuccessFactors.pdf
Lilley, S., McFall-McCaffery, J., & Marsters, M. (2009). Pasifika librarians & information managers: Catching the Pacific wave. Auckland, N.Z.: Pasifika Information Management Network.
Macpherson, C., Spoonley, P., & Anae, M. (2001). Tangata o te moana nui : the evolving identities of Pacific peoples in Aotearoa /New Zealand. Palmerston North, N.Z.: Dunmore Press.
Manu'atu, L. (2000). Katoanga Faiva: a pedagogical site for Tongan students. Educational Philosophy and Theory. 32(1), 73-80.
Manu'atu, L. (2003). TālanoaMālie: Innovative reform through social dialogue in New Zealand. Cultural survival quarterly, 27(4).
Madja, I., McKinley, E., Deynzer, M., & van der Merwe, A. (2010). Stumbling blocks or stepping stones: Students experience of transition from low-mid decile schools to university. Auckland Starpath Project. Auckland: The University of Auckland.
Mara, D, & Marsters, M. (2009). Pasifika Students: supporting academic success through the provision of mentoring. Report to Ako Aotearoa Regional Hub Project Fund Scheme. Hawkes Bay: Eastern Institute of Technology. Retrieved from https://akoaotearoa.ac.nz/download/ng/file/group-4/n3954-pasifika-students-supporting-academic-success-through-the-provision-of-mentoring.pdf
Marsters, Maryanne (2008) A Hawke's Bay engagement: Pacific peoples and libraries. Submitted to the School of Information Management, Victoria University of Wellington in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Library and Information Studies.
Mayeda, D.T., Keil, M., Dutton, H.D., & ‘Ofamo‘oni, I.F. (2014). “You’ve gotta set a precedent”: Māori and Pacific voices on student success in higher education. Alternative 10 (2), 165-180.
McFall-McCaffery, J. (2008). Enhancing learning for Pasifika@UOA: A view from the inside. Alternative: An Internationl Journal of Indigenous Scholarship, 4 (1), 173-187.
McFall-McCaffery, J. (2011, May, 23 & 24 ). Pasifika peoples and libraries. Unpublished lecture powerpoint presentation for INFO523 paper Masters in Libraries and Information Studies, Victoria University, Wellington, New Zealand.
McFall-McCaffery, J., & Cook, S. (2014, October 14). Connecting and thriving through integration: a (sP)acific example. Paper presented at the 2014 LIANZA conference, Auckland, New Zealand.
McFall-McCaffery, J., & Cook, S. (2015, May, Forthcoming). Connecting through integration: Blending Pacific approaches with online technologies. Paper presented at The Higher Education Technology Agenda THETA Conference, Gold Coast, 11-13 May, Australia.
Milne, A. (2009). Colouring in the white spaces: cultural identity and learning in school. A research report prepared for the ASB/APPA Travelling Fellowship Trust following a study tour in 2009. Auckland: Travelling Fellowship Trust.
New Zealand, Ministry of Education (2015) Pasifika Education Plan 2013-2017. Retrieved from http://www.minedu.govt.nz/NZEducation/EducationPolicies/PasifikaEducation/PasifikaEducationPlan2013.aspx Retrieved 7/01/2015
New Zealand Tertiary Education Commission Education Policies (2015). Retrieved from http://www.minedu.govt.nz/NZEducation/EducationPolicies/TertiaryEducation/PolicyAndStrategy/TertiaryEducationStrategy2014-2019/Priority3BoostingAchievement.aspx
Otsuka, S. (2006). Tālanoa research: Culturally appropriate research design in Fiji. Proceedings of the Australian Association for Research in Education (AARE) 2005 International Education Research Conference: Creative Dissent-Constructive Solutions. Melbourne, Australia.
Pacific Island Students Academic Achievement Collective University of Auckland. (1989). Coconuts begin with a "C" : Pacific Islanders at university. Auckland: Pacific Island Students Academic Achievement Collective, University of Auckland.
Pasikale, A. (1996). Seen, but not heard : voices of Pacific Islands learners : a qualitative study of Pacific Islands learners in second-chance education, and the cultural differences impacting on their aspirations, opportunities and participation. Wellington: Pacific Islands Education Unit Education & Training Support Agency.
Pasikale, A., (1999), Skills Pasefika: Contributions to Educating Pasefika Positively, Paper presented at Educating Pasefika Positively Conference, 10 –12 April 2001, Auckland.
Sanga, K. (2002). Beyond access and participation: Challenges facing Pacific education. In F. Pene, A. Taufe’ulungaki & C. Benson (Eds.), Tree of Opportunity: Rethinking Pacific Education, (pp. 52-58). Suva Fiji: Institute of Education, University of the South Pacific.
Suaalii-Sauni, T., & Fulu-Aiolupotea, S.M. (2014). Decolonising Pacific research, building Pacific research communities and developing Pacific research tools: The case of the tālanoa and the faafaletui in Samoa. Asia Pacific Viewpoint, 55(3), 331-344.
Taufe’ulungaki, A. (2002). Pacific education: are there alternatives? In F. Pene, A. Taufe’ulungaki & C. Benson (Eds.), Tree of Opportunity: Rethinking Pacific Education, (pp. 4-20). Suva Fiji: Institute of Education, University of the South Pacific.
Taufe’ulungaki, A. (2014). Look back to look forward: A reflective Pacific journey. In M. `Otunuku, U. Nabobo-Baba & S. Johansson Fua (Eds.), Of waves, winds and wonderful things, (pp. 1-15). Suva, Fiji: USP Press, University of the South Pacific.
Utumapu-McBride, T. (2013, November 29). The tertiary library and the success of Pasifika students. Presentation with student panel, Tertiary Librarians Special Interest Group Forum, Auckland, Engineering School, University of Auckland.
Vaioleti, T. M. (2006). Tālanoa research methodology: A developing position on Pacific research. Waikato journal of education, 12, 21-34.


LIBRARY AND INFORMATION ASSOCIATION OF NEW ZEALAND AOTEAROA (LIANZA) Submission on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPPA) Implementation Bill 2016 To: the Committee Secretariat Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade May it please the Committee: Introduction 1. LIANZA, The Library and Information Association of New Zealand Aotearoa / Te Rau Herenga o Aotearoa is a non-profit, membership based organisation that advocates on behalf of library and information professionals within the sector. LIANZA represents public, educational, commercial, industrial, legal and government libraries in New Zealand. 2. LIANZA has previously made submissions opposing the TPPA process. This opposition does not stem from a philosophical opposition to trade deals, nor from a partisan opposition to copyright owner rights. Rather, LIANZA recognises that copyright law needs to strike a balance between the interests of copyright owners and users. LIANZA submits that the current balance is weighted unduly heavily in favour of copyright owners and will be even more so if the TPPA Amendment Bill 2016 is passed in its present form. 3. We wish to appear in support of this submission. Jennifer Campion, chair of the LIANZA Standing Committee on Copyright, will appear. Scope: 4. This submission is particularly concerned with four key aspects of the TPPA Amendment Bill 2016 (“the Bill”): • extension of copyright term; • the new rights for performers; • the new regulations for technical protection measures; and • rights management information. 5. For each we will identify particular clauses and suggested amendments that would address issues we have with the Bill’s current wording and effect. 6. We begin with a summary identifying those aspects of the Bill we support, and those aspects we consider problematic. We then raise several preliminary points, before commencing our substantive submission on the 4 key aspects identified in [4], above. Support of Other GLAMS-Sector Organisation Submissions: 7. While our submissions are focused on the impact of the Bill on Library and Information service providers (“LIS”), we have had the benefit of reviewing, in draft, the submissions of Universities New Zealand, Creative Commons New Zealand, Te Papa Museum, and the Christchurch Art Gallery. We support those submissions. Summary General: 8. In summary, we consider that the Bill worsens the current imbalance of rights in copyright law. This is chiefly due to the increase in term, but the totality of the changes amount to the promotion of rights-holder interests at the expense of those of users. 9. LIANZA urges the government to reconsider the way in which it is giving effect to the TPPA; and to incorporate, by means of additional (explicit) exceptions, further safeguards for non-commercial copyright infringements. In particular, covering those non-commercial infringements that may occur in LIS sector activities and which copyright law recognises as legitimate, such as copying undertaken for educational purposes. While a consideration of these is beyond the scope of the Bill, and therefore beyond the scope of this submission, we submit that a robust copyright law review is the best means through which to identify and examine the appropriate exemptions. 10. The TPPA requires New Zealand to extend copyright term to match the “life plus seventy years” term under the United States of America’s copyright law. This does not conform to the “life plus fifty years” position agreed under international instruments such as the Berne Convention. As the Bill’s extension of copyright duration is being enacted only to bring New Zealand copyright law into alignment with United States law (the extension being of no value to authors or creators who are long dead, and being out of sync with international copyright conventions); LIANZA submits that, should the USA choose not to join the TPPA, no change should be made to the current copyright duration provisions of the Copyright Act 1994. 11. We submit that if copyright term is to be extended to match US law, New Zealand should also adopt the US’s “fair use” exemptions that somewhat mitigate the effect of a longer copyright term, rather than the more narrow “fair dealing” exemptions we currently operate within. This point is expanded upon, below at [25] et seq. 12. In the alternative, LIANZA would like to see the following provisions included in New Zealand copyright law: • clauses in our law equivalent to those in the United Kingdom that indicate that: “to the extent that a term of a contract purports to prevent or restrict the doing of any act which, by virtue of this section, would not infringe copyright, that term is unenforceable”; • comprehensive exemptions covering non-commercial infringements that may occur in LIS sector activities which copyright law recognises as legitimate; • extension of exemptions covering the use of film in educational contexts to extend beyond situations involving the teaching of film-making; • introduction of a clause to require tax-payer funded research outputs to be made available on exclusive licences for no more than one year before becoming free of copyright; or • a blanket requirement for non-commercially sensitive, tax-payer funded research project outputs to be made available free of copyright as a condition of funding; • a section that places limits upon the wholesale or unrelated selective extraction of private, copyright end-user content, and upon the external storage, mining, massaging, retention and distribution of this to (often identifiable) third parties; and • following an in-depth copyright law review, a statement of purpose, incorporated into our Copyright Act, in which it is made very clear that copyright is granted only for a limited period that should aim to provide public domain access within the lifetimes of authors and contemporaries.   Preliminary Points 13. Before setting out our substantive submission, there are several preliminary points that must be addressed, and we do so now, before moving to our substantive submission. Effect of TPPA supranational rules on N.Z. and developing nations: 14. Copyright law reflects a Western conception of intellectual productivity as a property right. This approach does not accord with the view of knowledge held in nations with a strong oral tradition, or with indigenous peoples who do not conceive of the world in this way. 15. Implementation of this Bill prior to undertaking undertake a wide, responsive, New Zealand copyright law policy review and modification, would reduce New Zealand’s ability to protect national intellectual property interests. 16. It will also affect our ability to take a leadership role in the South-Pacific region. Tokelau, the Cook Islands and Niue are nations that borrow from, or rely on New Zealand copyright legislation. Because the Bill proposes changes making it possible to ignore or minimise indigenous intellectual property rights in future, enacting it without suitable safeguards for indigenous rights risks New Zealand being unable to continue to guide these nations in this area or – worse still – risks guiding them in a way that may be contrary to their interests. Copyright Law Review: 17. We are concerned to learn that a broad review of the Copyright Act 1994 due in 2013, is now in question. LIANZA was already concerned that this overdue copyright law review would be taking place separately and subsequent to TPPA negotiation, so we are alarmed to think that the government could consider that the TPPA implementation process, together with the creative sector consultation process, could constitute an adequate substitute for wide-ranging and in-depth public consultation and review of copyright law more generally. 18. A national consultation process covering copyright law more fully than the TPPA implementation process is capable of, is absolutely necessary; and will, no doubt, bring out issues that have not arisen in this amending legislation. LIANZA urges the government to prioritise this review and engage with all stakeholders over this pressing concern. International Treaties, WIPO Participation, and Harmonisation of Law: 19. The TPPA requires New Zealand to sign up to international treaties, which will introduce stricter copyright provisions than those under which we currently operate. New Zealand’s previous non-signature of these treaties reflects a deliberate decision not to adopt these provisions which, we submit, reflects views expressed by the New Zealand public. 20. New Zealand’s non-signature of these treaties has enabled GLAMs sector organisations (galleries, libraries, archives, museums, and related information service providers) to provide content to users that would not be possible under these treaties. This has, in turn, benefitted society as a whole through the preservation, curation, and provision to the public of cultural and heritage content. Adoption of these international treaties jeopardises the quality of service that LIS can provide: there will be an increase in transactional costs, as well as reduction in flexibility and scope of information provision. 21. These international conventions provide for a copyright term of only 50 years from the death of the author or date of first publication. Consequently, it cannot be said that the TPPA’s extension of copyright term to a period of “life plus 70 years” is done to reduce regulation or bring our copyright law into line with international practice. (Indeed, only 50 of the world’s 193 countries have signed the WPPT; only 51 the WCT.) Rather, the TPPA extends copyright term to match the position in US law, without offering the more wide-ranging exemptions available under US law’s “fair use” provisions. 22. Rather than reducing regulations, the TPPA is having the opposite effect with regard to intellectual property law, without concomitant reductions in costs or increases in availability of intellectual content. Consequently, we must question whether the inclusion of copyright, as well as progressive copyright maximisation, in trade negotiations is the most appropriate way to shape national law and policy concerning intellectual property. 23. Additionally, we must note that New Zealand officials have not attended the World Intellectual Property Office’s Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights over the last few years, nor participated actively in, or signed, the development of the Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons who are Blind, Visually Impaired, or Otherwise Print Disabled. Issues discussed in these meetings figure prominently in the TPPA and this Bill. 24. We question how far the TPPA implementation process undermines New Zealand participation within WIPO endeavours and how far this Bill will impede harmonisation of New Zealand copyright law with that of other nations not party to the TPPA. Fair Use: 25. While LIANZA recognises that copyright can provide a valuable incentive for creativity and innovation, excessive and complex copyright can have contrary effects. 26. We submit that the increase in copyright term proposed by the Bill lacks the Fair Use regime understandings, limitations and exceptions available to the U.S. Member Party whose IP sectoral advisors have clearly had influence on this Bill. 27. We therefore submit that should increases in copyright duration such as stipulated in this Bill be imposed on New Zealand under the TPPA or other integrated economic or trade negotiations, our legislation should at least be fashioned to include the limitations and types of exceptions offered under Fair Use, thereby allowing New Zealand libraries and citizens to undertake activities that are clearly within the public interest. 28. Better still, we recommend New Zealand also adopts a “fair use” regime, which is simpler to understand and apply than our current “fair dealing” exemptions. The detailed restrictions in this Bill exacerbate the imbalances already apparent in our copyright law, and further handicap LIS’s ability to obtain, identify, preserve, and facilitate access to New Zealand intellectual content and cultural materials. 29. LIANZA appreciates that the open-ended nature of “fair use” provisions may not incline Parliament to endorse such a wholesale change to New Zealand copyright law. However, it is equally wholesale to extend copyright term by a further 20 years, particularly as the TPPA is a living agreement. 30. Finally, as we are considering a wholesale adoption of the United States of America’s copyright law term, it is worth bearing in mind the words of respected United States Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who observed during oral arguments in Eldred v Ashcroft 537 U.S. 186 (2003) that: “there has to be a limit...Perpetual copyright is not permitted.”   Substantive Submission Extension of Copyright Term 31. While it might seem that copyright extension from remaining author’s “life plus fifty” to “life plus seventy” years in clauses 9-12 will merely deprive the public domain of valuable creative works for a further couple of decades beyond our current term which accords with WIPO and WTO international instruments, there is more to this change than meets the eye. It will certainly have more negative impacts than have been emphasised by government analyses. TPPA is a Living Agreement: 32. The TPPA is a living agreement. No rule gives the opportunity to reduce this inordinate protection, nor is this extension capped. On the contrary, the de minimis approach is rejected, which creates a risk that this Agreement is paving the way for perpetual copyright - a situation deplored and rejected by framers of copyright regimes in both the United Kingdom and the United States of America. The US Register of Copyrights has acknowledged that: “the current length of the term – the life of the author plus seventy years in most circumstances – is long and the length has consequences.” 33. These concerns are brought out clearly in articles LIANZA has highlighted in https://www.lianza.org.nz/copyright-extension. The first, by Derek Khanna, references work by contemporary economists concluding that copyright terms should really be very similar to those first offered in England and the US - about 14 to 30 or so years, all up. LIANZA is concerned that this and research demonstrating that copyright make in fact impede innovation, has been overlooked. Changing Social Context: 34. We are now operating in a “born digital” age in which technology changes rapidly. Material that is “born digital” can be disseminated (and disappear) within hours, days or weeks. As a result, this increases the difficulties associated with identification of creators. 35. Lifetimes for human creators are now averaging between 79.5 (male) or 83.2 (female). Extending the rights that they or their assignees will enjoy from 50 posthumous years to 70 (or to a variable period depending on when an item was “first published by an authorised act”) creates a headache for anyone who has to identify the relevant creator(s) and their assignees in order to work with copyright material. It is often difficult or impractical to identify the creators, and this can give rise to the “orphan works” problem many GLAMs sector organisations are having to deal with. If creators cannot be identified and the rights associated with them managed in a cost-effective manner, it is very likely that this content will lost to future generations, abandoned on the “too hard” shelf at the back of the collection. 36. This is because excessive copyright terms increase the pool of works where the rights-holder is unknown, or legatees are unidentifiable, making it impossible to determine if the material is in the public domain and, if necessary, obtain permission to copy these “orphan” works for preservation and access purposes. 37. The granting of distribution and related rights to performers exacerbates this problem: the more creators (of varying longevity) that have to be taken into account, the more untenable it becomes for GLAMs sector organisations to work with this material. 38. While not particularly relevant to LIS providers, it is also worth noting that excessive copyright terms prevent a creator’s descendants dealing with their intellectual property if the rights over this have been assigned to a publisher or other entity. It cannot be assumed that excessive copyright terms benefit creators (and their heirs) in every case. 39. Compounding this problem is a current approach in commercial contracts covering rights to assigned intellectual content in all formats, and in all languages, worldwide. While there is no guarantee of execution of these rights, our legislation needs to counter this with stronger safeguards for the creators of intellectual property by supplementing such instruments with the provision of guidelines to facets of copyright law on the IPONZ site comparable to those of the United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office. 40. Few members of the general public realise the implications of their copyright material being shared or assigned, or held in platforms whose conditions of use may not have been read. Nor would many have realised the importance of putting in place formal arrangements for their transmission and ownership on death. 41. The situation described in the foregoing 2 paragraphs could lead to the loss of clarity over rights and/or access to New Zealand intellectual content, and it is submitted that Parliament should be proactive about clarifying rights. 42. Additionally, it is worryingly easy to conceive of a future in which there is a concentration of ownership of intellectual property content in the hands of a decreasing number of publishers or organisations which have no particular obligation to enable New Zealand to maximise the social, cultural and economic benefits of that content. Further, this concentration of ownership is likely to result in a regular and substantial annual profit taking amounting to a windfall for rights-holders, with no reciprocal benefit to the society conferring that windfall. 43. Extension of term imposes a serious limitation on access to comprehensive, trusted, up-to-date information and, consequently, New Zealand’s capability to direct its intellectual capital effectively in support of the nation’s scientific, cultural and social understanding and development. Practical Difficulties LIS Providers Face Due to Copyright Term: 44. Imposition and respect for posthumous copyright rests on assumptions that death dates of creators are readily identifiable. This can be hard enough for librarians to establish, let alone a member of the public! The extension of term therefore makes it more difficult for the general public to comply with the law, and may create a situation where LIS providers are expected to become the default “copyright” police. This would be unfair and impractical. 45. Recent initiatives to reduce library services costs exacerbate the burden that will be imposed on libraries by an extension of copyright term. It is not necessarily easy or cost-effective for staff to devote their time to identifying a creator of copyright content, ascertaining that creator’s death date, and determining what copyright restrictions apply in respect of their copyright works. 46. Commercial publishers are not in the business of disclosing the personal details of authors or creators they represent. Nor should they be, so this is another reason to question posthumous copyright. 47. The proposed term extension would mean digitisation projects aimed at preserving New Zealand’s cultural heritage risk being held up a further 20 years. Even a further 10 year wait for works due to come out of copyright within eight years of commencement of the Bill, unduly impedes LIS provision of important heritage material. Summary: 48. In summary, the effect of government directives, the timing of this Bill, and lack of a statement of purpose for copyright that reflects its original intent of serving both creator and user within a reasonable period, effectively grants the next best thing to perpetual copyright to rights-holders. The TPPA’s Preamble emphasises aspirations with which library services support; however, extended copyright duration will not assist their fulfilment. To be more than empty words, the wider socio-economic interests must be sustained through carefully crafted, evidence-based national legislation and wide international community agreement on minimal standards. 49. For the foregoing reasons, we suggest that, in order to protect the public interest, provisions that promote fair and democratic access to information need to be brought into the Copyright Act 1994. In particular, it is necessary to add a statement of purpose reflecting the original intent of providing strictly limited period of exclusive rights of reproduction and distribution of intellectual content, and to pursue a similar revisions of IP law within the appropriate international organisation like the World Intellectual Property Office. Specific Clauses: 50. Turning now to the specific clauses of the Bill, LIANZA sees absolutely no justification for the additional 25 years leeway allowed in cl 10 (amending section 23 of the Copyright Act 1994) concerning the period from within which copyright begins to apply with regard to sound recordings and films, as opposed to the period given most literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works. 51. With regard to the amendments proposed in clauses 9 and 10 of the Bill, LIANZA wishes to express its deep disappointment with the quality of analysis and selective arguments offered by way of justification for the extension of copyright term in: http://www.justice.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Publications/Trans-Pacific-Partnership-Agreement-Amendment-Bill.pdf. LIANZA would be very happy to elaborate on these in an oral submission to the Committee. 52. Clause 11 (amending s 28 of the Copyright Act 1994) concerns the types of organisations covered in the regulations. Given that these organisations: • publish international law and instruments like the UN Charter, various conventions, recommendations, world-wide plans and other material intended for public awareness and understanding; and • were not, to our knowledge, party to the development of the TPPA, let alone able to continuously monitor and edit its text; nor actively requested extension of copyright; and given that: • for storage or budgetary and/or management reasons (and possibly even due to lack of awareness of contractual responsibilities), New Zealand libraries have been disposing of international intergovernmental documents and publications that the public may look to access in NZ; and • IGO digital links cannot be relied on for ongoing access to content; LIANZA submits that the proposed extension of copyright duration in respect of s 28 of the Copyright Act 1994 per the TPPA Amendment Bill, is highly inappropriate and should not be enacted. 53. In light of overseas research into the negligible value, if any of copyright extension, LIANZA recommends that the clauses applying to copyright extension be rejected as unjustifiable. Performer Rights 54. The option in the new performer rights offered in the Bill that could give rise to high LIS transaction costs is the need to respect the moral attribution rights of all performers, not just those of authors or directors of performances. Without the limitations offered in mitigation of this, compliance would be costly and impractical. 55. The proposed new section 174C(2) of the Copyright Act 1994 will be too strict for genealogical and family history purposes, given that all subsections must apply. As it stands, it makes family sharing of recordings impossible for those not living in the same household; when a family performer has died without adequate testamentary arrangements in place; or is no longer able to articulate their wishes. And the owner may not necessarily have the equipment to undertake the steps required at their property. They may also seek assistance from libraries to achieve their ends. Thus, modification or exception to this section should be considered. 56. Regarding the proposed new section 194B of the Copyright Act 1994, LIANZA believes it is incumbent upon MBIE to make guidance available on its website on this issue, even if just pointing to pointers provided by InternetNZ and the New Zealand Law Society. Distribution Rights: 57. The Bill also proposes rights for performers to control the distribution of sound recordings, which will be granted equal standing to the rights of the authors, requiring third party users to separately negotiate with both rights-holding parties. 58. However, while LIANZA is not opposed to the recognition of distribution rights for performers per se, there are definite practical difficulties that arise from the inclusion of performers as an additional category of rights-holders from whom permissions must be sought in order for copyright works to be utilised. To this end, the Bill adds to the complexity of copyright law and, consequently, to the compliance costs incurred by LIS. While collecting societies are moving towards a unified process to mitigate the effects of this, it is submitted that it should not fall to these organisations to provide this counterweight to the terms of the law, and these endeavours can in no way be seen to ameliorate the clear legal barrier to rationalisation of copyright that the Bill introduces. 59. Given that the copyright permissions could be negotiated between the rights-holders (for example, between the author and producer when an author’s work is embodied in a sound recording settling distribution and royalty terms, so that third parties need only negotiate with the owner of copyright in the sound recording), to instead require third party users to negotiate separately with the various rights-holders unfairly burdens those users with the costs of establishing copyright permission. It is submitted that it is more appropriate for the rights-holders to bear this burden. Further, this approach in no way takes account of the realities of the digital environment in which much content is now being produced. Related Rights: 60. The Bill essentially provides performers the same moral rights as authors and producers. Mitigating this, the Bill proposes to provide the same exemptions for libraries in respect of performer rights as are currently allowed for in respect of authors and producers in ss 41, 42, 43A, 49, 59, 60 and 81A of the Copyright Act 1994. In effect, LIS will not be subject to these sections in respect of performer’s related rights if they are not subject to these rights for authors, etc. LIANZA supports these exemptions. 61. The requirement that the right to be identified as a performer must be asserted (as in the proposed new section 170C of the Copyright Act 1994) and the new 170B(2) may assist in reducing library cataloguing and events work. Similarly, the proposed new sections 170D, 170G, 170H and 170I will assist in reducing business costs when dealing with performance related matters in libraries. This suggests additional exceptions be proposed in cl 22 of the Bill. 62. However, LIANZA is concerned that the related rights provisions of the Bill reflect the realities that it is often difficult, impractical, onerous or impossible to accurately identify all performers. Given the non-commercial context in which LIS facilitate access to information, it is important that provision of these services is not impeded by burdensome compliance obligations that in no way benefit performers (i.e. if the costs of compliance are too great to justify LIS making the performance available to users). 63. Importantly, “performance” could include, for example, a lecture given in a library. While the LIS hosting the lecture would likely be advertising the lecture by identifying the speaker/“performer”, the rights granted to performers to control the distribution of that performance or recordings of it could impede the LIS making the performance available to the public. While this could perhaps be ameliorated by prior agreement between the performer and LIS, that will only address situations where the LIS is in a position to negotiate with the performer. With the screening of a recorded performance, this may not prove to be the case. For example, LIS may find themselves affected by these sections when: • assisting in the promotion of performances; • enabling performances to take place in library buildings; • assisting with recording or editing of performances; • providing access to recording of performances (on premises); or • lending copies of performances. 64. We submit that, for the sake of providing certainty, a specific exemption should apply to LIS, additional to the more general exemption covering situations where it is impractical to recognise moral rights of performers. 65. While it does not affect LIS service provision, we are generally concerned that the performer’s right not to object to derogatory treatment be tempered by a recognition that parody and satire are legitimate social criticisms, and appropriate exemptions be recognised. Having had the benefit of reading in draft New Zealand Universities’s submission on this, it is sufficient to note here that we agree with their points. Technological Protection Measures (“TPMs”) General: 66. Copyright law has traditionally focused on the act of making and distributing a copy - the point at which infringement occurs. While it is a generalisation and perhaps an oversimplification, if someone uses the work without copying it, copyright is not infringed. However, with improvements in technology and publishers increasingly operating across jurisdictions, rights-holders are now able to restrict access to protected content, and can also prevent non-infringing copying. The rationale for this (copying is becoming much easier thanks to technology, so technology measures must be taken to prevent this) is understandable, but LIANZA is concerned that TPM provisions introduced by the Bill may prevent users making legitimate (i.e. non-infringing) use of copyright content. 67. The clauses are not well-worded, and it is in parts unclear what the law is attempting to remedy. The 2008 amendment to the Copyright Act 1994 was concerned with prohibiting dealing in TPM circumvention devices and providing services to circumvent TPMs. The Bill proposes to prohibit the act of circumventing a TPM, but then applies this to acts carried out in the course of business, suggesting a commercial element must be present. If this is the case, this should be made explicit and appropriate exemptions applied to non-commercial uses, such as those LIS providers engage in. 68. It must be remembered that circumventing a TPM may be necessary in order to access legitimately acquired content, in order to use it in a way that does not infringe copyright. The law should reflect this reality. 69. Above all, copyright law should address the act of copying – if copyright is not infringed, the conduct should not be prohibited under copyright law. Response to Specific Clauses: 70. New sections 226A, 226AB and 226AC prohibit dealing in TPM circumvention devices and services if they are likely to be used to circumvent a TPM otherwise than in a manner permitted under ss 226D to 226K. Given that most products and services for circumventing TPMs could be used for both infringing and non-infringing TPM circumvention, this is likely to limit availability of products and services available to libraries for non-infringing circumvention. 71. LIANZA is in support of new section to the Copyright Act 1994 226D, which allows a person to circumvent a TPM to enable the person to do an act that does not infringe the copyright in the TPM work and does not infringe related rights. 72. LIANZA supports new section 226E, which allows a person to circumvent a TPM that controls geographic market segmentation that could prevent the playing or operating of a physical non-infringing copy of the TPM work in New Zealand, but we argue that this should be extended to the playing or operating of a digital non-infringing copy of a TPM work. 73. New section 226F (law enforcement, national security, and performing or exercising other functions, powers or duties), when read in conjunction with the Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Act 2013, Government Communications Security Bureau Act 2003 and section 237(b) of the Contracts and Commercial Law Bill, would appear to remove legal loopholes on access to items of interest to law enforcement and national security, by authorising circumvention of TPMs; thereby facilitating copying, without a warrant or other restriction, material in analogue or digital form, without the express knowledge or permission of the owner of the contracts or licence governing the software or hardware enabling access to supporting systems and private intellectual content of the copyright owner of the system. 74. The implication of the above brings into question the “No” response given in the section on Privacy in the Departmental Disclosure document on the Bill. 75. Libraries operate on principles of respect for client privacy, and expect to enjoy privacy of operations as much as any other person or corporate. LIANZA asks that this clause is qualified by a clause requiring that any circumvention for the two purposes mentioned is undertaken only following provision of a warrant (regardless of whether the case of circumvention is undertaken in or of library or others’s TPMs). 76. LIANZA would like to see libraries treated as a class for which warrants should be produced when exercising this and any other related copying, search and seizure rights under the Copyright Act 1994 for the purposes of law enforcement and national security. 77. Proposed new section 226G sets a high bar for the definition of “encryption researcher”. We suggest that this section be brought in line with 226J(3), which does not set the definition for security researchers as narrowly. 78. New section 226I will allow a person to circumvent a TPM in certain circumstances where the TPM involves a computer program that is no longer supported by a remote server. LIANZA would like to see clarification for the scenario where the copyright holder of the TPM work cannot be established - must a person retain the TPM protection that requires remote server interaction? 79. LIANZA greatly appreciates the provisions of new section 226M, but suggests that they be extended to museums and galleries in addition to libraries, archives and educational establishments. 80. LIANZA appreciates the focus in s 234 on ensuring that ss 226D to 226L allow for non-infringing use or copying in their respective contexts. We hope that both law and regulations made under this section are reviewed periodically to take into account new technologies and new methods of content distribution and access. However, as legislating by regulation is a less democratic process, we would prefer to see more frequent reviews of the Copyright Act itself to ensure that it remains fit for purpose. 81. Under the first clause of s 234(2)(a) citizens are very dependent on Ministers’s judgement, political ideology and willingness to consult individuals or groups who may be “substantially affected” by proposed regulations. But we welcome the requirement for justification in s 234(4) which offers that could offset the above-mentioned risks. Rights Management Information (“RMI”) 82. Libraries always do their utmost to do adequate research and avoid infringement, but there are times when that could inadvertently occur. 83. LIANZA welcomes the inclusion of subsection 2 of s 226O, 226P and 226Q because when materials are gifted to libraries for addition to their collection, it is not always clear if there should be some associated RMI, or RMI indications may not be provided, particularly with offers of personal collections. This protection is also valuable given that mergers and takeovers in companies with which we deal can alter what RMI applies. New owners’s policies may be partly at odds with, or quite different from RMI applicable at time of original print or digital publication. And some cases these are ambiguous and require the business costs of clarifying or correcting these. 84. Also some publishers have sought greatly increased rights over those under which works were originally contracted, and these can create collection management and information provision problems. Certainly missing or faulty RMI can have the effect of preventing content availability and preservation, and is a potential reason for permanent loss of intellectual content or orphan works. 85. We suggest the possible addition of “constitute” to the list of verbs in proposed new sections 226O(2)(b) and 226P(2)(c). 86. We are pleased to see s 226S (2)(a)(i) qualified by s 226S (2)(a)(ii) as, otherwise, given the breadth of RMI definition, relabelling file downloads with abbreviated label information indicating origin (e.g. New Zealand Herald to NZH) to a practical length for backups would be a case of infringement. 87. Given the scope RMI can take, from the trivial to RMI protecting very expensive intellectual content, we consider that the size of the statutory penalties proposed in s 226S(3) means that this clause should be qualified to make it clear that it needs to be applied with care to be proportionate to the offence. Concluding Remarks 88. For the reasons set out above, LIANZA supports an implementation of the Bill that takes account of the way in which LIS are used and affords appropriate exemptions for these. 89. LIANZA would like to note that the limitations and exceptions to TPPA requirements that Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment staff have drafted in the Bill in an endeavour to protect user interests are appreciated and we urge that these and any others that can be devised to appropriately safeguard national human interests be accepted by Parliament and external Member Parties, and not subsequently retracted or modified in ways inconsistent with the public interest. 90. Finally, we repeat our support for a more wide-ranging review of copyright law, and urge the government to treat this as a separate process to the TPPA implementation process, and to prioritise it. Jennifer Campion, Chair LIANZA Standing Committee on Copyright 22 July 2016.

Thadeusz, Frank. (2010 August, 18). No Copyright Law: The Real Reason for Germany's Industrial Expansion? Der Spiegel. http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/no-copyright-law-the-real-reason-for-germany-s-industrial-expansion-a-710976.html. Heald, P. (2013, July). How Copyright Keeps Works Disappeared. Chicago: University of Illinois, College of Law. Illinois Program in Law, Behavior and Social Science Paper No. LBSS14-07; Illinois Public Law Research Paper No. 13-54. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2290181 Carrier, M. A. (2012,October 12). Copyright and Innovation: The Untold Story. NJ: utgers Law School. (2012 Wisconsin Law Review 891). http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID2184620_code327943.pdf?abstractid=2099876&mirid=1 DiCola, P. C. (2013, January 9) Money from music: Survey evidence on Musicians' revenue and lessons about copyright revenue and incentives. Chicago, Ill: Northwestern University School of Law. 55 Arizona Law Review 301 (2013); Northwestern Law & Econ Research Paper No. 13-01 http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2199058&rec=1&srcabs=2290181&alg=1&pos=3 Brannick, K. Is Anyone Listening? An Examination of New Zealand Musicians in the Digital Age In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree Master of Information Management. Wellington: Victoria University of Wellington, School of Information Management. (See conclusion). De Zayas. A. EU / Trade agreements: UN rights expert warns against bypassing national parliaments.(2016, June 24). http://bit.ly/2aiyKerAlfred de Zayas Human Rights Corner). Shaheed, F. (2014 December 24). Report of the Special Rapporteur in the field of cultural rights, Farida Shaheed: Copyright policy and the right to science and culture. (Human Rights Council Twenty-eighth session Agenda item 3: Promotion and protection of all human rights, civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights including the right to development, A/HRC/28/57). New York: United Nations General Assembly. http://bit.ly/1J7xktZ. UN experts voice concern over adverse impact of free trade and investment agreements on human rights. (2015 June 2). (United Nations Human Rights, Office of the High Commissioner Media Statement) Geneva. United Nations Human Rights Council. http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=16031&LangID=E@ Capaldo, J, Izurieta, A and Kwame Sundaram, J. (2016 January). Trading Down: Unemployment, Inequality and Other Risks of the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Somerville, MA: Global Development and Environment Institute, Tufts University. (GDAE Working Paper, 16-01). http://www.ase.tufts.edu/gdae/Pubs/wp/16-01Capaldo-IzurietaTPP.pdf Coates, B. et al. (2016, January). The economics of the TPPA. Auckland. With funding support from the Law Foundation. https://tpplegal.files.wordpress.com/2015/12/ep5-economics.pdf Johnson, Dave. (2016, May 26). Stop Calling the TPP a Trade Agreement: It isn't. Common Dreams. Campaign for America's Future (Blog). http://www.commondreams.org/views/2015/05/26/stop-calling-tpp-trade-agreement-it-isnt Ikenson, D et al.(2016 June 30). Should Free Traders Support the Trans-Pacific Partnership? An Assessment of the Largest-Ever U.S. Preferential Trade Agreement. An Abstract of a Forthcoming Cato Publication http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/cato-trade-tpp-abstract-june-30-2016.pdf Stumo, M. (2016, January). CPA Commentary: How to think abou the new Peterson Report on the TPP. http://bit.ly/2ab9NAm


Author: Luqman Hayes
Series: NZLIMJ Vol 53, No. 2
Publication date: Mon, 2013-09-02

By Luqman Hayes, AUT University Library 

It is two decades since Tui MacDonald first studied the experience of Māori in New Zealand libraries.  Since then libraries have embraced change aimed at creating public spaces which reflect much of the biculturalism of New Zealand society.  Bilingual signage has been erected, awareness of and obligations to the Treaty are generally better accepted and understood, and Te Rōpū Whakahau has worked to ensure there is a growing professional Māori presence in our libraries. But there is a sense in which these are only small steps on a bicultural path which has yet to be fully travelled; that the journey should also aim to integrate Māori values and concepts in the ideals of the organisation. Such a biculturalism should reflect equally both the Pākehā (non-Māori) and the Māori worldview in the way information is organised, customers are greeted and activities are carried out in the library. One might therefore ask, to what extent do kaupapa Māori, or Māori knowledge frameworks, value systems, and a Māori worldview form part of a wider bicultural strategy within public libraries in Aotearoa?

This article is based on the findings of a study highlighting the bicultural achievements being made in public libraries as well as exploring the evolutionary and transformative challenges which lie ahead for the sector in striving towards an epistemological and cultural balance. Data was collected using a qualitative approach involving semi-structured interviews with a selection of library leaders chosen from a purposive sample of public library services in New Zealand.

The findings suggest a degree of inconsistency around the integration and understanding of kaupapa Māori concepts and practice, depending on location and demographic. They indicate that while there are personal, organisational and resource barriers to fully incorporating a kaupapa Māori, including a lack of Māori seniority within the industry, these limitations stem from political and historical roots which relate to colonialism in Aotearoa and the commitment to, and interpretation of, the Treaty of Waitangi. The results also reveal an aspiration for advancing the bicultural agenda and for exploring new paradigms for reshaping European designed public libraries in ways which integrate indigenous worldviews.

Applying a comfortable definition to the manifold concepts of kaupapa Māori  is in and of itself both misleading and contradictory. Nevertheless, words such as “general principles” or “first principles” have been used to describe it as the basis from which tikanga (custom) are formed, carried out and interconnected (Marsden 2003, p.66).  Kaupapa Māori gives meaning to the life of Māori (Walker 1996, as cited in IRI 2000, p.3), and as a philosophy has been adopted in the development of Māori education as conceptualising Māori knowledge (Nepe 1991, as cited in IRI 2000, p. 3).

Kaupapa Māori as theory is an evolving set of concepts which should be understood as “multiple” rather than “a singular, universal way of being” (IRI 2000, p.4), reflecting the diverse nature of Māori iwi and hapū. With its roots in te reo Māori, Māori culture and tino rangatiratanga (or self-determination), kaupapa Māori has expanded to operate as a critique and a challenge to Pākehā hegemony and the othering of Māori (IRI 2000, p.11).  Lee (2005) has emphasised the “transformative” relevance of kaupapa Māori in relation to tino rangatiratanga and the Treaty of Waitangi by providing “a framework from which to re-conceive” the “social circumstances” and “experiences of 'being Māori'” (Lee 2005 pp. 3-4).  In this context kaupapa Māori operates as a counterpoint to the scientific positivist discourses that position Māori as 'other'.

We may therefore identify kaupapa Māori as having significance beyond the physical changes which have thus far symbolised biculturalism in public libraries to a position where a Māori worldview and Māori philosophies are incorporated as both a complement and a challenge to the ways in which public libraries are perceived and operated.

Biculturalism is often loosely understood as partnership and power sharing between Māori and Pākehā without recognition for its historical and political roots and obligations in the Treaty of Waitangi.  As kaupapa Māori theory suggests, that recognition necessitates a more radical and transformative realignment within New Zealand society beyond the surface level of token appreciation for a non-European culture.  As Dick Grace has defined it, within a library context, biculturalism is “an organisational strategy based on the spirit and intent of the Treaty...an acknowledgement of the primacy of the tangata whenua, the indigenous people of the land...and aims to include Māori values and perspectives in the polices, practices and procedures of the organisation” (Grace in Garraway & Szekely 1994, p.6). In what ways have the values to which Grace refers been instilled in public libraries? Previous research reveals a paucity of recent literature on biculturalism and libraries and a distinct absence of data relating to kaupapa Māori.

What then, have public libraries done or what could they do to implement initiatives and change which accommodate a Māori worldview? Could one approach be to apply the Library and Information Association of New Zealand Aotearoa (LIANZA) Body of Knowledge 11 guidelines which address awareness of indigenous knowledge paradigms (LIANZA n.d.)?  Do public libraries and librarians understand what is meant by kaupapa Māori? Given that the actions and outcomes of the National Library’s bicultural strategies are designed to “feed into library networks around the nation” (National Library of New Zealand 2010, p.5) is the profession actually capable of the kind of paradigm shift that biculturalism requires?

Review of the literature
No known studies have been found to date which directly examine the application of kaupapa Māori values and concepts in Aotearoa public libraries, nor their specific relevance in the context of biculturalism and the library industry.  A small number of investigations have been carried out into elements of the wider topic of biculturalism and New Zealand public libraries (such as Wara 2001 and Evans 2011) but none which examine the issues in relation to kaupapa Māori, Māori or indigenous worldviews and knowledge paradigms.

The majority of researchers, while including considerations of kaupapa Māori, deal with issues of biculturalism largely from the perspective of provision of library services to Māori and access to information, particularly in urban centres.  The growth of kaupapa Māori as a theoretical perspective and a praxis has thus far been exemplified in its entrenchment in the discourse of the education, health and social welfare sectors (IRI 2000).  Nevertheless, this “bona fide theory of transformation” (IRI 2000, p.6) has yet to emerge in the library and information industry. Or rather, the sector has failed to keep pace with the changing discourse around biculturalism and the emergence of kaupapa Māori as a theoretical force.

The literature shows us that Māori value systems are integral to biculturalism, even if they have not been prioritised in the majority of bicultural developments in libraries thus far.  It also provides a theoretical perspective which demonstrates that biculturalism which promotes a Māori worldview is historically rooted in the Treaty of Waitangi (including the Māori version Te Tiriti o Waitangi and all that implies in terms of tino rangatiratanga and unresolved issues of sovereignty).  While such a biculturalism seeks partnership and power sharing, it also operates as a challenge to dominant, colonially established, European epistemologies.

The majority of literature that relates to the concepts of kaupapa Māori stems from the Te Ara Tika project (MacDonald 1993, Szekely 1997).  These two publications, along with Ka Mahi Tonu (Garraway and Szekely 1994) lay the foundations for assessing Māori information needs in developing a bicultural strategy for New Zealand libraries and for exploring the barriers to wider Māori use of and participation in library services.  MacDonald's investigation reveals a lack of written bicultural and Treaty policy in many libraries, and an imbalance in the number of skilled Māori librarians.  Szekely (1997) highlights a wide range of areas in which libraries are not meeting the information needs (particularly specialist knowledge) of Māori in terms of the library environment, its institutional and professional culture and its collections and access to them.  It also shows the need for a service which is culturally more sensitive, bilingual and more relevant to Māori.

Ka Mahi Tonu (Garraway & Szekely 1994) contains data aimed at demonstrating momentum along the path to bicultural libraries and in a chapter by Dick Grace, outlines the strategy with which biculturalism might be achieved in libraries. Grace's four-stage process of “bicultural reformism” (Grace in Garraway & Szekely 1994, p. 6) has an influential place in the Te Ara Tika project and is relevant for its main emphasis which is the blending of Māori and non-Māori concepts in altering organisational behaviour and culture.

Although more than a decade old, the Te Ara Tika project has an important legacy in the discourse on biculturalism in New Zealand libraries. Data in Te Ara Tika: Guiding Voices (Szekely 1997) lead to the Māori subject headings (MSH) initiative.  The research report which the MSH project produced examines difficulties experienced in accessing information specific to iwi (Simpson 2005).  However, it also uncovers a need for cataloguers in particular to have knowledge of, or be trained in, te reo Māori and tikanga.  Simpson's research is underpinned by the theoretical considerations of te Tiriti o Waitangi and the impact of the dominant (colonial) knowledge paradigm which Māori knowledge is subject to.  The aims of the MSH are to reclaim Māori knowledge from the Crown house, to organise Māori knowledge on whakapapa principles (within the Tikanga Māori house) in order that the partnership aims of the Treaty house be achieved.

Since Te Ara Tika there has been no further nationwide research which revisits the overall theme of biculturalism and its progress in New Zealand.  Instead, studies have emerged from major urban centres which examine the broader bicultural themes.  Auckland City Libraries carried out a large-scale survey of Māori library users and non-users (Worth 1995) with the aim of improving, and making more bicultural, services to Māori within the context of the New Zealand Library and Information Association's (now LIANZA) commitment to biculturalism and partnership working. The survey concludes as “unacceptable” the level of “discomfort” felt by Māori (Worth 1995, p.21) and highlights many of the concerns raised by Te Ara Tika, including the need for a bicultural strategy to focus on cultural awareness and better Māori representation amongst staff.

These outcomes are further contextualised in a paper to the Treaty Conference 2000 (Mamore & Brubeck 2000) in which the authors assert that Auckland City Libraries is an organisation which “is not based on Māori values.  These must be brought to the institution” in a way which promotes biculturalism and provides a “Māori world view” (Mamore & Brubeck 2000, p.130).

A smaller follow-up to Auckland's 1995 survey published seven years later indicates that some of the bicultural issues have begun to be addressed but that gaps remain that might encourage better take up of library services by Māori, such as use of te reo Māori in the library and resources and staff knowledge to facilitate whakapapa research (Auckland City Libraries 2002).

On a smaller scale, Peters (2006), Campbell, Hutton & Rewet (2004) and McCauley (2010) all consider the Māori cultural perspective in analysing services to Māori in Manukau, Wellington and Tauranga respectively.  Peters (2006) notes that barriers to Māori take up of library services at Manukau libraries include a need to develop library staff to be able to relate to Māori better, aided by embedding a Māori component within its bicultural strategy, Te Ao Marama.  Campbell, Hutton & Reweti's (2004) assessment of the services to Māori in Wellington public libraries considers the library operation from a kaupapa Māori perspective, applying Māori values to the various tenets of the operation. The outcome is a two-year customer care (or manaakitanga) plan which recommends the promotion of biculturalism “in all areas” of the library's work, training in te reo Māori, the Treaty and Te Ao Māori (the Māori worldview).  McCauley (2010) is concerned with the significance of intellectual property rights for Māori and stresses the importance of consultation with iwi.  The paper also concludes that there is a need for librarians to deepen their understanding of tangata whenua and their role in supporting the Treaty in forging a more harmonious future.

The National Library of New Zealand Te Puna Mātauranga o Aotearoa’s Te Kaupapa Mahi Tahi: a Plan for Partnership emphasises collaboration and consultation with iwi in all of its developments, is set in the context of Treaty obligations, recognition of te reo as an official language of New Zealand and the National Library of New Zealand Te Puna Mātauranga o Aotearoa Act of 2003.  The significance of the Act, as Mohi and Roberts note, is that “it recognises mātauranga Māori as a knowledge system” (2009, p. 50).  Te Kaupapa Mahi Tahi sets out a pathway to achieving a status of being a “truly bicultural organisation” where “collection and service development and delivery are approached from a shared Māori and Pākehā world view” (National Library of New Zealand 2010, p.5) and where “Māori models of learning” are comprehended and integrated within the library’s activities (National Library of New Zealand 2010, p.7).

Christchurch City Libraries’ bicultural action plan 2008-2010, Te Ara Hou – the New Pathway, is one such example of Māori  values being embedded within both a strategic framework and a set of tangible library development projects (Christchurch City Libraries 2008).  The strategy has the Treaty and obligations to the tangata whenua as its starting point and is underpinned by Māori  values and tikanga. While aiming to identify “future learner needs” it seeks to affirm “the knowledge and values of indigenous peoples in an age of information” (Christchurch City Libraries 2008, p. 4)

It is noticeable that in the period following Te Ara Tika little has been published which examines the progress of biculturalism in New Zealand libraries after such energetic beginnings (a gap which Chris Szekely noted in 2002).  Furthermore, there has been little recorded evidence of the kind of paradigm shift within the industry which Rowena Cullen (1997) discusses.  Cullen argues that the momentum brought about by the creation of the Bicultural Special Interest Group and Te Ara Tika necessitates a change (or the recognition of tikanga) in the way libraries handle, store and give access to Māori information as well as the more institutional recognition of the Treaty as the nation's founding document and Māori as its first inhabitants.  However, most pertinent perhaps is the theme which underpins Cullen's discussion that the assumptions that form the basis of library practice and design need to be reconsidered in order to be fully bicultural.  It is this validation of the knowledge structures of indigenous peoples such as Māori which, Cullen predicts, will force the “next major shift” (Cullen 1997, p. 8) in the philosophies around the library and information sciences as new cultural paradigms are embraced.

LIANZA’s BOK 11 (LIANZA n.d.) framework for awareness of Māori knowledge paradigms, which is underpinned by kaupapa Māori values, is evidence of the industry’s willingness to take steps towards this shift.  While BOK 11 represents formal recognition of Māori philosophies, methodologies and knowledge as being a key element in the fundamentals of professional development for New Zealand library and information workers, that acknowledgement is not universal but reserved for those who pursue professional registration via bodies such as LIANZA.

Along with Cullen (1997) there is a healthy body of commentary that acknowledges the links between biculturalism, te Tiriti and the need to embrace a Māori worldview.  Stevens (2004) and Johnston (2007) are concerned with the role which libraries have in the revitalisation and preservation of Te Reo and greater bilingual staffing of libraries in ensuring Māori information is handled in ways which are culturally appropriate.  Jacobs and Falconer (2004) examine issues around managing Māori information in archives through Māori concepts such as kaitiakitanga (guardianship) and tino rangatiratanga and suggest like many others, that partnership working under biculturalism should see archive staff trained in treaty issues, te reo and ngā tikanga.  Henry (2001) argues that a “kaupapa Māori paradigm” should be adopted by libraries, archives and museums to both protect indigenous knowledge and taonga as well as to foster greater “understanding of and respect for Māori culture and knowledge” (p.16).

Roy (2007) provides an indigenous perspective on native use of libraries in Australia, North America and New Zealand, arguing that libraries have a social role within the community in facilitating and contributing to “a sense of individual and group pride and identity” for indigenous peoples (Roy 2007 p.4).  Nakata (2005) calls for indigenous culture to be at the core of Australian heritage and the library and information sector where it goes beyond “liberal intervention in the interests of equality or inclusion” to a place of “recognition…and, to some extent, reconciliation of different traditions” (Nakata 2005, p. 208).

Reegan Breu’s discussion of what Canadian tribal band libraries can teach ‘mainstream’ public libraries resonates with the political drivers behind kaupapa Māori.  Breu argues that public libraries assume an inherently contradictory political neutrality, one which serves the “prevailing political and economic ethos” (Breu 2003, p. 254). Band libraries teach us to challenge and “deconstruct” the ideologies underpinning mainstream libraries which reinforce unequal power structures.  Breu also notes that for more equal partnership with Aboriginal peoples to take place in mainstream libraries, relationships need to be built, along with “social, physical and cultural spaces” which enable Aboriginal people to “participate and make decisions about public libraries and librarianship.” (Breu 2003 p.256).

Evidence from Christchurch, Auckland, Manukau, Wellington and Tauranga indicates that bringing Māori value systems into library practice has occurred or is beginning to take shape in particular libraries. These examples helped to inform the study by providing a context in which it was possible to ask what other libraries, particularly those outside of the main urban centres, could do to implement such initiatives.

The study was carried out using qualitative methods in the form of semi-structured interviews with library managers and senior library personnel chosen from a purposive sample of ten public libraries within Aotearoa New Zealand. A selection of libraries aimed at representing a cross-section of district, provincial and urban library services was chosen. Data was collected from six small and medium library services (level two and three), with the remaining four interviews carried out with large services (level one), including three from the major New Zealand cities. Libraries were selected using data from the Association of Public Library Managers (APLM) Public Library Statistics (LIANZA 2011).  In addition, in selecting libraries for this study, figures from Statistics New Zealand (Statistics New Zealand 2006) were also consulted in giving consideration to the proportion of Māori living within a selected district.  The aim of this approach was to provide a balance and comparison between high and low levels of Māori population as well as between a variety of library sizes.

Only one public library manager identified as Māori in the initial sample, making it weighted heavily towards non-Māori  opinions. Two senior library personnel were subsequently identified and included to allow better representation of Māori perspectives in the research.

From the interviews carried out there is scant evidence that kaupapa Māori, mātauranga Māori and Te Ao Māori form part of a formalised bicultural strategy within small and medium (that is, level two and three) public libraries in New Zealand.  Most level one libraries in the sample do, however, demonstrate ways in which Māori kaupapa such as Te Reo, tikanga and kawa (protocol) are integrated into library policies, programming and procedures.  However, one level one library stated emphatically that there was virtually no formalised Māori content in their institution’s practice.

The findings show an awareness amongst library managers of the need to reflect Māori culture, or more accurately, the Māori communities local to each library. The extent to which that culture is being reflected varies, as does the extent to which staff and institutions have the resource, skill or motivation to embrace an indigenous worldview in the processes of their operations.

The data reveal overall a general understanding of kaupapa Māori amongst library leaders. The depth of understanding varies depending upon location and between Māori and non-Māori managers.  Where Māori form a large proportion of the local population Māori kaupapa are better understood and more readily applied on an informal basis.  As one respondent notes: “It is implicit in everything we do… on an unspoken level it’s integrated into what we do. On a spoken level we have an organisational obligation to follow the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi” [Level two library interviewee].  However, where Māori form a small percentage of an area’s demographic, a more general, perhaps academic grasp of kaupapa Māori prevails amongst managers.

For Māori participants, kaupapa Māori is intuitive to how they operate. However, in some cases non-Māori managers express a good comprehension of kaupapa Māori in terms of its application of values and tikanga.

All participants in the study were aware of LIANZA’s BOK 11 guidelines around indigenous knowledge paradigms. However, there was a significant amount of variation around their interpretation and application. Responses ranged from not wanting to adopt too prescriptive an approach to understanding or implementing Māori concepts, to clearly seeing how the guidelines could be interpreted and recalling examples of how they were applied.

For all of the participants in the research, reflecting a Māori worldview in public libraries is seen as important. In some cases it is seen as especially so given the organisational obligations under the Treaty of Waitangi and the significance of Māori being the indigenous people of Aotearoa.

The ways in which kaupapa Māori is expressed and applied within the libraries varies. Level two and three libraries tend not to have any particular Māori values formalised within their library policies and practice. Nor are Māori values built into the values of the local authority which governs their practice. Māori values and kaupapa form a part of the organisational strategies of some of the level one libraries which took part in the research. However, while there is clear commitment at a senior level within some of the level one public libraries, there is some evidence of difference of opinion on how or whether those kaupapa are applied effectively ‘on the ground’ and how they are filtered out to a large urban library network.

Among the challenges which the research revealed, fear is frequently cited as being a barrier to non-Māori staff embracing Māori customs in library activities and in using Te Reo in their interactions with Māori customers.  Fear is also suggested by one level three library interviewee as being a possible reason for the low response rate from level three libraries to participate in the research.  Where there is some evidence of resistance to incorporating Māori elements in library practice, the findings suggest this may be due to fear of mispronouncing words, making mistakes and causing offence.  The lack of confidence around Te Reo, tikanga and kawa can lead to feelings of discomfort, failure or of not being genuine:

We’ve got this horrible cultural cringe in this country where you don’t want to be seen to be trying too hard. [level two library interviewee]

Coupled with these findings is the recurring theme that staff participating in Māori custom or protocol in library activities is in most cases reserved for special, Māori-relevant events, rather than part of the norm.  By contrast there is a consistent picture from all the participants that the majority of library staff are keen to learn, to develop skills in Te Reo and Māori cultural awareness and are willing and open to trying new practices.

While some managers expressed concern that formalising Māori cultural practice could be tokenistic in approach, training is identified by almost all participants as being of great importance in relation to the topic of kaupapa Māori. Māori staff, in particular, note the significance of Te Reo in understanding the Māori world, breaking down barriers, and providing a superior customer outcome:

If you had non-Māori who could korero Māori then I think Māori would be really happy with that… Māori don’t want to have to repeat themselves; they don’t want to have to keep spelling the words. You know, they get hoha. [Level one library interviewee]

There is an incoherent or in some cases piecemeal approach to training around Māori issues and language and few libraries outside of the large services offer training which covers the Māori worldview and Māori protocols in depth. Some libraries discuss the lack of resource and funding for training in-house, insufficient time for staff resources and a concern over the absence of context and deeper understanding which ensures training is more than token.

While biculturalism is seen as being of importance to libraries, along with a representation of the Māori worldview, all participants agree that their libraries are not working in a bicultural way, as the following responses from the study typify:

Theoretically we embrace biculturalism. Practically we lose our way, I think. Possibly it’s a non-event for three quarters of the staff. [Level one library interviewee]

We carry on more or less a monocultural service. We pay lip service to biculturalism, things like having Māori  signage, but I wouldn’t say that there’s kaitiakitanga at all.  There’s no deep immersion of Māori values within the way that we’re delivering our services. [Level one library interviewee]

A common theme to emerge from the interview data is that there is ‘a long way to go’ with biculturalism in Aotearoa.  For some respondents, the perception is that the progress of biculturalism in New Zealand libraries has fallen short of its aims, as the following interviewee notes:

We haven’t seemed to have come a long way in the last twenty years, you know, things have seemed to have stopped...There’s no urge or push forward for…more exciting things. [Level one library interviewee]

Multiculturalism and diversity are discussed by several managers as being important for libraries in accepting and catering to a growing range of ethnicities. However, some respondents suggest that the agenda of multiculturalism is being used to divert priorities away from biculturalism, and in particular commitments to the Treaty, as this interviewee remarks:

If they talk about multiculturalism then they don’t have to talk about the Treaty…the Treaty and things Māori are always in the too hard basket for most people. [Level one library interviewee]

The Treaty and adherence to it is raised, particularly by Māori respondents, as an important factor in libraries better reflecting the Māori worldview or the views of local iwi and hapū.  Some respondents perceive that non-Māori do not understand the Treaty, or that they regard it as too difficult to implement or do not care about it.

There is a strong sense from the data which appears to support Breu’s (2003) assertion, that public libraries in New Zealand cannot fully integrate a Māori worldview due to their being constructed upon Western and European knowledge paradigms within non- Māori designed buildings, and operated through local government structures which have been built on British colonial ideologies.  While many of the study respondents are positive about the place of indigeneity in New Zealand public libraries, the following quote summarises the paradox which the partnering of the two worldviews presents:

They can but they don’t sit happily inside the same institution. One of the things that we had started to do but never finished was to look at whether we should be delivering Māori services from the marae rather than trying to shoehorn them into a Western institution…We only got as far as consulting with the Māori community. We couldn’t get agreement about where, which marae, which institution, we couldn’t get agreement.  It all got too hard. [Level one library interviewee]

Nevertheless, there is a strong indication from managers that incorporation of the Māori worldview within libraries can have profound enhancements for staff and the communities in which they are operating. The following interviewee’s comments illustrate this point:

I am Pākehā ...I am comfortable sitting alongside a cultural process…I don’t feel threatened by it. I feel it enriches my life and it is part of my community I live in. And I don’t feel judged by not being an expert myself…so I can only think that people would resist partially because they feel threatened, personally. [Level two library interviewee]

The Māori subject headings project is held up as one positive example of connecting the two worldviews, although classifying Māori subjects using the Dewey decimal system is noted for inappropriateness as an Anglo-American model being applied to an indigenous knowledge system.

The shortage of Māori staff in libraries is raised as an issue in at least half of the cases. Several interviewees felt this was a factor which held libraries back from embracing more of a Māori kaupapa in their practices and continuing to progress biculturalism. While some libraries cite the positive impact of having a Māori specialist or takawaenga in their staff, it is acknowledged that such liaison positions are demanding, require high levels of responsibility and specialist knowledge. There is agreement that such positions are not senior enough within a library’s staff structure and as a consequence place individuals under excess pressure.

As the next interviewee quote demonstrates, the observation is also made that in ensuring that Māori tikanga is carried out there is a danger that non-specialist Māori members of staff may be vulnerable to exploitation by employers:

[If] you have, say, a staff member who can do a powhiri, a staff member who can speak Māori and they suddenly become the be all and end all of all Māori engagement on behalf of the library…it may have nothing to do with their job description. But they become it.  And the risk for that person is…they never successfully achieve what they’re employed to do in their job descriptions and it can turn ugly. [Level two library interviewee]

By contrast, in order to protect Māori from such treatment, others, such as the interviewee quoted below, see the responsibilities around embracing Māori culture as being organisation wide:

[There is] a perception sometimes that tikanga is in the Māori speaking staff, that they are the ones that will carry the tikanga and be responsible for it…we all have obligations around tikanga.  There are obligations around learning, there are obligations around giving it a try, there are obligations around listening and seeking to understand and asking Māori colleagues but not in the end expecting that one hundred percent of the effort will be our Māori colleagues doing it. We all have obligations. [Level one library interviewee]

Finally, there is not only a call for more Māori to be employed at a senior level in order to influence library policy, but also, for a culture of trust and respect to be prevail in order for the Māori worldview to be meaningfully shared amongst colleagues.

What this study has found is a national picture which lacks coherence above any real absence of kaupapa Māori. Although lack of resource, opportunity and expertise within libraries are sometimes cited as affecting the wider integration of kaupapa Māori, the evidence of willingness among staff to embrace Māori philosophies, language and customs expressed by library leaders at all levels, suggests that the main reasons for this inconsistency may lie in wider, political structures and ideological frameworks which govern public libraries.

Furthermore, the results point to a reluctance to commit to biculturalism in this more profound sense of incorporating Māori philosophies within organisational values. By extension, this hints at an inability, complacency or unwillingness to adhere to the commitments of the Treaty, and to give space for the expression of tino rangatiratanga, as exemplified in interview comments such as: “I think a lot of it is lip service and tick the box. And I think they still fully don’t understand the Treaty, and by ‘they’ I mean people in management.” [Level one library interviewee]. Or as a level one library interviewee put it, “maybe some of them just don’t care...Maybe they don’t want to either.”

These observations point to a political indifference to the Treaty despite corporate statements to the contrary from organisations.  However, the lack of Treaty engagement commented on in the data has its roots in the political history of Māori – Pākehā relations, and can be viewed as a legacy of the colonial power relation which has, and apparently continues, to subjugate Māori.  It is perhaps no coincidence that tino rangatiratanga is concept which is central to the expression of kaupapa Māori (IRI 2000, Lee 2005) or indeed that kaupapa Māori is interpreted by some as “a theory and practice of active resistance to the continued colonization of Māori people and culture” (Mahuika 2008, p.12).  Full acceptance of the Māori worldview, including its aspirations of self-determination, as fundamental to a genuine commitment to biculturalism and the Treaty, can therefore be interpreted as not only problematic for the colonial (or post-colonial) governing structure, but a threat to the dominant cultural hegemony. It is from that standpoint that the promotion of multiculturalism in library discourse is interpreted, particularly by Māori in the study, as a diversion from these threats.

The attitudes and fears which emerge in the data are reflective of those constructed on the colonial ideologies to which Smith (1999) refers. For some participants in the study, many of these attitudes have been affected by social conditions. As one interviewee notes, “there are whole generations of people whose school education around the Treaty was zilch, or was pretty lacking in real historical context” [Level one library interviewee].

However, the data also suggest increasing openness and a shift in attitudes, perhaps lead by a younger generation who have benefitted from the changes brought about by the Waitangi tribunal, Māori resistance movements and the renaissance in Te Reo.

Nevertheless, the absence of a strategic approach to integrating kaupapa Māori nationally suggests the unevenness with which the Māori worldview is understood and embraced within public libraries will continue.  LIANZA’s BOK 11 guidelines have a significant role to play in altering this imbalance.  This research demonstrates, however, that without tying the guidelines to training, mentoring and partnership working in order to understand the concepts in action, and help to integrate them within library policy and practice, such guidelines may fail to fulfil their aim. They may also appear inaccessible and abstract to those without an existing and active knowledge or experience of Māori tikanga, knowledge frameworks and value systems.  Furthermore, while the appearance of Māori specialist library positions, including in some smaller, less resourced services represents an acknowledgement of the need for Māori culture to influence library practices, the lack of seniority afforded such roles points to an ongoing power imbalance between the two parties within the bicultural debate.

Based on this study, shifts in that relationship appear to be gradual and selective rather than radical and overarching, and therefore viewed by Māori respondents in particular, as welcome but inadequate.  The data suggest that gaps in Māori representation at a strategic level within both libraries and their governing organisations are contributing to that power disparity and failing to influence policy in more fundamental ways which might integrate Māori values.  As the following interviewee’s remarks make clear, against this historical and political backdrop, radically transformative change is virtually impossible:

Sometimes policies and procedures from within your organisation do not support the use of te reo Māori or even kaupapa Māori…probably because it’s very old school. The history within organisations can be very long, and very traditional and very Western-based…so they’re not going to be open to those kind[s] of changes. And sometimes it’s a matter of small steps at a time. [Level two library interviewee]

In such a political environment, and given their current design and structure, it is doubtful whether public libraries can accommodate the indigenous worldview on an equal basis with that of a Westernised, European influenced one.

As this study confirms, Western and European methodologies prevail in the mainstream public library organisation of information and assume precedence over consideration for an understanding based on the philosophies or belief systems of iwi. It is for these reasons perhaps that all of the participants in this study felt their libraries to not be operating in a bicultural way.  As one respondent noted for example:

I don’t consider us a bicultural library service. I think libraries are essentially pākehā institutions…and we are expecting to work biculturally when we are forming our actions. [Level one library interviewee]

What is clear, however, is that small changes are emerging to challenge the traditional arrangement of information, with the Māori Subject Headings project as a significant bridge between the two worldviews.  The realisation from many in the research that the Dewey decimal system, for instance, is a ‘limit’ to integrating a Māori method of classification can also be interpreted as exposing the opportunity to radically transform the paradigms upon which public libraries are devised and run within Aotearoa.

The message that there is much further to go, to learn and to challenge libraries that frequently prevails in the data is both a concession that biculturalism has not achieved as much as would have been hoped, as well as an assumption that the process is a linear one which may even have a finite point of fulfilment.  What this research shows is that biculturalism cannot meaningfully evolve outward without significant political and philosophical change at both the structural and agency levels, a “stepping out of comfort zones” as one interviewee put it.

It does require us to have very different protocols and very different practices that our systems are not set up for. So it would require quite a lot of acceptance of new ways of thinking. It would require different operational structures…it’s a full immersion thing; you can’t just tack it on the side. [Level one library interviewee]

This study highlights an aspiration for change among library managers to embrace, more meaningfully, the values and belief systems of Māori. It also reveals a number of the issues preventing that change from occurring successfully and with greater pace.

The wider, systemic issues which come to the surface in exploring Māori subjects in relation to non-Māori may be ones which the library and information sector cannot specifically address but which remind us that the bicultural relationship is not an equal one in terms of resource, representation and expression.

However, within the public library sector there is a clear need for strong direction and advocacy in order to drive a coherent, nationwide strategy for biculturalism which incorporates kaupapa Māori and which addresses the iniquities of resource between the different levels of public libraries in New Zealand. Coupled with that is a requirement for practical guidance, mentoring and partnership working, particularly where there is little engagement with iwi locally within libraries. The following quote from the study summarises the need for bold leadership in driving a more far-reaching bicultural strategy:

It’s not just about putting up artworks and bicultural signage…you have to come through a cultural change about the way you look at things. That requires deep commitment at the highest level where it is set out in every policy in every line in every document…To a certain extent you can drive change from down under but unless it’s right at the top level and incorporated in everything that comes through at a high level…[it] is not good enough. [Level one library interviewee]

If biculturalism is to be taken seriously as a central pillar of the strategic future of public libraries, then change needs to be occurring both at the top as well as on the ground.  This requires building partnerships with iwi and hapū, integrating Māori values and concepts and filtering them down through all the strata of the organisation; granting staff the training and support to actively engage in kaupapa Māori in relation to their communities.

Rowena Cullen noted in 1997 that the library sector needed to work towards an epistemological transformation (p.8). The bicultural project in New Zealand has taken libraries a short way on that path but there is strong proof from this study that philosophical and political questions need to be asked of the profession if that transformation is to progress to a deeper and more meaningful stage.

The library environment, its policies and practice remain embedded with American and European concepts and paradigms.  Where their patronage is higher amongst the pākehā population, the tendency may be not to consider how Māoridom could influence the way the library is devised or run.  Kaupapa Māori presents a challenge to this status quo, one which perhaps should not be considered a threat but a possibility.

If we are limited by Dewey or any other Western library classification system then is there a case for devising integrated classification systems for both indigenous and non-indigenous worldviews? Are there new ways to consider our approach to knowledge; its creation, its sharing and its care?

In an era when public libraries are perennially under threat of budget cuts and closure, could the intertwining of indigenous and non-indigenous worldviews, the creation of a unique and inclusive template for our libraries, be the way to forge a dynamic new future?  Is there a way to transform our public libraries from the traditional paradigm to one which truly reflects indigeneity and multiculturalism without assuming the dominance of one cultural hegemony over all others?

Auckland City Libraries (2002). The customer's voice II - another quest: improvement of services to Māori at Auckland City Libraries. Auckland, N.Z.: Auckland City Libraries.

Breu, R. D. (2003). Band and Tribal Libraries: What Mainstream Public Libraries Can Learn from Them? Feliciter 49(5): 254-257.

Campbell, J., Hutton, G., & Reweti, A. (2004). Te Kohikohinga Māori: Manaakitanga : a two year Customer Care Plan. Wellington: Wellington City Libraries.

Christchurch City Libraries (2009). Te Ara Hou - Libraries Bicultural plan 2008 – 2010. Retrieved from http://christchurchcitylibraries.com/TeAraHou/TeAraHou.pdf October 2012

Cullen, R. (1997). Biculturalism and Librarianship in New Zealand: a More Fundamental Change than Information Technology. Paper presented at the 62nd IFLA General Conference. Retrieved from http://archive.ifla.org/IV/ifla62/62-culr.htm August 2010.

Evans, E (2011).  An investigation into the extent and application of bilingual signage in New Zealand public libraries. Unpublished MLIS research project. Victoria University of Wellington. Retrieved from ResearchArchive @ Victoria 10 September 2011.

Garraway, J & Szekely, C. (1994). Ka mahi tonu. Biculturalism in New Zealand librarianship 1992-   1994. Wellington: The N Strategy Bicultural Actions Group.

Grace, D. (1994). Bicultural Development. In J. Garraway & C. Szekely (Eds.), Ka mahi tonu : biculturalism in New Zealand Librarianship, 1992-1994. Wellington, N.Z.: The N Strategy Bicultural Actions Group, in association with the New Zealand Library and Information Association Te Rau Herenga o Aotearoa.

Henry, E. (2001). The challenge of preserving indigenous knowledge: a model for collaboration between libraries and Māori. Library Life. 26, pp 13-16.

International Research Institute for Māori and Indigenous Education (IRI) with Te Rōpū Rangahau Hauora a Eru Pomare (2000). Māori Research Development: Kaupapa Māori principles and practices: a literature review. Research Report to Te Puni Kokiri, Wellington. June 2000. Retrieved from http://www.kaupapaMāori .com/assets//Māori _research.pdf March 2012.

Jacobs, T, & Falconer, S. (2004). Ka mua, ka muri; Walking backwards into the future: Paths towards managing Māori information in archives. Archifacts, October, pp.1-20.

Johnston, L. (2007). The role of libraries and archival collections in the preservation and revitalisation of indigenous knowledge: The case of revitalisation of te reo Māori.  New Zealand Library and Information Management Journal, 50(3), pp.202-215.

Library and Information Association of New Zealand Aotearoa (LIANZA) (n.d.). BOK 11. Awareness Of Indigenous Knowledge Paradigms, Which In NZ Context Refers To Māori. Retrieved 10 May 2012 from https://www.lianza.org.nz/career/professional-development/bok-11

LIANZA (2011). Public library statistics 2010/2011. Retrieved 27 April 2012 from https://www.lianza.org.nz/resources/lianza-documents/public-library-statistics/public-library-statistics-20102011

McCauley, D. (2010). Tauranga City Libraries: Meeting the needs of local iwi? Biculturalism and Māori Cultural Property. The New Zealand Library & Information Management Journal : Nga Purongo, 51(4), 247-267.

MacDonald, T. (1993). Te Ara Tika : Māori and libraries : a research report. Wellington N.Z.: New Zealand Library & Information Association.

Mahuika, R (2008) Kaupapa Māori theory is critical and anti-colonial MAI Review 3, Article 4. Retrieved August 2012 from http://www.review.mai.ac.nz/index.php/MR/article/viewFile/153/180

Marsden, M (2003). Kaitiakitanga: A definitive introduction to the holistic worldview of the Māori.  In Te Ahukaramū Charles Royal (Ed.), The Woven Universe: Selected Writings of Rev. Māori Marsden (pp. 54-72). Otaki: Te Wananga o Raukawa.

Mohi, J. H. & Roberts, W.D. (2009). Delivering a strategy for working with Māori, and developing responsiveness to an increasingly multicultural population: a perspective from the National Library of New Zealand. IFLA Journal 35, (1), 48-58.

Nakata, M., Byrne, A.; Nakata, V.; Gardiner, O. (2005). Libraries, Indigenous Australians and a Developing Protocols Strategy for the Library and Information Sector. InNakata, M. & Langton, M. (Eds.). Australian indigenous knowledge and libraries; (pp.196-210) Sydney, NSW. UTSe Press. Retrieved March 2012 from http://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/dspace/bitstream/handle/2100/57/Libraries%20and%20Indigenous%20Knowledge.pdf?sequence=1  .

National Library of New Zealand (2006). Te Kaupapa Mahi Tahi - A Plan for Partnership. Retrieved September 2011 from National Library of New Zealand. http://www.natlib.govt.nz/catalogues/library-documents/te-kaupapa-mahi-tahi/?searchterm=te%20kaupapa%20mahi%20tahii

National Library of New Zealand (2010). Bicultural Implementation Roadmap 2010-2012. Retrieved November 2011 from National Library of New Zealand: http://www.natlib.govt.nz/catalogues/library-documents/bicultural-implementation-roadmap-june-2010

Peters, S. (2006). Te Ara Tika ki Manukau: Staying the distance -- 2006 and beyond. Paper presented at Next Generation Libraries: Library and Information Association of New Zealand Aotearoa 2006 Conference, 08-11 October 2006, Wellington, New Zealand.

Roy, L. (2007). Indigenous Libraries and Innovative Multicultural ServicesPaper presented at the (IFLA) International conference on Innovative multicultural library services for all. Pretoria, South Africa.

Simpson, S. (2005). Te Ara Tika: Guiding Words Ngā Ingoa Kaupapa Māori, Pūronga Tuatoru: Māori Subject Headings Project, Phase 3 Research Report. Retrieved September 2011 from http://www.trw.org.nz/publications/Te_Ara_Tika_Guiding_Words.pdf

Smith, L. T. (1999). Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples. Dunedin: University of Otago Press.

Statistics New Zealand (2006). Quick stats about a place. Retrieved May 2012 from http://www.stats.govt.nz/Census/2006CensusHomePage/QuickStats/AboutAPlace.aspx

Stevens, A. (2004). Are you Te Kaitiaki Pukapuka?:Bilingual staffing and ownership of Māori    information. New Zealand Libraries, 49(11), 371-376.

Szekely, C. (Spring 2002). Te Ara Tika: Māori and libraries in New Zealand – staying the distance. World Libraries 121.

Szekely, C. (1997). Te Ara Tika: guiding voices: Māori information needs. Wellington: NZLIA & Te Rōpū Whakahau.

Worth, H. (1995). The customer's voice - a quest: a survey: improvement of services to Māori at Auckland City Libraries. Auckland, N.Z.: Auckland City Libraries.

Wara, R. T. (2001). Case studies of successful implementations of bicultural policies and practices in Aotearoa New Zealand public libraries. Unpublished masters research project. School of Information Management. Victoria University of Wellington. New Zealand


Author: Dr Spencer Lilley
Series: NZLIMJ, Vol 53, Issue No 1, Feb 2013
Publication date: Mon, 2013-02-25

By Dr Spencer Lilley. Te Uru Maraurau / School of Māori & Multicultural Education, Massey University

This article reports on a research project that investigated whether New Zealand public library websites reflect New Zealand’s Māori/bicultural heritage.  Each website was assessed using a bicultural evaluation tool consisting of nine criteria.  The results of the evaluation reveal that although there are a small number of libraries achieving at a high level, the majority of websites have very low levels of Māori/bicultural content available.

The Public Libraries Strategic Framework 2012 – 2017 (2012), identifies the need for all public libraries in New Zealand to have a digital overlay, which allows libraries to deliver services in new and different ways. The tenor of this is that these services must be inclusive of all New Zealanders' needs with regard to the delivery of library services and information resource requirements. To test how inclusive this digital overlay is, this paper investigates whether the websites of our public libraries reflect New Zealand’s Māori/bicultural heritage. To assist with the assessment the researcher created a bicultural evaluation tool consisting of ten criteria that has been used to analyse the website of every library.

The library and information profession embraced biculturalism in the early 1990s. The momentum for this came from the NZLA Futures Group report (1990) that set a new direction for the New Zealand Library Association after its financial problems in the post-1987 share market crash. One of the report’s key recommendations was that a commitment to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi be inserted into the Association’s mission statement. Other changes initiated by the Report included the development of special interest groups (SIGs), leading to the formation of the Bi-cultural SIG in 1991. As a highly motivated group of professionals intent on change, the SIG members encouraged libraries and librarians to become proactive in their engagement with Māori, increase their knowledge of the Treaty of Waitangi and Māori culture and to deliver services that meet the needs of Māori clients. This momentum was maintained through regular hui (meetings), articles in Library Life and lobbying at Council and regional levels throughout the Association. In 1992, the themes of biculturalism and the Treaty of Waitangi featured prominently at the N Strategy Conference in Nelson, with the scene being set by a resource paper on the Treaty of Waitangi co-ordinated by Dick Grace (1992). In November 1992, Te Rōpū Whakahau was formed and added a strong Māori dimension to the profession. The N Strategy momentum was continued in 1993 with the publication of the first of the Te Ara Tika reports (MacDonald, 1993), which provided an overview of biculturalism in the profession, with a particular focus on the role of public libraries and Ka Mahi Tonu in 1994 (Garraway & Szekely, 1994).

MacDonald’s report was the first study that concentrated on how public libraries were providing resources and services to Māori clients. The results of the research conducted for the report demonstrated that more than half (54%), were delivering limited or no services to Māori (MacDonald, 1993: 25). Furthermore only fifteen libraries stated that they had a written mission statement or policy document that contained a reference to bicultural issues or Treaty of Waitangi obligations, (MacDonald, 1993:36). Reasons for not embracing biculturalism and/or Māori services were varied but the most frequently cited reasons for biculturalism being seen as a low priority was funding cuts and increased usage of public libraries, (MacDonald, 1993: 46). Ka Mahi Tonu continued the earlier work of Te Ara Tika by conducting a survey of libraries and library organisations, to ascertain the level of bicultural activity over the 1992-1994 period.  Twenty five of the 61 institutions and organisations that reported their activities were public libraries. The activities surveyed ranged [1] from bicultural policy development, service delivery, collection development, training and events management. The activities demonstrated that the concept of biculturalism and need for service and resource delivery for Maori clients had been embraced by the libraries that responded. What was particularly evident however that there were many other public libraries that did not respond, when it is remembered that there had been 72 responses to the survey undertaken for Te Ara Tika, (MacDonald, 1993: 24). The reasons for non-participation are not known, but if the results for the current study are any indication it can be assumed that for some libraries it was because there were no activities to report.

In 1997, the second Te Ara Tika report (Szekely, 1997) was published. Szekely’s report focused on Māori opinions about libraries. Although the report aimed at an overview of the entire library and information profession and the delivery of services and resources, several themes emerged from the research that had implications for public libraries, including the need for more Māori librarians, availability and accessibility of Māori resources in appropriate formats, and providing services that enabled Māori clients to undertake research and be able to effectively access and utilise technology in the library. Specific research on their services and resources for Māori clients in their libraries was undertaken by Auckland City Libraries (1995, 2001) and Manukau City Libraries (Szekely, 2002). Although specifically focused on their own library systems, the results from these surveys, like the second Te Ara Tika report, provided an insight into Māori opinions and resources and services needs, that other libraries could consider and apply accordingly to their own library system.

Literature review
A comprehensive literature search was undertaken in an attempt to identify content analysis frameworks or models based on cultural values. The more notable studies identified were largely from the business and marketing literature, particularly the studies by Singh et. al. (2003, 2005), Singh & Matsuo (2004), and Würtz (2006). Singh and his co-authors, and Würtz were influenced by the cultural values framework created by Hofstede (1980) and reconfigured and updated in later works (Hofstede, 1991). Hofstede’s model identified five consistent cultural dimension indicators: power distance,  individualism vs. collectivism,  femininity vs. masculinity,  uncertainty avoidance,  and long- vs. short-term orientation. The studies authored and led by Singh used Hofstede’s model as a basis for considering the cultural values represented by web sites of businesses in a variety of countries including, Japan, United States of America, Germany, China, India, South Korea and Mexico. Callahan (2006), also used the framework constructed by Hofstede  to assess and highlight the differences in graphical communication and design techniques used by university websites in Malaysia, Austria, the United States, Ecuador, Japan, Sweden, Greece and Denmark. Although the findings from these studies are of interest, they fail to take into account the necessity to have representations of two cultures in one country as is the case in New Zealand.

The literature on web-content analysis with a focus on Māori is relatively limited.  A study by Lahteenmaki (2012) looks at textual and visual imagery discourse analysis of Māori tourism sites and concludes that they generally portray and describe aspects of Māori culture and society. However, the focus of these Māori sites is not other Māori but overseas visitors who these companies are attempting to entice to have an authentic Māori experience while they are in New Zealand. For this reason, this study is judged to be of limited application to this project. Other studies viewed include Cullen & Houghton (2000), which evaluated New Zealand Government web sites in providing equitable and effective access to government information. Cullen developed a list of 34 criteria to measure the effectiveness and usability of government department websites and although there were a small proportion of Māori participants in the study, the issue of Māori content was not a consideration in the criteria. However, Cullen & Hernon's later study of e-government included a brief section on Māori participants information needs when accessing government web sites (2004). The participants revealed that they wished to see Māori reflected in government web sites including usage of te reo Māori, in addition to prominent reporting of news and events. Other information on careers, education, the environment, legislation, and statistics was also sought from selected central and local government websites (Cullen & Hernon, 2004: 24). Later in the report it is revealed that Māori participants were not happy about the lack of currency of Māori information and limited content relating to Māori on some web sites (pp. 31). Muhamad-Brandner (2009) investigated the representation of Māori in New Zealand’s cyber-space; particularly the development of two specific Māori focused domain name spaces and the usage of te reo Māori on selected web sites. Her research used a content analysis based text recognition tool to identify Māori text and words. Her research revealed a vast range of the usage of te reo, with the sites that had a 25% or more te reo Māori being more clearly aimed at Māori audiences and those with ten per cent and under usage being mainly businesses targeting  and informing consumers, including overseas tourists, (pp. 184-185). Having reviewed all of these studies, it was determined that the evaluation criteria used by the researchers was not within the scope of the study carried out for this paper.

Having determined that there was not an effective set of evaluation criteria to be applied; and to ensure that all libraries being checked were evaluated effectively and equitably the researcher developed a set of ten criteria that could be used to measure the level of Māori/bicultural content of New Zealand’s public libraries websites. These ten criteria and the rationale for their choice and application are:

  1. Use of Māori language on the web site home pageThe home page is the electronic gateway and welcoming point to the library’s services and resources, as such Māori clients might have an expectation that a Māori greeting be used, acknowledging te reo as an official language of New Zealand or that the Māori name of the Library or parent organisation would be present.
  2. Usage of Māori visual imagery (art work, logos, branding)The use of Māori visual imagery, like te reo Māori will indicate to Māori clients that there is an acknowledgment of the uniquely artistic methods of Māori. In some instances this imagery might be representative of the local government body that the library is part of.
  3. Descriptions of Māori services availableThis involves exploring the web site for any description of services specifically targeted at those wishing to get Māori information, including any information about Māori specialist staff.
  4. Ability to navigate the web site using te reo Māori menus/linksIn addition to assessing the existence of te reo Māori on the home page, this criterion assesses the ability of web site users to navigate it using either an alternative interface or links in te reo or te reo Māori menus.  Where this facility is available on an OPAC, this is accepted.
  5. Availability of brochures/leaflets/guides focused on Māori topicsThis explores whether there is any material to describe resources, including databases, bibliographies of material on a specific topic that will assist Māori clients with their use of the library.
  6. Information about Māori focused collectionsThis identifies any information about whether the library has Māori specialist collections and if there is any information about collection development policies/plans for Māori resources.
  7. Links to Māori resourcesThis looks for any links to external databases and websites that contain Māori resources, such resources could be listed as part of a general list of resources or as a subject specific list of Māori resources.
  8. Information about Māori focused eventsThis looks for any information about whether the library has hosted or is hosting any Māori/bicultural focused events or has links to other events in their locality. This is an indication of the library’s reach out into the Māori community and/or a demonstration that the library has a focus on Māori/bicultural specific events, such as Matariki, Waitangi Day, or Te Wiki o Te Reo Māori (Māori Language Week).
  9. Usage of photos of Māori staff and clientsThe main site and all of its sub-pages are searched for any photos that represent Māori staff or clients of the library. These photos can demonstrate that it is a place where Māori are welcome and indicates there are resources that are of interest.
  10. Other Māori contentThis catches any other information that does not fall into the previous categories, and might include links to biographies of prominent locals, stories of historic moments or sites, newsletters and blogs etc.

It was decided that only the first nine criteria would be used to evaluate each of the libraries' websites. Where information relevant to the tenth criteria was present this was recorded but not measured.

Over a two month period (May-June 2012), every public library website in New Zealand was accessed and checked by the researcher for evidence of Māori or bicultural content, including any references to the Treaty of Waitangi. To ensure that no public library system was missed, the list of libraries on the website of the Association of Public Libraries was checked and where a link was provided the researcher used it to connect to the library being evaluated.

Wherever possible, the evaluation of the website commenced from the library’s home-page; however there were two libraries did not have home-pages separate from their councils, so their council home-page was taken as the starting point. The method of evaluating the website was determined by the layout chosen by each library; however, each page whether it was navigated to from a drop down menu or by a direct link from a web page was followed and explored. Any subsequent links from these points were also investigated. Using the first nine criteria, each website was analysed and where matches were found for the criteria, these were noted and a description of the activity, resource or service was entered into an Excel spreadsheet, along with a score for that criteria. The score was awarded from a scale of one to three, with one representing ‘little evidence’, two equalling ‘some evidence’ and three indicating ‘strong evidence’. If no evidence was identified a score of zero was recorded for that criteria.

The most noticeable results were that only one library website met all of the criteria, and eleven (18%) of the libraries failed to meet any of the criteria. The one library to meet all nine of the criteria was Christchurch City Libraries. Auckland Libraries was the next best performed scoring eight out of nine, followed by Wellington City Libraries, Puke Ariki (New Plymouth) and Kapiti District Libraries. These three libraries all scored seven out of nine. All five libraries also scored three out of three for all of the criteria they met, resulting in a perfect score of 27 out of 27 for Christchurch City Libraries and 24 for  Auckland City Libraries and 21 for the other three libraries. The criteria not met by these four libraries varied slightly, with Wellington, Auckland and New Plymouth, not displaying any particular Maori art or branding in their web presence. There was no evidence of brochures/leaflets/guides on Maori topics on the Wellington, New Plymouth and Kapiti Coast sites. The other criterion missing for Kapiti Coast was the lack of any evidence of a Māori language option on their website or library catalogue.

After the five libraries already discussed, there is another group of three libraries that scored five, with these being Palmerston North City Library, Tauranga District Libraries and Whakatane District Libraries, closely followed by Wanganui Public Library, Taupo District Libraries, Porirua City Library, Nelson Public Libraries and Dunedin City Library all scoring four. When the evaluative scales were applied to each, Tauranga and Whakatane returned a result of fifteen; Palmerston North scored fourteen, with Dunedin, Porirua, Taupo, Wanganui and Nelson all scoring twelve.

Tauranga, Whakatane and Wanganui were all missing content relating to Māori services, brochures/guides and a Māori language option. Tauranga and Whakatane were also missing photos of Māori staff or clients. Wanganui had no reference or any indication of whether a Māori focused collection was available in the library and no information about recent or forthcoming Māori events. Palmerston North, Porirua and Nelson’s omissions included: photos of Maori staff or clients, Māori focused brochures/guides and information about Māori events, in addition Nelson and Porirua had no Māori language option and lacked any Māori art or branding. Taupo was also missing content relating to art/branding, Māori services available, te reo Māori options, photos of Māori staff or clients and any information about Māori specific events. The evaluation of the five areas where Palmerston North met the determined criteria, saw it receive scores of two for the criteria relating to information about Māori collections, and the Māori art and branding categories. Although the Māori collections information existed on the Kohikohinga Māori page, it only referred to digital collections and not the print collection that exists. The only Māori art or branding visible on the site was also on the Kohikohinga Māori page and not dispersed throughout the entire site. Nelson received an evaluative score of three for each of the four criteria they met.

The following table presents the cumulative scores for the criteria met and the evaluative scores for each of the ten top libraries.

Table 1 - Top ranked Public Libraries
Name of Library Number of criteria met Evaluative score
Christchurch City Libraries 9 27
Auckland Libraries 8 24
Puke Ariki (New Plymouth) 7 21
Kapiti District Libraries 7 21
Wellington City Libraries 7 21
Tauranga District Libraries 5 15
Whakatane Public Libraries 5 15
Palmerston North City Library 5 14
Wanganui Public Library 4 12
Porirua Public Library 4 12
Nelson Public Libraries 4 12
Dunedin City Libraries 4 12
Taupo District Libraries 4 12

After the thirteen libraries already discussed, the list of libraries with higher numbers of criteria being met tapers off very quickly, with the other 48 libraries all receiving scores of three out of nine or less for the criteria and nine or less when the evaluation tool was applied. Interestingly, several of these libraries are located in cities or regions where the local population demographics include higher percentages of Maori than the 14.7% for all of New Zealand. These places include Hamilton, Hastings, Horowhenua, Gisborne, Rotorua, Whangarei, Wairoa, Masterton, and Hutt City. When checking the evaluation data for these libraries, the more common criteria that were met included, having te reo Māori on the home page, either as a greeting or the Māori name of the library; information about Māori collections and Māori online resources.

Table 2: Libraries with low evaluative scores that have a significant Maori population in their district
Name of Library No. of criteria met Evaluative score Māori as % of total population
Wairoa 1 3 57%
H.B.Williams (Gisborne) 3 9 44%
Rotorua 2 6 34%
Whangarei 3 9 24%
Hastings 2 6 23%
Horowhenua 2 6 20%
Hamilton 3 8 19%
Hutt City 2 6 17%
Masterton 1 3 16%

As already mentioned, there were eleven libraries that did not register a score on any of the criteria. Like the libraries listed in Table 2, four of the libraries were in areas where Māori populations are a substantial percentage of the local population. Libraries in this category include: Wairarapa Library Service,  Waitomo District Libraries, Tararua District Libraries and Rangitikei Libraries. Only three of the libraries were based in the lower regions of the South Island, where the Māori population is less prominent, with these being, Waimate District Libraries, MacKenzie Community Library and Gore District Libraries. The other four libraries that scored zero were: Waipa District Libraries, Waikato District Libraries, Matamata-Piako District Libraries and Stratford and District Centennial Library.

The final table (table 3), provides an overview of how many libraries registered a score for each of the nine criteria.

Table 3 – Total number of libraries meeting criteria
Criteria Total number of libraries meeting criteria
Te reo on home page 23
Māori Art/Branding 6
Information about Māori Services 11
Māori Collection Information 23
Māori language option 7
Māori/bilingual brochures 3
Link to Māori Resources 34
Photos of Māori Staff/Clients 14
Information about Events 10

These results demonstrate that there is considerable room for improvement across the full range of criteria. Only the seventh criterion (Link to Māori Resources) had a return rate that meant that more than half of the libraries were doing this. Many other libraries linked to online resources but Māori websites and/or databases were not represented amongst these. The other two criteria with strong scores (Te Reo, and Māori collection information) were only represented in approximately a third of the websites that were scanned. The results for all the other criteria are very low and provide a guide for libraries as to how they could make meaningful improvements to their websites.

Interestingly enough, the ‘Other’ category which was not considered in the overall evaluative score was recorded as featuring in 20 of the libraries' web site content (but none of these were in the libraries that scored zero)

A full table of the results for all the libraries is available in Appendix One

The Māori/bicultural dimension within the library and information profession has been a prominent feature over the last twenty years and it would be reasonable to assume that this would have filtered through to larger numbers of public libraries than is evident in the research carried out for this article. Admittedly the research has only focused on this issue from one perspective and there could be stronger evidence of these services in the libraries themselves. This will be explored in the next phase of the research, due to take place in 2013. However as a website is often seen as a marketing tool, and is used as such particularly by businesses to highlight services and products with which they want to entice potential clients. The earlier studies undertaken by MacDonald, 1993; Szekely, 1997; and Auckland City Libraries, 1995 & 2001, indicated that Māori were reluctant users of libraries and felt that libraries would not cater for their needs. The libraries that returned either a low or no score against the criteria would only reinforce that view in the eyes of any person seeking Māori focused services or resources.
The libraries with high ratings (see Table 1) have several factors in common that led to them achieving their status. Some of these factors include: dedicated staff responsible for web services development, specialist Māori staff that can deliver Māori services, and well established collections of Māori resources. The critical mass factor should also not be overlooked, in that they are mainly libraries serving larger populations and are able to have staff dedicated to specialist functions. A prime example of this is Auckland Libraries, which was brought together through the creation of the super city in 2010 and has the combined resources of the libraries of the former Auckland City, Manukau City, Waitakere City, North Shore City and Rodney District to call on. The other factor not to be underestimated is the Māori specialist. As the champion for Māori in their library, they are responsible for connecting the communities they serve with the Māori resources and services they have available and would view a web presence as an important delivery and publicity tool.

For the libraries that were at the lowest end of the scale the true reasons for a lack of a Māori / bicultural presence on websites will vary from library to library and the reasons for the omissions might not be discovered until the next phase of the project has been undertaken. Some possible reasons for a lower score or no score at all might be due to the lack of dedicated staff to develop the library website, a lack of Māori services staff, or relying on a website owned or controlled by the library's parent organisation.

The results presented in Table 3 revealed that there is considerable scope for improvement across the nine criteria for all but a few high scoring institutions. At the lower end of the results, the lack of options to use te reo Māori is disappointing, especially when it is one of New Zealand’s official languages and has been so since 1987. It is ironic that the new shared library management and resource discovery system currently being used by thirteen public libraries is called Kotui (to interlace or interweave) and is available in several international languages but lacks a te reo Māori interface.

The lack of brochures either explaining aspects of the library services, or offering a description of key resources means that inexperienced users of technology  or new Māori clients might have difficulty in identifying whether their local library provides a service or has a collection of resources that they require. Again the lack of use of te reo Māori to explain the services of the library is disappointing. In terms of subject brochures, the libraries should give consideration to developing these on topics such as whakapapa, researching land claims, or books and resources on local heritage including tribal histories.

The lack of Māori art/branding and photographs of Māori staff and/or clients, particularly if there are photographs of other ethnicities, may be taken as a message that the library does not have anything of relevance to Māori. This may reinforce negative stereotypes they already held from previous encounters with libraries and librarians.

Although it was pleasing to see the strong showing of websites that had links to Māori resources, this number could have easily been much higher as there are a substantial number of websites, indexes and resources that contain Māori content that are freely available, including digital copies of Te Ao Hou, Fletcher’s Index of Māori names, Journal of the Polynesian Society, Transactions and Proceedings of the New Zealand Institute, and the New Zealand Electronic Text Centre’s corpus of Māori books. The Māori subject directory on the Te Puna Web Directory provided by National Library also has a wide range of resources that are free and can be easily added to any website.

The other two areas that scored highly, (te reo on the home page and information about Māori collections) are important. If there is a usage of te reo Māori on a library’s website, it is a clear indication to Māori users that the library values te reo Māori and that there might be a greater chance that they will find other content of interest to them on the website and/or in the library itself. Many of the libraries that received a score in this area had the Māori name of the library or their council on the masthead of the website, while others had a whakatauki (proverb) or a mihi whakatau (short greeting) on the home page.  For libraries that don’t have a Māori name, there is an opportunity to engage with the local iwi or hapu to create a name. For libraries who wish to add more te reo Māori to their web sites, they could once again do this in partnership with local iwi or if appropriate consult their Māori liaison/business unit within their parent organisation.

Providing information about whether Māori collections are available and any terms and conditions regarding their usage means that those wishing to access these resources can come to the library adequately prepared. Important information might include any restrictions on borrowing such as ‘Reference only’, access conditions, such as no pens and no bags allowed, photocopying limits and charges. This information would also be useful to librarians from other libraries that might need to refer their clients.

As mentioned earlier twenty of the websites had information within that was determined as belonging to the ‘Other’ category. The content that fell into this category included: links to newsletters or library blogs containing Māori information, information about local history and local resources e.g. Pounamu, Māori award winners, biographical information about prominent Māori, Māori relevant tertiary courses, information about local artworks. Most of the information that came into this category was highly relevant to Māori but it was principally focused on  subjects, events and features that were not central to the function of the library and were quite often found as an add on to the different websites.

Further research
There is a wide scope for future research looking at the state of biculturalism and Māori services in New Zealand public libraries. As a follow up to the research undertaken for this article another phase is currently being developed. It is likely to involve and investigation of the range of Māori / bicultural services and resources being made available by public libraries. An important aspect of this project will be an assessment of the value that public libraries place on mātauranga Māori and the delivery of Māori specialist services. The research will also look at the professional development opportunities experienced by Māori staff and what (if any) opportunities do non-Māori staff members to undertake continuing professional development on matauranga Māori and Treaty of Waitangi issues. The methodology will involve the use of a questionnaire and interviews, and will focus on these issues from the libraries perspectives.

The purpose of the research that this article was based on was to investigate whether the websites of New Zealand’s public libraries are representative of the Māori/ bicultural heritage of this country. For this purpose, a bicultural evaluation tool was developed by the researcher as a set of criteria for each website to be assessed against. The results of the research revealed that only a handful of libraries met a substantial number of the criteria, with Christchurch City Libraries' website being the only one to meet all nine. Only three criteria were met by a substantial number of libraries; these were: the provision of online links to Māori resources, te reo Māori on the website's home page and information about Māori collections. Although these scored highly in comparison to the other seven criteria, their scores were not representative of a high percentage of libraries meeting the criteria, with only 34 out of 62 websites having links to online resources, 23 websites having te reo on the homepage and another 23 having information about Māori collections. As this research did not investigate the reasons why the websites did not have more Māori/bicultural features, we can only speculate as to why this is the case. However, the next phase of this project will hopefully provide us with some definitive answers.

Auckland City Libraries. (1995). The customers' voice – a quest: a survey: improvement of services to Māori at Auckland City Libraries.  Auckland, Auckland City Libraries.

Auckland City Libraries. (2001). The customers voice II: another quest: improvement of services to Māori at Auckland City Libraries. Auckland, Auckland City Libraries.

Callahan, E. (2006). Cultural Similarities and Differences in the Design of University Web sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 11, 239–273.

Cullen, R. & Hernon, P. (2004).  Wired for well-being: citizens’ response to E-government: a report presented to the E-government Unit of the State Services Commission. Retrieved 12 November 2012 from http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/APCITY/UNPAN017975.pdf

Cullen, R. & Houghton, C. (2000). Democracy online: an assessment of New Zealand
Government websites. Government Information Quarterly, 17, (3), 243–267

Garraway, J. & Szekely, C. (1994). Ka mahi tonu: biculturalism in New Zealand librarianship 1992 – 1994. Wellington N Strategy Bicultural Actions Group and NZLIA.

Grace, D. (1992). “The Treaty of Waitangi”. In The N Strategy resource papers.  Wellington, New Zealand Library Association & National Library of New Zealand

Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. London: McGraw-Hill.

Lahteenmaki, S. (2012). ‘Experience the real New Zealand’ – Māori culture as it is today: representations of New Zealand and Māoris in Māori tourism sites. Unpublished Masters thesis, Department of Language,  University of Jyväskylä.

MacDonald, T. (1993). Te Ara Tika: Māori and libraries: a research report. Wellington, NZLIA.

Muhamad-Brandner, C. (2009) "Biculturalism online: exploring the web space of Aotearoa/New Zealand", Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, 7  (2/3), pp.182 - 191

NZLA Futures Group. (1990). Support, development and leadership for the library and information profession in New Zealand: final report of the NZLA Futures Group. Wellington, New Zealand Library Association.

Public Libraries of New Zealand (2012). A strategic framework 2012-2017. Wellington, Local Government New Zealand & Association of Public Library Managers.  Retrieved 12 November 2012 from http://www.publiclibrariesofnewzealand.org.nz/strategicframework

Singh, N. & Matsuo, H. (2004). Measuring cultural adaptation on the Web: a content analytic study of U.S. and Japanese Web sites. Journal of Business Research 57,  864– 872

Singh, N., Zhao, H. & Hu, X. (2003). Cultural adaptation on the web: a study of American companies' domestic and Chinese websites. Journal of Global Information Management. 11 (3). 63–81

Singh, N., Zhao, H. & Hu, X. (2005).  "Analyzing the cultural content of web sites: A cross- national comparison of China, India, Japan, and US". International Marketing Review, 22 (2), 129 – 146

Statistics NZ (2007). QuickStats about culture and identity: 2006 Census. Retrieved 14 January 2013 from http://stats.govt.nz/Census/2006CensusHomePage/QuickStats

Szekely, C. (2002).  Te Ara Tika: Māori and libraries – staying the distance. World Libraries, 12 (1), 46-53

Szekely, C. (1997). Te Ara Tika: guiding voices: Māori opinion on libraries and information needs. Wellington, NZLIA and Te Rōpū Whakahau.

Würtz, E. (2005). A cross-cultural analysis of websites from high-context cultures and low-context cultures. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(1), article 13. http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol11/issue1/wuertz.html

A full list of activities surveyed can be found in Garraway and Szekely, 1994 pp.3



I want to offer some tips on dealing with budget cuts to journal titles.

Journals: full text

If you are facing budget cuts or want to introduce electronic full text on a limited budget try some of the following:

  • Check journal titles in databases from EPIC to see which ones are available in full text. These databases are available to everyone. The full text for the current issue may not be an option, but clients will often accept a short delay. Journals include:

- Newspapers
- General publications like Time and New Scientist (one month delay)
- Specialist journals like New Zealand Dairy Exporter and New Zealand Doctor

  • Consider open access peer-reviewed journals on the web. These tend to be academic and are often sourced from universities. Try the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) to see if there are any in your subject areas. Tips on monitoring these journals will appear in my next column.

Journals: Tables of Contents

  • Publisher websites usually have a table of contents e-mail service.  If you have an online subscription, the links in the e-mail will link to the full text of the article. If not, at least you have the content of the issue and can often purchase individual articles of interest for less than the journal subscription.
  • Aggregators like EBSCO and Gale also offer a table of contents service
  • TicTocs is an aggregator website providing tables of contents
  • JournalTocs is another good aggregator of tables of contents.

Journals: Search

JournalSeek is a good site for checking on availability of journal titles.

Next column, I will continue looking at “Making do with less” by discussing free services and software to make life more comfortable.

​Claire Stent

Claire has spent the last 10 years working in Special Libraries.  She has spoken on ways for librarians to provide innovative services to their clients. This led to the 2009 Information Professional of the Year award from the Special Libraries Association (SLA) Australia and New Zealand Chapter. Currently, she works in the Preservation Team at Statistics New Zealand archiving datasets and working on the digitisation project. 


We often get requests from public libraries and their communities asking for our assistance with changes that are being directed by their council.

We help public libraries by providing support through making a formal submission during formal consultations. In our submissions we focus on the best practice for public libraries, and attempt to balance the needs of the community with the best possible outcome for the library in question.

Whether the issues concerning you are your book budgets, lending fees, or matters of freedom of speech, LIANZA is here to provide support for library and information professionals.

We have attached three of our most recent submissions to the right side of this page - we were delighted with the outcomes of both the Ruapehu District Councils and Hurunui cases as both libraries were able to secure their budgets for the coming year.

Unfortunately the Submission on Psychoactive Products Retail Locations Policy to Christchurch City Council has been a little more complicated. We suggested that libraries be defined as sensitive sites, thereby limiting the sale of psychotropic substances in nearby businesses. We're still waiting  to see how Christchurch proceeds.

If you're concerned about how council decisions are affecting your local libraries, get in touch.

It's our pleasure to provide you and your local library with support needed to get through the often complicated public consultation process.