reflections from an indigenous community on volcanic · pdf filecommunity on volcanic event...

Reflections from an IndigenousCommunity on Volcanic EventManagement, Communicationsand Resilience

H. Gabrielsen, J. Procter, H. Rainforth, T. Black,G. Harmsworth and N. Pardo

AbstractNgāti Rangi, an indigenous tribe of Aotearoa New Zealand, live on thesouthern flanks of their ancestral mountain, Ruapehu, an active volcano.Ruapehu has erupted and caused lahars within living memory, and nearbyTongariro erupted as recently as 2012. Ngāti Rangi and other tribesaffiliated to these mountains are intimately connected to and familiar withthe moods, signs, and language of the mountains and have valuableknowledge to contribute to decision-making and warning systems duringvolcanic events. To date this knowledge or mātauranga Māori has beensomewhat under-utilised, and Ngāti Rangi have not always been includedin decision-making processes during volcanic events. But communicationis improving, and Ngāti Rangi have begun a journey of building their ownmonitoring, information collection, and communication systems. Past andpresent monitoring, warning systems, communications and tribal civildefence resources are examined to determine how Ngāti Rangi and theirtribal knowledge can be better recognised, communications with govern-mental volcanic hazard management agencies improved to ultimatelywork together to improve outcomes for the tribe and local community.

1 Introduction

Koro Ruapehu is constantly changing. Sometimeshe’s sleeping, sometimes he’s active – sometimeshe erupts

(pers. comm. Ngāti Rangi Trust 2014)

Despite a plethora of initiatives internation-ally, regionally and locally to reduce risk orincrease resilience to natural hazards (e.g. theUnited Nations International Strategy for

H. Gabrielsen � H. RainforthTe Kahui O Paerangi—Ngāti Rangi Trust,P.O. Box 195, Ohakune, New Zealand

H. Gabrielsen � J. Procter (&) � N. PardoIAE, Massey University, Private Bag 11 222,Palmerston North 4442, New Zealande-mail: [email protected]

T. BlackTe Whare Wānanga O Awanuiārangi,13 Domain Road, Whakatāne, New Zealand

G. HarmsworthLandcare Research-Manaaki Whenua, Private Bag11052, Palmerston North 4442, New Zealand

Advs in VolcanologyDOI: 10.1007/11157_2016_44© The Author(s) 2017

1

Disaster Reduction), indigenous communitiesand peoples are not well provided for.

Like many indigenous cultures around theworld the indigenous people of Aotearoa NewZealand, have observed and monitored and thenresponded to and recovered from numeroushazardous volcanic events. The indigenousknowledge gained from these experiences israrely considered when scientifically identifyingvolcanic hazards or developing emergencymanagement plans, yet mātauranga Māori (Māoriknowledge) does contain a unique, valid episte-mology and data source. The mātauranga hasdriven Māori decision making to endure andadapt to the natural hazards they face (Durie2005). This has not been fully recognised bycurrent hazard and emergency managementregimes in New Zealand and has resulted in adisconnect in communication between theindigenous populations and Government agen-cies (Jolly et al. 2014). This disconnect hasbecome more evident over time and particularlyin relation to the 1995–6 sequence of eruptions ofRuapehu, the 2007 lahar and eruptions of Rua-pehu and the 2012 eruption of Te Maari, Mt.Tongariro. Is it then feasible to communicatehazard and risk in today’s world to Māori livingin these areas within a knowledge frameworkthat is spatially and temporally consistent withtheir past understandings? Simply, is there ameans to desegregate methods to create anunderstanding of risk unique to our volcanicareas that is universally acceptable by all?

The case study chosen for this research isNgāti Rangi, a central North Island iwi (tribe)who have held unbroken occupation over thearea for over 1000 years. They have an intenseand living relationship with their ancestralmaunga (mountain), which they refer to as Matuate Mana (“prestige of the father”) and is locatedwithin the Tongariro National Park, one of NewZealand’s United Nations Educational, Scientificand Cultural Organization (UNESCO) WorldHeritage sites. The Tongariro National Park isrecognised not only for the natural values of thelandscape, but also for the cultural values asso-ciated with these maunga (mountain) (UNESCO2014). This recognition demonstrates the cultural

importance placed on this area by local iwi andthe acknowledgement of this by UNESCO, whogovern the World Heritage List and locationsworldwide, in the awarding of dual status in 1993(recognition of cultural and environmental val-ues) (Keys and Green 2008). The TongariroNational Park is managed by the Department ofConservation, a Crown entity (an organisationthat forms part of New Zealand’s state sector).Despite the formal recognition of the culturalsignificance to local iwi of the TongariroNational Park, iwi have little involvement in itsmanagement (Gabrielsen 2014).

To understand and develop resilience withinMāori communities requires an examination ofthe role of traditional knowledge within vol-canological hazards, risk communication, andemergency management. This research combinesseveral disciplines and therefore requires a dis-tinct method to acquire and analyse data.A mixture of qualitative and semi quantitativeresearch data collection techniques were appliedthat is based upon recognised kaupapa Māoritechniques (Smith 1997). The research under-taken for this study is based on an analysis of thecurrent emergency management framework,analysis of marae survey data, marae assess-ments, conversations with Ngāti Rangi leadersand elders and an assessment of volcanic baseddata.

An important aspect of this research is that allresearchers are Māori with knowledge of Māorilanguage culture and customs. Secondly, the casestudy proposed was based on iwi and theirinteractions with their environment. This meantthat iwi determined the progression of theresearch throughout which was paramount. Thisprocess also allows the iwi to be the decisionmakers, to provide what information they wantand to decide how it is used. Consequently,special processes that protect the iwi and theirknowledge base were crucial to this research.This research involved the interviewing of iwileaders, iwi environmental management staff andelders within the Ngati Rangi Tribe. Over thecourse of a year (2014) approximately 10 indi-viduals were interviewed and 3 wananga (tradi-tional workshops of 3–5 people) were held on

2 H. Gabrielsen et al.

Ngati Rangi Marae (traditional meeting house) inrural areas located within the Ruapehu Volcanoring plain in recently active volcanic areas. Inconjunction with interviews, oral traditions,waiata (traditional songs), purakau (ancestralaccounts) were also examined. Another uniquesource of information was written records orminutes of traditional church meetings from the1800s. Due to traditional practice iwi membersare reluctant to have their information publicallyquoted.

The qualitative aspect of this research wasused largely to seek a human perspective. Theaim was to identify perspectives from the ground,from people that lived in the area, and frompeople with a relationship to the land, and to thevolcano. Iwi in general have large repositories ofknowledge coded in local waiata (songs) andkarakia (prayer) and held by those in particulardeemed worthy of holding on to such knowl-edge. Historical knowledge of volcanic episodesshould be confined within iwi history and korero(speech). This assumption was made purelybased on the fact that Ngāti Rangi have longlived within the lands of their ancestors, for overa thousand years, and therefore will have expe-rienced and recorded in some way, volcanicevents.

Gaining a better understanding of historicaloccurrences and responses is beneficial for cur-rent research on volcanic hazards and for emer-gency management. A qualitative approach wasable to unearth to some degree the current gap inthe knowledge base regarding iwi and volcanichazards, and understanding what aspects con-tribute to iwi resilience to natural hazards. Thisapproach was also required as a means for somefreedom of movement in the type of methodutilised to better support the dynamic nature ofiwi and the preference with which iwi choose tobe consulted. The ultimate outcome is elucidat-ing some potential indicators of what resiliencemeans to Māori and can it be strengthened withincurrent emergency management frameworks.

1.1 Resilience and IndigenousCommunities

Various aspects of communication with, and theresilience of, indigenous communities are con-tained within natural hazards research, but aredescribed in the following ways: disaster pre-vention (Alcántara-Ayala 2002), disaster riskreduction (Mercer et al. 2010), and assessing thevulnerability of communities to natural hazards(Cutter et al. 2010). Work with indigenouscommunities within the Pacific region has pro-vided examples of capacity building withinindigenous communities and incorporating theirown cultural knowledge into scientific method-ology to adequately prepare for, and deal with,natural hazards (Petterson et al. 2003). Thecommunity of Savo Island in the SolomonIslands is exposed to a high level of volcanicactivity with a history of large fatalities (Petter-son et al. 2003). Outside expertise and assistancewas sought to initiate the development ofstrategies to address the risks from volcanicactivity on the island (Petterson et al. 2003).

The development of these strategies to addressthe risks from volcanic activity on Savo encom-passed in-depth work with the local community.This work included workshops and identifyingand using local knowledge of hazards in con-junction with science to develop a disaster man-agement plan. This process identified in somerespects how crucial the political, economic andinfrastructural climate is in supporting the resi-lience of these island nations; political driverssecured the expertise thus enabling the develop-ment and implementation of the disaster man-agement plan. Despite the best intentions inaiding indigenous communities in developingstrategies to deal with natural hazards, there canbe a multitude of barriers in undertaking thiswork. One of the challenges identified in workundertaken on Ambae Island, Vanuatu, was ini-tially the lack of acceptance by the local popula-tion of scientific knowledge (Cronin et al. 2004b).

Reflections from an Indigenous Community on Volcanic Event … 3

Breaking through the barrier of the dominanceof science is essential for indigenous cultures, asthere are a significant number of deep-seatedissues surrounding research, intellectual propertyand exploitation. These issues have led toindigenous communities distrusting researchers,their methods and their desired outcomes. As ameans to alleviate such issues researchers haveused the principles of the Participatory RuralAppraisal to alter the attitudes and approach ofthe specialists and to promote community inputand knowledge (Bird and Gísladóttir 2012;Cronin et al. 2004a, b). These principles perhapsparallel Māori research initiatives (e.g. kaupapaMāori; Smith 1997), which emphasises elementscentral to the Treaty of Waitangi, such as par-ticipation, partnership, and protection (Robertson1999). In Vanuatu, Cronin et al. (2004b)observed that strong cultural customs preventedthe indigenous peoples from accommodatingstandard scientific methods, but also that thesemethods were inconsistent with those customsand the knowledge and beliefs of the people. Theresearchers envisaged that PRA would act as theinstrument to incorporate traditional knowledgeinto the development of a hazard managementplan without the risk of jeopardising the indige-nous communities’ local belief structures (Croninet al. 2004b).

Despite work by scientists and disaster man-agement researchers in their aim to understandand improve the resilience of many indigenouscultures, Campbell (2009) indicates that manyPacific Island nations were once inherently resi-lient to natural hazards. Traditional disasterreduction measures describe the ways throughwhich indigenous communities succeeded inliving with natural hazards. Colonisation intro-duced changes to these societies (Zimmet et al.1990) that removed the importance of their tra-ditional and highly social practices and leftcommunities unprepared and ill-equipped to dealwith natural hazards. Globalisation and otherexternal pressures may be processes that are outof these communities’ control, but still have farreaching impacts on their internal processes and

traditions (Mercer et al. 2010; Pelling and Uitto2001). Among these pressures, Paulinson (1993)found the market forces to be at fault. Theseaspects may inhibit indigenous communitiesfrom being resilient. Despite this, the traditionaldisaster reduction measures that are representa-tive of inherent qualities central to communitiesliving with natural hazards promote resilience.

2 Ruapehu Volcano

The convergence of the Australian and Pacifictectonic plates is the driver of volcanism withinNew Zealand. Situated within the TongariroVolcanic Centre (TVC) (Acoella et al. 2003)(Fig. 1), Ruapehu is the largest and most activevolcano in the North Island standing at 2797 mhigh (Lecointre et al. 2004; Neall et al. 1999).Upon Ruapehu are three summit craters that haveall been active over the last 10,000 years(Donoghue and Neall 2001). This includes thecurrent Crater Lake, Te Wai-a-moe, which issituated over the active southern Crater. Ruape-hu’s periodic activity causes a number of haz-ardous events with evidence of these volcanichazards recorded in the landscape and repre-sented by the surrounding volcaniclastic ringplain, (Fig. 1) which is made up of fragmentedrocks deposited by historical lahars, debris ava-lanches and some fluvial and glacial deposits(Donoghue and Neall 2001).

The Department of Conservation managementof this area is guided by the Tongariro NationalPark Management Plan 2006–2016 (Departmentof Conservation 2006a, b). This document out-lines the roles and responsibilities of theDepartment and the policies that guide the use ofthis area. The responsibility of managing naturalhazards lies with the District and RegionalCouncils, while monitoring volcanic activity isundertaken in conjunction with research provi-ders such as GNS Science and Massey Univer-sity. The Department of Conservation describesthe risks from natural hazards as taking ‘twomain forms’ (Department of Conservation


2006b): (1) flows such as lahars, pyroclasticflows, lateral blasts, landslides/floods and lavaflows and (2) air borne materials such as rocks,tephra and toxic gases. Ruapehu is unique in thesense that the Crater Lake, Te Wai-a-moe, islocated over the current active vent of the vol-cano. Keys and Green (2008) mention that onlyone other crater lake (i.e. Kelut in Java,Indonesia) similar to that of Ruapehu existswithin the world where there has been an intensefocus on physical lahar mitigation. Both of thesecrater lakes and the research undertaken in ref-erence to lahar hazards have provided importantscientific data for hazards research.

3 Māori/Iwi in New Zealandand Ngāti Rangi

Indigenous cultures around the world haveunique world views that inform their culturalvalues, belief systems and link them to the nat-ural world. Royal (2005) argues this worldviewsets Māori and other indigenous cultures apartfrom the mainstream populations. The commondenominator among indigenous cultures is thatthe natural world is perceived as a living being(Royal 2005; Hart 2010) and this connectionwith the environment ties indigenous peoples

Fig. 1 Location map of Tongariro Volcanic Centre, New Zealand and the Taupo Volcanic Zone (inset)


around the world with one another,epistemologically.

Although world views varies from iwi to iwi,a strong thread uniting iwi Māori viewpoints isthe genealogical connection to the physical andspiritual world. In the Māori world view, humanbeings are the last creation of the god of theforest, Tāne Māhuta. Rather than this furnishinghumans with primacy over creation, as is thecommon interpretation within the European tra-dition, for Māori this position renders them assubordinates of all other creatures in the naturalworld. This world view has two implications.Firstly, Māori are connected to all things withinnature. This includes physical features, such asmountains, rivers, rocks, and land, as well aswhat is traditionally thought of as living things.For Māori everything has a life force, an essenceor a mauri. Māori are bound to be continuallyrespectful to those who have precedence, i.e. therocks, the mountains, etc. that precede them intheir genealogy.

Mātauranga Māori is defined as ‘Māoriknowledge’, and is a term that places importanceon Māori histories, knowledge, and language,and refers to Māori ways of thinking, doing, andacting (e.g. Smith 1990). It is a multi-faceted andcomplex concept that is connected to a multitudeof sources of language, culture, land, customaryand intellectual knowledge sources. Furthermore,mātauranga Māori bridges both traditional andcontemporary Māori knowledge and philoso-phies through which Māori history and knowl-edge are uncompromisingly told. The platform ofmātauranga Māori advocates for a system ofMāori knowledge that recognises cultural iden-tity and cultural affirmation as important foun-dations that are connected to Māori world views.Mātauranga Māori is a crucial element inchronicling perspectives, experiences andknowledge of specific landscape and volcanicevents within iwi history in Aotearoa NewZealand. Information surrounding volcanic haz-ards exists within the mātauranga-ā-iwi (specifictribal knowledge), for Ngati Rangi principallythrough waiata (song) and karakia (prayer). As arepository of cultural knowledge and information

over the generations of Ngāti Rangi existence,these examples provide the opportunity to reviewpast events and provide a basis of knowledge torecover from future events.

At the time of the arrival of Europeanexplorers and traders, Māori may have numberedabout 100,000 (citation Pool 1991). Māorinumbers plummeted to around 42,000 in 1896,due to war and disease, before recovering in theearly 20th century (Pool 1991). A large propor-tion of Māori land was alienated, often throughland confiscations by the Crown, suspect landpurchases, or as a result of debt accrued, inassociation with the Crown programme of con-verting customary titles to fit with the Britishland title system; this loss removed the economicbase of the people and severed connections totraditional lands. Māori culture was severelyaffected through the imposition of Europeanbelief systems, practices, and laws. Despite that,iwi across New Zealand maintained culturalknowledge and connections to place. For NgātiRangi, this means chiefly or in part a connectionto Ruapehu, their ancestral mountain and activevolcano.

3.1 Māori and Hazards

There is limited literature on Māori and naturalhazards within New Zealand. Few unpublisheddocuments have provided further insight into therelationship that exists between iwi and the nat-ural hazards present within their rohe (tribalarea). Proctor (2010) explores how the principlesof tikanga (traditional practices) can be applied tothe management of natural hazards, particularlyflooding in Pawarenga in Northland, New Zealand.Proctor (2010) found that tikanga was a valuedresource used by locals and concluded that‘tikanga Māori is an inherent part of … resi-liency’ (Proctor 2010).

King et al. (2007) and Lowe et al. (2002) arethe few who have explored the relationshipsbetween iwi and natural hazards. They found thatiwi and hapū (sub-tribe) hold a store of infor-mation throughout oral narratives such as


‘mōteatea (laments), pēpeha (quotations), wha-katauki (proverbs) and waiata (songs)’ (Kinget al. 2007). These repositories of informationnot only tell stories but can contribute informa-tion on historical events and natural hazardoccurrences to natural hazard management. Kinget al. (2007) outlines three specific ways thatMāori environmental knowledge can be appliedto natural hazard management: (1) as describedpreviously, stories, songs and place names hold awealth of knowledge based on experiences andrecollections of events; (2) the informationextracted from these avenues can thus be mappedin relation to natural hazards; and (3) it can alsoprovide for Māori involvement in planning forhazards.

Most of the current volcanic based knowledgethat exists in New Zealand is largely derivedfrom the European context. Lowe et al. (2002)suggest that the lack of information is partly dueto the late settlement of New Zealand by humans.Consequently, the recorded history of interac-tions between people and volcanism is short.There is a paucity of information that has beenpublished on the actual experiences of earlyMāori prior to colonization; however, Lowe et al.(2002) assume that Māori must have experiencednumerous volcanic events from many of NewZealand’s volcanic centers (Table 1).

3.2 Ngāti Rangi and “Their” Volcano

In terms of volcanoes, the Māori world viewresults in an approach where humans are con-nected through genealogy to mountains, and inparticular for Ngāti Rangi they are descendantsof Mount Ruapehu. To Ngāti Rangi Mt. Ruape-huis referred to as the grandfather. For NgātiRangi, specific connections to the maunga comethrough Te Rau-hā-moa and Paerangi. When TeRau-hā-moa brought Paerangi to Aotearoa (NewZealand), the alighting of the bird ignited thefires waiting in Ruapehu, waking up the volcaniclife of the mountain. Paerangi himself made themountain his home, giving rise to one of thenames of the mountain—Paerangi i te WhareToka, or Paerangi of the House of Stone. Today,Ngāti Rangi numbers are at an estimated8000 people (citation). Fifteen percent of thoselive in the tribal area (rohe) (Fig. 2), while theothers live elsewhere in New Zealand and over-seas. The iwi is supported by an iwi authority,Ngāti Rangi Trust, and guided by a tribal councilrepresenting all subtribes, Te Kāhui o Paerangi.The Trust is responsible for supporting the day today work of the tribe, from social support pro-grammes, to tribal events, to upholding theenvironmental responsibilities and culturalknowledge of the tribe.

Table 1 Volcanic hazards probably experienced or witnessed by prehistoric Māori

Hazard type Volcano or centre associated with event

Pyroclastic fall Taranaki, Tongariro, Whakaari, Auckland, Okataina

Pyroclastic flows Tarakaki, Tongariro, Okataina

Pyroclastic surges Okataina

Lava flows Tongariro, Auckland, Okataina

Lava dome building Tarakani, Tongariro, Okataina, Tuhua

Lahars Taranaki, Tongariro

Post-eruptive flooding Taranaki, Tongariro, Okataina

Debris avalanches Taranaki, Tongariro, Whakaari

Volcanogenic earthquakes Taranaki, Tongariro, Auckland, Okataina

Lightning, forest fires Taranaki, Tongariro, Okataina

Hydrothermal eruptions High-temp. geothermal systems in the Taupo volcanic zone (e.g. Ketetahi Springs)

Acidic rain/volcanic gases Ruapehu, Tongariro

Adapted from Lowe et al. (2002)


For countless generations Ngāti Rangi haveinhabited the southern flanks of Ruapehu(Fig. 2). They have born witness to his volcanicactivity since human settlement in New Zealand.There are early written accounts of lahars withinthe Whangaehu River, one such by ReverendRichard Taylor (as cited in Hodgson 1993) whoin 1861 reported uncharacteristic flooding withinthe Whangaehu River. Ngāti Rangi has withintheir oral narratives records of events, records byway of mōteatea (poetry, accounts of ancestors,ngeri (chants), karakia (prayer), and other formsof waiata (songs). For example, the waiata below

is from Ngāti Rangi and was written with refer-ence to the eruption of 1945:

Moimoi Tahuārangi te pikinga i TuhirangiKa whakamau te hiwi ki Murimotu eeKei tuahiwi taku rori haerenga ki roto ŌhāpopoTakoto whāroa ngā mānia ki Karioi eeKia tū wātea taku titiro te puke ki RuapehuTe whakaingo mai he tau pakipakiPapaki rawa i taku umaHe puke nohoanga nō te keukeu roaHe roa te tāringa kia whakaaria mai ngā tohutukutukuTukutahi te puehu turaki whakatuaKa whakahoki mai hei tāpora mō te nohoanga iakoutou mā eei

Fig. 2 Ngāti Rangi tribal area or rohe and the Tongariro Volcanic Centre including the location of Ngati Rangi maraeor traditional meeting house


The guardians cry as they ascend TuhirangiAnd then continue on to MurimotuOver yonder is the path to ŌhāpopoWhere the plains of Karioi open upSo that I can clearly view RuapehuOh the majesty as I wait for a clear period ofweatherAnd his majesty also remindsThat he originated from the great surges of theoceanI stand waiting for activityBehold! An eruption of ash.Do not fear, this ash will cloak and replenish theland and help us live as one.

The waiata is another example of traditionalknowledge; waiata is a medium where largetracks of information are stored and repeatedthroughout the generations. Through this trans-lation provided by Ngāti Rangi, the waiata(songs) relays a number of factors describing theiwi and their relationship with Ruapehu, and theirreaction to volcanic activity. This has thepotential to reveal the nature of the relationshipbetween Ngāti Rangi and their ancestral maungaand the associated volcanic processes or hazards.

4 Ngāti Rangi Experiences

The communication of Ngāti Rangi perceptionsof volcanic ‘hazards’ or mātauranga Māori(Maori knowledge) or mātauranga-ā-iwi (iwiknowledge) is articulated in their internal iwikorero (oral tradition; language), but also offi-cially stated within their Ngāti Rangi TaiaoManagement Plan 2014, a management plandeveloped to address environmental issueswithin the Ngāti Rangi rohe or region(Gabrielsen 2014). Ngāti Rangi rejects the use ofthe term hazard when describing the conse-quence of volcanic activity (Rainforth et al.2012; Gabrielsen 2014). The perspective is that itis a natural event that should not be restrained,diverted or withheld. This position is communi-cated throughout the generations and therefore iswidely accepted throughout the iwi. This view-point is based on the acceptance of Matua teMana (in general terms, the power and prestigeassociated with the volcano as an ancestor) andin a wider context, Rūaumoko, as natural entities

and processes involved in volcanic activity.A Ngāti Rangi pao, a very concise song usuallysung for entertainment, describes Ruapehu in hiseruptive state.

O rongo RuapehuTuraki auahiPuahiri WhakarungaKi whai tua ee

If you ever hear RuapehuErupting with ashYou can be comforted knowingThe prevailing wind takes it elsewhere.

Key words and phrases within this pao such as‘puahiri whakarunga’ is a descriptive word for aneruption, ‘turaki auahi’ could also signify thevisual experience of witnessing a plume ofash—‘auahi’ meaning smoke and ‘turaki’ tothrow down. ‘Rongo’ could also represent repu-tation; the reputation or fame of Ruapehu, per-haps an indication of the perceptions andunderstanding of Ruapehu as a volcanic entity.

The Maori perceptions of the volcano as beingan active, living entity provides a focus and aneed for engagement with that entity on a prac-tical level through the designation of tapu(sacred) areas in relation to the mountain. Prac-tical measures such as exclusion areas or explicitprescriptions of behavior (i.e. not to stop in laharchannels when walking through) were put inplace to signify the dangers and risks of placesaround the maunga, such as Te One Tapu and thekaitiaki (guardian) of the mountain that exist inthis area known as Te Ririo and Takakā. Tapu isa belief, a notion that educates one to respect thenatural world as ‘Māori things involve the wholeof nature’ (Pewhairangi 1992).

In the past, Ngāti Rangi has taken advantageof the active nature of Ruapehu as a means todeliver specific kōrero (speech) and historicalknowledge concerning volcanic activity. Despitethe lull between periods of volcanic activity,there is a continuation of internal iwi knowledgesharing which extends throughout these periodsof quiescence. There are a variety of techniquesNgāti Rangi use to share knowledge and histor-ical experiences regarding the maunga, which isnot always specific to volcanic activity. These arethrough wānanga (workshops) and rā wairua


(religious services or more specifically the Rāmāramatanga—an annual event dedicated to thespiritual experiences of Ngāti Rangi). Knowl-edge and experiences are also transmitted viatikanga, iwi stories, karakia and waiata. Theexchange of knowledge is also crucial to theunderstanding and sharing of cultural and sci-entific language on a bi-cultural level.

4.1 1945 Eruption

The eruption of 1945 had substantial impacts onthe daily lives of those living at the foot of themountain, largely revolving around ash and itsresulting impacts: skin, eye and throat issues,crop failure, issues with stock feed, shearingblades dulling during shearing season, impactson driving visibility and corrosive impacts onvehicles and machinery (Johnston 1997).A prominent Ngāti Rangi kuia recollected theeruption clearly ‘we were covered in ash’ (perscomm. 2014). Johnston (1997) sourced 13 sep-arate references of ash fall within Ohākune in1945 from July through to September with thefinal date of ash fall occurring over a three-dayperiod. The tribal account of this event is alsocaptured within a waiata ‘Moimoi Tahuarangi’which pays homage to the prestige of themountain and the celebration of eruptive events.During this time, the relationship between thetribe and their mountain was not really recog-nized by authorities, and cultural use ofthe mountain was nil due to his state of tapu(sacredness) or exclusion areas were defined.

4.2 Tangiwai Disaster 1953

The Tangiwai railway disaster of 1953 (where alahar removed a rail bridge across the channelmoments before a train crossed killing 151 people)is long held within the memory of Ngāti Rangiand is potentially the most memorable lahar, dueto the present elder generation being alive duringthis time. Many whānau (families) hold storiesabout this night, as many were scheduled to

travel on the train, and others had a local danceinterrupted by news of the event. Many familiesalso contributed to the cleanup of the awapost-disaster and for some time Ngāti Rangi didnot visit the Whangaehu River for their culturaland spiritual purposes. A cultural a rāhui (periodof prohibition) over the area was implemented bythe iwi until a time when it was deemed cultur-ally appropriate. The communication of thisevent was predominantly by word of mouth. As aresult of this event, the New Zealand RailwaysDepartment installed a lahar warning deviceupstream of the Tangiwai Bridge in order todetect any future rise in river level and acidity inexisting stream flow due to the introduction ofCrater Lake water which could signal an alarm tohalt railway traffic until inspection (Neall 1976).

4.3 1995/1996 Series of Eruptions

The 1995/1996 volcanic activity initiated internaldiscussions within Ngāti Rangi around historicaliwi kōrero relating to volcanic activity. Thisperiod was integral for iwi revisiting localknowledge and perhaps gaining a more scientificunderstanding of volcanic activity. This againwould have fortified the iwi and their relationshipwith their ancestral mountain. Notwithstandingthis, activity still stimulated practical questionsregarding the safety of the iwi marae, homes andinfrastructure from volcanic flows (leading up tothe 2007 lahar). Many prominent key NgātiRangi leaders had belief in their ancestralmaunga that he would look after the iwi, which isresounded throughout the iwi. This also con-tributes to the trust in the experience of NgātiRangi tupuna (tribal ancestors) in the placementof marae in the rohe.

4.4 Consultation and InvolvementPre-2007 Lahar

The flow of communication between the Crownand Ngāti Rangi became an integral part ofconsultation following the 1995/1996 eruptions


due to the risk of an eminent Crater Lake dambreak, which occurred on 18 March 2007. Theconsultation between Ngāti Rangi and the gov-ernment (by way of the Department of Conser-vation, Minister of Conservation Sandra Lee andthe Ministry of Civil Defence and EmergencyManagement) was viewed as successful. Thesuccess was due to the sharing of knowledge,communication and decision-making by NgātiRangi. Ngāti Rangi took a stance on the engi-neering solutions that were proposed and deemedthem unacceptable on a cultural and spirituallevel, as well as practically.

The position Ngāti Rangi held and still holdwas that no intervention would be undertaken onthe maunga when discussions turned to a pro-posed engineering solution at the Crater Lake.An alternative was chosen with the creation of abund on an apex of the laharic fan or Te OneTapu in consultation with neighboring iwi andthe Crown. Emergency management preparationwas central to the lead up to the 2007 lahar. Thelocal Karioi Forestry and the timber mill ofWinstone Pulp International (WPI) participatedin planning for the event as the Whangaehu Rivermeanders through the forest and both of theirindustrial sites (Karioi and the Timbermill) arelocated within a 1–2 km vicinity to the Whan-gaehu River and the Tangiwai Bridge.

The community at Karioi was involved as partof preparatory measures to ensure the safety ofthe community as the lahar made its way past theTirorangi Marae bridge. Two community meet-ings were held for the Karioi residents largely todiscuss traffic safety measures and the movementof stock. Pagers were the main means of com-municating instructions, timeframes and—moni-toring the lahar flow. The main concern for theresidents was the safety of the bridge, as thepotential impact from its ruin would haveresounding economic and social impacts. Thelocal community was empowered through theprocess of consultation and heavy involvement inthe response to the lahar.

4.5 Current Communication

The Ngāti Rangi Trust website provides userswith direct links via the internet to a variety ofcurrent volcanic surveillance and monitoringtools of Ruapehu, which are:

• Links to GeoNet for current volcanic alertlevels;

• Link to Horizon Regional Council’s maungacamera;

• and The Ngāti Rangi installed Te Wai-ā-moe(Crater Lake, Ruapehu) camera, which feedsdirectly to the Trust.

High-level communication occurs at the toplevel, among research and monitoring institutessuch as GNS Science and Massey University,local authorities such as Horizons RegionalCouncil and Waikato Regional Council andCrown entities such as the Department of Con-servation and the Ministry of Civil Defence andEmergency Management and the iwi authority,Ngāti Rangi Trust. Through these interactionsactive involvement in current monitoring ofculturally significant sites has been initiated bythe iwi and supported by these organisations. Theiwi initiated monitoring of Te Wai-ā-moe,Whangaehu River and potentially Lake Rotokurain the near future. The ongoing dissemination ofinformation through these high-level personnel iscrucial.

5 Discussion

Tobin and Montz (1997) describe natural hazardsas the possibility of interaction between naturalevents and humans. Therefore, based on thisdescription, a natural hazard is described basedon its potential to impact people and property. Itis clear that the use of the term ‘hazards’ todescribe a volcanic eruption and its resultingimpact on surrounding populations by scientists


and emergency managers in New Zealand andinternationally is a subject of contention forNgāti Rangi. Their relationship with Ruapehuexpresses their acceptance and understanding ofhim as a powerful being of nature and awarenessof their place within nature and te ao Māori (theMaori world). This recognition and understand-ing of Ruapehu ultimately means that NgātiRangi people accept him as an active volcanicentity and celebrate and welcome his volcanicprocesses. Ruapehu is Matua te Mana, theguardian of mana (prestige/authority) who usesvolcanic activity to share part of his mana withthe people, and to replenish and revitalise theland and Ngāti Rangi.

Traditional practices and cultural traits haveallowed iwi to endure within New Zealand.Maintaining aspects of their cultural and spiritualtraditions and oral narratives have also aided theability for iwi to adapt to external changes suchas colonialism. Ulluwishewa et al. (2008) andHarmsworth and Awatere (2013) maintain thatiwi hold a distinct worldview that guides theirdaily lives. This worldview can be described asan outlook that is heavily embedded in the pastbut merges with the present; a combination oftraditional and modern concepts and beliefs. Thisworldview is often used as a basis for futuredecision-making and involves looking to the pastto better plan for the future. The teachings ofancestors are prominent in this worldview. Thereremains a close connection with the local envi-ronment, which is representative of a link to thewider holistic aspect of whakapapa (simplydefined as genealogy) and whānau (family). Iwialso take this focus on and reverence of theirhistory and fuse it with modern lifestyles. Thusthis worldview demonstrates a mixture of bothmodern and traditional aspects that represent iwiand the Māori culture.

Both Durie (2005) and Walker (2004)describe Māori resilience to natural hazards,more specifically as endurance. They both dis-cuss the struggles of Māori throughout thecolonisation phase and the later stages of growthwithin Aotearoa/New Zealand. Their workhighlights the endurance of Māori to survive andadapt specific cultural traits and practices to

flourish and be present in this day and age withinAotearoa/New Zealand.

5.1 Traditional Knowledge as a Toolfor Building Resilience

To adequately prepare for hazards specificallywith indigenous communities, traditionalknowledge should be used to provide a uniqueinsight into information on historical events, aswell as previous response methods. It has longbeen acknowledged that communities residing inhazard prone areas over a number of generationsunderstand hazard processes, and potentiallysome previous methods of response towardshazards (Campbell 2009; Cashman and Cronin2008; Cashman and Giordano 2008). Traditionalknowledge and oral traditions, which derive fromoral narratives (Cashman and Cronin 2008), arevaluable tools that represent an awareness andunderstanding of the locality. They provide anaccount of historical methods used to avoid,mitigate or reduce the impacts associated withnatural hazards. In Iceland, historical accounts ofash fall indicated the level of severity and theresulting impact on visibility (Bird and Gísla-dóttir 2012), therefore demonstrating for exam-ple, what work needs to be done prior to the lackof visibility setting in. These historical accountscan provide local communities with moral sup-port. In the study by Bird and Gísladóttir (2012)one participant said: ‘I just thought about thepast, the stories. How good it was that we hadheard the stories, I knew that it had happenedagain, I knew that it wouldn’t last forever’ (Birdand Gísladóttir 2012, p. 1271).

Recounting those stories from Iceland out-lined a natural hazard event, its impacts on thelocal communities, mitigation measures toundertake and perhaps some indication of itsduration. Place names also hold some merit inindicating further insight into a location and itshistory (King et al. 2007), as representative of anevent that left an imprint on the landscape andthe people. In contrast, there is still a lack ofunderstanding on the nature of the hazards involcanic zones, as well as a real understanding of


all possible hazard types. In Java, Indonesia,Lavigne et al. (2008) identified that there waslittle to no actual understanding of volcanicprocesses; therefore the local population was notaware of the entire volcanic hazard types, theirassociated risks and more importantly the areasthey impacted. This research highlights peoples’perceptions of risks and the importance ofbringing into account the human dimension withregards to natural hazard management.

It has been heavily emphasised of late howimperative the human dimension is to naturalhazard management (Bird et al. 2011). Under-standing the interaction and relationship localcommunities have with the land may describe thecontinued existence of people in the vicinity ofvolcanoes. Lavigne et al. (2008) supports thisview by noting the rise in research relating to thehuman dimension of natural hazard managementand more specifically, the behaviour of people inthe face of natural hazards. They outlined threesignificant areas to further understanding thehuman dimension of hazards and the reactions tonatural hazard events: (1) the perception of risk,(2) cultural beliefs and (3) socio-economicconstraints.

Individual and community perception of riskis based on a number of differing factors, such asthe nature of the hazard, its frequency, duration,past experiences and exposure to the hazard.These factors do contribute to risk perception;however, the lack of understanding of volcanicprocesses, their low frequency and durationcombined with limited or no exposure to pastevents despite living in an active volcanic zoneall contribute to lower perception of riskregarding volcanic hazards. Hazard knowledgeand risk perception of Katla by locals in Icelanddemonstrated the results of hazard knowledgeinherited from their forebears (Bird et al. 2009).This study indicated that exposure to and expe-rience of volcanic hazards was discussed andrecognised by the younger generation and con-tributed to their level of risk perception. Gregget al. (2004) note that, in some cases, hazardawareness is not an indication of hazard knowl-edge and does not carry over to preparedness orresponsiveness. Limited knowledge of the threat

that Kona in Hawai’i has on the local populationis mirrored with the low level of preparedness atthe individual level (Gregg et al. 2004).

The cultural belief system of the humandimension as described by Lavigne et al. (2008)focuses on the ties that individuals and commu-nities have with their local environment. Thesecultural beliefs can often dictate the decisions ofthe individuals regarding their residence in thesehazard zones, and can also act as an avenue todescribe the events.

6 Conclusions

Ngāti Rangi have resided at the southern side ofRuapehu from time immemorial. Their exposureto volcanic activity throughout the generationshas meant that they have adjusted their liveli-hoods and developed strategies and practices tolive safely with a volcano. Subsequently, theirtraditional kainga and pā (traditional homes andfortified villages) are located in areas consideredsafe by the people. Ngāti Rangi are the humanvoice of their maunga, and they speak for himwhen needed but will watch and listen for thetohu (indicators) that will indicate to them theirlevel of safety. Any precautionary measuresagainst the potential impacts of volcanic activityand eruptions that involve alterations have theability to distort their connection to their maunga.Therefore, Ngāti Rangi is adamant in their stanceto protect Mt. Ruapehu against any humanalteration. It goes against Iwi cultural constructs(or termed their tikanga) to demean the mana ofMatua te Mana by altering his geomorphologicalnature. People chose to settle in areas along floodplains and along lahar channels, perhaps withoutprior knowledge and understanding of volcanicprocesses. People chose to position themselveson the landscape and therefore make the maungaand its natural processes hazardous. However,from the perspective of Ngāti Rangi, moving amountain to protect their home is unacceptable;people should move their homes to protect themountain. Finally, their belief is Ruapehu is theirancestor (tūpuna), their koroheke (most seniorelder) and as such, he is the key to their cultural


identity, and history and the link to the realm ofngā atua through whakapapa. Matua te Manaprovides strength to the iwi, who are strong in thebelief that Ruapehu is a maunga and has the rightto be able to erupt, shake, and express his emo-tions without restraint from humans.

The gap between western-scientific basedhazard management/monitoring frameworks andmātauranga Māori adaption strategies can bebridged by determining mātauranga Māori-basedcultural descriptors or indicators that are tradi-tionally used to monitor volcanic hazards andplan for risk. Combined with the documentationof strategies of recovery/adaptation by Māoricommunities in volcanic landscapes utilisingMāori researchers, Māori language/Te Reo andapplying participatory research techniques, NgātiRangi has developed its own mitigation,response and recovery strategies to be applied inthe future, alongside and in tandem withwestern-science based hazard management plans.The recognition and application of traditionalknowledge and practices to act as a basis forfuture planning and decision making in volcanicemergencies will ultimately increase participa-tion of the indigenous communities and con-tribute to increasing resilience of the community.

Acknowledgements We would like to thank the supportof Ngati Rangi Iwi, Kaumatua and Kuia that contributedto this research and provided a valuable contribution tothis work. We would also like to thank the various NgatiRangi Marae that provided hospitality and a culturallyappropriate venue to share knowledge. This would nothave been possible without the support of the NewZealand Natural Hazards Research Platform or MBIEthrough the Vision Matauranga Capability Fund.

Glossary

Māori Term Description

Ahi tipua Fire demons who bought volcanicactivity to Aotearoa ‘Te Hoata’ and ‘Te Pupū’according to Ngāti Tūwharetoa tradition

Ahi-kā-roa Burning fires of occupation

Aotearoa New Zealand

Atua Godsdeities

Hapū Sub-tribe

Haungaroa Sister to Ngātoroirangi (Ngātoroir-angi—tohunga of the Te Arawa waka)

Hawaiiki The ancestral homeland of Māori

Iwi Tribe

Karakia Incantationprayer

Kawa Protocols

Kōrero Speakspeech, narrative

Koroua Eldergrandfather

Kuiwai Sister to Ngātoroirangi

Mana Prestigeauthority

Marae Term used to describe the traditionalmeeting house and entire complex of Māori

Mauri Life force

Mouri See ‘Mauri’

Ngā atua ‘The gods’ but refers to the gods in TeAo Māori (the Maori World)

Ngāti Turumakina Hapū of Ngāti Tūwharetoa

Ngāti Tūwharetoa Iwi in the central NorthIslandNew Zealand, of the Te Arawa Waka

Ngauruhoe Mountain of the central NorthIsland

Paerangi-i-te-Whare-Toka Paerangi’s house ofstone (Paerangi—the eponymous ancestor ofNgāti Rangi)

Papatūānuku Earth mother

Pareitetaitonga Shelter from the southernwinds. Peak on Ruapehu

Pēpeha Proverb

Ranginui Sky father

Ritenga Customs

Ruapehu Mountain of the central North Island

Rūaumoko God of earthquakes

Tane Mahuta Son of Rangi and PapaGod of theForest

Tangata Whenua People of the land

Tangihanga Funeral

Tapu Sacred


Tawhirimatea God of the Wind

Te Ao Marama The world of light

Te Arawa Waka and iwi of the Bay of Plenty

Te Ika ā Māui The big fish of Māui (alsoknown as the North Island of New Zealand)

Te kore Nothingness energy, the void

Te po The night

Te reo Māori The Māori language

Te Wai-ā-moe Ruapehu’s Crater Lake

Tikanga Customs

Tohu Signs

Tohunga Spiritual leader

Tongariro Mountain of the central North Island

Tupuna Ancestor (Tūpuna = Ancestors)

Tūrangawaewae Place to stand

Uri Descendants

Waiata Songs

Waka Canoeor rather, the large double hulledwaka that journeyed from Hawaiiki toAotearoa

Wānanga Specific gathering devoted to learn-ing and sharing knowledge

Whakapapa Geneology (simple translation)

Whānau Family

Wharepuni Meeting house of a marae

Whenua Land

References

Acoella V, Spinks K, Cole J, Nicol A (2003) Obliqueback arc rifting of Taupo Volcanic Zone, NewZealand. Techtonics, 22(4):19-1, 19-18

Alcántara-Ayala I (2002) Geomorphology, natural haz-ards, vulnerability and prevention of natural disastersin developing countries. Geomorphology 47:107–124

Bird DK, Gísladóttir G (2012) Residents’ attitudes andbehavior before and after the 2010 Eyjafjallajökulleruptions—a case study from southern Iceland. BullVolc 74:1263–1279

Bird DK, Gísladóttir G, Dominey-Howes D (2009)Resident perpection of volcanic hazards and evacula-tion procedures. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 9:251–266

Bird DK, Gísladóttir G, Dominey-Howes D (2011)Different communities, different perspectives: issuesaffecting residents’ response to a volcanic eruption insouthern Iceland. Bull Volc 73(9):1209–1227

Campbell J (2009) Islandness: vulnerability and resiliencein Oceania. Shima Int J Res I Cult 3:85–97

Cashman KV, Cronin SJ (2008) Welcoming a monsterinto the world: myths, oral traditions, and modernsocietal response to volcanic disasters. J VolcanolGeoth Res 176:407–418

Cashman KV, Giordano G (2008) Volcanoes and humanhistory: an introduction. J Volcanol Geoth Res176:325–329

Cronin SJ, Petterson MG, Taylor PW, Biliki R (2004a)Maximising multi-stakeholder participation in govern-ment and community volcanic hazard managementprograms; a case study from Savo, Solomon Islands.Nat Hazards 33:105–136

Cronin SJ, Gaylord DR, Charley D, Alloway BV,Wallez S, Esau JW (2004b) Participatory methods ofincorporating scientific with traditional knowledge forvolcanic hazard management on Ambae Island, Van-uatu. Bull Volcanol 66:652–668

Cutter SL, Burton CG, Emrich CT (2010) Disasterresilience indicators for benchmarking baseline con-ditions. J Homel Secur Emerg Manage 7(1), Article 51

Department of Conservation (2006a) Lahars from Mt.Ruapehu: Tongariro/Taupo. Retrieved from http://www.doc.govt.nz/documents/about-doc/concessions-and-permits/conservation-revealed/lahars-from-mt-ruapehu-lowres.pdf

Department of Conservation (2006b) Tongariro NationalPark Management Park: Te Kaupapa Whakahaere moTe Papa Rēhia o Tongariro. Retrieved from http://www.doc.govt.nz/Documents/about-doc/role/policies-and-plans/national-park-management-plans/tongariro-national-park/tongariro-national-park-management-plan.pdf

Donoghue SL, Neall VE (2001) Late quaternary construc-tional history of the southeastern Ruapehu ring plain,New Zealand. N Z J Geol Geophys 44(3):439–466

Durie M (2005) Ngā tai matatū: Tides of Māori endurance.Oxford University Press, Melbourne, Australia

Gabrielsen H (2014) Ngāti Rangi Taiao ManagementPlan. Ngāti Rangi Trust, Ohākune, New Zealand

Gregg CE, Houghton BF, Johnston DM, Paton D,Swanson DA (2004) The perception of volcanic riskin Kona communities from Manua Loa and Hualālaivolcanoes, Hawai`i. J Volcanol Geoth Res130:179–196

Harmsworth GR, Awatere S (2013) Indigenous māoriknowledge and perspectives of ecosystems. In:Dymond JR (ed) Ecosystem services in New Zeal-and—conditions and trends. Manaaki Whenua Press,Lincoln, New Zealand

Hart MA (2010) Indigenous worldviews, knowledge, andresearch: the development of an indigenous researchparadigm. J Indigenous Voices Soc Work 1(1):1–16

Hodgson KA (1993) Late quaternary lahars from MountRuapehu in the Whangaehu River Valley, North


http://www.doc.govt.nz/documents/about-doc/concessions-and-permits/conservation-revealed/lahars-from-mt-ruapehu-lowres.pdf




http://www.doc.govt.nz/Documents/about-doc/role/policies-and-plans/national-park-management-plans/tongariro-national-park/tongariro-national-park-management-plan.pdf





Island, New Zealand. Unpublished doctoral disserta-tion, Massey University, Palmerston North, NewZealand

Johnston DM (1997) Physical and social impacts of pastand future volcanic eruptions in New Zealand.Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Massey University,Palmerston North, New Zealand

Jolly GE, Keys HJR, Procter JN, Deligne NI (2014)Overview of the co-ordinated risk-based approach toscience and management response and recovery forthe 2012 eruptions of Tongariro volcano, NewZealand. J Volcanol Geoth Res 286:184–207

Keys HJ, Green PM (2008) Ruapehu lahar New Zealand18 March 2007: lessons for hazard assessment and riskmitigation 1995–2007. J Disaster Res 3(4):284–296

King DNT, Goff J, Skipper A (2007) Māori environmen-tal knowledge and natural hazards in Aotearoa—NewZealand. J R Soc N Z 37(2):59–73

Lavigne F, De Coster B, Juvin N, Flohic F, Gaillard JC,Morin J, Sartohadi J (2008) People’s behaviour in theface of volcanic hazards: perspectives from Javanesecommunities, Indonesia. J Volcanol Geoth Res 172(3–4):273–287

Lecointre J, Hodgson K, Neall V, Cronin S (2004)Lahar-triggering mechanisms and hazard at Ruapehuvolcano, New Zealand. Nat Hazards 31:85–109

Lowe DJ, Newnham RM, McCraw JD (2002) Volcanismand early Māori society in New Zealand. In: Grattan J,Torrence R (eds) Natural disasters and culturalchange. Routledge, London, England, pp. 126–134

Mercer J, Kelman I, Taranis L, Suchet-Pearson S (2010)Framework for integrating indigenous and scientificknowledge for disaster reduction. Disasters 34(1):214–239

Neall VE (1976) Lahars as major geological hazards. BullInt Assoc Eng Geol 14:233–240

Neall VE, Houghton BF, Cronin SJ, Donoghue SL,Hodgson KA, Johnston DM, Lecointre JA,Mitchell AR (1999) Volcanic hazards at RuapehuVolcano. Wellington: Ministry of Civil Defence.Volcanic hazards information series 8. 30 p

Paulinson DD (1993) Hurricane hazard in WesternSamoa. Geogr Rev 83:45–53

Pelling M, Uitto JI (2001) Small island developing states:natural disaster vulnerability and global change. GlobEnviron Change Part B Environ Hazards 3(2):49–62

Petterson MG, Cronin SJ, Taylor PW, Toila D, Papa-batu A, Toba T, Qopoto C (2003) The eruptive historyand volcanic hazards of Savo, Solomon Islands. BullVolc 65:165–181

Pewhairangi N (1992) Learning and Tapu. In: King M(ed) Te Ao Hurihuri: aspects of Māoritanga. OctopusPublishing Group (NZ) Ltd, Auckland, New Zealand,pp 9–14

Pool I (1991) Te iwi Maori: a New Zealand population,past, present & projected. Auckland University Press,Auckland

Proctor EM (2010) Toi tu te whenua, toi tu te tangata: aholistic Māori approach to flood management inPawarenga. Unpublished master’s thesis, WaikatoUniversity, Hamilton, New Zealand

Rainforth H, Procter J, Black T, Harmsworth G, Pardo N(2012) Exploring indigenous knowledge for assessingvolcanic hazards and improving monitoringapproaches. In: 7th cities on volcanoes conference,19–23 Nov 2012, Colima, Mexico

Robertson N (1999) Māori and psychology: research andpractice. In: The proceedings of a symposium spon-sored by the Māori and psychology research unit. Māori& Psychology Research Unit, Hamilton, New Zealand

Royal TAC (2005) An organic arising: an interpretationof tikanga based upon the Māori creation traditions.Paper presented at the Tikanga Rangahau MātaurangaTuku Iho: traditional knowledge and research ethicsconference, 10–12 June 2004, Te Papa Tongarewa,Wellington, New Zealand

Smith GH (1990) Research issues related to Māorieducation. Paper presented to NZARE Special InterestConference, Massey University, reprinted in 1992,The Issue of Research and Māori, Research Unit forMāori Education, The University of Auckland

Smith GH (1997) The development of kaupapa Māori:theory and praxis. Doctoral dissertation, ResearchSpace, Auckland

Tobin GA, Montz BE (1997) Natural hazards: explanationand integration. The Guildford Press, New York City,NY

Ulluwishewa R, Roskruge N, Harmsworth G, Antaran B(2008) Indigenous knowledge for natural resourcemanagement: a comparative study of Māori in NewZealand and Dusun in Brunei Darussalam. GeoJournal73(4):271–284

UNESCO (2014) World heritage list. Retrieved fromhttp://whc.unesco.org/?cid=31&mode=table

Walker R (2004) Ka whawhai tonu matou: strugglewithout end. Penguin Books, Auckland, New Zealand

Zimmet P, Dowse G, Finch C, Serjeantson S, King H(1990) The epidemiology and natural history ofniddm-lessons from the South Pacific. Diab MetabRev 6(2):91–124


http://whc.unesco.org/?cid=31&mode=table

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms ofthe Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 InternationalLicense (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/),which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution andreproduction in any medium or format, as long as yougive appropriate credit to the original author(s) and thesource, provide a link to the Creative Commons licenseand indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapterare included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license,unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material.If material is not included in the chapter’s CreativeCommons license and your intended use is not permittedby statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, youwill need to obtain permission directly from the copyrightholder.


http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/