This thesis tries to unpack a seemingly stable network for its instabilities. The network studied involved a cross-cultural NRM issue, that of Kererū Management in New Zealand, that was last explicitly analysed as controversial by Renganathan (2004). This is an issue that can be considered to have “gone quiet” until the events of 2015. It ties together texts and inscriptions associated with, and connected to, Kererū Management, both historic and contemporaneously, to delineate a network through which the development and context of the controversy can be examined while also considering its state today and how this might adapt in the future. The goals of this research are to establish a historical overview of Kererū management since the arrival of Māori in New Zealand and to provide insight into the current management of Kererū, which was last studied by one person in detail (Renganathan, 2004).
This thesis explores the development of ANT from its roots in the early 1980s and relied on Callon’s seminal work “Some elements of a sociology of translation: domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St. Brieuc Bay” (1986) to develop a methodology suited for analysis to NRM and Kererū management focussing on the core concepts of translation and obligatory passage points. Consideration was given to ANT use in a NRM context, where previous work has shown ANT’s success in the field by removing preconceptions, labels of ‘success’ and ‘failure’ and in focussing on the collective actions of multiple stakeholders.
The development of the Kererū management network was examined through five distinct historical network phases – termed in order of appearance, the “Archaic” Network, the “Classic” Network, the “Colonial” Network, the “Preservation” Network and the “Conservation” Network. Through each of these phases the significant actants involved were followed in the management of Kererū through historical inscriptions and identified the major events in the network transitions. Each phase also saw the recognition of the network problematizer and the OPP and followed the problematizer through their translation process: problematization, intéressement, enrolment and mobilisation. The contemporary network was also subject to ANT and the historical relations could still be seen in the present – The Government, represented by DoC, remain the problematizer while Conservation Scientists enjoy a privileged position as ‘gate keepers’ of Kererū knowledge, the only actants able to speak to the sustainability of an unknown Kererū population. Numerous inscriptions continue to play roles in the network, most significantly the Northland Conservation Management Strategy (CMS)
2014-2024 (Department of Conservation, 2014) and the Wildlife Act 1953 which continue to allow action at a distance, the translation of the Governments interests into material form and inhibits any legal return to Kererū cultural harvest. Significant events were identified and are likely to play a role in the next network transition, if one occurs, with debated levels of accountability including the ever- evolving understanding and adherence to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, the Wai 262 claim specifically and the increased use of citizen science, such as ‘the Great Kererū Count’. The growth of TEK was also identified as being a possible contributor to the next network transition and examined through the harvesting of Tītī in Southland, as were the continuing threats to Kererū such as illegal harvesting, introduced pests and habitat clearance.
This thesis presented future change scenarios in Kererū management using a more contemporary application of ANT. Civic Science, Boundary Organizations and Competency Groups scenarios where investigated in considering what a future shift in the Kererū management network could look like. The analysis contributed to a new understanding of how ontological claims, specifically the importance designated to particular knowledge sources such as science, TEK or generative knowledge, could dominate in the network and attribute power and exemplified how the successful translation of actants would be critical to the punctualization of networks. The ‘Civic Science’ scenario explored how scientific realism could dominate in a future scenario while still engaging the Intéressed Public. ‘Boundary Work’ considered a future network that engaged TEK in a selective manner and resulted in an unequal ground for coproduction, which risked the enrolment of both Intéressed Public and tangata whenua actants. ‘Competency Groups’ showed a future network that sought to disseminate and understand knowledge and values collaboratively however still failed to account for the agenda of the Kererū, and risks being implemented in a way that manipulates the process.
While Kererū Management in New Zealand has proven to be controversial, the focus of this work was not solely to observe this controversy but also to consider the ability of ANT to be applied as a practical methodology in controversy involving NRM and cultural interactivity. Using “Some elements of a sociology of translation: domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay” (Callon, 1986a) to develop a practical methodology allowed for the ‘following the actants’, tracing their relationships with the network over time and successfully utilized an inscription backed research methodology. Through this Kererū Management was specifically examined by surveying texts and connections in a novel way and it is appropriate now to assess the suitability of applying an ANT approach in other NRM and cross-cultural controversies. This research was to show an approach using a variety of tools, developed by ANT scholars, to question the assumptions in the current network and to provide intéressed parties with new ideas and connections to consider. As a result of this ANT analysis associations within Kererū management were described, the distribution of power
was shown, and the translation process exposed. It is hoped this work will be useful for those involved with or have an interest in the management of the Kererū and those who are exploring controversial cross-cultural NRM issues, especially related to the management of indigenous species. For those managing Kererū, this analysis could be beneficial in exposing how historically Kererū management has resulted in the divergence of some actants to rival network, and thus provides a way in which to ensure each actant is successfully translated into future network structures.
As this is not a crisis situation it would be advisable to establish a liaison group for involved members to come together, collaborate and make recommendations for Kererū management. At present there is no clear instrument for all parties to come together and have an open and free discussion. A suggested point to focus efforts originally would be to discuss a co-ordinated plan to deal with threats such as introduced predators and deforestation in which the parties are likely to be more agreeable. However one of the chief tensions is clearly between conservation values and Maori practices, which in current management terms conservation values predominate. A verdict on the Wai 262 Treaty Claim could offer a profound shift in the current dynamic, however this is an unknown variable and it is unreasonable to wait and do nothing in the meantime. DoC is already obliged to consult with Māori and through a liaison group and both the DoC Management Plan and the Māori rahui system could be co-ordinated and co-evolve based on shared knowledge. Rahui in some areas may allow for limited harvesting rights in others. This would represent a more balanced trade off between conservation values and Maori practices than the current situation. Alternatively the New Zealand Conservation Authority (NZCA) tackling the issue of cultural harvest would seem to be the most plausible way currently of achieving a management approach that accounted for the majority of group’s views. Building on recent public interest in 2015 it seems to be an ideal time to bring the issue out for open discussion for those who are interested. The public is likely not aware of the foundation for a return to legal Kererū harvest, nor the extent to which it could be enacted. Does iwi intend to selectively harvest only as dying kuia or kaumatua call for a final meal of Kererū [in the belief that it will help them on their journey to the afterlife] or allow for more wholesale approach in which anyone is able to harvest? There is also likely to be a different approaches and viewpoints taken by different iwi and there is evidence some in the younger generation of Maori have little interest in Kererū harvest which could make this less of a issue in future as these individuals grow older.
Currently field workers would do well to consider the inviolability of “scientific facts” in creating management plans and recognize that forcing a total ban on Kererū has thus far been ineffective. It appears that Government and DoC, along with most of the general public, presently refuse to entertain any scenario in which limiting hunting of Kererū is allowed. History indicates members of Māoridom will continue to partake in “illegal” hunting when their views are not accounted for and
discussion is closed down. Increased pest control measures could be used to compensate for this in affected areas and more forests protection measures encouraged on private and public land in order to promote Kererū population growth. Farming of Kererū could also be highly effective in reducing demand for wild Kererū if this is the primary concern, creating a stable supply to feed demand. Ultimately the course of action decided upon by managers and involved parties depends on the goals for the future of Kererū management, but this thesis may provide historic lessons, allowing groups to better appreciate the perspectives of others involved.
References
3 News. (2012, April 18). Stop hunting kereru, Conservation Board pleads. 3 News. Retrieved from http://www.3news.co.nz/Stop-hunting-kereru-Conservation-Board-
pleads/tabid/1160/articleID/250790/Default.aspx
3News. (2015). Sonny Tau kereru crime “culturally acceptable” - Ngapuhi leader. Retrieved August 3, 2015, from http://www.3news.co.nz/nznews/sonny-tau-kereru-crime-culturally-acceptable-- -ngapuhi-leader-2015062513#axzz3hhqfyXp4
Acheson, J. M. (2006). Institutional failure in resource management. Annu. Rev. Anthropol., 35, 117– 134.
Afarikumah, E., & Kwankam, S. Y. (2013). Deploying actor-network theory to analyse telemedicine implementation in Ghana. Science, 1(2), 77–84.
Anderson, A. (2003). Prodigious Birds: Moas and Moa-Hunting in New Zealand. Cambridge University Press.
Anderson, A. J. (2000). Defining the period of moa extinction. Archaeology in New Zealand, 43, 195– 200.
Aramakutu, E. (1997). Colonists and Colonials: Animals’ Protection Legislation in New Zealand, 1861- 1910: a Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in History, Massey University, 1997. Massey University.
Asdal, K., & Ween, G. B. (2014). Writing Nature. Nordic Journal of Science and Technology, 2(1), 4–10. Atkinson, R., & Flint, J. (2001). Accessing hidden and hard-to-reach populations: Snowball research
strategies. Social Research Update, 33(1), 1–4.
AWASTHY, M. (2010). “Fright moult” in kereru (Hemiphaga novaeseelandiae) during capture results in loss of tail feathers. Notornis, 57, 37–38.
Awasthy, M. (2012). Kereru in Urbanised Landscapes. Retrieved from http://researcharchive.vuw.ac.nz/handle/10063/2575
Bäckstrand, K. (2003). Civic science for sustainability: reframing the role of experts, policy-makers and citizens in environmental governance. Global Environmental Politics, 3(4), 24–41.
Barrington, J. (1995). Magpies: a black and white issue. Forest and Bird, 275(4). Barrington, J. (1996). Waikato Magpie Wars. Forest and Bird, (281), 32–35.
Base, R. F., Ranger, J., & Sutton, M. (2014). Assessment of Environmental Effects for possum and rat control in the Kotarenui and Mangapiko Scenic Reserves August-September 2014. Retrieved from http://www.doc.govt.nz/documents/conservation/threats-and-impacts/pest-
control/SOPs/sop-preparing-assessment-environmental-effects-appendix3.pdf
Belgrave, M., Kawharu, M., & Williams, D. V. (2004). Waitangi revisited: Perspectives on the Treaty of Waitangi. Oxford University Press.
Belich, J. (2002). Paradise Reforged. Penguin UK.
Belich, J. (2013). The New Zealand Wars and the Victorian Interpretation of Racial Conflict. Auckland University Press.
Best, E. (1922). Some aspects of Maori myth and religion (Vol. 1). Dominion Museum.
Best, E. (1942). Forest Lore of the Maori: With Methods of Snaring, Trapping, and Preserving Birds and Rats, Uses of Berries, Roots, Fern-root, and Forest Products, with Mythological Notes on Origins, Karakia Used, Etc. Polynesian Society in collaboration with Dominion Museum. Biernacki, P., & Waldorf, D. (1981). Snowball sampling: Problems and techniques of chain referral
sampling. Sociological Methods & Research, 10(2), 141–163.
Bijker, Wiebe E. (1994). Sociohistorical technology studies. In Handbook of science and technology studies / Sheila Jasanoff ... [et al.], eds (pp. 229–256). Sage. Retrieved from
http://arno.unimaas.nl/show.cgi?did=3778
Blok, A., & Jensen, T. E. (2011). Bruno Latour: Hybrid Thoughts in a Hybrid World. Routledge. Bloor, D. (1999). Anti-latour. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 30(1), 81–112. Blue, L., & Blunden, G. (2010). (Re) making space for kiwi: beyond “fortress conservation”in
Northland. New Zealand Geographer, 66(2), 105–123.
Boessenkool, S., Austin, J. J., Worthy, T. H., Scofield, P., Cooper, A., Seddon, P. J., & Waters, J. M. (2009). Relict or colonizer? Extinction and range expansion of penguins in southern New Zealand. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 276(1658), 815–821.
Bookchin, M. (1972). Post Scarcity. Anarchism.
Bowler, I. R. (1999). Recycling urban waste on farmland: an actor-network interpretation. Applied Geography, 19(1), 29–43.
Braun, B., & Castree, N. (2005). Remaking reality: nature at the millenium. Routledge. Retrieved from http://books.google.co.nz/books?hl=en&lr=&id=zgKIAgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=Castre e+2005&ots=W-FxD-sHTl&sig=g4sI8WZEShV642zWKaVlthOagnc
Brooking, T. (2004). The History of New Zealand. Greenwood Publishing Group.
Brown, J. H., Gupta, V. K., Li, B.-L., Milne, B. T., Restrepo, C., & West, G. B. (2002). The fractal nature of nature: power laws, ecological complexity and biodiversity. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 357(1421), 619–626.
Brumby, A., Hartley, S., & Salmon, R. (2015). Evaluation of the Great Kererū Count 2014 and Recommendations for Future Citizen Science Projects [Wellington Council]. Retrieved from http://wellington.govt.nz/~/media/about-wellington/research-and-evaluation/natural- environment/eval-great-kereru-count-2014.pdf
Burningham, K., & Cooper, G. (1999). Being constructive: social constructionism and the environment. Sociology, 33(2), 297–316.
Callon, M. (1986a). Some elements of a sociology of translation: domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay. Power, Action and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge, 32, 196–233.
Callon, M. (1986b). The sociology of an actor-network: The case of the electric vehicle. Mapping the Dynamics of Science and Technology, 23. Retrieved from
http://epl.scu.edu:16080/~stsvalues/readings/Callon.pdf
Callon, M. (1987). Society in the making: the study of technology as a tool for sociological analysis.
The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology, 83–103.
Callon, M. (1991). Techno-economic networks and irreversibility. A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power, Technology and Domination, 38, 132–161.
Callon, M. (1992). The dynamics of technoeconomic networks. Retrieved from http://www.citeulike.org/group/980/article/555019
Callon, M., & Blackwell, O. (2007). Actor-Network Theory. The Politics of Interventions, Oslo Academic Press, Unipub, Oslo, 273–286.
Callon, M., & Latour, B. (1981). Unscrewing the big Leviathan: how actors macro-structure reality and how sociologists help them to do so. Advances in Social Theory and Methodology: Toward an Integration of Micro-and Macro-Sociologies, 277–303.
Callon, M., & Law, J. (1989). On the construction of sociotechnical networks: Content and context revisited. Knowledge and Society, 8(1), 57–83.
Callon, M., & Law, J. (1997). After the individual in society: Lessons on collectivity from science, technology and society. Canadian Journal of Sociology/Cahiers Canadiens de Sociologie, 165– 182.
Callon, M., Law, J., & Rip, A. (1986). Mapping the dynamics of science and technology. Book. Retrieved from http://www.citeulike.org/group/6444/article/3148665
Camino, L., & Zeldin, S. (2002). From periphery to center: Pathways for youth civic engagement in the day-to-day life of communities. Applied Developmental Science, 6(4), 213–220.
Campbell, K. L., Schotborgh, H. M., Wilson, K.-J., & Ogilvie, S. C. (2008). Diet of kereru (Hemiphaga novaeseelandiae) in a rural-urban landscape, Banks Peninsula, New Zealand. Notornis, 55(4), 173–183.
Cassels, R. (1984). The role of prehistoric man in the faunal extinctions of New Zealand and other Pacific Islands.
Castree, N. (2001). Socializing nature: Theory, practice, and politics. Social Nature: Theory, Practice, and Politics, 1–21.
Castree, N. (2002). False antitheses? Marxism, nature and actor-networks. Antipode, 34(1), 111–146. Castree, N. (2013). Making sense of nature. Routledge. Retrieved from
ee+2005.+Nature:+the+adventures+of+a+concept.+&ots=Tch90giiqj&sig=Q6H7jEhetsHwksab _rMY5qFmm2A
Castree, N., & Braun, B. (1998). The construction of nature and the nature of construction. Remaking Reality: Nature at the Millenium, 3–42.
Castree, N., & MacMillan, T. (2001). Dissolving dualisms: actor-networks and the reimagination of nature. Faculty of Social Sciences - Papers, 208–224.
Catton Jr, W. R., & Dunlap, R. E. (1978). Environmental sociology: a new paradigm. The American Sociologist, 41–49.
Clark, G. R., O’Connor, S., & Leach, B. F. (2008). Islands of Inquiry: Colonisation, Seafaring and the Archaeology of Maritime Landscapes. ANU E Press.
Cloke, P., & Perkins, H. C. (2005). Cetacean performance and tourism in Kaikoura, New Zealand.
Environment and Planning D, 23(6), 903.
Clout, M. N. (1990). The kereru and its forests. Birds International, 2(4), 10–19.
Clout, M. N., Denyer, K., & James, R. E. (1995). McFadden. 1995. Breeding success of New Zealand pigeons (Hemiphaga novaeseelandiae) in relation to control of introduced mammals. New Zealand Journal of Ecology, 19, 209–212.
Collinge, C. (2006). Flat ontology and the deconstruction of scale: a response to Marston, Jones and Woodward. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 31(2), 244–251.
Collins, M. (2015, July 27). Northland poachers a threat to native bird. New Zealand Herald. Retrieved from http://www.nzherald.co.nz/northern-
advocate/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503450&objectid=11487375
Colwyn Jones, T., & Dugdale, D. (2002). The ABC bandwagon and the juggernaut of modernity.
Accounting, Organizations and Society, 27(1), 121–163.
Cordella, A., & Shaikh, M. (2006). From Epistemology to Ontology: Challenging the
Constructed’truth’of ANT. London: Department of Information Systems, London School of Economics and Political Science.
Cornell, S. E. (2006). Indigenous peoples, poverty and self-determination in Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United States. Native Nations Institute for Leadership, Management, and Policy. Retrieved from
http://www.udallcenter.arizona.edu/jopna/pubs/jopna%202006_02_indigenous.pdf Cousins, R. A., Battley, P. F., Gartrell, B. D., & Powlesland, R. G. (2012). IMPACT INJURIES AND
PROBABILITY OF SURVIVAL IN A LARGE SEMIURBAN ENDEMIC PIGEON IN NEW ZEALAND, HEMIPHAGA NOVAESEELANDIAE. Journal of Wildlife Diseases, 48(3), 567–574.
Craig, E. (1998). Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Index. Taylor & Francis.
Craig, J., Anderson, S., Clout, M., Creese, B., Mitchell, N., Ogden, J., … Ussher, G. (2000). Conservation issues in New Zealand. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 61–78.
Craw, C. (2008). The ecology of emblem eating: Environmentalism, nationalism and the framing of kangaroo consumption. Retrieved from
http://search.informit.com.au/documentSummary;dn=931530485639820;res=IELHSS Cressman, D. (2009). A brief overview of actor-network theory: Punctualization, heterogeneous
engineering & translation [University Blog]. Retrieved from http://summit.sfu.ca/item/13593 Crimmens, P. (2006). Drama therapy and storymaking in special education. Jessica Kingsley
Publishers. Retrieved from
http://books.google.co.nz/books?hl=en&lr=&id=PSwn4sPitewC&oi=fnd&pg=PA3&dq=M%C4 %81ui+turned+himself+into+a+kerer%C5%AB&ots=iOFIwLR-T6&sig=LBmoYwNIG14PR-