Re: The lowly sweet potato may unlock America's past, How the root vegetable found it's way across the Pacific

On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 14:09:43 -0700 (PDT), Jack Linthicum
<jacklinthicum@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Mar 30, 4:03 pm, George <gbl...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 30, 10:16 pm, Jack Linthicum <jacklinthi...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

On Mar 30, 12:35 am, Eric Stevens <eric.stev...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
That's all very well but I can say that at the time of the arrival of
Europeans in New Zealand the Maori proved to be ferocious adopters of
new technology. That is still the case today with respect to tools and
machines.

Eric Stevens

Yes, 20% of the poverty level, 14% of the population.

So by your figures the Europeans, Asians and others in New Zealand
have 80% of the poverty spread across 86% of the total population...

I echo Erics statement

I apparently erred, the Maoris are the technical cutting edge of the
highly technological world of New Zealand. My mistake.

Jack,

You disappoint me. The I was responding to the argument you you were
developing after you wrote in Message-ID:
<a1d33234-d794-4bb7-8624-d8eea3c5efac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> of
Wed, 26 Mar 2008 16:37:15 -0700:

"In the book The Blue of Capricorn the Westerner sees his female
companion as a an anti-innovator. He notices here arranging shells
in a pattern asks here to do a different one and she refuses. The
life is in a pattern, something that has been lost by the contact
with the outside. I would guess that there is almost no innovation
after the various groups reached into the Pacific."


My point was that the Maori were very strong innovators. That does not
mean that they can completely transform their culture from the old
form to the new in only one or two generations. As it is, your quote,
true as it may be, is very far from addressing the original point.


http://www.eastonbh.ac.nz/?p=1

CLOSING THE GAPS: POLICY OR SLOGAN?
Filed under: Listener, Social Policy, Maori -- Brian Easton at 12:00 pm
on Saturday, November 25, 2000

Listener 25 November, 2000

Keywords Distributional Economics; Social Policy

For over a quarter of a century we have been quantifying the
differences in income, employment, education, health and crime levels
between Maori and non-Maori. Taking income we find that:

* About 20 percent of Maori are in the bottom income quintile
(roughly, below the poverty line) compared to 14 percent of the
population being of Maori descent.

* Thus the Maori poverty rate is over 50 percent more than the non-
Maori. However

* About 80 percent of the poor are not Maori, and

* The poverty rate for Pacific Islanders is higher than for Maori.

* Moreover, the gap between Maori and non-Maori has been slowly
closing in the post-war era (although the general policies of the late
1980s and early 1990s setback the trend). Additionally

* Part of the effect is the differences in the age distributions,
since the young are more likely to be poor than the old, and the Maori
are a younger population.

* Another cross-cutting factor may be social position . As ex-Police
Commissioner Peter Doone concluded 'simply being Maori does not lead
to a life of crime, but Maori are more likely to grow up in an
environment plagued with social problems.' So do many non-Maori, and
they suffer the same cycle of deprivation.

* There appears to be a 'dilution' effect. The Maori who say they are
also part-European, appear to better off on average than the Maori who
give no additional ethnicity. (A major difficulty is different
definitions of Maoriness. Some of (part) Maori descent will call
themselves ethnically 'Maori', 'part-Maori' or 'non-Maori' in
different situations. Official recording can be even more erratic.

There are similar salient facts for other social dimensions. They warn
just how complicated the technicalities of a coherent 'closing the
gaps' policy framework can be. But there is no such framework. Rather
the policy seems to be a throwing together of some good - and not so
good - ideas without much attention to how particularly well targeted
they will be, or whether they are even effective.

For instance, I have to be convinced how reserving places for Maori on
hospital boards will improve Maori health. I do understand how Maori
based providers of public health (e.g. the anti-smoking program, Ahua
Kore) can be effective, since cultural responses can be critical here.
But most hospital provision is not so culturally dependent. (The
proposal may be actually about recognizing the rights of minorities to
be properly represented in decision-making, but that is a political
matter - rangatiratanga - not a matter of reducing social inequality).

Alas, flinging together a variety of part-thought through policies,
under a slogan is becoming too common. Recall 1999's 'knowledge
society'. Great notion. But every thoughtful comment begins with 'of
course I agree, but I don't know what it means' (other than as an
incoherent policy package).

The 'knowledge economy' slogan has not generated any political
backlash. But because 'closing the gaps', is about social relations,
even the most socially sensitive ask 'what is going on?'Raising
average Maori incomes could increase the incomes of rich Maori, while
reducing incomes of poor Maori (as well as those of the poor non-
Maori). There being no policy framework, they get no useful answer. As
a result those who explore these questions, like economists Simon
Chapple and John Gould, get misrepresented.

Relevant robust research gets ignored. In separate studies, John
Gibson, Sholeh Maani, Liliana and Rainer Winkleman, and Chapple have
all found that the (private) rate of return to education of the
average Maori is higher than the return to the Pakeha. This (probably)
occurs because the average Maori, being poorer, cannot afford to
invest in education as much as the average Pakeha. But the policy
conclusion is not to fling money at the Maori - rich and poor - but to
recognize that our education system still discriminates against the
poor - white, brown, yellow, black, and every hue between. Addressing
this discrimination benefits the Maori (and Pacific Islanders) more,
because they are on average poorer.

It would be to miss the point of this column to suggest that this
research should add another item to a disjointed policy package
subsumed under a slogan. What is needed a coherent policy framework,
rigorously developed out of the available research.



Eric Stevens
.

Relevant Pages