Capturing the Diversity Dividend of
Aotearoa New Zealand – Project Briefs
for Massey University Scholarship
Applicants
Purpose
This document contains short project briefs for each of the three projects in ‘Capturing the Diversity
Dividend of Aotearoa New Zealand’ for which Massey is seeking PhD or MA candidates. You can find
more information about CaDDANZ here.
These project briefs will help prospective PhD and Masters students understand the objectives of
CaDDANZ . Proposals for PhDs need to directly relate to one of CaDDANZ projects described in this
document. We are seeking MAs only for the last project in this document – Life Histories of
Diversity.
An Overview of CaDDANZ
The demographic structure of Aotearoa/New Zealand is changing rapidly. CaDDANZ (cadence)
investigates over six years (2014-2020) how New Zealand can better prepare for, capture and
maximise the benefits/dividend of an increasingly diverse population. The research is funded by the
Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) part of the New Zealand government. The
research programme is comprehensive, multi-phased and organised around three themes:



ethnodemographic diversity (ED)
societal impacts and opportunities (SIO)
institutional implications and responses (IIR).
Massey University projects
CaDDANZ comprises 20 projects. Projects are run from Waikato University, Massey University and
MOTU (an economic consultancy). Figure 1 gives an overview of projects.
The project briefs outlined in this document are for the mixed-method projects managed by Massey
University where we are seeking PhD or MA candidates. These are:



SIO4 – commonplace diversity through urban encounters (PhD)
IIR2 and IIR5 – diversity policy and practice in two schools (PhD)
IIR6 - life histories of diversity (MA)
1
Each brief starts with the paragraph from the bid used to secure funding from MBIE then briefly
describes the:







Aim
Key Questions
Research Approach
Outputs and reporting
Links to other CaDDANZ projects
Human Ethics
Contribution
We anticipate most of the fieldwork for the projects will be carried out in suburbs in Auckland, New
Zealand’s most superdiverse city. However, depending on candidates interests, we will also look at
fieldwork sites in Wellington, New Zealand’s capital city. Each project will provide a different lens on
how diversity contributes to social cohesion in a location. By focusing multiple lenses on particular
locations we intend to build a rich, policy relevant picture of the processes contributing to social
cohesion. This picture will be complemented by population modelling work from the Waikato
projects. These population projections are intended to provide a comprehensive ‘whole of family’
and ‘whole of life’ approach that will allow policy-makers, economic and community development
agencies, local and regional councils and other end-users to better understand the in/stability of
population trends, provide the capacity for untangling the effects of ageing as well as an
understanding of lifecycle stage and period effects.
Where helpful we also intend to use research approaches employed in international comparative
studies such as GlobaldiverCities. Using a comparative approach will allow us to see what is unique
to New Zealand and what can be learned from other jurisdictions.
2
Figure One: Overview of CaDDANZ (Massey projects in bold under each heading)
CaDDANZ
Societal Impacts and
Opportunties (SIO)
Ethnographic Diversity (EDD)
Institutional Implications and
Responses
(IIR)
1 ethnic futures
1 diverse firms
1 institutional evaluation
2 ethnic auckland
2 diverse households
2 school policy
3 diversity measures
3 infra and enviro planning
3 meta eval policy
4 family ethnicity
4 urban encounters
4 econometric model value
5 Maori Civic
5 demo support (DDS)
5 school action research
discourse
6 Maori and Migrant
6 demo support Maori
6 life history
7 urban governance
7 eval DDS
3
SIO4. Common place diversity through urban encounters
We are seeking up to three PhD candidates to complete fieldwork for this project. We
anticipate each PhD will have their own ‘community’ where they will conduct the research.
Researchers will have some training in methods. We expect findings from fieldwork in each
community to contribute to the overall goals of the urban encounters project through crosscase analysis.
Background (from MBIE bid)
SIO4. ‘Urban encounters’ and an understanding of commonplace diversity (Wessendorf, 2013)
employs multiple research methods to reveal how everyday interactions, including practices of
consumption (at events such as festivals/ethnic precincts) that occur in
homogeneous/heterogeneous communities in Auckland impact on how difference is understood,
negotiated and contested. Cultural diversity enhances urban vibrancy and consumption
opportunities. Such amenity effects can be quantified (e.g. Bakens et al., 2013), but they also have
myriad qualitative benefits (Sales et al., 2011). Using a range of ethnographically oriented research
methods including the ‘go-along’ (Kusenbach, 2003), this study will examine diversity as it is enacted
and negotiated in daily life. A particular focus is the nature of conviviality and the way in which
everyday encounters contribute to social cohesion (Meares & Gilbertson, 2013).
Time frame: 3 years
Aim
This project takes a lead from the GlobaldiverCities project which asks: What accounts for social and
spatial patterns that arise under conditions of diversification when new diversity-meets-old
diversity? (para-phrased from Vertovec, 2011, p.12)
This project aims to describe the nature of contact between people in public spaces within diverse
suburbs in Auckland (and Wellington). It will assess how opportunities for contact are taken up and
contribute to understandings of diversity in the neighbourhood and the historical, structural and
material conditions allowing such interaction to take place. A further aim of this project is to
understand how urban settings such as markets and parks themselves contribute to sociality in an
area (Amin, 2015; Larkin, 2013).
Key Questions
Within an identified location:




How do people understand diversity in their local area? What are their attitudes to diverse
others?
What are the available public spaces (eg, parks, markets, malls) and who uses them/who
does not use them and how?
What are the material features of public spaces that condition, constrain and create
opportunities for social and spatial relationships for different people?
What is the nature of everyday social interactions among people in public spaces?
4



What are the historical and structural conditions contributing to the identified patterns of
interaction in public spaces (eg how diversity and inequalities have been managed by public
authorities and local actors?)
What are the implications of these interactions for social cohesion?
What evidence is there, if any, of the ways people avoid or ignore diversity?
Theoretical context
Urban landscapes, particularly cities, have been theorised both as places of isolation and segregation
and as places with possibilities to connect with diverse others or at least find a niche where
difference is not demonised (van Leeuwen, 2010). Opportunities for contact in public spaces in some
traditions (contact theory in psychology) are seen as opportunities to break down stereotypes and
social distance between groups (Hewstone, 2007). Ethnographic studies in diverse neighbourhoods,
such as Hackney, note how in super diverse conditions, difference becomes ‘common place’ or
unremarkable as people go about their daily lives (Wessendorf, 2014). However, such studies
situated within the emerging field of everyday multiculture (Neal et al, 2013) have been criticised for
overlooking the role of structural determinants of social behaviour (eg, racism) on one hand and
focusing on ‘happy’ or ‘convivial’ interactions on the other. Such criticisms have led some theorists
to suggest an empirical focus on ‘happy and hard’ forms of lived encounters within an understanding
of ‘conviviality’ that expresses the ‘atmosphere’ produced by situated encounters (Wise and
Velayutham, 2013).
We aim to investigate ‘hard and happy’ forms of lived experience paying attention to the conditions
contributing to social interactions.
Taking a ground-up approach we want to illuminate how diversity works out in practice, with the
possibility of re-theorising how people ‘group together’ that may or may not be consistent with
existing social categories (ethnicity, culture etc).
Research approach
This project will replicate to some degree that methods used in the GlobaldiverCities Project.
Investigation will be of ‘public spaces’ that is: ‘physical settings – especially streets, squares, parks
and markets - which are in principle accessible to all regardless of background’.
Site selection
An area with currently high levels of ethnic diversity and where (physical/spatial, visual and social)
manifestations of old and new diversities can be seen to meet. (Vertovec, 2011, p.16)
Method
This project will use multiple methods categorised following GlobDiv under: conceiving, observing,
visualising
Conceiving
This activity focuses on how old and new diversities are imagined, read and represented locally,
including how ethnicities, cultures or religions themselves are understood. Data includes: archival
research of public administrations and media reports; statistical profiles of communities; field
5
research including random questionnaires in public spaces, in-depth interviews with key informants,
focus groups with locals, expert interviews (eg planners and leaders)
Observing
This activity focuses on how people interact in public spaces. Ethnographic techniques such as
participant observation of public space and public meetings, ‘go-along walks’ and behavioural
mapping will explore the negotiation and reproduction of rules, mores and codes for appropriate
behaviour in public spaces for different groups.
Visualising
This activity refers both to gathering and documenting visual material (visual anthropology) and also
making data visible in new and compelling ways. Techniques from visual anthropology may include:
geo-coding visual anthropological and other data (observations) for later geo-mapping; semistructured interviews using photos and videos as prompts for data gathering; ‘go-alongs’ using video
or photographic records; key informants using cameras to photograph and describe their own
representations for their social worlds; an ethnographic documentary of diversity within the chosen
locality. Geographic data visualisation includes transforming quantitative data into graphic images
and mapping data to identify spatial relationships. Other data collected during the study could be
mapped on to these visualisations.
Outputs and reporting






E-book incorporating analysis and visual artefacts of the case study
Technical Report
Report back to suburb
Geographic visualization models
Documentary of case study incorporating analysis from fieldwork (this is a point of
difference with the original GlobDiv movies)
Journal articles
Links to other CaDDANZ projects
Where based in the same location, this project may complement, feed into or learn from the
following projects.







SIO7 – social cohesion opportunities through space-place integration initiatives
IIR1 – formal developmental evaluations of institutions
IIR2 – diversity policy and practice in two schools
IIR5 – complete participatory action research in two schools
IIR6 - life history of Diversity
EDD5 – cultural diversity and civic participation in Te Ao Maori
EDD6 – Conceptualisation and examination of EDD from indigenous standpoint
Data and geographic visualisation may also have links to:




EDD3 – Operationalisation of diversity measures
EDD2 – Spatial Microsimulation model of Auckland city
SI06 – Demographic Decision Support and Kaupapa Maori
IIR7 – Demographic Decision Support system evaluation
6
Human Ethics

Full Massey Human Ethics process required
Contribution
Vertovec (2011, p.11) notes social scientists (and policy makers) have few accounts of ‘what
meaningful interchanges between multiple groups look like, how they are formed, maintained or
broken, and how the state or other agencies might best promote them.’ This project seeks to
remedy that gap by providing a case study within a diverse suburb in Auckland. Such information
could be useful to urban planners, social service policy makers and providers, and policing who are
involved in shaping the environments contributing to encounter of everyday diversity.
References
Bakens, J., P. Mulder, et al. (2013). Economic impacts of cultural diversity in The Netherlands:
Productivity, utility and sorting. Journal of Regional Science 53(1): 8-36.
Hewstone, M., N. Tausch, et al. (2007). Prejudice, intergroup contact and identity: Do
neighbourhoods matter? Identity, Ethnic Diversity and Community Cohesion. R. Berkeley, M.
Lafleche and M. Wetherell. Los Angeles, Sage Publications Ltd: 102-112.
Kusenbach, M. (2003). Street phenomenology: The go-along as ethnographic research tool.
Ethnography 4(3): 455-485.
Meares, C. and A. Gilbertson (2013). "We all get along": Social Cohesion in Three Auckland Suburbs.
Auckland, RIMU Auckland Council.
Neal, S., Bennett, K., Cochrane, A. & Mohan, G. (2013). Living multiculture: understanding the new
spatial and social relations of ethnicity and multiculture in England. Environment and
Planning C: Government and Policy 31 (2): 308-323
van Leeuwen, B. (2010). Dealing with urban diversity: Promises and challenges of city life for
intercultural citizenship. Political Theory. 38 (5): 631-657.
Vertovec, S. (2011). Migrant and New Diversities in Global Cities: Comparatively Conceiving,
Observing and Visualising Diversification in Urban Public Spaces. MMG Working Paper 11-08.
Göttingen, Germany
Wessendorf, S. (2014). Commonplace Diversity: Social Relations in a Super-Diverse Context.
Basingstoke, Palgrave MacMillan.
Wise, A. and S. Velayutham (2014). Conviviality in everyday multiculturalism: Some brief
comparisons between Singapore and Sydney. European Journal of Cultural Studies 17(4):
406-430.
7
Schools project (wrapping up IIR2 and IIR 5)
We are seeking up to three PhD candidates to complete fieldwork for this project. We
anticipate each PhD will have their own ‘school’ where they will conduct the research.
Researchers will have some training in methods. We expect findings from fieldwork in each
school to contribute to the overall goals of the project through cross-case analysis. Ideally,
we will access schools serving the same communities we are examining in the urban
encounters project (SI04 above).
IIR2. Diversity Policy and Practice in Two Schools (PAR)
Background (from MBIE bid)
A Participatory Action Research (PAR) in two Auckland schools (see below) will use a range of
methods including Photovoice (Wilson et al., 2007) to investigate how diversity policy shapes
students' experiences and understandings of diversity in practice (and place). This project extends
earlier diversity focused school-based research by moving beyond planning and teaching (Conner &
Greenwood, 2008) or research on a diverse student body (see, Higgins, 2008) toward the
intersection of educational policies (central government and school) and diversity as it is multiply
enacted in the school environment (Gruenewald, 2008).
IIR5. Deconstructing Discourse
Background (from MBIE bid)
Deconstructing discourse uses Participatory Action Research to understand how difference is
understood and articulated by school students in two differently diverse secondary schools in
Auckland. In an institution that requires co-habitation and is a crucible for identity
expression/negotiation, this activity will record the nature of encounters, understanding and
discourse of groups in a formative stage of identity development (Fairclough, 2013). The
participatory underpinnings will allow young people to identify the issues associated with diversity
and work collaboratively toward an integrated student-centred diversity policy (and practice) for
their school (Irizarry, 2009).
Time frame: 3 years
Aim
The aim of this project is to understand how school policies and practices shape students
experiences of diversity in practice.
Key Questions
Demographics and decision-making (explicit diversity management)

What are the population demographics of the school presently? How have these changed
over time? And how are they likely to change?
8





How does the school keep track of changing population demographics? How is the
information used? What policies, practices or programmes does it influence?
How does the school frame ‘diversity’, ‘difference’, ‘cohesion’, ‘community’ (or related
concepts)?
Where is awareness of diversity evident? (eg among governors, managers, staff, in school
plans, policies, in school activities and opportunities for students?)
How are schools explicitly dealing with diversity now? What programmes, projects,
processes or practices are being used? To what effect?
How are schools preparing or positioning themselves for increasing diversity in their areas?
What programmes, projects, processes or practices are anticipated? To what effect?
Student connections

Who do students connect with in the school environment? Who are their close friends and
who are their associates? How do students talk about their social groups? How did they
come to occupy their particular social milieu? What ‘differences’ are salient to students and
how do they make sense of these ‘differences’? How do students shift and change through
niches during their school careers? What school activities, opportunities, spaces or practices
are salient to students in their friendship or associate groups?
School practices
Activities and opportunities (explicit and implicit diversity practices)


What regular activities are offered within the school? What resources do you need to
participate (gear, time, money)? Who participates and why? How are the larger community
involved?
What happens in ‘free time’ at school? What do students do? Where do they go? Who uses
particular spaces and for what purposes? How does the school regulate the use of school
spaces?
Coming together (explicit diversity)

What does the school celebrate? Who decides? What wider communities are invited into
the school? Who takes up the offer and who doesn’t? Why?
Learning the rules (explicit)


How do students learn to be an ‘X’ college student? How are students inducted into the
culture of the school? What are the explicit rules for being part of the school community?
What are the emergent codes of behaviour? What structures are in place to build
community across difference (eg ages, abilities etc syndicates, houses and so on)
What happens when rules are broken? How are situations of conflict handled in the school?
School spaces and technologies
The built environment (explicit and implicit diversity)
9



How does the built environment and the spaces between contribute to connection? What
opportunities are there for meeting up publically, privately or for having ‘time out’ from
community when wanted? What are these spaces, who uses them and how?
What signals does the built environment (and furnishings) send to the school community
about belonging, inclusion and exclusion?
How are technologies used in maintaining or disrupting social connections (eg social media)
at school and at home?
Research Approach
How does diversity play out in everyday school based practices? For this project, we examine the
practices of social connection, inclusion and exclusion in diverse school populations and trace the
multiple influences contributing to emergent school cultures. We do not start with an assumption
about which differences are salient to schools, but will investigate what priorities and assumptions
about difference schools start with. Here schools are understood as complex adaptive systems.
Briefly, complex systems are composed of multiple interacting subsystems. In a school, such subsystems include individuals, groups of students, teachers, managers, boards of trustees, families and
communities and the rules, practices, and goals they enact. Patterns of social outcomes, including
school cultures, are emergent properties of the interactions between people involved in the school
system. Potential emergent outcomes are also shaped by the local and historical contexts within
which the system operates (Byrne 2005, 2011). This project will use multiple-methods and be
conducted in collaboration with social science teachers and students at participating schools.
Schools in diverse communities identified for community case studies for CaDDANZ will be invited
into the study (Auckland and potentially Wellington).
Methodologies
Particular methods will be negotiated with schools. Below are suggested approaches given the
background and questions assumed above. We assume students and teachers will be active
collectors, analysers and communicators of the research within their school depending on their time,
interest and resources. The school may be sampled through the experiences of participating classes
or cohorts of students (rather than the whole school).
Demographic change in schools and explicit responses to demographic changes will be examined
through documentary analysis of school policies and information systems as well as interviews with
school governors and managers (principals, syndicate or curriculum leaders). Wider Ministry Policies
will also be examined for advice to schools about meeting the needs of diverse student populations
and groups of particular interest to the government. School populations will be placed in a context
of community demographic change.
Student connections will be investigated in partnership with teachers and students. Data collection
will draw on social network analysis, interviews, ethnography and visualising technologies (like
photovoice). Analysis will draw on social network analysis, content analysis and discourse analysis
and spatial mapping of students activities within the school.
Methods for examining student connections will overlap with investigations of the how students
inhabit school spaces in free-time and also in taking up opportunities and activities provided by the
school. Ethnography, photography, photovoice, spatial mapping techniques will be used here.
10
Interviews of students and staff and review of school restoration policies (policies for dealing with
conflict and bullying) will be used to examine ‘school rules’. Such rules become explicit at times of
transition (starting school and changing roles) as well as times of disruption.
Outputs and reporting






Presentation to school board and management
Presentation to school
Recommendations for changes to school
CaDDANZ report
Life histories of students/families/teachers
Any documentation for students against Curriculum assessment requirements
Links to other CaDDANZ projects





SIO7 – social cohesion opportunities through space-place integration initiatives
IIR1 – formal developmental evaluations of institutions
IIR6 - life history of Diversity
EDD5 – cultural diversity and civic participation in Te Ao Maori
EDD6 – Conceptualisation and examination of EDD from indigenous standpoint
Assumptions, Constraints and Dependencies


Consent of schools
Participation of students
Human Ethics

Full Massey Human Ethics Approval process. Approval from School Board of Trustees,
Management, and possibly Ministry of Education
Contribution
Comparing policies, practices and experiences across schools all dealing with an increasingly diverse
student population could result in strategies for schools also meeting this challenge. While findings
will be conditioned by the context of particular schools, the pros and cons of participatory methods
used in this project could provide exemplars for schools wanting to develop diversity strategies in
collaborative ways.
References
Byrne, D. (2005). Complexity, configurations and cases. Theory, Culture and Society, 22, 99-111.
Byrne, D. (2011). Applying Social Science: The Role of Social Research in Politics, Policy and Practice.
Bristol, The Policy Press.
Connor, L. and J. Greenwood (2008). The value of enabling teachers to research their practice. New
Zealand Journal of Teachers' Work 5(2): 65-78.
Gruenwald, D., Ed. (2008). Place-based Education in the Global Age: Local Diversity. New York, Taylor
& Francis.
11
Higgins, J. (2008). Annotated Bibliography of New Zealand Literature on Migrant and Refugee Youth.
Migrant and Refugee Youth Settlement and Inclusion Series. Wellington, Department of Labour.
Irizarry, J. G. (2009). Reinvigorating Multicultural Education Through Youth Participatory Action
Research. Multicultural Perspectives 11(4): 194-199.
Wilson, N., S. Dasho, et al. (2007). Engaging young adolescents in social action through photovoice:
The Youth Empowerment Strategies (YES) project. The Journal of Early Adolescence 27(2): 241-261.
12
IIR6. Life History of Diversity
We are seeking up to 6 MA students to conduct life histories of diversity. Ideally
participants in life histories will be from communities selected for fieldwork in urban
encounters (SI04 above). Each MA would produce one life history.
Background (from MBIE bid)
Visualising and articulating diversity will invite members of the community to contribute stories of
their experiences of diversity as autobiographical narratives in audio/video life histories or
photographic images in contemporary NZ. These will be intended to be contributor driven, and will
replicate the visualisation techniques of the GlobDiv project.
Time frame: 10 life histories over 3 years
Aim
The aim of the life histories are to understand an individual’s life in the context of the community
they currently inhabit and the journey to that community. Ultimately, the life histories could link
together. For example, chronologically by date of birth of participants or when they came to New
Zealand (if applicable), or grouped by place of origin or pathway into New Zealand.
Research Approach
Key informants and other participants in Massey CaDDANZ projects will be invited to participate in
Life History collections. Individual stories, told chronologically or thematically (eg work, family,
hobbies and leisure, politics, religion, relationships) will be set in a context of larger social forces
shaping their lives. These might include for example, reasons to migrate or move, education, health
and employment policies and life stage.
Method
Use a time-line constructed with the participants to understand major life stages, movement and
decision in the individual’s life.
Photos or other visual prompts could be used, for example, a walk around the current and old
neighbourhoods.
Participants will be interviewed about their life course with narratives unfolding chronologically
and/or thematically. Interviews will be documented either audio-visually or with transcripts and
photos.
Interviews will be set into the historical, political and social contexts through which participants
travelled.
Outputs and reporting
A number of audio-visual documentaries or oral life-histories of participants in the CaDDANZ project.
These may be supplemented with other artefacts such as participant’s photos or images of things
important to participants (eg locations, objects). We will also produce written reports of the
13
historical, political and social contexts of each participant’s life journey and a synthesis report of
common themes and implications as well as noting unique experiences.
Links to other CaDDANZ projects
Participants in the life history project will be drawn from people participating in fieldwork in the
other Massey CaDDANZ projects. They are likely to be key informants from the urban encounters
research, the governance research or the school research.





SIO4 – commonplace diversity through urban encounters
SIO7 – social cohesion opportunities through space-place integration initiatives
IIR1 – formal developmental evaluations of institutions
IIR2 – diversity policy and practice in two schools
IIR5 – complete participatory action research in two schools
Assumptions, Constraints and Dependencies
Consent of participants
Human Ethics

Full ethics proposal required (or life history may form a part of a larger proposal).
Contribution
Life histories will provide living exemplars from our selected communities. Life histories will ‘put a
face to’ the people at the intersection of conditions present in our selected communities.
14