Changing the broken record: New theory and data on Maori offending
Simone Bull
Introduction
Despite being experts in criminal justice, when we gauged how well we know
Maori representation in the criminal justice system at the recent IPS evidence
forum, our knowledge was shown to be seriously lacking. This is reflected in
the sparse literature on the topic.
Existing theory
Few explanations for the seemingly high levels of offending by Māori have
been the object of rigorous research in New Zealand - although many have
been the subject of "rigorous assertion" (Stenning, 2005).
Over the past century, the volume of literature generated by Maori offending is
such that you could list most of the references on one page. The drivers of
crime specified in that literature range from atavism to tradition and cultural
mores; urbanisation, cultural discontinuity, failed integration, acculturation
stress, social disorganisation, and lifestyle instability; primary and secondary
culture conflicts; colonial injustices, institutional racism, tradition corrupted,
cultural denigration and powerlessness; poor education outcomes (sometimes
involving glue ear) and socio-economic deprivation; whānau alienation, stress,
alcohol and drug abuse; necessity, excitement, consumerism; politicisation
and decolonisation; and, most recently, trapped lifestyles (complex interplay
between socio-economic variables, confused or partially developed cultural
identities, and individual and collective experiences).
Bias and the age structure of the population have also been identified as
critical issues for Maori. But, I view them not as explanations of offending so
much as [partial] explanations of the extent of Maori representation in the
criminal justice system (though General Strain Theory does posit bias as a
motivation for crime).
I don’t have the space here to review or critique this literature. At the risk of
over-simplifying, I want to focus on key themes.
Key theme 1: Maori 'over-representation' is the wrong paradigm
The bulk of published literature on the causes of Maori offending consists of
general (as opposed to offence-specific) theories that try to explain all Maori
offending. Most start with the observation that Maori are over-represented in
the criminal justice system, and work from there. But, how robust is this claim?
On the surface, it seems valid. While making up only 15% of the general
population, Maori currently comprise 40-45% of all Police apprehensions.
Therefore, Māori are over-represented in the criminal justice system. On the
other hand, this view of Maori over-representation ignores the roles played by
known criminogenic factors. Rather than compare the proportion of Māori
apprehensions to the proportion of Māori in the general population, for
example, we should examine whether the proportion of Māori who are young,
male, unmarried, unemployed, uneducated, in substandard housing, is
reflected in the apprehension statistics. Rates of recorded offending, and
hence imprisonment, are well known to depend on a range of social
development factors (Braithwaite, 1989), rather than raw population
proportions. But, we have never undertaken research to test whether Maori
are still over-represented in the criminal justice system once you control for
known criminogenic variables.
Key theme 2: Perceptions of Maori offending are distorted
It is my conjecture that, as far as our perceptions of Maori offending are
concerned, reality has been overtaken by stereotypes and assorted
misinformation much of which is generated by corporate media. In the book
Simulacra and Simulation (1995), French social theorist Jean Baudrillard
refers to this state of affairs as hyper-reality. Unfortunately, this hyper-reality
(rather than a sound evidence base) has become the starting point for much
research and policy. Our ability to correct this requires us to fully utilise the
available evidence.
Key theme 3: Existing data is under-utilised
Braithwaite (1989) identified 13 powerful associations that all general theories
of crime need to account for. These include, for example, the observation that
80% of reported offending is committed by males, and that crime is
disproportionately committed by those aged between 15 and 25 years. In New
Zealand, the data needed to characterise Maori representation in the criminal
justice system along these lines, has been publicly available on the Statistics
New Zealand website for over 10 years. That data is rarely utilised in depth.
Key theme 4: The research record is sparse
Part of the problem with theorising about Maori offending is that the research
record is discontinuous – we never take one theory and thoroughly test,
enhance or re-examine it in light of new evidence. We just wait a few years for
another to come along – usually from overseas. Although the record may
seem broad it has little depth, and is actually small compared to other topics in
criminal justice.
Status quo
Notwithstanding the failure to account for Maori offence profiles, prevailing
opinion seems to be divided between those who see socio-economic
deprivation as key among numerous developmental and/or life course risk
factors (trajectory and risk theorists), and those who see it as stemming from
broad social inequalities (critical and counter-colonial criminologists). At
present, no one is joining the two together though the connection seems
obvious: colonisation generated broad social inequalities leading to
deprivation, the deprivation causes the crime, causes the inequality, causes
the deprivation.
Of course, all of this is of very little help (or interest, probably) to the victims
and offenders who find themselves caught up in the criminal justice system.
While we wait for existing theory to be enhanced in light of better data, and/or
for new theory to be developed, there is scope for using the data that we do
have to initiate primary crime prevention initiatives where they are most
needed. However, their efficacy rests on the assumption that much offending
is opportunistic, that is, it occurs on the spur of the moment without
premeditation or planning. The basic idea, famously demonstrated by Mayhew
et al., 1976), is that crime can be prevented by reducing opportunities for it to
occur, using techniques developed under the rubric of situational crime
prevention. Obviously, this does not address the underlying drivers of
offending. But this may not be necessary for the large majority of people
whose offending only occurs during adolescence.
According to the data, then, what characteristics of volume crime among
Māori are in most need of being addressed?
'New' data
In the most recent fiscal year, 2007/08, we know that 79% of all
apprehensions of Māori were of males (72,186 out of 91,944), in accordance
with the general rule that females are responsible for roughly 20% of reported
offences.
We can narrow the bulk of Maori apprehensions down to a relatively small
number of offence classes/types. It is important to note, however, that family
violence-related offending cuts across several different offence classes. When
collated (n=17,106), it exceeds all of the individual offence classes/types
noted above.
2007/08 Maori apprehensions, all ages, all genders, by key offence class/type (excl traffic)
17%
37%
6%
Assaults
Drugs (Cannabis Only)
Disorder
Burglary
Car Conversion Etc
11%
Theft Ex Shop (No Drugs)
Wilful Damage
Other
8%
8%
8%
5%
There are some variations on this theme when the data is broken down by
age/gender (excl family violence). For example, shoplifting accounts for 50%
of 0-9 year old Maori girls' apprehensions and 25% of 0-9 year old Maori boys'
apprehensions. "Disorder" and "assaults" tend to feature more prominently
from 17 years of age onwards, as access to alcohol increases.
Police apprehensions of Māori males and females are disproportionately of
those aged between 14 and 30 years (see graph below). However, the age
profiles do vary by offence category (as well as class and type). Age
distributions of traffic apprehensions are slightly more skewed toward the
older age brackets, reflecting children and young peoples' relatively limited
access to vehicles.
Total Māori Apprehensions in 2007/08 (per 1,000 Māori) by Age Band
600
Māori Apprehensions per 1,000 Māori
500
400
Dishonesty
Drugs & AntiSocial
Violence
Property Damage
300
Property Abuse
Administrative
Sexual
Total
200
100
0
0 to 9
10 to 13
14 to 16
17 to 20
21 to 30
31 to 50
51 to 99
Age group
In 2007/08 (and preceding years), the Police areas with the highest volumes
of Maori apprehensions were: Hamilton city, Waitakere, Western Bay of
Plenty, Whangarei, Rotorua, Auckland city central, with some variations by
age and gender. Generally, the further south you go, the lower the volume of
Maori apprehensions.
On converting apprehension volumes into “crude” apprehension rates1 a more
classical picture is obtained. Auckland city has the highest rate of
apprehensions at 1,322 apprehensions per 1,000 Māori with Christchurch
central a distant second on 432 apprehensions per 1,000 Maori (the picture is
broadly the same irrespective of gender, though the extent of the problem is
worse for males). The conjecture is that the two rate hotspots are driven by
commuters rather than residents. The question then becomes: From how far a
field are these offenders travelling?
Over the past 10 years, diversions have remained fairly steady at 1-2% of all
resolutions. In 2007/08, Maori had the lowest proportion of cases resolved via
diversion at 0.6%, while "Asiatics" had the highest (5.9%) - suggesting a
possible model for good practice. Prosecutions have increased from 59% to
69% overall and warnings/cautions have dropped from 22% to 16%. 71% of
Maori (and "Pacific Isle") apprehensions are resolved by prosecution, 13% by
warnings/cautions. For "Caucasians", the corresponding figures are 66% and
18%. Ethnic discrepancies in offence resolutions between Maori and
"Caucasians" appear most pronounced among 14-16 yr olds.
1
Using 2006 census population data broken down by age, gender, ethnicity and Police area we can calculate a
"crude" rate by dividing the total number of apprehensions by the population figures and multiplying by (say) 1,000. It
is "crude" because it is assumes that each apprehension represents a discrete offender when we know that some
offenders are responsible for multiple apprehensions.
Road policing data is particularly important to Maori offence profiles because
"drink driving" is a driver of the Maori prison population. Ethnicity data is not
recorded in a lot of traffic-related apprehensions. But where we do have the
information, it reveals that drink driving dominates the four highest volume
offence types for Maori. This is more so for Maori females (45%) than males
(34%), and varies even more by age. Among Maori females aged 21-30, drink
driving comprises 76% of the apprehensions for the four key offence types. By
Police area, the highest volume of Maori traffic apprehensions were in the Far
North, Western Bay of Plenty, Whangarei, Rotorua, CM central, CM south,
Hamilton city, Gisborne, Hastings, Waitakere.
Making the most of available evidence
Most of us would have no difficulty in acknowledging the sources below as
evidence. Yet, despite the shortage of Maori-specific evidence on offer, we
rarely use all of these sources, let alone collectively.
 6 monthly Maori apprehensions dataset (SNZ)
 some analysis of NZCASS Maori findings (MoJ) available later in 2009,
and triennially at best
 unpublished findings of TPK (assisted by MoJ, MWA, and Corrections)
engagement with Maori providers, practitioners & offenders (2007)
 Moana Jackson’s colloquium (2008) and subsequent report (2009)
 longitudinal studies (ongoing)
 infrequent publications from Maori criminologists (Tauri, Webb, myself)
I think we could also agree that we need many more than this if we are to
address Maori offending. So, how do we generate more evidence?
Not by looking offshore to theory constructed without reference to the local
context. If we accept that all knowledge is socially constructed, and that what
makes one point of view acceptable at any one time is not that it is more
truthful than another but that it is backed by greater power resources, then I
believe we must look to popular culture as a source of evidence. The views of
very few people find expression in academic literature and policy circles. This
is especially true for Maori. According to the 1996 Adult Literacy survey, 70%
of Maori [45% of non-Maori] have literacy skills below what is regarded as the
minimum level required to meet the "complex demands of everyday life and
work" in the emerging "knowledge society". More perspectives are heard in
song lyrics, films, poetry, novels, biographies – the matatini performing arts
festival is a classic example of this. Great Maori composers like Tuini Ngawai
and her niece Ngoi Pewhairangi provided extensive commentary on a broad
range of social, political and cultural issues through the performing arts. And
their work was intimately linked with the Kotahitanga movement. I am not
suggesting uncritical acceptance of this material, but what Clifford Geertz
describes as analysis that searches for meaning, measured by the
consistency and coherence of “thick description”.
Responding to offending by Maori
There is no wonder drug for responding to Maori offending. Instead, there is a
choice we all need to make. We can stick with the status quo, tinker at the
fringes with ad hoc policy and research, jealously guarding our territory as
though we have a monopoly on expertise and competence. But theory not
based on robust evidence, which is what I propose we are relying too heavily
upon, is guesswork (no matter how well educated). And guesswork,
demonstrably, has a low probability of success.
Or, we can start afresh, and engage with ALL of the available evidence,
perhaps even invest in independent Maori research aligned to a proper
characterisation of "the problem". We can use it to tell us where, when, how
and with whom we need to make an impact if we are to reduce Maori
offending and victimization. And we can work with the people who are directly
affected by it, preferably while Maori offence profiles are relatively minor and
concentrated in few offence classes/types (i.e. before they reach the adult
jurisdiction), to develop solutions.
Whatever we do, unless it changes Maori criminal justice data, is ultimately
doomed. Why? Because corporate media are wedded to crime news. As long
as that crime news casts Maori in a consistently negative light, the discourse
surrounding Maori crime won’t change; therefore nor will Maori criminal
justice outcomes. As Foucault (cited in Davidson, 1997) famously said,
discourse is not merely a surface inscription. It brings about effects.
References
Alia, V. and Bull, S. (2005) Media and Ethnic Minorities. Edinburgh: Edinburgh
University Press.
Balzer, R., Haimona, D., Henare, M., and Matchitt, V. (1997) Māori Family
Violence in Aotearoa. Wellington: Te Puni Kokiri (TPK), the Ministry of
Māori Development.
Baudrillard, J. (1995) Simulacra and Simulation (translated by Sheila Glaser).
Michigan: University of Michigan Press.
Braithwaite, J. (1989) Crime, Shame and Reintegration. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Bull, S. J. (2001) The land of murder, cannibalism, and all kinds of atrocious
crimes? An overview of "Māori crime" from pre-colonial times to the
present day, Victoria University of Wellington PhD thesis (Criminology).
Bull, S. (2004) The land of murder, cannibalism, and all kinds of atrocious
crimes? Māori and Crime in New Zealand, 1853-1919, British Journal
of Criminology, Vol. 44, No. 4, July 2004, pp. 496-519.
Bull, S. J. and Alia, V. (2004), ‘Unequalled Acts of Injustice? Pan-Indigenous
Encounters with Colonial School Systems’, Contemporary Justice
Review, Vol. 7, Issue 2, June, pp. 171-182.
de Bres, P. H. (1975) Māori Religious Affiliation in a City Suburb: The
Function of Urban Churches in Establishing Criteria for Social
Behaviour Among Immigrant Families. In: Kawharu, I. H. (ed.) (1975)
Conflict and Compromise: Essays on the Māori Since Colonisation.
Wellington: A. H. and A. W. Reed.
Davidson, A. I., ed. (1997) Foucault and his Interlocutors. London and
Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
Department of Justice (1968) Crime in New Zealand. Wellington: R. E. Owen,
Government Printer.
Duff, A. (1990) Once Were Warriors. Auckland: Tandem Press.
Duncan, L. S. W. (1970) Crime by Polynesians in Auckland: An Analysis of
Charges Laid Against Persons Arrested in 1966. Master of Arts Thesis,
University of Auckland.
Duncan, L. S. W. (1971) Explanations for Polynesian Crime Rates in
Auckland. Recent Law, October 1971, pp. 283-288.
Durie, M. (2003) Imprisonment, Trapped Lifestyles, and Strategies for
Freedom. In: Ngā Kāhui Pou – Launching Māori Futures. Wellington:
Huia Publishers.
Fergusson, D. M., Donnell, A. and Slater, S. W. (1975) The Effects of Race
and Socio-Economic Status on Juvenile Offending Statistics. Research
Report No. 2. Wellington: Joint Committee on Young Offenders
(JCYO).
Fergusson, D. M., Horwood, L. J., and Lynskey, M. T. (1993a) Ethnicity,
Social Background and Young Offending: A 14 Year Longitudinal
Study. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, Vol. 26,
July, pp. 155-70.
Fergusson, D. M., Horwood, L. J., and Lynskey, M. T. (1993b) Ethnicity and
Bias in Police Contact Statistics. Australian and New Zealand Journal
of Criminology, Vol. 26, December, pp. 193-206.
Fergusson, D. M., Horwood, L. J., and Nagin, D. S. (2000) Offending
Trajectories in a New Zealand birth cohort, Criminology, Vol. 38, No. 2,
pp 525-551.
Fifield, J. and Donnell, A. (1980) Socio-Economic Status, Race, and Offending
in New Zealand. An Examination of Trends in Officially Collected
Statistics for the Māori and Non-Māori Populations. Research Report
No. 6. Wellington: Joint Committee on Young Offenders (JCYO).
Glover, M. (1993) Māori Women's Experience of Male Partner Violence:
Seven Case Studies. Master of Social Science Thesis, University of
Waikato.
Geertz, Clifford (1973) "Thick Description: Toward an Interpretive Theory of
Culture", in The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays. New York:
Basic Books.
Hunn, J. K. (1961) Report on the Department of Māori Affairs. Wellington: R.
E. Owen, Government Printer.
Jackson, M. (1988) The Māori and the Criminal Justice System: He
Whaipaanga Hou - A New Perspective, Part 2. Wellington: Department
of Justice.
Lovell, R. and Norris, M. (1990) One in Four: Offending from Age Ten to
Twenty-four in a Cohort of New Zealand Males. Study of Social
Adjustment Research Report No. 8. Wellington: Department of Social
Welfare.
Lovell, R. and Stewart, A. (1983) Patterns of Juvenile Offending in New
Zealand: No. 1 Summary Statistics for 1978-1981. Wellington:
Department of Social Welfare.
Mayhew, P. M., Clarke, R. V., Sturman, A. and Hough, J. M. (1976) Crime as
Opportunity. Home Office Research Study No. 34. London: HMSO.
McCreary, J. R. (1955) Māori Age Groupings and Social Statistics. Journal of
the Polynesian Society, Vol. 64, No. 1, March, pp. 16-21.
McCreary, J. R. (1969) Consideration of Some Statistics on Māori Offending.
New Zealand Social Worker, Vol. 5, No. 2, 1969, pp. 40-45.
Morris, A. (1955) Some Aspects of Delinquency and Crime in New Zealand.
Journal of the Polynesian Society, Vol. 64, No. 1, March, pp. 5-15.
O'Malley, P. (1973a) The Amplification of Māori Crime: Cultural and Economic
Barriers to Equal Justice in New Zealand. Race, Vol. 15, No. 1, July,
pp. 47-57.
O'Malley, P. (1973b) The Influence of Cultural Factors on Māori Crime Rates.
In: Webb, S. D. and Collette, J. (eds.) (1973) New Zealand Society Contemporary Perspectives. Sydney: John Wiley and Sons Australasia
Pty Ltd.
Paterson, K. (1992) Wahine Maia, me te Ngawari Hoki - Māori Women and
Periodic Detention in Kirikiriroa: Their Life Difficulties and the System.
Master of Social Science Thesis, University of Waikato.
Philipp, E. (1946) Juvenile Delinquency in New Zealand - A Preliminary Study.
Wellington: New Zealand Council for Educational Research.
Rogers, H. (undated) A Study of Māori Crimes in Auckland. School of Social
Science Thesis, Victoria University of Wellington. Cited in Sheffield
(1958).
Sheffield, M. C. (1958) Māori Theft: A Study of Crime and Acculturation
Stress. Master of Arts Thesis, University of New Zealand.
Slater, S. W. and Jensen, J. (1966) Study of Crime Among Māoris. Interview
Study. Preliminary Report of Results. Joint Committee on Young
Offenders (JCYO). Unpublished report held at National Archives.
Smiler, W. (undated) Some Problems of Minority Groups. School of Social
Sciences Thesis, Victoria University of Wellington. Cited in Sheffield
(1958).
Stenning, p. (2005) Māori, Crime and Criminal Justice: Over-representation or
Under-representation?, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
(Victoria University of Wellington) Seminar, 18 March 2005.
Tauri, J. (2005). "Indigenous perspectives" In R. Walters & T. Bradley (Eds.),
Introduction to Criminological Thought: 129-145. Auckland: Pearson
Longman.
Webb, R. (undated) Social Change and Theorising on Māori Crime.
Association of Pacific Rim Universities Conference Presentation.
Unpublished.
Webb, R. (2003) Māori Crime: Possibilities and Limits of an Indigenous
Criminology, PhD thesis in Criminology, University of Auckland, New
Zealand.
Williams, C. (2001) The Too Hard Basket: Māori and Criminal Justice Since
1980. Wellington: Institute of Policy Studies, Victoria University of
Wellington.