|
|
|
| strategy | research | technology | training | publications | about | contact |
Maori and the new wireless frequencies |
|
wairua » publications » Maori and the new wireless frequencies Andy
Williamson, Wairua Consulting Table of Contents
AbstractThird Generation Cellular telephone technology heralds a new wave in wireless communications. The sale of four frequencies in the 2GHz range capable of carrying these services has attracted significant interest in Aotearoa/New Zealand. One of the frequencies will be reserved for Maori, the indigenous peoples of Aotearoa, who have been economically marginalised over decades and, as a result, are now over-represented in virtually every negative statistic. In this paper, I will look at the background to the 2GHz radio spectrum auction, at the position of Maori in society and at Maori and other indigenous models for asset management. I will then examine how Maori can close the gap on non-Maori through the education, employment and economic benefits of owning one of the four radio frequencies. IntroductionIn July 2000, management rights for three blocks of New Zealand's 2GHz radio spectrum will be auctioned, with one additional block reserved for Maori at a discounted price (Bidois and Young 2000). This article will examine and discuss the potential issues and benefits for Maori from owning a resource that promises to take telecommunications to a new level, both in New Zealand and around the world (Griggs 1999). The background to the radio spectrum auctions will be explored and the potential impact of the frequency and the third generation (3G) cellular technology that it supports discussed. I will then review the market for cellular services in Aotearoa/New Zealand. Having explored the technology issues, the socio-economic context of Maori in society will be discussed along with the Maori relationship to scientific knowledge. Since the Waitangi Tribunal has asserted that radio frequencies are a taonga in the context of Te Tiriti O Waitangi (Griggs 1999), I will use the example of a traditional taonga, fisheries, to contextualise potential benefits for Maori (Te Ohu Kai Moana 2000) and to identify issues concerning the management and equitable distribution of assets (James 1996; Durie 1998). Finally, as an example of technology usage within indigenous communities, I will briefly review some of the literature regarding the ownership, use and management of telecommunications amongst Native American tribes. Overview of the TechnologyIn this section I will look at the background of the spectrum auction process in Aotearoa/New Zealand, contextualised with regard to auctions of similar spectrum bands overseas. I will then identify the potential usage of the 2GHz Radio Spectrum band and review the cellular telephone market in Aotearoa/New Zealand. The Radio Spectrum in Aotearoa/New ZealandThe Ministry of Commerce manages the New Zealand Radio Spectrum Auction process on behalf of the New Zealand Government (Ministry of Commerce 2000). Its purpose is to sell management rights to parcels of the electromagnetic spectrum known as the radio spectrum (Waitangi Tribunal 1999). As the Waitangi Tribunal observed, today's technology allows for exploitation of frequencies in the 3Khz to 60Ghz range. Usage and management of the radio spectrum between 9Khz and 3000Ghz in Aotearoa/New Zealand is subject to the Radiocommunications Act 1989. Durie (1998) noted that this Act has been criticised for failing to protect Maori interests, although such criticism has been with regard to broadcasting rather than telecommunications. Background and Uses for the 2GHz Frequency RangeThe auction for the 2GHz frequency range takes place in July 2000 (Ministry of Commerce 2000). It includes frequencies in the range of 1710MHz to 2300Mhz, with the portion of this band between 1920Mhz and 1980Mhz being suitable for third generation (3G) mobile telecommunications (Ministry of Commerce 2000). The Government is offering management rights to four blocks within this spectrum, one of which will be allocated to Maori to be managed by a trust. It will be sold for a price equal to the average market price paid of the three auctioned blocks, less a five percent discount (Bidois and Young 2000) It is the capability to provide 3G cellular services that makes the 2GHz frequency band potentially so valuable (Griggs 1999). The recent auction of 3G-compatible frequencies in the UK attracted thirteen companies and bids worth £26 Billion (Bradd 2000; Radiocommunications Agency 2000). An estimate of the value in New Zealand put the cost of each band at between $50 million and $200 million (Bidois and Young 2000). Third Generation (3G) CellularThe Finnish Telecommunications Administration Centre (TAC Finland 1998: 1) described 3G cellular services, as: "A global wireless multimedia system that opens up totally new horizons for wireless communication in addition to the phone call." "3G" is a generic term that encapsulates the next generation of mobile communications systems (GSM World 2000). Where first generation cellular technology was voice-only, second generation (available today) added simple text and data services, albeit at relatively low data rates. 3G will enhance these services by allowing theoretical data rates of 2 Megabits per second. It introduces the possibility of high-speed data streaming for multimedia and high-resolution video, as well as enhancing existing services (Radiocommunications Agency 2000). Expectations are high that 3G technologies will replace fixed connections for Internet access; a recent survey indicated that 78 percent of Internet access in the U.S. would be cellular by 2001 (Corechange 2000). In preparation for this new technology, standards for mobile commerce (m-commerce) are under development: Ericsson, Motorola and Nokia recently announced that they would collaborate on a methodology for credit card payments via cellular telephones (Brown-Humes 2000). Cellular Telephone Market in Aotearoa/New ZealandNew Zealand has one of the most saturated and competitive cellular telephone markets in the world, with 32.8 percent of the population now connected (Resources and Networks Branch 2000). As at January 2000 the two major cellular networks, Telecom and Vodafone, reported 1,250,000 connections, an increase from the previous quarter of 13 percent and 35 percent respectively (Resources and Networks Branch 2000). Limited mobile services are also offered by Telstra New Zealand (Telstra 1999) and by CLEAR Communications (Vodafone 2000), both through alliances with Vodafone. Vodafone is implementing new technology on its GSM network, using Wireless Application Protocol (WAP) to allow Internet access from wireless devices (Vodafone 2000) and a trial of General Packet Radio Services (GPRS). GPRS can provide bandwidth of up to 115 kilobits per second, meaning Vodafone would be able to deliver multimedia content to mobile users, a pre-cursor to the services available through 3G technologies. The Socio-political and Technological Context of Maori in Aotearoa/New ZealandIn order to assess the benefits to be obtained from ownership of management rights to portions of the radio spectrum, it is important to understand the context of Maori in society. Firstly, it should be noted that the issue of ownership is controversial, some claiming that Maori should not be forced to buy back from the Crown what they already own (Pamatatau 2000). Since this article is discussing the benefits and issues of ownership, rather than how ownership itself should be established, I do not intend to discuss the Waitangi Tribunal ruling that supports this position (Waitangi Tribunal 1999) or the Crown argument for disputing it (Bradd 2000). However, it is important to understand that the relationship between Maori and Pakeha in Aotearoa/New Zealand is defined in the context of this country's founding document, Te Tiriti O Waitangi/The Treaty of Waitangi, signed in 1840 by the Crown and Maori Chiefs (Du Plessis and Alice 1998). As Du Plessis and Alice (1998) observed, Te Tiriti forms the basis for biculturalism, which Sullivan (1994: 195) defined as:
Biculturalism in a technology context was summarised by the Waitangi Tribunal (cited in Stokes 1996: 370), which asserted: "Access to new technology was part of the quid pro quo for [Pakeha] settlement". The radio spectrum is a communications tool and Justice Savage (cited in Solomon 2000: 4) observed that; "communication is the life force of language and culture". Population and DemographicsIn 1996, people of Maori ancestry accounted for 16 percent of the population, with approximately 80 percent living in urban areas (Statistics New Zealand 1999). Maori population is younger than the non-Maori population: In 1996, 45.7 percent were aged 15 to 29, compared to 24 percent of the total population (Statistics New Zealand 1999). The rapid post-war urban drift (Statistics New Zealand 1999) has led to a dislocation from traditional iwi structures for many (Durie 1998), raising the question of representation for Maori who, as James (1996) observed, cannot locate or choose not to claim a connection to iwi. This has proved divisive with regard to asset management and negotiation with the Crown (Hill 2000), despite a Waitangi Tribunal ruling establishing that urban Maori authority Te Whanau O Waipareira is representative (Waitangi Tribunal 1998). The Tribunal notes that such an authority is the culmination of efforts to manage the urban population in a Maori way. Education and EmploymentUnemployment became a major social issue in Aotearoa/New Zealand from the 1970's with Maori the group most vulnerable to this economic dislocation (Keefe, Cram et al. 1998). Traditionally, Maori had been employed in agriculture, forestry, at the freezing works or on the railways, all industries that suffered severe contractions in employment. Keefe et al. reported that Maori unemployment in 1984 was 22.4 percent, comparing unfavourably with the general rate at the time of 9.4 percent, and that this was further compounded because Maori were not only more likely to be unemployed but were also more likely to remain unemployed. Moving forward, the unemployment rate for Maori in 1999 was 19 percent, in comparison to only 6 percent for non-Maori. In 1997 Maori represented 40 percent of those who remained unemployed for two years or more (Te Puni Kokiri 1999). Maori unemployment shows regional and demographic variations, with the rates being highest in the rural areas of Northland and the Bay of Plenty/Gisborne and amongst the young: 18 percent of all unemployed Maori are aged under nineteen and 32 percent of Maori aged fifteen to nineteen are unemployed (Te Puni Kokiri 1999). Employment of Maori in the information technology sector is equally poor: A recent government report shows that only six percent of IT workers (excluding data entry staff) are Maori (Ministry of Technology Policy Group 2000). Maori are over-represented in most negative socio-economic statistics and major disparities exist in housing, health, employment and education (Durie 1998). Although Durie notes that some educational disparities have been removed, Maori remain under-represented in the tertiary education sector (Nga korero o te wa 1999) and are less likely to have formal qualifications than non-Maori (Statistics New Zealand 1999). Maori who are degree-qualified are significantly more likely to be in employment, with an unemployment rate amongst this group of 5 percent in 1996 (Te Puni Kokiri 1999). Education is seen as a critical success factor in raising Maori involvement in the information economy (Information Technology Advisory Group 1999).
(Source:
Ministry of Education cited in Durie 1998: 87)
Scientific/Technology ContextMaori embracing new technologies must address their traditional relationship with knowledge, which differs from the Pakeha perspective (Information Technology Advisory Group 1999). However, non-Maori must also recognise and respect this difference. Little value has been placed on indigenous knowledge in Aotearoa/New Zealand: A Government strategic paper on the future of Research, Science and Technology (cited in Cunningham 1998: 388) described Maori knowledge as "other kinds of knowledge". As Cunningham observed, this is unfortunate since Maori knowledge has equal status within the concept of partnership and should never be judged as 'other'. Secondly, Maori knowledge should not be ascribed to 'tradition', since this implies that it is outdated. Cunningham argued that the history of modern scientific research in Aotearoa/New Zealand has excluded Maori in favour of Pakeha-led Western paradigms. He suggested that Maori knowledge must be considered in the context of both the past (pre- and post-Treaty) and the future and that this is entirely congruent with the Maori view. This localised knowledge, according to Gorjestani (1998), forms the basis for local-level decision making and is vital for developing decision-making strategies. Gorjestani believed that the community, not the individual, holds indigenous knowledge and Durie (1998) supports this in the context of Maori. Such knowledge is often tacit and, therefore, difficult to codify in terms of Western ways of thinking (Gorjestani 1998). Indigenous Asset ManagementIn this section, Maori management of assets returned from the Crown will be discussed and models of co-operation that support indigenous ownership reviewed. Finally, telecommunications usage amongst another indigenous community, Native American tribes, will be reviewed to gain an impression of the benefits and issues that could exist for Maori. Maori Models of OwnershipIt is not enough that, as Cunningham (1998) demanded, Maori knowledge be given equal standing or that Maori become more technically literate (Information Technology Advisory Group 1999), opportunities for economic self-determination must also exist (Durie 1998). The recent Waitangi Tribunal finding that Maori have a legitimate claim on the radio spectrum (Griggs 1999; Waitangi Tribunal 1999) presents an opportunity to create economic benefit. What is not certain is how this asset can be managed effectively to achieve the maximum benefit for Maori. Fisheries ManagementFollowing The Treaty of Waitangi (Fisheries Claims) Settlement Act 1992, the Crown agreed to fund a joint venture with Brierley Investments to acquire Aotearoa/New Zealand's largest fisheries company, Sealord (James 1996). Te Ohu Kai Moana/The Treaty of Waitangi Fisheries Commission (TOKM) was created to administer Maori fisheries "for the benefit of all Maori" (Findlay 1998: 363). Over $5 million has been spent creating a training and development strategy, which aims to ensure that Maori have the skills needed to manage and operate the assets they now own. Courses developed by TOKM include an iwi management course, run by Te Wananga O Ruakawa and the University of Waikato, and a practical skills course, operated by Aoraki Polytechnic (Te Ohu Kai Moana 2000). The effects of the return of fisheries can be seen in the changing statistics of iwi involvement between 1986 and 1996:
(Source:
TOKM cited in Durie 1998: 170)
TOKM can be examined in the context of an iwi-based organisation managing and distributing assets on behalf of Maori. There are three proposed distribution models within this framework (James 1996: 158):
Distribution of assets has been contentious, with a long-standing legal dispute still unresolved (Hill 2000). Even supporters of an iwi-based distribution model have differing opinions on whether division should be made with regard to coastline or population base (Bidois 2000; Hill 2000): Southern iwi (Ngai Tahu in particular) benefit substantially under the manamoana model, whereas Northern iwi benefit more under the population-based system (James 1996). As James observed, self-interest appears a major motivator in this process. These models perpetuate the hegemony of iwi, causing an inequality of distribution amongst urban Maori who do not identify with traditional structures (Durie 1998; Waitangi Tribunal 1998). Similar issues have already appeared with regard to the radio spectrum (Bidois and Young 2000) and this indicates the danger of attempting to treat Maori as a homogenous grouping (Durie 1998). Despite these difficulties, Findlay (p. 366) argued that an institution such as TOKM is viable because it can become a holder of knowledge and because they are able to "determine the incentives facing economic actors". Findlay (p. 367) suggested the following factors that could be important in determining the structure of a pan-Maori or iwi-based organisation:
Collaborative Models of ManagementTOKM's administration of fisheries shows that Maori can generate immediate economic returns and invest in long-term strategies for the community. However, fisheries are a traditional area of Maori expertise where knowledge is pre-existing. How will Maori succeed in managing and producing economic returns from a technology area where internal knowledge is limited? The Government has indicated that it will sell one block within the 2GHz frequency to a Maori trust and allow this to be operated in collaboration with a commercial partner. Although the exact details of this remain unclear (Bidois 2000), Ericsson and CLEAR Communications have expressed initial interest (Pamatatau 2000). Maori understand collaboration with external partners, as The Maori Economic Development Commission (1999) observed when reviewing the commercial operations of Ngai Tahu. The iwi focused on recruiting the right people for a job, even if this means going outside the iwi. At a broader level, Taiepa (1998) talked of collaborative management in terms of land use, involving a partnership between Maori and other agencies and communities. The author observed that success in collaborative management is reliant on an increasing level of dialogue between the groups to ensure that common goals are articulated. Collaboration is an appropriate paradigm when additional support or funding is required (Casey, Ross et al. 1999), making this approach viable, so long as the chosen partner has proven skills in the field and is prepared to work collaboratively with Maori (Taiepa 1998). Telecommunications Infrastructure Amongst Native AmericansTo help identify solutions for Maori, I will now review how another indigenous minority, Native American's, are managing telecommunications. The Native American population of the United States is currently just over two million, of which one million live in rural or semi-rural locations (one third of the total population living on reserves) (Office of Technology Assessment 1995). Most tribes are now involved in telecommunications, ranging from Internet access to the provision of full telecommunications infrastructures (Casey, Ross et al. 1999). Tribes are building viable economic models within a telecommunications framework and Casey et al. noted that tribes see telecommunications as creating building blocks for stronger communities and for establishing their place to stand within the cultural, economic and socio-political landscape of modern America. The downside is that new technologies bring conflict between the old and new ways of being and issues of cultural preservation, identity and values must be resolved at a tribal level. The U.S. Government sees modern telecommunications as a way of re-building traditional Native American values and identity and as a means to connect communities together (Office of Technology Assessment 1995). Ownership and culturally appropriate management of the technology is seen as important. Training in the use of technology is seen as economic empowerment and training becomes vital when the user base is traditionally an unsophisticated user of technology, due to financial and educational barriers (Dutton 1993). Technology is seen as ensuring the future viability, improved standard of living and access to new economic paradigms, particularly given the large rural bias in the population base (Casey, Ross et al. 1999). As Dutton observes, many minority-owned organisations lack the technical expertise within their own organisation or community framework; however, in the U.S. there are numerous sponsorship and support programmes available to assist with development (Casey, Ross et al. 1999). ConclusionDurie (1998) observed that major social and economic disparities still exist between Maori and non-Maori. In 1984, then Minister of Maori Affairs, Koro Wetere, (cited in Solomon 2000: 5) suggested: "The pace of economic development for Maori had to be two steps for everyone else's one, if Maori were to catch up with non-Maori." The purpose of owning management rights to the radio spectrum is not to generate revenue per se but to create economic independence from the state and from Pakeha, thus redressing past injustices and restoring balance. Partnership in the context of Te Tiriti O Waitangi is an important concept, yet whilst Maori remain economically constrained it is hard to achieve. Any venture must be commercially viable; otherwise it will fail in New Zealand's highly competitive telecommunications marketplace. A commercial partnership can succeed if there is a common purpose and respective positions are understood. Partnership has been successful for fisheries and external funding sources and knowledge important for the development of the telecommunications industry amongst Native Americans. Benefits of ownership come from opportunities to train for and be employed in a high technology business, thus closing the gap between Maori and non-Maori. Raising the level of education and improving qualifications for individuals is an imperative for success in the information economy, evidenced by the experience of Native Americans. There are also benefits from ensuring that access to technology is targeted appropriately and usage is managed in a cultural appropriate way. Native American experience suggests that creating a sufficient level of technological knowledge will allow Maori communities to manage their own networks and interfaces in a Maori way. Ultimately, helping to assimilate technology into everyday Maori society. Revenue can be used to benefit Maori and restore balance. However, the distribution model is critical and the saga of the fisheries assets demonstrates that no clear agreement exists within Maoridom. Division and disagreements are already apparent over the radio spectrum. Maori must determine methods of ownership and distribution for themselves. However, such methods should be fair and equitable for all Maori and not create pockets of isolated wealth whilst bypassing those who are disenfranchised by an iwi-based hegemony. ReferencesBidois, V. (2000). Decision soon on Maori mobile phone spectrum. New Zealand Herald. Auckland, NZ. Bidois, V. (2000). Maori fish deal leader rejects share-out plan. New Zealand Herald. Auckland, NZ. Bidois, V. and A. Young (2000). Govt backs pan-Maori trust for radiowaves. New Zealand Herald. Auckland, NZ. Bradd, R. (2000). Government under fire over radio rights. New Zealand Herald. Auckland, NZ. Brown-Humes, C. (2000). The future in their handsets. Financial Times. London, England. Casey, J., R. Ross, et al. (1999). Native networking: Telecommunications and information technology in Indian country. Washington D.C., Benton Foundation. Corechange (2000). Survey says: 78% percent of the U.S. internet population to use wireless by 2001, Corechange/Cap Gemini. 2000. Cunningham, C. (1998). A framework for addressing Maori knowledge in research, science and technology. Te Oru Rangahau, Massey University, Palmerston North, Massey University. Du Plessis, R. and L. Alice (1998). Feminisms, connections and differences. Feminist thought in Aotearoa New Zealand. R. Du Plessis and L. Alice. Auckland, OUP. Durie, M. (1998). Te mana, te kawanatanga: The politics of Maori self-determination. Auckland, NZ, OUP. Dutton, W. H. (1993). Electronic service delivery and the inner city: the risk of benign neglect. Facing the challenge of risk and vulnerability in an information society. J. Berleur, C. Beardon and R. Laufer. Amsterdam, Elsevier. Findlay, M. (1998). Institutions for the management of iwi commercial fisheries assets. Te Oru Rangahau, Massey University, Palmerston North, Massey University. Gorjestani, N. (1998). Indigenous knowledge for development. First international conference on rural telecommunications, Valetta, Malta, International Telecommunications Union. Griggs, K. (1999). Maori win wireless rights, Wired. 2000. Griggs, K. (1999). New Zealand's invisible treasure, Wired. 2000. GSM World (2000). What is 3G?, GSM Association. 2000. Hill, K. (2000). Interview with Harry Mikaere and John Tamihere (May 17). Wellington, NZ, Radio New Zealand. Information Technology Advisory Group (1999). The Knowledge Economy. Wellington, NZ, Information Technology Advisory Group. James: (1996). Case study: Sealord and treaty settlement. Changing places: New Zealand in the nineties. R. Le Heron and E. Pawson. Auckland, NZ, Longman Paul. Keefe, V., F. Cram, et al. (1998). Mauri mahi, mauri ora, mauri noho, mauri mate: Health effects of unemployment portfolio. Te Oru Rangahau, Massey University, Palmerston North, Massey University. Maori Economic Development Commission (1999). The way forward/Kaua e hoki whakamuri. Wellington, NZ, Maori Economic Development Commission. Ministry of Commerce (2000). 2 GHz Auction - Consultation on auction rules and management rights deed, Ministry of Commerce. 2000. Ministry of Commerce (2000). 2 GHz Auction to Start in July 2000, Ministry of Commerce. 2000. Ministry of Technology Policy Group (2000). Statistics on Information Technology in New Zealand. Wellington, NZ, Ministry of Economic Development. Nga korero o te wa (1999). Nga korero: Business. Nga korero o te wa. Office of Technology Assessment (1995). Telecommunications and Native Americans. Washington, D.C., Office of Technology Assessment. Pamatatau, R. (2000). Maori spectrum claimants negotiating for 'what is ours'. InfoTech Weekly. Radiocommunications Agency (2000). Auction of third generation mobile telecommunications licenses in the UK - Frequently asked questions, Radiocommunications Agency. 2000. Resources and Networks Branch (2000). New Zealand Telecommunications 1987 - 2000. Wellington, NZ, Ministry of Commerce. Solomon, M. (2000). Submission to Ministerial inquiry into telecommunications. Wellington, NZ, Kawatea Chambers. Statistics New Zealand (1999). Maori, Department of Statistics. 2000. Statistics New Zealand (1999). Maori population, Department of Statistics. 2000. Stokes, E. (1996). Maori identities. Changing places: New Zealand in the nineties. R. Le Heron and E. Pawson. Auckland, NZ, Longman Paul. Sullivan, K. (1994). Bicultural education in Aotearoa/New Zealand. New Zealand annual review of education/Te arotake a tau o te ao o te mataurangi i Aotearoa. H. Manson. Wellington, NZ, Victoria University. TAC Finland (1998). Annual Report, Telecommunications Administration Centre. 2000. Taiepa, T. (1998). Collaborative management - Enhancing Maori participation in the management of natural resources. Te Oru Rangahau, Massey University, Palmerston North, Massey University. Te Ohu Kai Moana (2000). Why TOKM was established, Te Ohu Kai Moana/Treaty of Waitangi Fisheries Commission. 2000. Te Puni Kokiri (1999). Maori unemployment. Wellington, NZ, Te Puni Kokiri/Ministry of Maori Affairs. Telstra (1999). MobileNet introduction, Telstra Corporation. 2000. Vodafone (2000). CLEAR Communications and Vodafone announce alliance [media release]. Auckland, NZ, Vodafone Limited. Vodafone (2000). Vodafone New Zealand continues phenomenal growth [media release]. Auckland, NZ, Vodafone Limited. Waitangi Tribunal (1998). Te Whanau o Waipareira Report. Wellington, NZ, Waitangi Tribunal. Waitangi Tribunal (1999). Radio spectrum management and telecommunications development (Wai 776). Wellington, NZ, Waitangi Tribunal. Copyright
© 2000 Wairua Consulting. All rights reserved. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
wairua » publications » Maori and the new wireless frequencies |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Copyright
1997-2005 Wairua Consulting. All rights reserved. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||