Tradition and change: celebrating food systems resilience at two Indigenous Māori community events
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cultural wellbeing and resilience are of key importance in many Indigenous communities impacted by colonization processes. Reciprocity and the sharing of an intergenerational way of life in extended family collectives is an enduring cultural obligation. For many communities, hosting large gatherings expresses customary philosophies and practices and brings families together, and food and food systems are central to these events. We partnered with two Indigenous Māori communities in Aotearoa New Zealand to explore how these communities embody resilience in their food systems. We collected data from two large pan-community gatherings or poukai in the Waikato-Tainui tribal calendar that have been held annually for more than 100 years. The first took place in a remote, rural, coastal community, Marokopa, whereas the second took place at a tribal hub, Tūrangawaewae, that frequently hosts international visitors. Most visitors were > 50 years old, consistent with the purpose of this gathering, with more women elders than men attending. At Marokopa, volunteers returned from a variety of locations, mostly by car, in contrast to Tūrangawaewae where volunteers generally lived close and either walked or drove short distances to the poukai. Gifted contributions of food and supplies from local gardens continued a history of reciprocity and connection to traditional food systems at Marokopa. At Tūrangawaewae, most provisions were store bought, but there was a strong focus on healthy eating. Both events produced little waste. Despite a shift from traditional foods and self-sufficiency in food systems, these communities demonstrate collective resilience in their motivations for hosting, cultural vitality in their expressions of manaakitanga (hosting), and a commitment to kaitiakaitanga (stewardship) in their focus on healthy foods, recycling, food waste, and intergenerational learning at these events.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".