Ethnicity Measures Intermarriage and Social Policy

0 Comment

For the New Zealand census, respondents have the freedom to choose their own ethnicity how they see fit. Of course, this can sometimes lead to skewed data. Another factor that contributes to unreliable data is how the questions about ethnicity are worded. In the New Zealand censuses of 1991, 1996, and 2001, the way questions about ethnicity are worded have varied considerably. Inevitably, responses have also varied depending on how the question is asked. For those who are of mixed ancestry, they can sometimes claim to have ties to a number of different races or none at all. Maori people in particular have a hard time responding to questions about ethnicity because they can often claim more than one. Interracial marriage has led to many people who have a stake in more than one culture, and this had led to questions about which group they truly belong to. However, because respondents have the ability to be able to choose which ethnic group they affiliate with the most, they are more likely to choose the group that they feel the most comfortable with. The definition of ethnicity in New Zealand will continue to provoke debate about how people are classed in terms of their ethnic groups. Due to the rise in interracial marriages, it is likely that this definition will become more clouded over the next few decades. In my mind, ethnicity is an important part of a person’s being because it gives them an identity. Without an identity, we are likely to become defined by how other people view us. If people are to be given the choice to choose which ethnic group they belong to, then there should be some measures put in place to make sure that census data does not become unreliable. From Statistics New Zealand’s Review of the Measurement of Ethnicity, I feel that a fractional ethnicity model from Gould would be the best option. This way, the total number of responses would equal the total population. Also, each part of a person’s ethnic background would contribute towards the total makeup of New Zealand’s population. This is better than forcing people who identify with more than one ethnicity to choose one over the other. Also, it would be more effective than randomly allocating prioritisation, where people of more than one ethnicity are randomly applied to only a single ethnicity. Politics, power and indigenous tourism In his article Politics, power and indigenous tourism, Michael Hall investigates how tourism is thought of in terms of politics and power. Power is something that is placed in the hands of those qualified to lead on a certain issue. For the tourism industry, many of the decisions are made without consulting the local people who perhaps have more expertise and cultural links to the tourist attractions that are made available. Power can be given or taken away depending on who has the power and what they have it over. Lukes identified three approaches that analyze power. a one-dimensional view (observable, over behaviour, conflict and decision-making), a two-dimensional view (decisions and non-decisions and observable conflict), and a three-dimensional view (decision-making and control over political agenda, observable and latent conflict). The one-dimensional view says that even though the community decision-making process is imperfect, it can at least be observed since two