The Interaction Between Culture, Resilience, Risks and Outcomes: A New Zealand Study

  • Jackie SandersEmail author
  • Robyn Munford
Part of the Cross-Cultural Advancements in Positive Psychology book series (CAPP, volume 11)


This chapter focuses on experiences of a group of young people in New Zealand who faced high levels of adversity. It considers three key cultural groups in the New Zealand context (Māori, Pacific Island and Pākehā) and the relationship of these to four key dimensions of youth lives; risk, resilience, social and educational outcomes and opportunities. We explore the nuanced and subtle ways that different cultural identification manifested itself in these key areas of youth lives. The findings suggest a complicated set of interactions between culture, risks, resilience and outcomes among vulnerable youth that may not be apparent when considering patterns of overall advantage and disadvantage that apply at national population levels. Service providers need to respond to this complex relationship between risk, resilience and culture by developing interventions with individual youth that directly respond to the specific aspects of their social ecologies in order to create opportunities for improved outcomes. This means we need to think differently about each of the cultural groups we work with rather than responding in uniform ways; for Māori and Pacific youth there are cultural resources to draw on that can be used to address risk, but for Pākehā youth attention may need to be given to creating resources and relationships that will provide them with a stronger positive sense of identity and cohesion.


Culture Resilience Risk Intervention outcomes Identity 


  1. Bell, A. (2004). Relating Māori and Pākehā: The politics of indigenous and settler identities. A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand.Google Scholar
  2. Berliner, P., Larsen, L., & de Casas Soberon, E. (2012). Case study: Promoting community resilience with local values – Greenland’s Paamiut Asasara. In M. Ungar (Ed.), The social ecology of resilience – A handbook of theory and practice (pp. 387–398). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bovan, R., Harland, C., & Grace, L. (2011). More ladders, fewer snakes: Two proposals to reduce youth disadvantage. Auckland, New Zealand: The New Zealand Institute.Google Scholar
  4. Briggs, S., & Cheek, J. (1986). The role of factor analysis in the development and evaluation of personality scales. Journal of Personality, 54, 106–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cormack, D., & Robson, C. (2010). Classification and output of multiple ethnicities: Issues for monitoring Māori health. Wellington, New Zealand: Te Rōpū Rangahau Hauora a Eru Pōmare.Google Scholar
  6. Diener, E., Emmons, R., Larsen, R., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Education Counts. (2000, 2003, 2006, 2009). Programme for International Student Assessment, various authors. Retrieved March 21, 2013, from
  8. Foster, R., & Spencer, D. (2011). At risk of what? Possibilities over probabilities in the study of young lives. Journal of Youth Studies, 14, 125–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Goodman, R. (1997). The strengths and difficulties questionnaire: A research note. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 38, 581–586.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Goodman, R. (2001). Psychometric properties of the strengths and difficulties questionnaire. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 40, 1337–1345.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hektner, J. (1995). When moving up implies moving out: Rural adolescent conflict in the transition to adulthood. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 11, 3–14.Google Scholar
  12. Henare, M., Puckey, A., & Nicholson, A. (2011). He Ara Hou: The pathway forward: Getting it right for Aotearoa New Zealand’s Māori and Pasifika children. Auckland, New Zealand: Every Child Counts.Google Scholar
  13. Johnson, A. (2013). She’ll be right: A state of the nation report from the salvation army. Auckland, New Zealand: The Salvation Army, Social Policy and Parliamentary Unit.Google Scholar
  14. Keddell, E. (2006). Pavlova and pineapple pie: Selected identity influences on Samoan‐Pākehā people in Aotearoa/New Zealand. Kotuitui: New Zealand Journal of Social Sciences Online, 1, 45–63.Google Scholar
  15. Liebenberg, L., Ungar, M., & Van de Vijver, F. (2012). Validation of the Child and Youth Resilience Measure-28 (CYRM-28) among Canadian youth with complex needs. Research on Social Work Practice, 22, 219–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lipspitt, L., & Demick, J. (2012). Theory and measurement of resilience: Views from development. In M. Ungar (Ed.), The social ecology of resilience – A handbook of theory and practice (pp. 43–52). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Macfarlane, A. (2004). Kia hiwa ra! Listen to culture: Māori students plea to educators. Wellington, New Zealand: NZCER Press.Google Scholar
  18. Macfarlane, S., & Macfarlane, A. (2012). Diversity and inclusion in early childhood education: A bicultural approach to engaging Māori potential. In D. Gordon Burns, A. Gunn, K. Purdue, & N. Surtees (Eds.), Te Aoturoa Tataki, inclusive early childhood education: Perspectives on inclusion, social justice and equity in Aotearoa New Zealand (pp. 21–38). Wellington, New Zealand: NZCER Press.Google Scholar
  19. Mackey, G., & Lockie, C. (2012). Huakina mai: Opening doorways for children’s participation within early childhood settings – Economic disadvantage as a barrier to citizenship. In D. Gordon Burns, A. Gunn, K. Purdue, & N. Surtees (Eds.), Te Aoturoa Tataki, Inclusive early childhood education: perspectives on inclusion, social justice and equity in Aotearoa New Zealand (pp. 75–93). Wellington, New Zealand: NZCER Press.Google Scholar
  20. Masten, A., & Wright, M. O. (2010). Resilience over the lifespan: Developmental perspectives on resistance, recovery, and transformation. In J. Reich, A. Zautra, & J. Hall (Eds.), The handbook of adult resilience (pp. 213–237). New York, NY: The Guildford Press.Google Scholar
  21. Mila-Schaaf, K. (2010). Polycultural capital and the Pasifika second generation: Negotiating identities in diasporic spaces. A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Sociology at Massey University, Albany, New Zealand.Google Scholar
  22. Munford, R., & Sanders, J. (2011). Embracing the diversity of practice: Indigenous knowledge and mainstream social work practice. Journal of Social Work Practice, 25, 63–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. OECD. (2011). Divided we stand: Why inequality keeps rising. Country note New Zealand. OECD.
  24. OECD Family Database. (2011). OECD social policy division – Directorate of employment, labour and social affairs, the structure of families, SF2.4: Share of births out of wedlock and teenage births, Chart SF2.4.D: Adolescent fertility rates, 1980 and 2008.,3746, en_2649_34819_37836996_1_1_1_1,00.htm
  25. Panter-Brick, C., & Eggerman, M. (2012). Understanding culture, resilience and mental health: The production of hope. In M. Ungar (Ed.), The social ecology of resilience – A handbook of theory and practice (pp. 369–388). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pearson, D. (2012). Ethnic inequalities – Race, ethnicity and inequality. Te Ara – the Encyclopedia of New Zealand, updated 13 July 2012. URL:
  27. Poulin, C., Hand, D., & Boudreau, B. (2005). Validity of a 12-item version of the CES-D used in the national longitudinal study of children and youth. Chronic Diseases in Canada, 26, 65–72.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Theokas, C., & Lerner, R. (2006). Observed ecological assets in families, schools, and neighborhoods: Conceptualization, measurement and relations with positive and negative developmental outcomes. Applied Developmental Science, 10, 61–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ungar, M. (Ed.). (2011). The social ecology of resilience. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  30. Ungar, M., Liebenberg, L., Dudding, P., Armstrong, M., & Van de Vijver, F. (2012) Patterns of service use, individual and contextual risk factors, and resilience among adolescents using multiple psychosocial services. Child Abuse and Neglect. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2012.05.007#doilink.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Health and Social ServicesMassey UniversityPalmerston NorthNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations