Reparations for Indigenous Tribes: What the United States Can Learn From New Zealand
In 1800s America, Native American tribes experienced an exponential loss of land when eastern settlers of the United States began expanding Westward.[1] Native American tribes owned 138 million acres of land in 1887.[2] By 1934, however, Native Americans owned only 48 million acres.[3] Much of this land loss was due to the Dawes Act,[4] which split Native American land into individual allotment divisions owned by the federal government.[5] Only the Native Americans who accepted this division and agreed to give up their land were allowed to become US citizens.[6] In turn, the government would offer individual allotments back to heads of Native American families or sell the land to non-Native citizens.[7] By the time Congress repealed the Act in 1934, Native American tribes had lost ownership of more than 70 percent of their land.[8]
The United States attempted a reparations program after World War II for Native Americans who had given up their land under these policies.[9] The program allowed for any federally recognized tribe who had land seized by settlers to receive compensation.[10] By the time the program dissolved in 1978, the government had paid out about $1.3 billion to Native Americans.[11] This payout, however, was the equivalent of less than $1,000 for each Native American in the United States and was held in trust accounts rather than paid directly to individuals.[12]
The United States has never publicly acknowledged the violence and mistreatment of Native American tribes. A small section in the Defense Appropriations Act of 2010 included an apology to tribes, but a stand-alone apology resolution has attempted to and failed to pass multiple times.[13] To adequately address the harm done to Native American tribes, the American government needs to take a more comprehensive approach to reparations. Publicly admitting wrongdoing, engaging in meaningful negotiation, and providing adequate compensation will not right the wrongs of the past. Still, it would be an essential step to healing and restoring justice for Native American communities.
In the 1970s, the New Zealand government began working on a reparations program for Indigenous tribes that had land seized.[14] Māori, the Indigenous people of New Zealand, were the primary owners of land until European explorers began settling in the country in the 1800s.[15] In the 1860s, large areas of Māori tribal land were deemed “confiscation districts” by European settlers.[16] With this classification, settlers began taking and settling on Māori land, confiscating almost all of the previously owned tribe land.[17] By 1920, only eight percent of New Zealand land remained in Māori ownership.[18]
In 1975, New Zealand created a settlement system where Indigenous people could seek reparations for colonization atrocities.[19] The Treaty of Waitangi Act established a special tribunal to hear contemporary grievances brought by Māori tribes against the Crown, and the tribunal was allowed to hear historical grievance claims starting in 1985.[20] By the late 1980s, the New Zealand government had established a unit within the Department of Justice focused specifically on treaty settlement negotiations, which eventually became the Office of Treaty Settlements.[21]
By mid-2018, the New Zealand government had paid over 2.24 billion dollars in settlements, made dozens of apologies, and negotiated various other reparations with multiple tribes.[22] The Ngāi Tahu tribe, for example, received an apology signed by Queen Elizabeth, 170 million dollars in compensation, and the return of the sacred mountain Aoraki.[23] After years of negotiations, the Rangitāne tribe received a formal apology, 32.5 million dollars in money and land, and the government officially reverted the name of a sacred Rangitāne mountain to its Māori name, Pūkaha.[24] In 2022, the New Zealand Prime Minister issued an apology and a plan for settlement and reparations for the Ngāti Maniapoto tribe.[25] Additionally, the government agreed to 155 million dollars in compensation to the Ngāti Maniapoto and the return of thirty-six sites of cultural significance.[26]
Though imperfect, New Zealand has made strides beyond what the United States government has achieved. Nonetheless, there are limitations to settlements from the Crown. For example, New Zealand will not contemplate repatriating ownership of large tracts of oil or gas-rich land to Māori.[27] Like New Zealand, Indigenous land in the United States is rich in resources, with Indian reservations holding more than 35% of America’s fossil fuel resources.[28] Yet, New Zealand has gone further than the US, negotiating directly with tribes who lost land through dedicated government entities.
The US has yet to dedicate resources to reparations for its Native tribes to the same extent New Zealand has, and thus far, has failed to address the full extent of harm caused by the government’s actions. In contrast, New Zealand’s approach has continuously led to monetary settlements, admissions of guilt, and land repatriation. The US can learn from New Zealand’s commitment to addressing Indigenous grievances by engaging in genuine dialogue and providing reparations, including and beyond monetary compensation. By adopting a similar framework, the United States could take meaningful steps toward restoring justice and building a foundation for healing for Native American communities.
Erin Duddy is a staff member of Fordham International Law Journal Volume XLVIII.
[1] See The Expedition's Impact on Indigenous Americans, National Park Service, https://www.nps.gov/articles/the-expeditions-impact.htm (last visited Jan, 20, 2025).
[2] Native American Ownership and Governance of Natural Resources, U.S. Dep’t of the Interior, https://revenuedata.doi.gov/how-revenue-works/native-american-ownership-governance/ (last visited Dec. 10, 2024).
[3] See id.
[4] General Allotment (Dawes) Act of 1887, ch. 119, 24 Stat. 388 (repealed 1934).
[5] See What Was the Dawes Act?, National Park Service (July 9, 2021), https://www.nps.gov/articles/000/dawes-act.htm.
[6] See id.
[7] See id.
[8] See U.S. Dep’t of the Interior, supra note 2.
[9] See Adeel Hassan & Jack Healy, America Has Tried Reparations Before. Here Is How It Went., N.Y. Times (June 19, 2019), https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/19/us/reparations-slavery.html.
[10] See id.
[11] See id.
[12] See id.
[13] John D. McKinnon, U.S. Offers An Official Apology to Native Americans, The Wall Street Journal (Dec. 22. 2009) https://www.wsj.com/articles/BL-WB-15589.
[14] See History of Māori Land, Tupu.nz, https://www.tupu.nz/en/tuhono/about-maori-land-in-new-zealand/history-of-maori-land (last visited Dec. 10, 2024).
[15] See id.
[16] See Fabiola Cineas, A Story of Reparations and Healing From New Zealand, Stanford Social Innovation Review (July 12, 2023), https://ssir.org/articles/entry/a_story_of_reparations_and_healing_from_new_zealand.
[17] See id.
[18] Tupu.nz, supra note 14.
[19]See Eva Corlett, Māori Tribe Secures Landmark Apology and Compensation Over Colonial Atrocities, The Guardian (Sept. 22, 2022), https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/sep/23/maori-tribe-secures-landmark-apology-and-compensation-over-colonial-atrocities.
[20] See Kelly Buchanan, Indigenous Rights in New Zealand: Legislation, Litigation, and Protest, Library of Congress Blogs (Nov, 18, 2016) https://blogs.loc.gov/law/2016/11/indigenous-rights-in-new-zealand-legislation-litigation-and-protest/.
[21] See id.
[22] See Cineas, supra note 16.
[23] See Id.
[24] See Planet Money, Reparations In New Zealand, NPR (Feb 28, 2020), https://www.npr.org/2020/02/28/810485160/episode-975-reparations-in-new-zealand.
[25] See Ben McKay, ‘Momentous’: Ardern Issues Historic Māori Apology and $155m in Redress, The Sydney Morning Herald (Dec. 5, 2022), https://www.smh.com.au/world/oceania/momentous-ardern-issues-historic-maori-apology-and-155m-in-redress-20221205-p5c3v0.html.
[26] See id.
[27] Ranginui Walker, Ka Whawhai Tonu Matou: Struggle Without End 302–03 (2004).
[28] Rick Tallman, Daniel Cardenas, & Morgan Bazilian, Native American Energy Sovereignty is Key to American Energy Security, Wilson Center (Nov. 09, 2023), https://www.wilsoncenter.org/article/native-american-energy-sovereignty-key-american-energy-security.
This is a student blog post and in no way represents the views of the Fordham International Law Journal.