Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Fixed not fluid: European identification in the Aotearoa New Zealand census

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Journal of Population Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Social scientists have long treated ethnicity as socially constructed and historically contingent, rather than fixed at birth and transmitted across generations in a linear fashion. A growing body of work has theorised and examined how individuals construct and express their ethnic identities in a variety of contexts and at different life course stages. Most studies have focused on Indigenous and ethnic minority groups; studies focusing on the experience of majority or dominant groups are rare. Utilising a unique longitudinal census dataset that links whole census microdata in successive censuses, this article adds to the literature by empirically measuring the relative fluidity or rigidity of majority European ethnic identification over several decades. Analysing four sets of linked census pairs, we find that European patterns of self-identification diverge significantly from those of Māori and ethnic minority groups. Individuals who identify solely as European in one census are far less likely to change their ethnic self-identification in the next census. These findings suggest that affiliation to dominant ethnicity operates in ways that are meaningfully different to other ethnic groups, indicating key cross-category differences in how majority ethnicity is socially constructed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. A wide range of concepts are used to define this form of cultural, group-based difference, from the biological frame of phenotype or race, to origins, language, or culture. We use ethnicity as an umbrella term for distinguishing such socially defined groups.

  2. The 2018 Census had an unexpectedly low response rate and had to be supplemented with the use of other government datasets, which has affected the quality of some ethnicity data (2018 Census External Data Quality Panel 2019). 2018 census microdata had not been included in the NZLC database at the time of writing this paper.

  3. And Simpson and Akinwale (2007) note how changes in ethnic response on a form does not necessarily indicate a change in identity per se, but can reflect other factors, such as data collection, transcription or coding error; change or ambiguity in the survey instrument, or changes in who in practice is completing the form.

  4. Perez and Hirschman (2009) extended these methods to provide such ‘error of closure’ estimates across American racial categories, subtracting national increase and net international migration numbers from official counts to provide ‘reasonable’ estimates of net interracial mobility. They found a small drift from the non‐Hispanic white population into minority ethnic groups over the past quarter century.

  5. The US census asks a question on race which lists racial and national-origin groups and a separate ‘ethnicity’ question asking if respondents are of Hispanic or Latino origin. Liebler et al. (2017) measure change over both categories.

  6. While Britain proclaimed sovereignty on the basis of the Treaty, the Waitangi Tribunal’s response to stage one of the Wai 1040: Te Paparahi o te Raki inquiry determined that iwi and hapū did not cede sovereignty in signing Te Tiriti (Waitangi, 2014).

  7. The term Pakeha seems to have been dropped after many people in 1996 crossed the word out or otherwise complained about its inclusion (Marcetic, 2018). Many Europeans have a visceral dislike of this word, although it should be noted that a group with the slogan ‘Call Me Pākehā Please’ campaigned for it to be included in the most recent 2018 census (Tokalau, 2018).

  8. People recording New Zealander ethnicity increased from 85,300 people in 2001 to 429,429 in 2006 (Kukutai and Didham 2012), and this number dropped still further to 65,973 people in 2013 (Didham 2017).

  9. Records created via a ‘substitute’ census form were also excluded. This approach was used when Statistics New Zealand gained sufficient evidence during the collection process that a person existed, or a dwelling was occupied but no corresponding form was received (Statistics New Zealand 2014). Some variables are imputed for these records, but they do not contain sufficient information to satisfy the requirements of the linking process.

  10. A number of theoretically linkable census records at each census (t) were not eligible for deterministic matching because age, sex or address variables were not stated or otherwise available. Such records were included in the subsequent probabilistic matching stage.

  11. Since 1991, when a question on ‘ethnic group’ was introduced, a separate question in the New Zealand census has asked if the respondent is of (indigenous) Māori ancestry/descent.

  12. Note that categories will include people who report two or more ethnicities within each level one category, so that those who recorded New Zealand European (level one European), Samoan and Tongan (both level one Pacific peoples) would be counted here as European and Pacific.

  13. While the level three categories listed are for the most part identical to the level four category, British and Irish is a level three category which aggregates British not further defined (nfd), Celtic, Channel Islander, Cornish, English, Gaelic, Irish, Manx, Orkney Islander, Shetland Islander, Scottish, and Welsh level four records.

  14. Disaggregating European into various listed groups may relate to criticisms from minority groups, expressed in the 1988 Review of Ethnic Statistics, that while minority groups were enumerated in great detail, Europeans were not subject to the same level of scrutiny (Department of Statistics 1988).

  15. The relative stability in the total usually resident population counted in the level 1 European category, 83.2 per cent in 1991 and 83.1 per cent in 1996, would seem to validate this suggestion (Broman 2018).

  16. Some have suggested that early European settlers had generally more parochial notions of identity centred in countries, counties or even parishes (Akenson 1990; Wells 2008).

References

  • (2018) Census External Data Quality Panel. (2019). Initial report of the 2018 census external data quality panel. Statistics New Zealand.

  • Akenson, D. H. (1990). Half the world from home: Perspectives of the Irish in New Zealand, 1860–1950. Victoria University Press.

  • American Anthropological Association. (1998). AAA statement on race. American Anthropologist, 100, 712–713.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, B. (1991). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism (Revised and extended). Verso.

  • Anderson, I., et al. (2016). Indigenous and tribal peoples’ health: The lancet and Lowitja Institute global collaboration. The Lancet, 388(10040), 131–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2017). Cultural Diversity in Australia, 2016. Canberra. https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/2071.0~2016~Main%20Features~Cultural%20Diversity%20Article~60. Accessed 20 June 2020.

  • Baker, S. J. (1945). Origins of the words Pakeha and Maori. Journal of the Polynesian Society, 54(4), 223–231.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barth, F. (Ed.). (1969). Ethnic groups and boundaries: The social organization of culture difference. George Allen & Unwin.

  • Belich, J. (1996). Making peoples: a history of the New Zealanders from Polynesian settlement to the end of the nineteenth century. Penguin.

  • Bell, A. (1996). We’re just New Zealanders’: Pakeha identity politics. In P. Spoonley, D. Pearson, & C. McPherson (Eds.), Nga Patai: Racism and ethnic relations in Aotearoa/New Zealand. (pp. 144–158). Dunmore Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, A. (2006). Bifurcation or entanglement? Settler identity and biculturalism in Aotearoa New Zealand. Continuum, 20(2), 253–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biddle, N., & Crawford, H. (2015). The changing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander population: Evidence from the 2006–2011 Australian census longitudinal dataset. CAEPR indigenous population project 2011 census papers paper 18. Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research.

  • Blau, P. M. (1977). Inequality and heterogeneity: A primitive theory of social structure. Free Press.

  • Bonilla-Silva, E. (2001). White supremacy and racism in the post-Civil Rights era. Rienner.

  • Boyd, M. (1999). Canadian eh? Ethnic origin shifts in the Canadian census. Canadian Ethnic Studies, 31(3), 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broman, P. (2018). Measuring the majority: Counting Europeans in the New Zealand Census. New Zealand Sociology, 33(3), 83–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broustet, D., & Rivoilan, P. (2015). Recensement de la population 2014: Une démographie toujours Dynamique. Synthèse N° 35. Noumea, New Caledonia: Institut de la statistique et des études économiques de Nouvelle-Calédonie.

  • Brown, P., Callister, P., Carter, K., & Engler, R. (2010). Ethnic mobility: Is it important for research and policy analysis? Policy Quarterly, 6(3), 45–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, P., & Gray, A. (2009). Inter-ethnic mobility between the 2001 and 2006 censuses: The statistical impact of the ‘New Zealander’ response. Final report of a review of the official ethnicity statistical standard 2009. (pp. 27–36). Statistics New Zealand.

  • Callister, P. (2004). Ethnicity measures, intermarriage and social policy. Social Policy Journal of New Zealand, 23, 109–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callister, P., Didham, R., & Potter, D. (2005). Ethnic intermarriage in New Zealand. Statistics New Zealand working paper. Statistics New Zealand.

  • Caron-Malenfant, É., Coulombe, S., Guimond, É., Grondin, C., & Lebel, A. (2014). Ethnic mobility of Aboriginal peoples in Canada between the 2001 and 2006 censuses. Population-E, 69(1), 29–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coope, P., & Piesse, A. (1997). 1991–1996 intercensal consistency study. Statistics New Zealand.

  • Cormack, D., & Robson, C. (2010). Classification and output of multiple ethnicities: Issues for monitoring Māori health. Te Rōpū Rangahau Hauora a Eru Pōmare.

  • Department of Statistics. (1988). Report of the review committee on ethnic statistics. Department of Statistics.

  • Didham, R. (2016). Ethnic mobility in the New Zealand census, 1981–2013: A preliminary look. New Zealand Population Review, 42, 27–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Didham, R. (2017). Reflections on identity: Ethnicity, ethnic recording and ethnic mobility. In Z. L. Rocha & M. Webber (Eds.), Mana Tangatarua: Mixed heritages, ethnic identity and Biculturalism in Aotearoa/New Zealand. Routledge.

  • Didham, R., Callister, P., & Chambers, G. (2017). Multidimensional intersections: The merging and emerging of complex European settler identities. In Z. L. Rocha & M. Webber (Eds.), Mana Tangatarua: Mixed heritages, ethnic identity and Biculturalism in Aotearoa/New Zealand. Routledge.

  • Didham, R., Nissen, K., & Dobson, W. (2014). Linking censuses: New Zealand longitudinal census 1981–2006. Statistics New Zealand.

  • Doane, A. (1997). Dominant group ethnic identity in the United States: The role of ‘hidden’ ethnicity in intergroup relations. Sociological Quarterly, 38(3), 375–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, R. (2017). ‘It’s a bicultural nation. But the journey towards true Biculturalism, it’s not there yet’: Exploring fathers’ racial projects in bringing up their multi-race children in New Zealand. In F. Fozdar & K. McGavin (Eds.), Mixed race identities in Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific Islands. (pp. 197–212). Routledge.

  • Elder, C., Ellis, C., & Pratt, A. (2004). Whiteness In constructions Of Australian Nationhood: Indigenes, immigrants and governmentality. In A. Moreton-Robinson (Ed.), Whitening race: Essays in social and cultural criticism. (pp. 208–221). Aboriginal Studies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eschbach, K. (1993). Changing Identification among American Indians and Alaska natives. Demography, 30(4), 635–652.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eschbach, K., Supple, K., & Snipp, M. (1998). Changes in racial identification and the educational attainment of American Indians, 1970–1990. Demography, 35(1), 35–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fenton, S., & Mann, R. (2010). Introducing the majority to ethnicity: Do they like what they see? In G. Calder, P. Cole, & J. Seglow (Eds.), Citizenship acquisition and national belonging: Migration, membership and the liberal democratic State. (pp. 141–155). Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Frankenberg, R. (1993). White women, race matters: The social construction of whiteness. University of Minnesota Press.

  • Gans, H. J. (1979). Symbolic ethnicity: The future of ethnic groups and cultures in America. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 2(1), 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldmann, G. (2009). Intra-generational ethnic flows: Ethnic mobility in the Canadian census. Canadian Studies in Population, 36(3–4), 189–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guimond, É. (1999). Ethnic mobility and the demographic growth of Canada’s aboriginal populations from 1986 to 1996. In A. Bélanger (Ed.), Report on the demographic situation in Canada 1998–1999. (pp. 187–200). Statistics Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guimond, E. (2009). L’explosion démographique des populations autochtones du Canada de 1986 à 2001. PhD Thesis, Université de Montréal, Canada

  • Guimond, É., Robitaille, N., & Senecal, S. (2015). Fuzzy definitions and demographic explosion of Aboriginal populations in Canada from 1986 to 2006. In P. Simon, V. Piché, & A. Gagnon (Eds.), Social statistics and ethnic diversity: Cross-national perspectives in classifications and identity politics. (pp. 229–244). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hage, G. (2012). White nation: Fantasies of white supremacy in a multicultural society. Routledge.

  • Ho, E. (2015). The changing face of Asian peoples in New Zealand. New Zealand Population Review, 41, 95–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hochschild, J. L., & Powell, B. M. (2008). Racial reorganization and the United States census 1850–1930: mulattoes, half-breeds, mixed parentage, Hindoos, and the Mexican race. Studies in American Political Development, 22, 59–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jardina, A. (2019). White identity politics. Cambridge University Press.

  • Kaufmann, E. (2018). Whiteshift: Populism, immigration, and the future of white majorities. Abrams Books.

  • Kaufmann, E., & Haklai, O. (2008). Dominant ethnicity: From minority to majority. Nations and nationalism, 14(4), 743–767.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kertzer, D. I., & Arel, D. (2002). Census and identity: The politics of race, ethnicity, and language in national censuses. Cambridge University Press.

  • King, M. (1985). Being Pakeha: An encounter with New Zealand and the Maori Renaissance. Hodder and Stoughton.

  • Kukutai, T., & Callister, P. (2009). A ‘main’ ethnic group?: Ethnic self prioritisation among New Zealand youth. Social Policy Journal of New Zealand, 36, 16–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kukutai, T., & Didham, R. (2009). In search of ethnic New Zealanders: national naming in the 2006 Census. Social Policy Journal of New Zealand, 36, 46–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kukutai, T., & Didham, R. (2012). Re-Making the majority? Ethnic New Zealanders in the 2006 census. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 35(8), 1427–1446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kukutai, T., & Rarere, M. (2019). Tribal sex ratios in the New Zealand population census: Why are women so dominant? New Zealand Population Review, 43, 63–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liebler, C. A., & Ortyl, T. (2014). More than one million new American Indians in 2000: Who are they? Demography, 51(3), 1101–1130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liebler, C. A., Porter, S. R., Fernandez, L. E., Noon, J. M., & Ennis, S. R. (2017). America’s churning races: Race and ethnicity response changes between census 2000 and the 2010 census. Demography, 54(1), 259–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacLean, M. (1996). The silent centre: Where are Pakeha in biculturalism? Continuum, 10(1), 108–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahuika, N. (2019). A brief history of Whakapapa: Māori approaches to genealogy. Genealogy, 3, 32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marcetic, B. (2018, March 3). A history of outrage over the word ‘Pākehā’. The Spinoff. https://thespinoff.co.nz/atea/03-03-2018/a-history-of-outrage-over-the-word-pakeha/ Retrieved 20 June 2020.

  • Moore, T. (1989). The 1981/86 Intercensal consistency study. Working paper No. 1989/3. Department of Statistics.

  • Morning, A. (2008). Ethnic classification in global perspective: A cross-national survey of the 2000 census round. Population Research and Policy Review, 27, 239–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nagel, J. (1995). American Indian ethnic renewal: Politics and the resurgence of identity. American Sociological Review, 60(6), 947–965.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nix, E., & Qian, N. (2015). The Fluidity of Race: "Passing" in the United States, 1880–1940. Working Paper 20828. National Bureau of Economic Research.

  • O’Regan, T. (1987). Who owns the past? Change in Māori perceptions of the past. In J. Wilson (Ed.), From the beginning: The Archaeology of the Māori. (pp. 141–145). Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2019). Foreign-born population (indicator). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1787/5a368e1b-en. Retrieved 20 June 2020.

  • Passel, J. S. (1976). Provisional evaluation of the 1970 census count of American Indians. Demography, 13(3), 397–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Passel, J. S. (1996). The growing American Indian population, 1960–1990: Beyond demography. In G. D. Sandefur, R. R. Rindfuss, & B. Cohen (Eds.), Changing numbers, changing needs: American Indian demography and public health. (pp. 72–112). National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, D. (2008). Reframing Majoritarian National Identities within an Antipodean Perspective. Thesis Eleven, 95, 48–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perez, A. D., & Hirschman, C. (2009). Estimating net interracial mobility in the United States: A residual methods approach. Sociological Methodology, 39(1), 31–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pettersen, T., & Brustad, M. (2015). Same Sámi? A comparison of self-reported Sámi ethnicity measures in 1970 and 2003 in selected rural areas in northern Norway. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 38(12), 2071–2089.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robitaille, N., Guimond, E., & Boucher, A. (2010). Intergenerational ethnic mobility among Canadian aboriginal populations in 2001. Canadian Studies in Population, 37(1–2), 151–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rocha, Z., & Aspinall, P. (Eds.). (2020). The Palgrave international handbook of mixed racial and ethnic classification. Palgrave Macmillan.

  • Roth, W. D. (2005). The end of the one-drop rule? Labeling of multiracial children in black intermarriages. Sociological Forum, 20, 35–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saperstein, A., & Penner, A. M. (2012). Racial fluidity and inequality in the United States. American Journal of Sociology, 118(3), 676–727.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saperstein, A., Penner, A. M., & Light, R. (2013). Racial formation in perspective: Connecting individuals, institutions, and power relations. Annual Review of Sociology, 39, 359–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, L., & Akinwale, B. (2007). Quantifying stability and change in ethnic group. Journal of Official Statistics, 23, 185–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, L., Jivraj, S., & Warren, J. (2016). The stability of ethnic identity in England and Wales 2001–2011. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society), 179(4), 1025–1049.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Song, M. (2003). Choosing ethnic identity. Polity Press.

  • Spoonley, P. (2015). New diversity, old anxieties in New Zealand: The complex identity politics and engagement of a settler society. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 38(4), 650–661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Statistics New Zealand. (2005). Statistical standard for ethnicity 2005. Statistics New Zealand.

  • Statistics New Zealand. (2006). Asian ethnic groups profiles, 2006. http://archive.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/people_and_communities/asian-peoples/asian-ethnic-grp-profiles-06-tables.aspx#gsc.tab=0 Retrieved 20 June 2020.

  • Statistics New Zealand. (2009). Final report of a review of the official ethnicity statistical standard 2009. Wellington: Statistics New Zealand.

  • Statistics New Zealand. (2013). Developing a historical longitudinal census dataset in New Zealand: A feasibility study. Statistics New Zealand.

  • Statistics New Zealand. (2014). 2013 Census QuickStats about culture and identity. http://archive.stats.govt.nz/Census/2013-census/profile-and-summary-reports/quickstats-culture-identity.aspx. Retrieved 20 June 2020.

  • Statistics New Zealand. (2017). National Ethnic Population Projections: 2013(base)–2038 (update). http://archive.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/population/estimates_and_projections/NationalEthnicPopulationProjections_HOTP2013–2038.aspx. Retrieved 20 June 2020.

  • Statistics New Zealand. (2020). Māori descent indicator and ethnic group. http://nzdotstat.stats.govt.nz/ Retrieved 20 June 2020.

  • Statistics New Zealand. (n.d.). Ethnicity. http://archive.stats.govt.nz/methods/classifications-and-standards/classification-related-stats-standards/ethnicity.aspx. Retrieved 20 June 2020.

  • Sue, D. W. (2004). Whiteness and ethnocentric monoculturalism: Making the “Invisible” visible. American Psychologist, 59(8), 761–769.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tapaleao, V. (2014, March 4). Auckland now more diverse than London. The New Zealand Herald. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11213317 Retrieved 23 October 2019.

  • Terruhn, J. (2015). Being Pākehā: White settler narratives of politics, identity, and belonging in Aotearoa/New Zealand. PhD Thesis, University of Auckland, NZ.

  • Tokalau, T. (2018, March 2). Exclusion of ethnicity option Pākehā from census creates a stir. Stuff. https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/101892189/exclusion-of-ethnicity-option-pkeh-from-census-creates-a-stir. Retrieved 20 June 2020.

  • Waitangi, T. (2014). He Whakaputanga me Te Tiriti: The declaration and the treaty. Report on stage 1 of the Te Paparahi o Te Raki Inquiry (Wai 1040). Wellington: Waitangi Tribunal.

  • Waters, M. C. (1990). Ethnic Options: Choosing Identities in America. University of California Press.

  • Ward, A. (1974). A show of justice: Racial amalgamation in nineteenth century New Zealand. Auckland University Press.

  • Wells, P. (2008). In richer dust. In P. Wells & G. Pope (Eds.), Somebody’s darling: Stories from the Napier Cemetery 1855–1917. (pp. 8–19). Hawke’s Bay Museum & Art Gallery.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, P. (2018). Dear Oliver: Uncovering a Pākehā history. Massey University Press.

  • Wetherell, M., & Potter, J. (1992). Mapping the language of racism. Harvester Wheatsheaf.

  • Wimmer, A. (1997). Who owns the state? Understanding ethnic conflict in post-colonial societies. Nations and Nationalism, 3(4), 631–665.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We gratefully acknowledge the advice and assistance given with New Zealand Longitudinal Census (NZLC) data by Robert Didham and Inny Kang from Statistics New Zealand. We also thank the anonymous reviewers of our manuscript for their insightful comments and suggestions.

Funding

This research is supported by the New Zealand Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE)-funded project UOWX1404 Capturing the Diversity Dividend of Aotearoa New Zealand (CADDANZ). Any errors or omissions are ours alone. Access to the anonymised New Zealand Longitudinal Census data used in this study was provided by Statistics New Zealand under conditions designed to give effect to the security and confidentiality provisions of the Statistics Act 1975. The results presented in this study are the work of the authors, not Statistics New Zealand or individual data suppliers.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Institute of Demographic and Economic Analysis, The University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand

    Patrick Broman & Tahu Kukutai

Authors
  1. Patrick Broman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tahu Kukutai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Patrick Broman.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix 1

See Table

Table 6 Census t usually resident population totals compared to linked (in-study) records, 1991–2013 census pairs
Full size table

6

Appendix 2

See Table

Table 7 Ethnic group question in the New Zealand Census, 1991–2013
Full size table

7

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Broman, P., Kukutai, T. Fixed not fluid: European identification in the Aotearoa New Zealand census. J Pop Research 38, 103–138 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12546-021-09262-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12546-021-09262-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation