Understanding Pacific Island Well-Being Perspectives Through Samoan and Tongan Material Cultural Adaptations and Spatial Behaviour in Auckland and Brisbane

Authors

  • Ruth Faleolo University of Queensland (UQ) Aboriginal Environments Research Centre (AERC) Institute for Social Science Research (ISSR)

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.11157/sites-id423

Keywords:

diaspora, material culture, Pacific Island, Samoan, Tongan

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to discuss the tangible links that exist between Pacific Island well-being perspectives and their material culture. We can gain a better understanding of Pacific Island well-being perspectives through the analysis of Samoan and Tongan material cultural adaptations and how people interact with these via spatial behaviour, as observed in Auckland and Brisbane. This paper analyses a collection of images that capture evidence of six different types of material cultural adaptations that infer on, and reference spatial behaviours. Preliminary findings have been drawn from a wider-scale research project conducted during 2015–2018, that has explored Pacific Island TransTasman migrants’ perspectives of well-being. This inquiry process has revealed significant links between Pacific Island traditions and adaptations in Pacific diaspora contexts.

Author Biography

  • Ruth Faleolo, University of Queensland (UQ) Aboriginal Environments Research Centre (AERC) Institute for Social Science Research (ISSR)
    Ruth (Lute) Faleolo is a PhD candidate with the Aboriginal Environments Research Centre, and Institute for Social Science Research, at the University of Queensland. Ruth’s PhD research focuses on the well-being of Pasifika Trans-Tasman migrants, of Samoan and Tongan descent, in Auckland and Brisbane.

Downloads

Additional Files

Published

02-09-2019

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Understanding Pacific Island Well-Being Perspectives Through Samoan and Tongan Material Cultural Adaptations and Spatial Behaviour in Auckland and Brisbane. (2019). Sites: A Journal of Social Anthropology and Cultural Studies, 16(2). https://doi.org/10.11157/sites-id423