ScienceFreePrintable

Cultural Environmental Perspectives

A free science worksheet ready for your classroom. Open in Kuraplan to grab the print-ready PDF, customize it for your students, or generate a fresh version in seconds.

Download now

Name:Date:

Cultural Environmental Perspectives

Explore how values and knowledge shape environmental decisions. Read the case study, then answer each question. There may be more than one reasonable response to discussion questions; use evidence and explain your thinking.

Case study: Te Riu Stream

Te Riu Stream flows past farms and a small town before reaching the coast. Tests show that after heavy rain, sediment and nutrients wash into the stream. Some native fish are harder to find, and swimming is not always safe. A local iwi, council scientists, farmers, and residents meet to discuss what to do. The iwi representatives explain that their relationship with the place includes whakapapa and responsibilities handed down through generations. They describe kaitiakitanga as active care and guardianship, guided by local knowledge and the needs of the environment. They stress that iwi are not all the same, and that local tikanga and priorities should be discussed with mana whenua—the iwi or hapū with authority and enduring connection to that place. Scientists share water-test results and fish surveys. They suggest planting stream banks, fencing stock out of the water, and checking whether water quality improves. Farmers point out that planting takes time and that practical support would help. Residents value having a healthy stream for swimming and for future generations. The group agrees to plant native vegetation along one stretch, measure water quality at set points, and review results together after a year. The plan combines measured evidence with local knowledge, relationships, and shared responsibilities.

Perspective or role

Knowledge or priority shown in the case

Mana whenua representatives

Scientists

Farmers

Residents

Questions

Answer using the case study and your own reasoning. Respect that cultural perspectives are diverse and can change over time.

1.Match each term to its meaning. 1) Kaitiakitanga 2) Mana whenua 3) Environmental responsibility 4) Environmental right

A. A duty to help protect the environment
B. A claim to conditions such as a clean and healthy environment
C. Active guardianship and care, understood in its local context
D. The iwi or hapū with authority and enduring connection to a place

2.In the case study, what does kaitiakitanga involve? Choose the best answer.

A. Protecting a place through active care and responsibilities, informed by local knowledge
B. Using only laboratory results to make every decision
C. Preventing all people from visiting a natural area
D. Treating every iwi’s beliefs and priorities as identical

3.Name two pieces of evidence or knowledge the group could use to judge whether the stream-restoration plan is working.

4.True or false? The case study suggests that all iwi have exactly the same environmental priorities and tikanga. Explain your choice.

5.According to the grid, give one contribution each that scientists and mana whenua representatives bring to the stream plan.

6.Identify one similarity between the scientists’ and mana whenua representatives’ contributions. Use a detail from the case study.

7.Why might the group combine water testing with local knowledge instead of relying on only one source of information?

8.Which action in the case study helps address sediment and nutrients entering the stream after rain?

A. Planting native vegetation along the stream bank
B. Stopping water-quality checks
C. Removing all streamside plants
D. Waiting without reviewing the plan

9.The group will review results after a year. Give one reason to monitor the plan and one possible change the group might make if the stream has not improved.

10.Propose one additional action for caring for Te Riu Stream. Explain how it could help and identify whose knowledge or involvement should be included.