Rasanathan Kumanan, Craig David, Perkins Rod
Auckland Regional Public Health Service, Private Bag 92 605, Symonds Street, Auckland, New Zealand.
Ethn Health. 2006 Aug;11(3):211-27. doi: 10.1080/13557850600565525.
'Asian' is increasingly used as an ethnic category in the health sector in New Zealand but does not have a 'natural', fixed, uncontested meaning. Two differing constructions of 'Asian' are commonly used in New Zealand. One is racially based and includes only East and Southeast Asian peoples. It is commonly employed in popular discourse and by the media. The other construction includes peoples from East, South and Southeast Asia, but excludes peoples from the Middle East and Central Asia. This construction is recent and unique to New Zealand and is being increasingly operationalised in the health sector. This use for planning and research is problematic. For the health sector, 'Asian' does not differentiate a group of people with shared characteristics in terms of health status or needs. The diversity of the 'Asian' category, with several axes of difference, will result in an averaging of health indicators. This may result in the high health needs of groups within this category being masked or the inappropriate targeting of services. Another major concern is the general lack of acknowledgement of the contestable nature of the 'Asian' category or justification for its use. However, the 'Asian' category provides a political platform to advocate for resources and enable research into the previously ignored health status of the diverse 'Asian' population. Despite its shortcomings, usage of the category is likely to continue in the New Zealand health sector. As such, the sector needs to be aware of the limitations of the category and show greater precision in its use.
