Accountability to whom/what? As part of the discussion of context (for instance, for tikanga Māori) the responsibility to whom must be considered. The different relationships within whānau, hapū, iwi, rūnanga, marae, trusts and confederations will affect how tikanga Māori should be applied. In most matters, those different groups will all apply a longer-term rather than shorter-term lens to accountabilities and responsibilities that is to the long-term health of the environment and to future generations. Accountability may be to whenua as identity and whakapapa, whenua not being conceived as a commodity. In the context of Te Tiriti, accountability is likely to be perceived by Māori as an obligation the Kāwanatanga wrote into the provisions of Article 2, which in turn may be enacted by the Kāwana but preferably by Māori enabling tino rangatiratanga. However, in considering Te Ao Māori view, the accountability for enacting tikanga Māori is to Māori as the first priority. In the Matike Mai Aotearoa report, the authors describe tikanga in conjunction with the nature of relationships, providing a detailed analysis of key values, including the value of tikanga.52 Helpfully, the report notes that values-based tikanga could also be the means to deal with Kāwanatanga/ Rangatiratanga to resolve differences and conflicts,53 indicating that the interface between Rangatiratanga and Kāwanatanga is the appropriate territory for resolution by tikanga Māori. Again, considering to whom accountability is directed, the relationship between the Kāwanatanga and iwi institutions is the sphere in which accountability can be addressed. 21