In consideration of Indigenous Data Sovereignty
“Indigenous Peoples have always been ‘data warriors’. Our ancient traditions recorded and protected information and knowledge through art, carving, song, chants and other practices.” (Kukutai, 2020)
Long before the advent of computers and the written word, Indigenous Peoples had a rich tradition of transmitting knowledge and data from one generation to the next. However, the concept of Indigenous Data Sovereignty (ID-SOV) is a relatively recent development, with its first official documentation dating to 2016. (Taylor & Kukutai) This post will review ID-SOV and the CARE principles of Indigenous data governance in an effort to move towards decolonizing data.
ID-SOV can be described as the right of Indigenous Peoples to possess, manage, access, and have authority over data that originates from their communities and relates to their members, traditional knowledge, customs, or lands. (Kukutai, 2020)
To state something as a right is one thing, however to see it carried out, we must detangle from a long history of manipulation of data on Indigenous peoples, who were historically demonized to justify settler colonialism. Now, when neo-colonialism is rife, we see how this narrative continues by victimizing Indigenous peoples. I align with those who argue that this narrative needs to change. According to the Global Indigenous Data Alliance (GIDA), building strategic relationships with global bodies and mechanisms is necessary to promote ID-SOV and governance internationally by providing a visible, collective approach. (Kukutai, 2020)
Even today, sensitive COVID-19 data is being mined and reused without consent from Indigenous Americans by the media, researchers and non-governmental organizations, under the assumption that making tribes more visible would be helpful but actually causing unintentional harm in the process. (RDA COVID-19 Indigenous Data WG, 2020) Settler colonialists thought that they were ‘helping’ too, via ethnic cleansing and direct violence. Where neocolonialism is not inherently violent, it is extremely dangerous (Couldry & Mejias, 2021), and tracing the histories can help us understand how to move towards decolonizing data for the benefit of all.
Decolonizing Data Via Self-Determination
Data and data analytics have become increasingly important and interdependent in many ways in the digital age. Even governments are heavily reliant on data for their decision making and policies. As has been the case in much of our history, the unwilling targets of policy interventions are disproportionately Indigenous Peoples, whose enduring aspirations for self-determination over their own knowledge, information systems, institutions and resources get undermined by governments. Data is extracted from Indigenous Peoples, their territories, and cultural heritage without seeking their consent or involvement in decisions regarding the collection, utilization, or application of this data. (Walter et al. 2021)
To have the conversation about ID-SOV, let us first discuss the difficulty in defining what it means to be Indigenous. As per The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), indigeneity is intricately tied to the point of initial colonial contact, which can prove challenging to ascertain in regions where colonizers did not establish permanent settlements. The term 'tribes,' though sometimes practical, carries with it problematic colonial connotations. Nevertheless, the label 'indigenous' possesses a broader scope, encompassing a diverse range of ethnic groups, including tribes like the hill tribes residing in the Mekong River area of Southeast Asia (Scott, 2009). A common thread among Indigenous Peoples is their strong inclination toward preserving their autonomy. Simultaneously, they frequently confront marginalization and discrimination, often framed within a narrative that portrays them as victims. (Chung & Chung 2019 P7)
In the pursuit of decolonization, it's crucial to emphasize that the concept of 'Indigenous' itself was a construct devised by colonizers to delineate who was considered fully human and who was relegated to a status deemed less than human (Scott, 2009). It is inherently problematic that we continue to operate within the framework established by this historical perspective. When it comes to the contemporary mission of decolonizing data, a pivotal starting point lies in the recognition of Indigenous Data Sovereignty. By placing the focus on those who have endured the most severe marginalization due to colonialism, we may uncover a clearer path forward in our journey towards decolonization.
There are many concerns from Indigenous groups, such as those in the Mekong area, referred to as Indigenous ethnic minorities (IEM). Many contradictions arise that result in security risks and the impact of sharing IEM data could be both positive and negative in ways unanticipated. A balance of freedoms is required - transparency versus personal security. (Chung & Chung 2019 P12)
Within this contradiction lies a major difficulty: how to have accessible and transparent data, while also ensuring the right to privacy for the subjects of that data. This presents the deeper issue which is that data does not promote change automatically nor address issues of marginalization, colonialism or discrimination, not to mention combatting imbalances of power in negotiations and consultations led by governments. (Chung & Chung 2019 P20)
Open Data initiatives raise apprehensions within ID-SOV networks because they often lack safeguards for Indigenous Peoples. There is a growing emphasis on expanded data sharing, exemplified by the widely embraced FAIR principles (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable). Nevertheless, this trend has generated tensions when it comes to safeguarding, sharing, and utilizing data pertaining to Indigenous Peoples. To promote meaningful engagement between data collectors and users with Indigenous perspectives, the CARE Principles provide a valuable framework for deliberating upon responsible data utilization. (Kukutai, 2020)
CARE Principles for Indigenous Data Governance
While the FAIR principles primarily focus on data itself and overlook the ethical and socially responsible aspects of data usage, such as power imbalances and historical contexts related to data acquisition and utilization, the CARE principles prioritize the welfare of Indigenous Peoples and their data. They can be integrated alongside the FAIR Principles across the entire data lifecycle to ensure mutual advantages and address these broader ethical considerations.(RDA, 2020 P57)
CARE Principles
Collective Benefit
Data ecosystems shall be designed and function in ways that enable Indigenous Peoples to derive benefit from the data
Authority to Control
Indigenous Peoples’ rights and interests in Indigenous data must be recognised and their authority to control such data be empowered. Indigenous data governance enables Indigenous Peoples and governing bodies to determine how Indigenous Peoples, as well as Indigenous lands, territories, resources, knowledges and geographical indicators, are represented and identified within data
Responsibility
Those working with Indigenous data have a responsibility to share how those data are used to support Indigenous Peoples’ self determination and collective benefit. Accountability requires meaningful and openly available evidence of these efforts and the benefits accruing to Indigenous Peoples.
Ethics
Indigenous Peoples’ rights and wellbeing should be the primary concern at all stages of the data life cycle and across the data ecosystem
If these principles can be integrated into systems of open data, it could truly turn towards decolonizing data, however, the need to be more than just principles. If we center on the CARE principles and Indigenous data sovereignty for data governance on a global scale, perhaps we can steer away from harmful colonial data mining and towards a more balanced relationship with data.
Resources
Carroll, S. R., Garba, I., Figueroa-Rodríguez, O. L., Holbrook, J., Lovett, R., Materechera, S., Parsons, M., Raseroka, K., Rodriguez-Lonebear, D., Rowe, R., Sara, R., Walker, J. D., Anderson, J., & Hudson, M. (2020). The CARE Principles for Indigenous Data Governance. Data Science Journal, 19. https://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2020-043
Chung, P., & Chung, M. (2019). INDIGENOUS DATA SOVEREIGNTY IN THE MEKONG REGION. 2019 WORLD BANK CONFERENCE ON LAND AND POVERTY”.
Nick Couldry & Ulises Ali Mejias (2021): The decolonial turn in data and technology research: what is at stake and where is it heading?, Information, Communication & Society, DOI: 10.1080/1369118X.2021.1986102
Kukutai, T., Carroll , S. R., & Walter , M. (2020). Indigenous data sovereignty . eprints.utas.edu.au. Retrieved March 5, 2022, from https://eprints.utas.edu.au/34971/2/140589-Indigenous%20data%20sovereignty.pdf
RDA COVID-19 Indigenous Data WG. "Data sharing respecting Indigenous data sovereignty." In RDA COVID-19 Working Group (2020). Recommendations and guidelines on data sharing. Research Data Alliance. https://doi.org/10.15497/rda00052
Taylor, J., & Kukutai, T. (2016). Indigenous data sovereignty toward an agenda. Australian National University Press.
Walter, M., Kukutai, T., Russo Carroll, S., & Rodriguez-Lonebear, D. (2021). INDIGENOUS DATA SOVEREIGNTY AND POLICY.