Affirming Indigenous data sovereignty in collaborative wildlife conservation in the era of open data

Indigenous Peoples have been stewarding lands with fire for ecosystem improvement since time immemorial. These stewardship practices are part and parcel of the ways in which Indigenous Peoples have long recorded and protected knowledge through our cultural transmission practices, such as oral histories. In short, our Peoples have always been data gatherers, and as this article presents, we are also fire data gatherers and stewards. Given the growing interest in fire research with Indigenous communities, there is an opportunity for guidance on data collection conducted equitably and responsibly with Indigenous Peoples. This Special Issue of Fire presents fire research approaches and data harvesting practices with Indigenous communities as we “Reimagine the Future of Living and Working with Fire”. Specifically, the article provides future-thinking practices that can achieve equitable, sustainable, and just outcomes with and for stakeholders and rightholders (the preferred term Indigenous Peoples use in partnerships with academics, agencies, and NGOs). This research takes from the following key documents to propose an “Indigenous fire data sovereignty” (IFDS) framework: (1) Articles declared in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) as identified by the author and specified in Indigenous-led and allied Indigenous fire research in Australia, Canada, and the U.S.; (2) recommendations specific to cultural fire policy and calls for research in the 2023 Wildland Fire Mitigation and Management Commission report; (3) research and data barriers and opportunities produced in the 2024 Good Fire II report; and threads from (4) the Indigenous Fire Management conceptual model. This paper brings together recommendations on Indigenous data sovereignty, which are principles developed by Indigenous researchers for the protection, dissemination, and stewardship of data collected from Tribal/Nation/Aboriginal/First Nations Indigenous communities. The proposed IFDS framework also identifies potential challenges to Indigenous fire data sovereignty. By doing so, the framework serves as an apparatus to deploy fire research and data harvesting practices that are culturally informed, responsible, and ethically demonstrated. The article concludes with specific calls to action for academics and researchers, allies, fire managers, policymakers, and Indigenous Peoples to consider in exercising Indigenous fire data sovereignty and applying Indigenous data sovereignty principles to fire research.

This study explores the current state and dynamics of the global Indigenous data sovereignty movement-the movement pressing for Indigenous peoples to have full control over the collection and governance of data relating to their lived realities. The article outlines the movement's place within the broader push for Indigenous self-determination; examines its links to big data, open data, intellectual property rights, and access and benefit-sharing; details a pioneering assertion of data sovereignty by Canada's First Nations; outlines relevant UN and international civil society processes; and examines the nascent movement in Africa. The study identifies a fundamental tension between the objectives of Indigenous data sovereignty and those of the open data movement, which does not directly cater for Indigenous peoples' full control over their data. The study also identifies the need for African Indigenous peoples to become more fully integrated into the global Indigenous data sovereignty movement.

In an increasingly digital world, we are continuously being met with novel and unprecedented challenges, the likes of which we have never encountered in our human history. Not only are we engaged in the balancing act of protecting individual and personal rights and freedoms with respect to both positive and negative rights, but we are also working to balance the interests of our communities, societies, and the greater global world in this novel forum. We have seen a growth in the desire for equality and equity for under-recognized and marginalised social groups, including the interest in indigenous rights and data sovereignty, as well as greater environmental accountability and transparency with regard to the inner workings of data centres and large technological infrastructure projects. Finally, we are seeing the fast-paced growth of artificial intelligence, machine learning, and the corresponding concerns relating to human rights and ethics. These topics, and many more, are the ones which we will have to face as emerging topics in data sovereignty and digital governance in the months and years to come.In this chapter, we will discuss some of the major emerging topics in data sovereignty and digital governance, including the concept of digital rights, indigenous data sovereignty, the issues associated with data centres and data mines, digital self-determination, artificial intelligence, social responsibility, and data policing.KeywordsDigital rightsIndigenous data sovereigntyData centres and minesDigital self-determinationArtificial intelligence

In the twenty-first century, data are the world’s most valuable resource. Technological capacities for the collection, storage, analysis and sharing of data are evolving rapidly, and as a result, so too are the possibilities for improving the day-to-day lives of people. However, data use can also result in exploitation and harm; nowhere is this more evident than for Indigenous peoples. Unfortunately, the rapid expansion of technology has not been matched by a sufficiently robust discussion of ethics nor the development of governance frameworks. Indigenous Data Sovereignty (IDS) has emerged as a key consideration for this cause. Beginning with the presumption of Indigenous rights to tribal/nation sovereignty, IDS weaves together Indigenous research ethics, cultural and intellectual property rights and Indigenous governance discourse, with the view to offer solutions to the challenges being presented in an open data environment. This chapter will expand on this existing literature base and consider Māori data sovereignty in the context of Aotearoa New Zealand. More specifically, it provides the basis for a discussion around how kawa and tikanga drawn from Te Ao Māori might inform approaches to data ethics and data governance.

Concerns about secondary use of data and limited opportunities for benefit-sharing have focused attention on the tension that Indigenous communities feel between (1) protecting Indigenous rights and interests in Indigenous data (including traditional knowledges) and (2) supporting open data, machine learning, broad data sharing, and big data initiatives. The International Indigenous Data Sovereignty Interest Group (within the Research Data Alliance) is a network of nation-state based Indigenous data sovereignty networks and individuals that developed the ‘CARE Principles for Indigenous Data Governance’ (Collective Benefit, Authority to Control, Responsibility, and Ethics) in consultation with Indigenous Peoples, scholars, non-profit organizations, and governments. The CARE Principles are people– and purpose-oriented, reflecting the crucial role of data in advancing innovation, governance, and self-determination among Indigenous Peoples. The Principles complement the existing data-centric approach represented in the ‘FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship’ (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable). The CARE Principles build upon earlier work by the Te Mana Raraunga Maori Data Sovereignty Network, US Indigenous Data Sovereignty Network, Maiam nayri Wingara Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Data Sovereignty Collective, and numerous Indigenous Peoples, nations, and communities. The goal is that stewards and other users of Indigenous data will ‘Be FAIR and CARE.’ In this first formal publication of the CARE Principles, we articulate their rationale, describe their relation to the FAIR Principles, and present examples of their application.

Kidney Outcomes for First Nations Children

American Indians, Alaska Native, and other Indigenous people throughout the world have undergone and continue to experience research abuses. Qualitative data such as intellectual property, Indigenous knowledge, interviews, cultural expressions including songs, oral histories/stories, ceremonies, dances, and other texts, images, and recordings are at risk of exploitation, appropriation, theft, and misrepresentation and threaten the cultural sovereignty of American Indians, Alaska Native, and other Indigenous people. These issues are potentially magnified with the increasing use of big data. Partly as a result of past and current research abuse, the Indigenous data sovereignty, the control, ownership, and governance of research and data, is growing. In this article, I discuss American Indian political sovereignty, cultural sovereignty, and Indigenous data sovereignty, with an emphasis on qualitative data sovereignty. In addition, I explore whether Arizona’s public universities—Northern Arizona University, Arizona State University, and University of Arizona—policies and guidelines support Indigenous data sovereignty and the extent to which they align with the Arizona Board of Regent’s tribal consultation policy that governs relations between the three Arizona universities and Arizona American Indian nations. Overall expectations, requirements, and processes do not go far enough in supporting Indigenous data sovereignty. Although each university has specific research policies that follow the Arizona Board of Regent’s tribal consultation policy, the university guidelines differ in scope in term of supporting Indigenous data sovereignty. In addition, none of the policies address qualitative data sharing, including those in big data sets. Based on the findings I make several recommendations for researchers, including supporting the Indigenous sovereignty movement and to reconsider big data use and past positions about qualitative data ownership and sharing with regard to American Indians, Alaska Native, and other Indigenous people.

Indigenous Data Sovereignty, in its proclamation of the right of Indigenous peoples to govern the collection, ownership, and application of data, recognises data as a cultural and economic asset. The impact of data is magnified by the emergence of Big Data and the associated impetus to open publicly held data (Open Data). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, families and communities, heavily overrepresented in social disadvantage–related data will also be overrepresented in the application of these new technologies, but in a data landscape, Indigenous peoples remain largely alienated from the use of data and its utilization within the channels of policy power. Existing data infrastructure, and the emerging Open Data infrastructure, neither recognise Indigenous agency and worldviews nor consider Indigenous data needs. This is demonstrated in the absence of any consideration of Indigenous data issues in Open Data discussions and publication. Thus, while the potential benefits of this data revolution are trumpeted, our marginalised social, cultural and political location suggests we will not share equally in these benefits. This paper discusses the unforeseen (and likely unseen) consequences of the influence of Open Data and Big Data and discusses how Indigenous Data Sovereignty can mediate risks while providing pathways to collective benefits.

Indigenous Peoples have always been warriors.1 Our ancient traditions recorded and protected information and knowledge through art, carving, song, chants and other practices. Deliberate efforts to expunge these knowledge systems were part and parcel of colonisation, along with state-imposed practices of counting and classifying Indigenous populations. As a result, Indigenous Peoples often encounter severe data deficits when trying to access high-quality, culturally-relevant data to pursue their goals but an abundance of data that reflects and serves government interests regarding Indigenous Peoples and their lands. The concept of Indigenous Data Sovereignty is a relatively recent one, with the first major publication on the topic only appearing in 2016.2 Indigenous Data Sovereignty is defined as the right of Indigenous Peoples to own, control, access and possess data that derive from them, and which pertain to their members, knowledge systems, customs or territories.3, 4, 5 Indigenous Data Sovereignty is supported by Indigenous Peoples’ inherent rights of self-determination and governance over their peoples, territories and resources as affirmed in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), as well as in domestic treaties. Indigenous Data Sovereignty recognises that data is a strategic resource and provides a framework for the ethical use of data to advance collective Indigenous wellbeing and self-determination.6, 7 In practice, Indigenous Data Sovereignty means that Indigenous Peoples need to be the decision-makers around how data about them are used. Given that most Indigenous data is not in the possession of Indigenous Peoples, Indigenous data governance is seen as a key lever for addressing Indigenous Data Sovereignty. Indigenous data governance harnesses Indigenous Peoples’ values, rights and interests to guide decision-making about how their data are collected, accessed, stored and used.8 Enacting Indigenous data governance results in Indigenous control of Indigenous data through both internal Indigenous community data governance policies and practices and external stewardship of Indigenous data via mechanisms and frameworks that reflect Indigenous values. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the necessity of enhancing Indigenous data governance as well as the pressing need for increased data for governance and decision-making.9

Data have become the new global currency, and a powerful force in making decisions and wielding power. As the world engages with open data, big data reuse, and data linkage, what do data-driven futures look like for communities plagued by data inequities? Indigenous data stakeholders and non-Indigenous allies have explored this question over the last three years in a series of meetings through the Research Data Alliance (RDA). Drawing on RDA and other gatherings, and a systematic scan of literature and practice, we consider possible answers to this question in the context of Indigenous peoples vis-á-vis two emerging concepts: Indigenous data sovereignty and Indigenous data governance. Specifically, we focus on the data challenges facing Native nations and the intersection of data, tribal sovereignty, and power. Indigenous data sovereignty is the right of each Native nation to govern the collection, ownership, and application of the tribe’s data. Native nations exercise Indigenous data sovereignty through the interrelated processes of Indigenous data governance and decolonizing data. This paper explores the implications of Indigenous data sovereignty and Indigenous data governance for Native nations and others. We argue for the repositioning of authority over Indigenous data back to Indigenous peoples. At the same time, we recognize that there are significant obstacles to rebuilding effective Indigenous data systems and the process will require resources, time, and partnerships among Native nations, other governments, and data agents.

This article explores the concept of Indigenous Data Sovereignty (IDS) in Canada, examining its barriers, resources, implementation, and policy implications. While not an exhaustive list of all IDS-related policies, the article focuses on key definitions, successful implementations, support programs and resources, and outdated policies that hinder IDS and Indigenous governance practices. Through a First Nations lens, the paper highlights the importance of Indigenous People's control over data and knowledge about their communities and lands. It discusses the challenges of implementing IDS within non-Indigenous organizations and communities, including financial constraints and the influence of colonial policies. The article also addresses the impact of IDS on Indigenous self-determination, emphasizing the need for government and educational institutions to support IDS practices. Additionally, it explores the First Nations' principles of Ownership, Control, Access, and Possession (OCAP) as an example of successful IDS implementations. The paper acknowledges the role of data sovereignty in reconciliation frameworks and highlights resources such as the International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs (IWGIA) and the Global Indigenous Data Alliance (GIDA) that advocate for IDS and Indigenous self-governance. The conclusion emphasizes the ongoing need for support, collaboration, and the mobilization of UNDRIP and TRC frameworks to ensure the success of IDS and the amendment of colonial policies.

ABSTRACTAchieving data sovereignty is a critical concern for Indigenous communities worldwide and should be considered essential for an information‐resilient society. Māori‐led initiatives in Aotearoa New Zealand have successfully raised awareness of the issues concerned and led to considerable progress being made towards implementing Māori data sovereignty principles in the public sector. The process of updating the statute requiring the collection and use of official data and statistics has provided the opportunity to embed those principles in legislation. Analysis of the submissions made on the draft Data and Statistics Bill provides a unique window on very different perspectives with regard to Indigenous data sovereignty and how it should be realised. Findings show a range of views expressed by key stakeholders, provide insight that will be relevant for Indigenous data sovereignty initiatives in other countries, and raise awareness of issues that deserve attention from the information science community.

Indigenous data sovereignty (IDS) is a relatively recent term and global movement that originated from the Global Indigenous Data Alliance (GIDA) in 2015 when the formal international network was created. The global North and South have representation in the GIDA through the nation-states including the Maiam nayri Wingara Collective (Australia), Te Mana Raraunga Maori Data Sovereignty Network (Aotearoa New Zealand), and the United States Indigenous Data Sovereignty Network. IDS is founded on time-immemorial knowledge, wisdom, and lifeways of Indigenous peoples and First Nations globally including Tribal treaties, Tribal constitutions, the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and other human and natural rights laws. The authors share an overview of IDS; the experiences they had presenting and learning at the 2024 IDS Conference in Tucson, Arizona, USA; and examples and applications of IDS to their direct evaluation, editorial, and publication policy work. They conclude the article with their reflections on how the field of evaluation should be aware and inclusive as it moves forward into the future applying IDS to evaluative thinking, theory, policies, funding, and practice.

In this article we argue that in Australian social work context and practice, Indigenous Data Sovereignty (ID-SOV) needs to be operationalised by enacting the principles of Indigenous Data Governance (ID-GOV). Failure to embed ID-SOV and ID-GOV leaves the profession open to claims that it is complicit in disempowering Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in relation to data. ID-SOV is a global movement focused on Indigenous Peoples having access to, and ownership, control, and possession of, their data. Social work is a profession committed to championing equal rights and challenging injustices. Therefore, it has an obligation to decolonise existing data structures in its workplaces. This article outlines the Australian ID-SOV movement, including current scholarship on operationalising ID-SOV in the form of ID-GOV, and the challenge for social work to position itself in alliance with the ID-SOV movement and in active participation in changing the way Indigenous data have traditionally been collected and used in Australia IMPLICATIONS The Indigenous Data Sovereignty (ID-SOV) movement demands the data rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and is re-shaping the Australian data landscape. If social work is true to its stated commitment to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander self-determination, the profession needs to engage with ID-SOV and work to operationalise Indigenous Data Governance (ID-GOV) across social work environments. A particular focus of this article is the importance of ID-SOV and ID-GOV being operationalised within social work research and policy in areas such as “child protection”, the criminal justice system, health and wellbeing, and housing.

Indigenous Peoples' right to sovereignty forms the foundation for advocacy and actions toward greater Indigenous self-determination and control across a range of domains that impact Indigenous Peoples' communities and cultures. Declarations for sovereignty are rising throughout Indigenous communities and across diverse fields, including Network Sovereignty, Food Sovereignty, Energy Sovereignty, and Data Sovereignty. Indigenous Research Sovereignty draws in the sovereignty discourse of these initiatives to consider their applications to the broader research ecosystem. Our exploration of Indigenous Research Sovereignty, or Indigenous self-determination in the context of research activities, has been focused on the relationship between Indigenous Data Sovereignty and efforts to describe Indigenous Peoples' Rights in data.