This article will introduce the many notions of Indigenous Data and Māori Data Sovereignty and explain the differences.
It is becoming common in New Zealand that the terms Indigenous and Māori Data Sovereignty are interchangeably used by Māori Data practitioners and the Crown, removing all Te Tiriti, legal and moral rights to Māori Data and recognition that Māori Data is a Taonga.
INDIGENOUS (General)
This is a term that is predominately used in Data Sovereignty by and for Indigenous Peoples and their tribes in the United States of America.
In 2020, 574 Indian tribes were legally recognized by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) of the United States 1. There are estimated that more than 400 are not federally recognised.
Indigenous Data
Indigenous data is defined here as data in a wide variety of formats inclusive of digital data and data as knowledge and information. It encompasses data, information, and knowledge about Indigenous individuals, collectives, entities, lifeways, cultures, lands, and resources.
Indigenous Data Sovereignty
Indigenous Data Sovereignty (IDS) is defined as the right of an Indigenous nation to govern the
collection, ownership, and application of data generated by its members. This is primarily an American Indigenous Peoples definition.
Indigenous Data Sovereignty is an international term that arose from the implications of the 2010 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) for the collection, ownership and application of data pertaining to Indigenous Peoples and what these might mean for Indigenous Peoples’ sovereignty.
ALASKA NATIVE/INUIT DATA SOVERIGNTY
In 2020, there were 231 Native Alaskan/Inuit tribes legally recognized by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) of the United States. It appears that Alaska Natives/Inuit use the Indigenous Data Sovereignty Principles and there is no formal network. An interesting read from an Alaskan Native/Inuit perspective here.
HAWAI’I
The Indigenous Peoples of Hawai’i are referred to by a number of terms. Hawai’i and Kānaka Hawai’i are the two terms that are translated as “Hawaiian” for “native”. There are several other terms “Maoli, ʻŌiwi, Kamaʻāina, Kupa, Keiki papa, Kulaiwi, Keiki hānau o ka ʻāina, Ewe hānau o ka ʻāina”. (Pukui, 1986).
Over time, the terms “Kānaka Māoli and Kānaka ʻŌiwi have evolved as the popular Hawaiian terms for Native Hawaiian” (McGregor & MacKenzie, 2014). “Politically, the distinction between Native Hawaiians and non-Native Hawaiians did not become significant until the Kingdom of Hawai’i allowed foreigners to become naturalized citizens and subjects of the Kingdom” (McGregor & MacKenzie, 2014).
Native Hawai’i Data Sovereignty
Data sovereignty” refers to indigenous peoples’ right to reclaim the purpose and value of data that is collected, analyzed and used by and for their communities. Within the dominant western deficiency approach, data often focuses on disparities and damaged people. Native Hawaiians, among others, need to be at the table to determine how data can document their true wellbeing, illustrate their many strengths and successes, and be used to invest public resources in effective services and supports. https://www.hibudget.org/blog/presenting-data-sovereignty-disaggregation-state-capitol
FIRST NATIONS (Canada)
“First Nation is one of three groupings of Indigenous people in Canada, the other two being Métis and Inuit. Unlike Métis and Inuit, most First Nations hold reserve lands, and members of a First Nation may live both on and off these reserves. While the term First Nation can describe a large ethnic grouping (e.g. the Cree Nation), in other cases it is synonymous with the term band, a word originally chosen by the federal government and used in the Indian Act. The word band describes smaller communities. Many First Nations prefer the term First Nation over band” .
In 2016, 1,673,785 people in Canada identified themselves as Aboriginal – making up 4.9 percent of the total population [24]. Of those, 977,230 (58.4 percent) were First Nations, 587,545 (35.1 percent) were Métis, and 65,025 (3.9 percent) were Inuit [24]. First Nations people accounted for 2.8 percent of the total population of Canada. According to the federal government there are currently 636 recognized Indian bands in Canada https://content.iospress.com/articles/statistical-journal-of-the-iaos/sji180478#ref025
Aboriginal Peoples, regardless of status and residency, have a special constitutional relationship with the Crown, including existing Aboriginal and treaty rights, which is recognized and affirmed in section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982. As described above, in this Act, “Aboriginal peoples of Canada” includes the Indian, Inuit, and Métis peoples of Canada. Following Canada’s support of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) in 2010, the federal and provincial governments, as well as many Aboriginal groups and organizations, have moved to support the use of the term Indigenous, rather than the term Aboriginal.
What is First Nations Canada Data Sovereignty
OCAP ® acknowledges and respects that the right of self-determination of First Nations includes the jurisdiction and authority to make decisions about research in their communities. It addresses issues of privacy, intellectual property, data custody and secondary use of data. OCAP®® was conceived as a result of First Nations interest in protecting their data and information, the legacy of unethical research practices, and the desire to have control over research in their communities [Source].
What is First Nations Canada Data
First Nations data, “when developed, gathered, and used correctly, provides First Nations with a way to bring evidence to issues that could have otherwise been ignored. When communities become their own data stewards, they can take on a leading role in the direction of their community wellbeing and in the very definition of that well-being” [Source]. It is essential for research to “be integrated with cultural and traditional knowledge, such as Indigenous languages an history, so that the policy narrative is framed in a meaningful and relevant way” [Source].
Other First Nations Data Sovereignty Initiatives
- Alberta First Nations Information Governance Centre (AFNIGC)
- Chiefs of Ontario and the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES) – Data Governance Agreement
- British Columbia First Nations Data Governance Initiative
I acknowledge the following article for the source and quotes for this section https://content.iospress.com/articles/statistical-journal-of-the-iaos/sji180478
First Nations Data Sovereignty
A vision that every First Nation will achieve data sovereignty in alignment with their distinct worldview — as an inherent right and as a transformational requisite to further advance self-determination and self-governance, and to enable the transfer of community service delivery back to First Nations governments (as dictated by rights holders).
This is guided by the following 9 pillars sourced from
Pillar 1, First Nations Data Governance
Pillar 2, First Nations Digital Infrastructure and Human Resources
Pillar 3, Rights Holders Relationship Management
Pilar 4, First Nations Data Access and Repatriation
Pillar 5, First Nations Data Collection, Discovery and Gap Bridging
Pillar 6, First Nations Data Standards and Intergovernmental Interoperability
Pillar 7, First Nations Data Management
Pilar 8, First Nations Data Trust, Ethics, and OCAP® implementation
Pillar 9, Data Relationship Management with Other Levels of Governments and Partners
SAAMI
Also known as Sápmi/Sábme/Sábmie/Saepmie, depending on the Sami language—is situated in the northern
parts of Norway, Sweden, Finland and Russia. The size of the Sami population is estimated at between 75,000 and 120,000. For Saami, they are still identifying and discussing how best to define procedures for the protection of their ethnic data according to this article.
PASIFIKA
Pasifika (sometimes spelt Pasefika) is used to refer to the people, cultures, and language of Pacific groups (including: Sāmoa, Tonga, the Cook Islands, Niue, Tokelau, Tuvalu, and other smaller Pacific nations) who are now living in New Zealand. https://pasifika.tki.org.nz/LEAP/Pasifika-in-New-Zealand
Pacific data is:
A living taonga that reflects and derives from our history presents realities and future aspirations.
Pacific Data considers and values the history of Pacific information, knowledge, and data. It ought to be conceptualized and understood from emic insider Pacific perspectives, therefore within Pacific frameworks. Further, for some – data can only be categorically ‘Pacific’ if collated, analysed, accessed, managed, and shared by Pacific peoples through a Pacific lens. This upholds the cultural filter that is embedded in traditional values and knowledge systems.
Pacific Data Sovereignty is:
‘Nothing is about Us – Pacific Peoples – without us – Pacific Peoples.’
Pacific Data Sovereignty acknowledges that diversity exists across Pacific peoples and cultures. Even so,
across the unique differences, there are elements and ties that unify us as the People of the Moana.
Pacific Data Sovereignty is understanding our ancestral heritage while upholding the ethos that ‘Nothing
is about Us – Pacific Peoples – without us – Pacific Peoples.’ This ensures that the lineage of Pacific Data
paves its paths and linkages back to Pacific ancestors and the generations following to present-day Pacific
peoples (Moana Research & Ministry for Pacific Peoples, 2019).
The capacity and capability of our Pacific peoples to obtain governance over their own data will be transformative for decision making, policy, systems change, the privileging of our voices and frameworks in spaces that may have traditionally resisted it or misrepresented our stories and
perspectives (Moana Research & Ministry for Pacific Peoples, 2019).
Beyond the transformations, it is the right of Pacific Peoples to take ownership over their own data, what happens to it, how it is collated, used, analysed, presented, and disseminated.
As the world moves increasingly to open data environments which are subject to the laws of the nation which it is stored; Pacific Data Sovereignty is both a welcomed challenge and an aspiration, where the network will advocate for ‘Our Data, Our Sovereignty, Our Future.’
Pacific data matters as it may detail the problems we face as Pacific, but also emergent from it is the solutions that will be effective. This is reminiscent of the Samoan Proverb – e fofo e le alamea le alamea; the solutions lie within our communities.
Pacific data sovereignty needs but will also construct social connectedness between communities, organisations, and agencies. The unifying of Pacific people, followed by identifying and playing on the strengths of each person and group, will enable progress.
Pacific data sovereignty is therefore focused on:
- Rights and responsibilities to determine the means of collection, access, analysis, management and
dissemination of Pacific data or data deriving from Pacific data – inclusive of historical, existing, and
impending datasets.
• Producing information from and/or about Pacific peoples is driven by epistemologies, Pacific cultural
values, Pacific traditional knowledge systems and that Pacific people maintain these.
• Pacific peoples understanding of what data exists, the sources, access pathways, data management,
the purpose of collection, how it was used and will be used in future. This will allow for Pacific stewardship
of data that is enhancing and not destroying the vitality and wellbeing of Pacific communities and families.
• Acknowledging the source of knowledge and from where data derives. Strategic and legal recognition of
the Pacific as stewards of the interests that the data represents. This may entail authority and ownership of
data bout Pacific, Pacific values, and Pacific interests. Ergo, data is curated and cared for by Pacific people.
AUSTRALIA
Indigenous Australians or Australian First Nations consist of two distinct groups: the Aboriginal peoples of the Australian mainland and Tasmania, and the Torres Strait Islander Peoples. There are about 500 different tribes with their own clans in Australia, each with their own language and territory.
Australia Tribal Focused Indigenous of Data Sovereignty
In recent years, Indigenous Peoples in Australia and Pacific Peoples have created recognised the need to create principles and definitions to claim their own sovereignty of Data.
Pacific people are a unique population within Aotearoa New Zealand and across the diaspora. They are often and consistently researched. The framings and findings about Pacific Peoples have significantly been portrayed through a deficit framework and etic ‘outsider’ perspectives (Tualaulelei & McFall-McCaffery, 2019).
Australian Indigenous Data Sovereignty is:
The Maiam nayri Wingara Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Data Sovereignty Collective have created their own definitions and principles that again differ from Indigenous, Māori and Pacific Peoples.
Australia Indigenous Data Sovereignty refers to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ inherent right to govern their communities, resources, and Country (including lands, waters and sky). It is the right of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples to exercise ownership over Indigenous data. Ownership of data can be expressed through the creation, collection, access, analysis, interpretation, management, dissemination and reuse of Indigenous data )
Australian Indigenous Data Governance protocols and principles are the right of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to:
- Exercise control of the data ecosystem including creation, development, stewardship, analysis, dissemination and infrastructure.
- Data that is contextual and disaggregated.
- Data that is relevant and empowers sustainable self-determination and effective self-governance.
- Data structures that are accountable to Indigenous peoples and First Nations.
- Data that is protective and respects our individual and collective interests.
Exercising Indigenous Data Governance enables Indigenous peoples and their representative or governing bodies to accurately reflect their stories. It provides the necessary tools to identify what works, what doesn’t work, and why. Effective Indigenous Data Governance empowers Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples to make the best decisions to support their communities and people in the ways that meet their developmental needs and aspirations.
NEW ZEALAND MĀORI
Māori Data
Māori as with many other Indigenous Peoples are one with the land and the water. Without the natural resources we are not Indigenous Peoples. History, customs, and knowledge bind us together in a complex genealogical hierarchy.
Māori custom does not see a difference between our land and our data. Our data has the same sort of connections as a land does, but it is just a different format. To protect our data and we need to recognise that it is collectively owned by whānau, hapū, iwi and Māori organisations. Not one individual can own our data or should own our data. No non-Māori individual or group can own Māori data.
There are also the cultural considerations of the origins of the data, the mauri of the data, what rights does the person who gave that data have, what rights do they actually give the person who is collecting it or the organisation? This also creates issues about Māori data about the living being stored with Māori data about the dead.
Māori Data is:
Datum, data, information or knowledge in any format or medium, which is about, from, is produced by Māori Peoples, whānau, hapū, iwi or Māori organisations either collectively or individually, describes Māori Peoples, whānau, hapū, iwi and Māori organisations and their environments, has relationships with, or is made by Māori Peoples, whānau, hapū, iwi and Māori organisations or contains any Māori Peoples, whānau, hapū, iwi and Māori organisations content or association or may affect Māori, whānau, hapū, iwi and Māori organisations. Māori Data are a living taonga and are of strategic value to Māori Peoples, whānau, hapū, iwi and Māori organisations (Taiuru, 2020).
Māori Data Sovereignty
Māori Data Sovereignty refers to the inherent rights and interests Māori, whānau, hapū, iwi and Māori organisations have in relation to the creation, collection, access, analysis, interpretation, management, dissemination, re-use, and control of data relating to Māori, whānau, hapū, iwi and Māori organisations as guaranteed in Article II of Te Tiriti/Treaty of Waitangi (Taiuru, K. 2020).
This definition is the umbrella definition of Māori Data Sovereignty and should be adapted depending on the circumstances with considerations to ‘Whānau, Hapū, Marae, Rōpū & Iwi”.
The above definition firstly recognises the Te Tiriti commitment by the Crown to Māori and that the term Iwi is a post-colonial construct grouping whānau, individuals, marae, and other groups into the one heading.
The above definition also reflects that WAI 262 which set the foundation for data as a taonga was lodged by individuals who were experts in tikanga/mātauranga Māori. That, furthermore, communications with their individual descendants are occurring with The Crown.
The definition also reflects that the WAI 2522 TTPA claim that addressed Māori Data recognised some Māori Data has mātauranga[Source].
OTHER DATA SOVERIGNTY TERMS
There are a number of other digital sovereignty principles that are internationally applied including the following which all relate directly to Māori Data Sovereignty.
Data Sovereignty
Data Sovereignty relates to the laws and governance structures that data is subject to, due to the geographical location of where it’s processed.
Operational Sovereignty
Operational sovereignty (often called “digital sovereignty”) is where the state has full independence and operational control over its digital technology and infrastructure. Doug Dixon. For example the use of American owned servers and software that make the Data vulnerable to international governments. One of several examples below:
Section 702 of the US Foreign Intelligene Surveillance Act (FISA 702), which permits the US government to conduct targeted surveillance of foreign (ie, non-US) persons located outside the US in order to acquire “foreign intelligence information.” Under Section 702, the US Attorney General and Director of National Intelligence may issue directives compelling US electronic communication service providers (ECSPs) to provide such information. Doug Dixon
Software Sovereignty
Software Sovereignty means running workloads without dependence on a provider’s software. For example the use of local software and hardware. Another important aspect of Māori Data Sovereignty
Residence Data Sovereignty
Data residency refers to the geographical location of data.
REFERENCES
“Federal Register, Volume 83, Number 141 dated July 23, 2018” (PDF). Loc.gov. Retrieved October 5, 2018.
McGregor, D. P., & MacKenzie, M. K. (2014). Moʻolelo Ea O Nā Hawaiʻi History of Native Hawaiian Governance in Hawaiʻi. Retrieved from Hawai’i.
Pukui, M. K. (1986). Hawaiian Dictionary: Hawaiian-English, English-Hawaiian In. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Tualaulelei, E., & McFall-McCaffery, J. (2019). The Pacific Research Paradigm:
Opportunities and challenges. MAI Journal: A New Zealand Journal of Indigenous
Scholarship, 8(2), 2–17. https://doi.org/10.20507/maijournal.2019.8.2.7
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.