Bridging the geospatial gap: Data about space and indigenous knowledge of place

Abstract

Indigenous knowledge of place is not well-served by today's digital geospatial technologies, such as spatial data, maps, spatial databases, and GIS. This paper aims to identify and explore new connections between Indigenous knowledge of place and digital geospatial technologies. Our analysis is structured around three key gaps in past work: (a) the overrepresentation of digital data about space, rather than knowledge of place; (b) a lack of facility to differentiate access to knowledge and enable Indigenous data sovereignty; (c) a lack of facility to support and sustain relationships between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples. The paper further identifies and explores recent research topics in the field of geographic information science (GI science) with relevance to addressing these gaps. This includes identifying new serendipitous synergies with previously unconnected research areas, such as research into location privacy, uncertainty, qualitative spatial reasoning, or distributed spatial computing. The conclusions acknowledge that our retrospective approach is unlikely to lead to radical reformulation of geospatial technologies. Nevertheless, we argue that identifying technological opportunities could offer a pragmatic pathway to more rapidly bootstrap new approaches, beyond simply technological "fixes." All Authors contributed equally to the manuscript and share first authorship status.

Indigeneity and spatial information science

“…The authors would like to acknowledge the advice, discussions, and intellectual contributions of Ani Landau-Ward, Daisy San Martin Saldias, Aunty Di Kerr, N'Arweet Carolyn Briggs, Fiona McConachie, Ingrid Burfurd, Libby Porter, Maria Vasardani, Mariana Dias Baptista, Mark McMillan, Olivia Guntarik, and Prashanti Mayfield, already reported in [7,29], that led directly to the ideas communicated here.…”

“…Accordingly, many of the basic rights of Indigenous Peoples set out in the 2007 UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) [69] have an inherently spatial aspect. Space, place, region, locality, and natural features are essential elements to constituting Indigeneity [7].…”

Monitoring the dynamic vulnerability of an Arctic subsistence food system to climate change: The case of Ulukhaktok, NT

“…With regard to critiques over the potentially ‘undemocratic’ nature of past GIS research [ 94 , 95 ], results and associated maps were regularly shared with participants. In relation to perceived incompatibilities between GIS and Indigenous value systems (see [ 96 , 97 ]), the mixed-methods nature of this research meant that trails tracked using GPS were also hand-drawn by the cohort in participatory mapping sessions; therefore, a process of ‘interviewing the map’ was undertaken (see [ 98 , 99 ]). Combining routes with an oral recounting of hunting trips allowed for trail data to be contextualised and facilitated the conveyance of Indigenous values and worldviews about the traversed environment that would not ordinarily be captured through conventional, more technocentric participatory GIS studies [ 97 , 100 ].…”

GIScience II: Newness and imminence

“…Imminent GIScience is hardware, software, practices and social, participatory, radical, anti-racist, caring, activist, historical. Thinking with Indigenous knowledge practices and values (Briggs et al, 2020; Reid and Sieber, 2020, 2021), these mapping efforts grapple with the challenges of place – as these geographies ‘reside equivalently and simultaneously in past, present, and future time’ (Pearce and Hornsby, 2020: 174). Imminent GIScience therefore considers how it operates as memory and how it performs the world.…”