Colonialism’s and postcolonialism’s fellow traveller: the collection, use and misuse of data on indigenous people

Pool, Ian

doi:10.22459/caepr38.11.2016.04

Cited by 16 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Given the hostile environment created by a profit-based multinational model, responsive and responsible language technology development must be done with care and planning to protect Indigenous languages from the effects of digital colonization and potential exploitation. In the context of an online existence, Indigenous communities around the world are increasingly thinking about the role of data sovereignty in their digital futures (Davis, 2016;Pool, 2016;Walter & Suina, 2019;Wilks et al, 2018). Data sovereignty is briefly defined as Indigenous people maintaining control over their own data and digital development.…”

Section: A Note About Data Sovereigntymentioning

confidence: 99%

Indigenous language technologies: Anti-colonial oases in a colonizing (digital) world

Brinklow

2021

WINHEC Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Language technologies are an increasingly common part of daily life for people around the world. Millions of users per day access services like Google Translate and Apple's Siri in a technology ecosystem that favours a handful of the world's most common languages. In a form of digital colonization, Indigenous languages are pushed aside in a profit-based system of research and development that results in both values conflicts and technological misalignments. Despite the hostile environment that disincentivizes the use of Indigenous languages, Indigenous language communities are pushing back by engaging language technologies to proactively support their work of language maintenance and revitalization. This paper argues that Indigenous leadership in the development of language technologies encourages the development of responsive and responsible Indigenous language technologies (ILT) that push back against dominant cultural and technical limitations.

show abstract

Section: A Note About Data Sovereigntymentioning

confidence: 99%

Indigenous language technologies: Anti-colonial oases in a colonizing (digital) world

Brinklow

2021

WINHEC Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Tools that support the articulation of local Indigenous protocols have been developed in the last ten years, including Local Contexts' Traditional Knowledge (TK) Labels and data protection protocols such as the Equity for Indigenous Research and Innovative Coordinating Hub's (ENRICH) Biocultural Labels and the CARE Principles for Indigenous Data Governance. Indigenous Data sovereignty is the right of a group or nation to reclaim and govern the collection, organization, and use of its own data, and as part of the process of reclamation it "is essential to recognise that, before contact with imperial powers, Indigenous peoples had their own vibrant, meaningful bodies of data" which only they controlled (Pool 2016).…”

Section: Indigenous Protocol Tools: Traditional Knowledge Labels and Data Protection Protocolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Engaging Respectfully with Indigenous Knowledges Copyright, Customary Law, and Cultural Memory Institutions in Canada

Ludbrook¹,

Owen²,

Nayyer³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper contributes to building respectful relationships between Indigenous (First Nations, Métis, and Inuit) peoples and Canada's cultural memory institutions, such as libraries, archives and museums, and applies to knowledge repositories that hold tangible and intangible traditional knowledge. The central goal of the paper is to advance understandings to allow cultural memory institutions to respect, affirm, and recognize Indigenous ownership of their traditional and living Indigenous knowledges and to respect the protocols for their use. This paper honours the spirit of reconciliation through the joint authorship of people from Indigenous, immigrant, and Canadian heritages. The authors outline the traditional and living importance of Indigenous knowledges; describe the legal framework in Canada, both as it establishes a system of enforceable copyright and as it recognizes Indigenous rights, self-determination, and the constitutional protections accorded to Indigenous peoples; and recommend an approach for cultural memory institutions to adopt and recognize Indigenous ownership of their knowledges, languages, cultures, and histories by developing protocols with each unique Indigenous nation.

show abstract

“…relating to the collection, ownership and application of data about their people, lifeways and territories” (Kukutai and Taylor 2016, 2). In practice, IDS initiatives involve the right of Indigenous nations and peoples to govern the collection, ownership, and use of data, in contrast to the dominant settler-colonialist approaches which have often forcibly collected data about Indigenous peoples in culturally inappropriate ways, data which has then been used against them (Pool 2016). IDS initiatives, such as the Yawuru Knowing Our Community from the Yawuru people of North Western Australia (Yap and Yu 2016) and the development of Mayi Kuwayu, the first national longitudinal study of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander well-being (Lovett 2016), represent a counterhegemonic current to the Australian colonial settler-state’s North- in -South data collection and surveillance practices.…”

Section: Conclusion: Australia’s Informational Imperialism and Digitamentioning

confidence: 99%

(Big) Data and the North-in-South: Australia’s Informational Imperialism and Digital Colonialism

Mann

Daly

2018

Television & New Media

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Australia is a country firmly part of the Global North, yet geographically located in the Global South. This North-in-South divide plays out internally within Australia given its status as a British settler-colonial society which continues to perpetrate imperial and colonial practices vis-à-vis the Indigenous peoples and vis-à-vis Australia’s neighboring countries in the Asia-Pacific region. This article draws on and discusses five seminal examples forming a case study on Australia to examine big data practices through the lens of Southern Theory from a criminological perspective. We argue that Australia’s use of big data cements its status as a North-in-South environment where colonial domination is continued via modern technologies to effect enduring informational imperialism and digital colonialism. We conclude by outlining some promising ways in which data practices can be decolonized through Indigenous Data Sovereignty but acknowledge these are not currently the norm; so Australia’s digital colonialism/coloniality endures for the time being.

show abstract

Colonialism’s and postcolonialism’s fellow traveller: the collection, use and misuse of data on indigenous people

Cited by 16 publications

References 3 publications

Indigenous language technologies: Anti-colonial oases in a colonizing (digital) world

Indigenous language technologies: Anti-colonial oases in a colonizing (digital) world

Engaging Respectfully with Indigenous Knowledges Copyright, Customary Law, and Cultural Memory Institutions in Canada

(Big) Data and the North-in-South: Australia’s Informational Imperialism and Digital Colonialism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About