Data as a Strategic Resource: Self-determination, Governance, and the Data Challenge for Indigenous Nations in the United States

Abstract

Data about Indigenous populations in the United States are inconsistent and irrelevant. Federal and state governments and researchers direct most collection, analysis, and use of data about U.S. Indigenous populations. Indigenous Peoples' justified mistrust further complicates the collection and use of these data. Nonetheless, tribal leaders and communities depend on these data to inform decision making. Reliance on data that do not reflect tribal needs, priorities, and self-conceptions threatens tribal self-determination. Tribal data sovereignty through governance of data on Indigenous populations is long overdue. This article provides two case studies of the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo and Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe and their demographic and socioeconomic data initiatives to create locally and culturally relevant data for decision making.

Research Methodology and Community Participation: A Decade of Indigenous Social Science Research in Canada

“…2005:72; Rainie et al. 2017). But others go further and demand that CBPR approaches for Indigenous research should also decolonize, rebalance power, and provide healing (Drawson, Toombs, and Mushquash 2017:12; e.g., Simonds and Christopher 2013:2186).…”

“…1 Among advocates of CBPR, some scholars suggest that CBPR with Indigenous people does not require specific evidence sources or methods of analysis because Indigenous methodologies often involve similar evidence sources and analysis methods to those of Western-oriented research (Evans et al 2014:185;Walter and Andersen 2013). Others stress that CBPR and meaningful community participation go beyond having community members administer surveys or approve research protocols, but also design the study, analyze evidence, and determine how to best disseminate findings (Burhansstipanov et al 2005:72;Rainie et al 2017). But others go further and demand that CBPR approaches for Indigenous research should also decolonize, rebalance power, and provide healing (Drawson, Toombs, and Mushquash 2017:12;e.g., Simonds andChristopher 2013:2186).…”

“…These guidelines encourage reflections about research engagement with Indigenous peoples (see Rainie et al. 2017; Riddell et al. 2017), but serious incongruences remain between the demands of ethical research in Indigenous communities and the policies and practices of research funding agencies, university financial administration, and Research Ethics Boards (Moore et al.…”

“…These included revisions to the TCPS (TCPS2) SSHRC 2010, 2014) and documents by Indigenous organizations outlining guidance for ethical research in and with their communities (First Nations Information Governance Centre 2014;Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami 1998; Métis Centre 2010). These guidelines encourage reflections about research engagement with Indigenous peoples (see Rainie et al 2017;Riddell et al 2017), but serious incongruences remain between the demands of ethical research in Indigenous communities and the policies and practices of research funding agencies, university financial administration, and Research Ethics Boards (Moore et al 2017;Riddell et al 2017:9).…”

Untitled

“…It is obvious that these approaches fit less comfortably with Indigenous ways of knowing so can they be used ethically in research with Indigenous Peoples? Rainie, Schultz, Briggs, Riggs, and Palmanteer-Holder (2017) note that quantitative data about Indigenous populations is a critical resource used by the leaders of Indigenous nations in the United States (and around the world) for strategic planning purposes, to develop and evaluate policies and programs, to negotiate with US governments at all levels, and to apply for external funding. However, much of the data that is held by external organizations, such as government departments and nonIndigenous research centres, is "sparse, inconsistent, and irrelevant information complicated by limited access and utility" (p. 1).…”