Decolonising Framings in Pacific Research: Indigenous Fijian Vanua Research Framework as an Organic Response

Abstract

Research among indigenous peoples of the Pacific in the 21st century face a number of challenges. One of the most powerful of these is the unchecked and careless use of frames that do not take into account languages and Indigenous knowledge protocols, philosophies and principles, especially where and when their own knowledges and tribal issues are researched. Today, indigenous Pacific people are beginning to describe and articulate their preferred processes of knowledge gathering, processing and dissemination in a wider move to achieve some form of self-determination in academia and in knowledge institutions especially. This article details Fijian Vanua Framework for Research (FVRF) and proposes that it is used when researching indigenous Fijian histories, knowledges, skills, arts, values and lifeways. The paper connects the Fijian Vanua Research Framework to other similar movements around the Pacific and then details the protocols and processes involved, as well as examples of its use.

Decolonizing Community Psychology by Supporting Indigenous Knowledge, Projects, and Students: Lessons from Aotearoa New Zealand and Canada

“…Projects of any sort (applied or basic research) must first go through a vanua (“the land and its people”)‐based consultation process that works through local power structures within the village context (Nabobo‐Baba, ). This consists of a formal Fijian entry ceremony called an i sevusevu, which features a gift of yaqona (kava).…”

“…The researcher can open the communication pathways to discuss projects that might be of interest to community members, but this is unlikely to result in a direct answer right away. Instead, researchers should focus on talenoa (storytelling), an otherwise unstructured or semi‐structured way of holding conversations that forms a core methodology iTaukei communities use to share information (Nabobo‐Baba, ). When adapted to a research context, talenoa entails a speaker (a storyteller, i.e., the participant) and a listener (the researcher, translators, assistants, etc.)…”

“…This allows both the speaker and the listener to save face, but may present a challenge to researchers more familiar with “Western” interview methods, as it requires careful listening and discrete follow‐up questioning to confirm understanding. If the researcher is themselves a member of the iTaukei community, there may be additional relationship and hierarchical limitations on whom they may speak to, which will require further assistance from others who can act as a speaker between the talenoa storyteller and the researcher listener (Nabobo‐Baba, ).…”

“… This example focuses on the researcher as an outsider because this example is from a researcher who did not originate from this community. Other barriers to working in one's own community as an iTaukei researcher are discussed in Nabobo‐Baba (). These challenges to within‐community researcher‐driven intitiatives include the chance that one might be seen as inappropirately rising above one's place in the community heirarchy and barriers to communication that come along with kinship, gender, and/or age‐related norms.…”

The Principles and Ethics of Including Children with Disability in Child Research

“…Such a shift requires a deep learning of each local context and the recognition that marginalised knowledge, such as that of children with disability in developing countries, is ‘respected and credible’ (Grech, , p. 66). Local or Indigenous knowledge, values and processes need to be privileged, and local cultural protocols used as a frame for research design (Baba and others, ; Nabobo‐Baba, ). Therefore, a decolonising approach to research requires engaging in critical dialogue with all research partners to explore alternative understandings of children with disability and embed local protocols in the research practice.…”