Respect, trust and engagement: creating an Australian indigenous data archive

Abstract

Purpose -This paper aims to demonstrate the work being done to develop a trusted digital archive for social sciences data relating to the indigenous peoples of Australia. It explores the issues that arise through respectful engagement with both indigenous communities and research communities as well as the development of pragmatic and effective data management planning strategies for higher education researchers. Design/methodology/approach -As a conceptual paper, the approach consists of a review of the current situation, a discussion of the work already undertaken by the project team, and an analysis of the challenges being faced and plans for ongoing development of the project. Findings -There are major challenges in tackling a project with issues of such complexity but the project has great significance because its success could contribute enormously to the indigenous communities to which the research relates while building the capacity of researchers to design respectful and effective data management strategies. Practical implications -This project is rapidly evolving and the strategies for managing it are dynamic as the layers of complexity are unfolded and the project team addresses issues arising from the materials and groups with which it is working. Social implications -The impact of this project has already reaped dividends for the communities involved. Indigenous communities whose intellectual property or knowledge has seeded the research are having material returned to them in digital formats that are useful to them and which provide accurate portrayals of their knowledge, communities and culture. Researchers using the service provided by ATSIDA are confident that their material is being curated and reused appropriately. The work done by the ATSIDA team in building protocols and guidelines around research data will influence public policy, particularly in the work of collecting agencies and in their application to situations other than indigenous. Originality/value -ATSIDA fills a gap in informed research management. There is no other project like it anywhere in the world. This paper is valuable to anyone working in or considering higher education research in an indigenous area and is applicable to other research dealing with identifiable and vulnerable communities.

The Warramiri website: applying an alternative Yolŋu epistemology to digital development

“…The Warramiri website as a digital resource to aid transmission of Indigenous language and culture intersects with a number of pertinent and evolving theoretical frameworks; decolonising Indigenous methodologies (Smith 1999; Haebich 2014) ICT Indigenous pedagogies (Jorgensen 2013; Watson 2013) and Indigenous digital archiving (Nakata et al 2008; Gardiner et al 2011) to name a few. And there are some works which analyse the role of technology and broadly defined ‘literacy’ in remote Australian Indigenous settings similar to Gäwa in some ways (Kral 2012).…”

Hydrological Perspectives on Integrated, Coordinated, Open, Networked (ICON) Science

“…For example, programs and strategies to decolonize science such as the Global Water Futures Program and indigenous community water research bring together researchers across all levels to enhance coordination and broaden impacts with the intent to accelerate a positive paradigm culture shift (GWF, 2018). Indigenous peoples must be responsibly engaged in the scientific processes at all stages, which includes ownership of data and knowledge and having a say in how/when it gets shared (Cohen & Livingstone, 2020; Gardiner et al., 2011; Goucher et al., 2021; Lovett et al., 2019; Wong et al., 2020; Woodbury et al., 2019). Policies such as Ownership, Control, Access, and Possession, Collective Benefit, Authority to Control, Responsibility, and Ethics and Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reuse principles can help hydrologists ethically develop protocols relating to the collection, use, and sharing of community data (Carroll et al., 2020; Maheshwari et al., 2014; Mecredy et al., 2018; Wilkinson et al., 2016).…”

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

“…In contrast, Indigenous systems of knowledge often treat knowledge as privileged to be shared according to context‐specific rules. These rules may be expressed in terms of secret and sacred knowledge, and can extend to the privacy of individuals and their families and communities (Gardiner et al, 2011). Nakata et al (2014) explain that Indigenous knowledge is “differentiated” across levels, with Gumbula (2005) identifying public areas (open‐access); peri‐restricted areas which require negotiation for access and use; and highly restricted or closed areas, which include secret‐sacred knowledge sites, practices, and documentation.…”