The challenge of Indigenous data in Sweden

Open science in Sámi research: Researchers' dilemmas

“…Sámediggi , as a political authority, has no specific (formal or informal) mandate for coordinating research or, consequently, take the responsibility of control over research data. The interviews conducted by Axelsson and Storm Mienna show how participants “thought that data should be owned and managed by Sámi themselves, but recognized that no such system was currently in place to make that happen” (Axelsson and Storm Mienna, 2020 , p. 105).” Researchers express in the interviews that it would be appropriate to have the data close to the communities, but also that the university is a logical and practical solution since there are regulations, routines, and expertise for taking responsibility in the matter. The concerns of the researchers are about how to ensure trust and strengthen relationships between academic institutions and community members.…”

“…Research on data sovereignty in a Sámi context is scarce, but has recently received more attention as ethical guidelines for Sámi research are under development in Norway, Finland and, to some extent, Sweden [Sámediggi (Sámi Parliament of Finland), 2016 ; Kvernmo et al, 2018 ; Sámiid Riikkasearvi, 2019 ]. Axelsson and Storm Mienna ( 2020 ), conducting a project in Swedish Sápmi, have approached the topic of data governance in focus group interviews. They observe how the fact that misuse and inappropriate use of data in the past is still very present in the minds of the participants when considering possible risks when giving access to data (in this case, related to health).…”

Data Sovereignty in Community-Based Environmental Monitoring: Toward Equitable Environmental Data Governance

“…Given the historical power imbalances between knowledge systems, most written documents using or referring to Indigenous data do not explicitly address Indigenous peoples’ sovereignty over information, often resulting in misrepresentation, or mistreatment of Indigenous knowledge holders’ contributions, and limited opportunities for benefit sharing ( Kukutai and Taylor 2016 , Carroll et al 2021 , Tengö et al 2021 ). In this context, Indigenous peoples and organizations have drawn attention to legal and ethical questions regarding ownership, custody, control, access, and return of Indigenous knowledge and data ( First Nations Information Governance Centre 2014 , Axelsson and Mienna 2020 , Oguamanam 2020 , Prictor et al 2020 ). Such issues are particularly relevant in relation to existing open data principles in science, because adherence to data-­centric research standards often contrasts with Indigenous worldviews, which are typically centered on people, purpose, and place through customary governance processes ( Harding et al 2012 , McMahon et al 2015 , Carroll et al 2021 ).…”

Revisiting the digital humanities through the lens of Indigenous studies—or how to question the cultural blindness of our technologies and practices

“…The question of data ownership in S apmi has only been discussed to a very limited extent. One exception is Axelsson and Storm Mienna (2020) who, based on 11 focus group interviews, show that there are multiple perspectives on the ownership of data (in this case, about health research). The historical legacy of the misuse of research and research data, as well as contemporary processes of repatriation (which have slowly started in Sweden but are a topic of immediate interest discussed and debated at several levels of S ami society), influence the way that S ami participants consider the question of the ownership of S ami health data.…”