Abstract
Advances in open data, big data and data linkage allow us to analyse more data and on a larger scale than ever before. However, this brings with it the challenge of ensuring that Indigenous data sets are used in a way that protects Indigenous rights to that data and maximises benefits for Indigenous peoples. The CARE principles for Indigenous data governance—Collective Benefit, Authority to Control, Responsibility and Ethics—were developed to protect Indigenous data sovereignty, but there are few examples of how to translate these principles into practice. In this paper, we show how these CARE principles can be applied to data collection, integration, analysis and translation practices. Our case study is a project that used data reported by Indigenous ranger groups to capture the multiple benefits of Indigenous land and water management activities. Through this case study, we offer a framework for the design and use of CARE-informed data practices, which can be embedded into project design to enable the ethical and responsible use of Indigenous data to improve Indigenous policies and services. Such practices are critical in the context of ongoing demand for Indigenous data for bureaucratic purposes, and Indigenous interest in using that data to influence management and policy decisions affecting their estates and resources.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Austin BJ, Robinson CJ, Lincoln G, Dobbs R, Tingle F, Oades D et al. (2018) Mobilising Indigenous knowledge for the collaborative management of Kimberley Saltwater Country: WAMSI Kimberley Marine Research Program Final Report. Western Australian Marine Science Institution, Crawley
Austin BJ, Robinson CJ, Mathews D, Oades D, Wiggin A, Dobbs RJ et al. (2019) An Indigenous-led approach for regional knowledge partnerships in the Kimberley region of Australia. Hum Ecol 47:577–588. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-019-00085-9
Australian Government (2017) The Indigenous land and sea management outcomes framework. Australian Government, Canberra
Australian Government Productivity Commission (2020) Indigenous evaluation strategy draft. Australian Government, Canberra.
(2020) Guidelines for ethical research in Australian Indigenous studies. AIATSIS, Canberra
Barber M, Jackson S (2017) Identifying and categorizing co-benefits in state-supported Australian Indigenous environmental management programs: international research implications. Ecol Soc 22:11. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-09114-22021
Bourdieu P (1977) Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge University Press, Canberra
Brondizio ES, Le Tourneau F-M (2016) Environmental governance for all. Science 352:1272–1273. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf5122
Chan L, Kirsop B, Arunachalam S (2011) Towards open and equitable access to research and knowledge for development. PLoS Med 8:e1001016. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001016
Corrigan C, Robinson CJ, Burgess ND, Kingston N, Hockings M (2018) Global review of social indicators used in protected area management evaluation. Conserv Lett 11:e12397. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12397
Davis M (2016) Data and the United Nations Declaration of the rights of indigenous peoples. In: Kukutai T, Taylor J (eds) Indigenous data sovereignty: towards an agenda. ANU Press, Canberra, p 25–28
Devon M, Hoover E eds (2019) Indigenous food sovereignty in the united states: restoring cultural knowledge, protecting environments, and regaining health. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman
Díaz S, Demissew S, Carabias J, Joly C, Lonsdale M, Ash N et al. (2015) The IPBES conceptual framework—connecting nature and people. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 14:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2014.11.002
Dufva T, Dufva M (2019) Grasping the future of the digital society. Futures 107:17–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2018.11.001
Duncan T, Villarreal-Rosas J, Carwardine J, Garnett ST, Robinson CJ (2018) Influence of environmental governance regimes on the capacity of Indigenous peoples to participate in conservation management. Parks 24(2):87–102. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2018.PARKS-24-2en
Fache E (2014) Caring for country, a form of bureaucratic participation. Conservation, development, and neoliberalism in Indigenous Australia. Anthropological Forum 24:267–286. https://doi.org/10.1080/00664677.2014.939576
Feir D, Hancock RLA (2016) Answering the call: a guide to reconciliation for quantitative social scientists. Can Public Policy 42:350–365. https://doi.org/10.3138/cpp.2016-018
Fogarty W, Lovell M, Langenberg J, Heron M-J(2018) Deficit discourse and strengths-based approaches: changing the narrative of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health and wellbeing. The Lowitja Institute, Melbourne, https://www.lowitja.org.au/content/Document/Lowitja-Publishing/deficit-discourse-strengths-based.pdf
Garnett ST, Burgess ND, Fa J, Fernández-Llamazares A, Molnár Z, Robinson CJ et al. (2018) A spatial overview of the global importance of Indigenous lands for conservation. Nat Sustain 1:369–374. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0100-6
Global Indigenous Data Alliance (GIDA) (2020) CARE principles for Indigenous data governance. GIDA. https://www.gida-global.org/care
Hudson M, Farrar D, McLean L (2016) Tribal data sovereignty: Whakatohea rights and interests. In: Kukutai T, Taylor J (eds) Indigenous data sovereignty: towards an agenda. ANU Press, Canberra, p 157–178
Hunt J, Altman JC, May K (2009) Social benefits of Aboriginal engagement in natural resource management. Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, Australian National University, Canberra
Jarvis D, Stoeckl N, Hill R, Pert P (2018) Indigenous land and sea management programs: can they promote regional development and help ‘close the (income) gap’? Aust J Soc Issues 53:283–303. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajs4.44
Johnson JT, Howitt R, Cajete G, Berkes F, Louis RP, Kliskey A (2016) Weaving Indigenous and sustainability sciences to diversify our methods. Sustain Sci 11:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-015-0349-x
Kerins S (2012) Caring for country to working on country. In: Altman J, Kerins S (eds) People on country, vital landscapes, Indigenous futures. The Federation Press, Sydney, p 26–44
Kukutai T, Taylor J (eds) (2016) Indigenous data sovereignty: toward an agenda. Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, Canberra, 10.22459/CAEPR38.11.2016
Kukutai T, Walter M (2016) Recognition and indigenizing official statistics: reflections from Aotearoa New Zealand and Australia. Stat J IAOS 31:317–326. https://doi.org/10.3233/sji-150896
Kwaymullina A (2016) Research, ethics and Indigenous peoples: an Australian Indigenous perspective on three threshold considerations for respectful engagement. AlterNative: Int J Indigenous Peoples 12:437–449. https://doi.org/10.20507/AlterNative.2016.12.4.8
Leiper I, Zander KK, Robinson CJ, Carwadine J, Moggridge BJ, Garnett ST (2018) Quantifying current and potential contributions of Australian Indigenous peoples to threatened species management. Conserv Biol 32:1038–1047. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13178
Lovett R, Lee V, Kukutai T, Cormack D, Rainie SC, Walker J (2019) Good data practice for Indigenous data sovereignty and governance. In: Daly A, Devitt SK, Mann M (eds) Good data. Institute of Network Cultures, Amsterdam, p 26–36
Maiam Nayri Wingara (2020) Good data practices for Indigenous data sovereignty and governance. Maiam Nayri Wingara. https://www.maiamnayriwingara.org/s/Good-data-practices-for-Indigenous-Data-Sovereignty-and-Governance-submitted.pdf
Mikolov T, Chen K, Corrado G, Dean J (2013) Efficient estimation of word representations in vector space. arXiv:1301.3781.
Nadasdy P (2004) Hunters and Bureaucrats: Power, Knowledge, and Aboriginal-State Relations in the Southwest Yukon. UBC Press, Vancouver
National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) (2007) National statement on ethical conduct in human research 2007 (updated 2018). Australian Research Council and Universities Australia, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra
Pert PL, Ens EJ, Locke J, Clarke PA, Packer JM, Turpin G (2015) An online spatial database of Australian Indigenous biocultural knowledge for contemporary natural and cultural resource management. Sci Total Environ 534:110–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.01.073
Pert PL, Hill R, Robinson CJ, Jarvis D, Davies J (2020) Is investment in Indigenous land and sea management going to the right places to provide multiple co-benefits? Australasian. J Environ Manag 27(3):249–274. https://doi.org/10.1080/14486563.2020.1786861
Povinelli EA (1992) Labor’s lot. The power, history and culture of Aboriginal action. Chicago University Press, Chicago
Pulsifer PL, Laidler GJ, Taylor DRF, Hayes A (2011) Towards an Indigenist data management program: reflections on experiences developing an atlas of sea ice knowledge and use. Can Geographer 55:108–124. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0064.2010.00348.x
Rainie SC, Rodriguez-Lonebear D, Martinez A (2017) Policy brief: Indigenous data sovereignty in the United States. Native Nations Institute, University of Arizona, Tucson, https://static1.squarespace.com/static/58e9b10f9de4bb8d1fb5ebbc/t/5b297686f950b7690cf0f9a9/1529443976962/Policy+Brief+Indigenous+Data+Sovereignty+in+the+United+States+V0.3+copy.pdf
TallBear, K (2014) Standing with and speaking as faith: a feminist-Indigenous approach to inquiry 10(2) Journal of Research Practice Article N17. Retrieved from http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/article/view/405/371.
The Global Indigenous Data Alliance (GIDA) Research Data Alliance International Indigenous Data Sovereignty Interest Group (2019) CARE principles for Indigenous data governance. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5d3799de845604000199cd24/t/5da9f4479ecab221ce848fb2/1571419335217/CARE+Principles_One+Pagers+FINAL_Oct_17_2019.pdf
Todd Z (2014) Fish pluralities: Human-animal relations and sites of engagement in Paulatuuq, Arctic Canada. Etudes/Inuit/Stud 38(1-2):217–238
Robinson CJ (2016) Hunting for country and culture: the challenges surrounding Indigenous collaborative partnerships on the coast of northern Australia. In: Margerum RD, Robinson CJ (eds) The challenges of collaboration in environmental governance: barriers and responses. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, p 355–368
Robinson CJ, James G, Whitehead PJ (2016) Negotiating Indigenous benefits from payment for ecosystem service (PES) schemes. Glob Environ Change 28:21–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.02.004
Robinson CJ, Wallington TJ (2012) Boundary work: engaging knowledge systems in co-management of feral animals on Indigenous lands. Ecol Soc 17:16. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-04836-170216
Scassa T, Taylor F (2017) Legal and ethical issues around incorporating traditional knowledge in polar data infrastructures. Data Sci J 16:1–14. https://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2017-003
Sterling EJ, Filardi C, Toomey A, Sigouin A, Betley E, Gazit N et al. (2017) Biocultural approaches to well-being and sustainability indicators across scales. Nat Ecol Evolution 1:1798–1806. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-017-0349-6
Te Arawhiti (Office for Māori Crown Relations) (2019) Māori crown relations capability framework for the public service – organisational capability component. Te Arawhiti, Wellington
Tengö M, Hill R, Malmer P, Raymond CM, Spierenburg M, Danilsen F et al. (2017) Weaving knowledge systems in IPBES, CBD and beyond – lessons learned for sustainability. Curr Opin Environ Sustainability 26–27:17–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2016.12.005
Verran H, Christie M (2007) Using/designing digital technologies of representation in Aboriginal Australian knowledge practices. Hum Technol 3:214–227
Walter M (2016) The voice of Indigenous data. Beyond the markers of disadvantage. Griffith Rev 60:256–263
Walter MM (2010) The politics of the data: how the Australian statistical indigene is constructed. Int J Crit Indigenous Stud 3:45–56
Walter M, Suina M (2018) Indigenous data, indigenous methodologies and Indigenous data sovereignty. Int J Soc Res Methodol 22(3):233–243
Walter M, Lovett R, Maher B, B Williamson, Prehn J, Bodkin-Andrews G, Lee V (2020) Indigenous Data Sovereignty in the Era of Big Data and Open Data. Australian Journal of Social Issues 1-14
Watson I, Chen C, Kong T, McConnell A, Pert P, Robinson C et al. (2020) Physical Environment Analysis Network (PEAN) – Indigenous environmental programs: socio-economic analysis – methods report supporting the key project insights. CSIRO, Canberra, https://www.pean.gov.au/
Whyte KP, Brewer JP, Johnson JT (2016) Weaving Indigenous science, protocols and sustainability science. Sustain Sci 11:25–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-015-0296-6
Wiseman ND, Bardsley DK (2016) Monitoring to learn, learning to monitor: a critical analysis of opportunities for Indigenous community-based monitoring of environmental change in Australian rangelands. Geographical Res 54:52–71. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-5871.12150
Acknowledgements
We acknowledge funding support from Australia’s national science organisation CSIRO and the Data Integration Partnership Alliance (Physical Environment Analysis Network).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Robinson, C.J., Kong, T., Coates, R. et al. Caring for Indigenous Data to Evaluate the Benefits of Indigenous Environmental Programs. Environmental Management 68, 160–169 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-021-01485-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-021-01485-8