The second portion of the book is "The Road Back to Sovereignty" and deals with many of the legal issues involved with the situation. It explores alternatives for criminal prosecution as well as rebuilding First Nation communities.
We're fighting for our lives
I was surprised at the variety of different tribes in Canada. They have many distinctive communities among the First Nations; members from different tribes relate their experiences and views. The goal of this book is to seek out mutually beneficial alternatives. Rod Robinson writes of the Nisga'a tribe efforts to become a viable part of Canada. There have been instances where joint efforts have been made that have been beneficial to both aboriginal and non-aboriginal peoples.
The book provided me with an interesting glimpse into problems facing Canadian society. The authors of these articles are committed toward building a better Canada and a workable partnership between aboriginals and non-aboriginals. There is much work to be done. The history of broken treaties and stolen land is extensive. It reveals that most aboriginal people do not necessarily want to become a separate nation but rather to regain sovereignty over their own lives and communities.
The problems are very complex. The examples contained in this chapter assure that success can and will be achieved but it must be based on the local reality, environment and construct of laws. By building information governance capacity, enacting our own laws, entering into data-sharing and licence-to-use contracts, creating regional data centres and repatriating our data, First Nations are getting closer to exercising full jurisdiction over our information.
Model tribal research code: with materials for tribal regulation for research and checklist for Indian health boards , 3rd edn, American Indian Law Centre, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque. Volume 3: gathering strength , Canada Group Communication, Ottawa. Espey J IMS Brogan IMS Brogan, Montreal, www. Community confidentiality, consent, and the individual research process: implications for demographic research. Population Research and Policy Review 24 2 — Rubin P Indian givers. Pheonix New Times , 27 May Tournier C Wiwchar D Nuu-chah-nulth blood returns to west coast. Ha-Shilth-Sa 31 25 16 December Data sovereignty for indigenous peoples: current practice and future needs Part 1: Decolonising indigenous data 2.
What does data sovereignty imply: what does it look like? Data politics and Indigenous representation in Australian statistics 6. Indigenising demographic categories: a prolegomenon to indigenous data sovereignty 7. Governing data and data for governance: the everyday practice of Indigenous sovereignty Part 3: Data sovereignty in practice 8.
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community wellbeing: identified needs for statistical capacity Data sovereignty for the Yawuru in Western Australia Building a data revolution in Indian country Part 4: State agency responses According to the report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples: The gathering of information and its subsequent use are inherently political. The principle states that a community or group owns information collectively in the same way that an individual owns their personal information.
Ownership is distinct from stewardship. The stewardship or custodianship of data or information by an institution that is accountable to the group is a mechanism through which ownership may be maintained. Control: The aspirations and inherent rights of First Nations to maintain and regain control of all aspects of their lives and institutions extend to information and data. The element of control extends to all aspects of information management, from collection of data to the use, disclosure and ultimate destruction of data.
Access: First Nations must have access to information and data about themselves and their communities, regardless of where it is held. The principle also refers to the right of First Nations communities and organisations to manage and make decisions regarding who can access their collective information.
Possession is the mechanism by which to assert and protect ownership and control. First Nations generally exercise little or no control over data that are in the possession of others, particularly other governments. The mechanics: making it all work To give practical expression to these principles and values, the FNIGC also developed a set of governance and structural supports to ensure that data sovereignty was achieved and protected.
Privacy impact assessments Mindful that the survey respondents participating in the RHS share very personal and often sensitive information, the RHS has also been very vigilant in the protection of personal privacy. Conclusion: achieving indigenous data jurisdiction In Canada, it is from the premise that First Nations are accountable to their membership for the use and management of community information that First Nations will exercise jurisdiction in relation to information governance.
These laws can govern how community information may be used and under what circumstances. It can also address personal privacy concerns. Policies and procedures: These can be developed to provide direction on the protection of personal and collective privacy. They can describe what requirements are needed for data-sharing agreements or licences to use contracts. Policies may define the relationship with outside contractors and researchers, ensuring that supplementary publication is controlled and approved.
Governance can be exerted ideally through repatriation of the data back to the First Nation. Open data can also help meet global challenges such as poverty, hunger, climate change, and inequality. It is not uncommon for Indigenous values to clash with the development goals of national governments and, at times, even intergovernmental organisations and international NGOs, particularly in relation to environmental stewardship. The principle of inclusive development and innovation needs to be tempered with an appreciation of the fraught relationship that many Indigenous communities have experienced in the name of development, democracy, and citizenship, as well as an awareness of the systemic barriers that continue to make it challenging for Indigenous peoples to take leadership of solutions which support their own aspirations including data-driven solutions.
Currently, these networks are engaging in an informal, and somewhat ad hoc fashion, to share information and strategies, hold joint events, and collaborate on research. The RDA IDS Group also supports the drafting of principles for the governance of Indigenous data for adoption and implementation by international research organisations. IDS network engagement with other data actors has occurred both at the nation-state and international levels across a range of data topics, including privacy, ethics, research data, big data, open data, and many others.
Open data is just one aspect of the larger data and Indigenous data sovereignty discussions. Open data agents and actors must recognise that Indigenous peoples and networks, which have already experienced bias, disregard, and limited investment in data capability and capacity, are operating across a range of topics. Of the almost unlimited amount of work still to be undertaken, open data is but one aspect. The Canadian government has recognised the need to collaborate more closely with Indigenous peoples with respect to open data.
Previous Termination Plans: 1969 White Paper & Buffalo Jump of 1980’s
Presentations and discussions focused on three elements: 1 how Indigenous peoples were or were not engaging with open data and why; 2 building connections and community at the intersection of IDS and open data; and 3 identifying the tensions between IDS and open data and potential paths forward to ameliorate the tensions, while supporting useful data to meet development goals.
Despite these efforts, there are ongoing resource and infrastructure constraints to advancing the shared goals and aspirations of IDS partners, including connecting with and expanding the IDS dialogue beyond the wealthy colonial settler states of North America and Australasia. Given the global scope of IDS, it is critical that the colonial and oppressive exclusion of Indigenous peoples in the Global South is not reproduced in IDS discourse and advocacy.
To that end, a more robust and coherent international collaboration is needed to achieve impactful outcomes at the intersection of IDS, IDG, and open data. Currently there are no funders or investors driving activity at the nexus of these topics. The RDA IDS Group and the nation-state network activities highlight three potential steps forward for the open data community in relation to Indigenous data and peoples. First, the necessity of engaging with Indigenous peoples, not merely in a consultative way, but rather as partners and knowledge holders at the table to inform how to steward Indigenous data.
Second, the IDS networks need to provide a way forward for engagement with Indigenous peoples. The networks offer pre-existing contacts for non-Indigenous entities to begin working with in order to insert an Indigenous voice and vision into existing open data principles and practices. These networks can also connect non-Indigenous data actors with Indigenous leaders and communities. Udall and Morris K. The forum fostered discussion on IDS across four stakeholder groups, including tribal leaders, scholars, federal government officials, and non-profit organisations, as well as staff.
The dialogue focused on drafting principles of IDG for use by tribes and other entities that govern and steward Indigenous data. Draft principles included recognition of inherent sovereignty and the right to self-determination. Since gathering at UCLA, the draft principles have been discussed at a number of events in order to finalise the principles and a format for sharing. International Indigenous collaboration — Creating broad principles of Indigenous data governance for policy-makers, researchers, and others.
- Nation to Nation: Aboriginal Sovereignty and the Future of Canada - Google книги.
- Youth Transitions, International Student Mobility and Spatial Reflexivity: Being Mobile?.
- Nation to Nation: Aboriginal Sovereignty and the Future of Canada, paper ed UNAVAILABLE.
- Fibonacci Applications and Strategies for Traders: Unveiling the Secret of the Logarithmic Spiral.
Conceptualised as a set of five to seven key words, each principle would have a brief descriptor statement and then one to three paragraphs placing the principle in context for the intended audience e. The principles will be accompanied by a companion set of use cases to present the principles in practice.
The concept of open data that is free to use, reuse, and share is laudable. But as we have described in this chapter, open data principles are in direct tension with IDS and the rights of Indigenous peoples to govern their data. This chapter has articulated, via a description of the history and current state of Indigenous data, case studies, and recommendations, that the path forward to addressing this fundamental tension between IDS and open data is through engagement with Indigenous peoples, both in the drafting of the next round of the ODC and the myriad open data contexts, and the inclusion of IDS and IDG principles within the ODC and in how open data is stewarded.
All open data actors have a role in this path forward, including funders, national statistical offices, those building data infrastructures, and sector-specific communities like agricultural or environmental data groups. Additionally, funder commitments are needed in order to support increased scholarship, action, and education about the issues at the intersection of open data and IDS and to bring Indigenous peoples into the conversations around open data.
Such efforts could range from projects to increase Indigenous community data science capacity to encouraging engagement between nation-states and IDS networks in order to create open data policies around the stewarding of data in accordance with IDS and IDG. This chapter also describes how government is more multi-layered than current open data governance assumes, and that data for governance requires a number of sources.
Indigenous nations are political entities, and, as such, are another government actor in the open data world. This challenges the open data binary with one government actor, the nation-state. In addition, the history of Indigenous data and IDS illustrates that the data needed for governance for Indigenous nations or other nation-states requires information from more sources and perspectives than are currently available.
As a result, IDS calls for more nuanced approaches to data than open data binaries often assume. Thus, the stewardship of open data arises as a key area of action requiring engagement with Indigenous peoples. The ODC sits in a powerful seat to advocate for IDS and changes to data stewardship, as well as to facilitate investments in building Indigenous data capacity and capability. Such recognition also should include the importance of IDG and the stewardship of Indigenous data by others, in partnership with Indigenous peoples. IDS can be seen as an anathema to open data, but acknowledgment of IDS and engagement with Indigenous peoples supports ethical open data that allows for development aligned with and benefitting Indigenous aspirations.
Engagement with Indigenous peoples during the next round of ODC revisions must include the IDS networks, but also Indigenous leaders, scholars, and community members. Particular care should be taken to include Indigenous rights holders from the Global South, including Africa and Central and South America. The existing IDS networks provide a launching point for establishing such relationships. When creating open data stewardship policies and practices to make data open, nation-states, researchers, civil society, and others must abide by the rights of Indigenous nations to govern data.
Indigenous peoples have the right to decide what is shared or withheld, ultimately affecting how others steward open data.
[PDF] Nation to nation : aboriginal sovereignty and the future of Canada - Semantic Scholar
Relationships are key and necessitate that open data actors reach out to Indigenous peoples and not just assume their involvement. While tension exists between IDS and open data, multiple paths forward exist as opportunities to diversify data types and improve sources, stewardship, access, and data quality. University of Arizona and the U. Indigenous Data Sovereignty Network.
His research focuses on the study of colonization and the health of Indigenous Peoples in Sweden, Australia, and New Zealand. Kukutai, T. Indigenous data sovereignty: Toward an agenda.
The Indigenous People’s Movement Bringing Long Overdue Justice to Canada
Canberra: Australian National University Press. Indigenising statistics: Meeting in the recognition space. Indigenous data sovereignty communique. National Congress of American Indians. Resolution KAN Support of US Indigenous data sovereignty and inclusion of tribes in the development of tribal data governance principles. Policy brief: Data governance for native nation rebuilding. Policy brief: Indigenous data sovereignty in the United States.
- Karst Aquifers—Characterization and Engineering.
- Sexuality in Greek and Roman Culture (Ancient Cultures);
- Upconverting Nanomaterials: Perspectives, Synthesis, and Applications.
International Indigenous Policy Journal, 8 2. Walter, M. Indigenous data sovereignty. Briefing Paper 1. Governing data and data for governance: The everyday practice of Indigenous sovereignty. Taylor Eds.
Canberra: Australian National University Press, p. Ownership of open data: Governance options for agriculture and nutrition. Data sovereignty for Indigenous peoples: Current practices and future needs. Indigenous data sovereignty: Toward an Agenda pp. What does data sovereignty imply: What does it look like? Policy brief: Data governance for native nation rebuilding version 2. International Open Data Charter: Principles. International Open Data Charter, p 1. Permanent forum. Indigenous peoples at the UN. Declaration of the rights of Indigenous peoples.
New York: United Nations. Recognition and indigenizing official statistics: Reflections from Aotearoa New Zealand and Australia.