9 - Indigenous Data Sovereignty: Implications for Data Journalism

Summary

Abstract

This chapter discusses some of the potential harms of digitalization and considers how Indigenous data sovereignty (ID-SOV), as an emerging site of science and activism, can mediate risks while providing pathways to benefit.

Keywords: Indigenous data sovereignty, activism, data journalism, statistical surveillance, Indigenous peoples

Digital technologies, including monitoring and information technologies and artificial intelligence (AI), are increasingly becoming a feature of Indigenous peoples’ lives, especially for peoples in developed and transition economies. Yet, while data-driven technologies can drive innovation and improve human well-being, Indigenous peoples are unlikely to share equitably in these benefits given their nearly universal position of socio-economic, cultural and political marginalization. The growing use of linked and integrated big data by governments and businesses also brings significant risks for Indigenous peoples. These include the appropriation of cultural knowledge and intellectual property; the exploitation of land and other natural resources; and the perpetuation of discrimination, stigma and ongoing marginalization. These risks are amplified by journalistic storytelling practices that recycle well-rehearsed tropes about Indigenous dysfunction. In this chapter we discuss some of the potential harms of digitalization and consider how Indigenous data sovereignty (ID-SOV), as an emerging site of science and activism, can mediate risks while providing pathways to benefit. We conclude by suggesting that ID-SOV research and networks also represent valuable sources of data and data expertise that can inform more equitable, critical and just approaches to journalism involving Indigenous peoples and issues.

Indigenous Peoples and Data

There are an estimated 370 million Indigenous peoples globally, covering every continent and speaking thousands of distinct languages (United Nations, 2009). The actual global count is impossible to know as the majority of countries that encapsulate Indigenous peoples do not identify them in their national data collections (Mullane-Ronaki, 2017). Notwithstanding these Indigenous “data deserts” and the significant global variation in Indigenous political autonomy and living standards, there is ample evidence that Indigenous people are often among the poorest population groups in their homelands, carrying the heaviest burden of disease, over-incarceration and broad spectrum inequality (Anderson et al., 2016; Stephens et al., 2006). This shared positioning of marginalization is not coincidental; it is directly related to their history as colonized and dispossessed peoples.