By: Claire Lavarreda, DITI Assistant Director
On October 25th, the NULab for Digital Humanities and Computational Social Science co-hosted a virtual visiting speaker event with the English Department as part of the “Environment and English” speaker series, and in collaboration with Arts, Humanities, and Tech Weeks. In a talk titled “The CARE Principles as an Anti-Colonial Framework to Counter Systemic Racism,” Dr. Stephanie Russo Carroll presented her work on overcoming the legacies of structural racism through data relations, specifically as data pertains to Indigenous communities. The talk began with an introduction by Dr. Ellen Cushman, who noted Stephanie Russo Carroll’s many roles and accolades, including her positions as an Associate Professor in the Public Health and American Indian Studies Graduate Program and as the Director of the Collaboratory for Indigenous Data Governance at the University of Arizona.
At the start of her talk, Stephanie Russo Carroll introduced herself as an Ahtna woman, a citizen of the Native Village of Kluti-Kaah in Alaska and of Sicilian descent. With masters and doctoral degrees in Public Health, Carroll has worked for over twenty years at the University of Arizona and its Native Nations Institute. After sharing images of her family and noting her responsibility to her communities and ancestors, Carroll highlighted the major topics of her talk, including Indigenous Data Sovereignty, the CARE Principles, and CARE Data Maturity Model.
Image: A presentation slide featuring images of Stephanie Russo Carroll’s family is in the top left and middle sections. A photo of herself in Alaska during the summer solstice is in the top right, followed by a banner photo at the bottom of fellow drafters of the CARE principles in Botswana.
Emphasizing the importance of sovereignty and Indigenous self-governance, Carroll transitioned into key position points that guide her work and methodology. These include the following concepts: (1). Sovereignty matters. (2). The settler colonial project continues. (3). Colonization causes inequities. (4). Indigenous Peoples survive, thrive, persist. (5). Data are our relations and are part of our healing journey. (6). Self determination and governance lead to healthy, vibrant communities.
Carroll continued her talk by examining the connection between inherent sovereignty and data, noting that data represents elements of our lived experience as humans. Carroll defined the term “Indigenous Data Sovereignty,” as “the right of indigenous peoples and nations to govern the collection, ownership, and application of their own data.” According to Carroll, Indigenous Data can be divided into three categories, including: (1). Data about non-human relations: Land, water, geology, sacred ecosystems, etc., (2). Data about individuals: Administrative, legal, social, etc., (3). Data about us as collectives: Traditional and cultural info, language systems, etc.
Image: Source is the Global Indigenous Data Alliance. The acronyms for FAIR and CARE data principles are featured, with one word corresponding to each letter underneath. F is Findabale, A is Accessible, I is Interoperable, R is Reusable; followed by C is Collective Benefit, A is Authority to Control, R is Responsibility, and E is Ethics.
Having established guiding terminology and a brief overview of IDGov responsibilities, Carroll then provided an overview of the four defining principles of CARE, all of which are centered around the concept that we must look to the community at stake to learn how to care for their data. Russo Carroll listed the four high-level principles:
(1). Collective Benefit: Data ecosystems shall be designed and function in ways that enable Indigenous Peoples to derive benefit from the data.
(2). Authority to Control: Indigenous Peoples’ rights and interests in Indigenous data must be recognized and their authority to control such data be empowered. Indigenous data governance enables Indigenous Peoples and governing bodies to determine how Indigenous Peoples, as well as Indigenous lands, territories, resources, knowledges and geographical indicators, are represented and identified within data.
(3). Responsibility: Those working with Indigenous data have a responsibility to
share how those data are used to support Indigenous Peoples’ self-determination and collective benefit. Accountability requires meaningful and openly available evidence of these efforts and the benefits accruing to Indigenous Peoples.
(4). Ethics: Indigenous Peoples’ rights and well-being should be the primary concern at all stages of the data life cycle and across the data ecosystem. (Global Indigenous Data Alliance).
Image: Jennings, L., Anderson, T., Martinez, A. et al. Applying the ‘CARE Principles for Indigenous Data Governance’ to ecology and biodiversity research. Nat Ecol Evol 7, 1547–1551 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-023-02161-2.
Carroll addressed the challenges Indigenous communities face in maintaining the sovereignty of their data—most of which are rooted in longstanding practices of archives and computational structures. Data can be difficult to find, collections mislabeled, reproduction and access rights not belonging to Indigenous peoples. Materials held by private collectors and institutions require continued efforts to implement CARE practices. In response to these challenges, the creators of the CARE principles have been working on a CARE Data Maturity Model to serve as a tool to assess, measure, and improve organizational systems and processes. While there is high need and demand across institutions and projects to use the CARE principles, concrete activities and workflows to implement CARE and observe compliance must be developed for each institution and project. Carroll concluded with examples from two projects that have realized the CARE model, including the Tekakapimak Contact Station and the Whakatōhea Waiata app.
The NULab was honored to host this event and looks forward to continued discussions around data sovereignty and social justice in the year to come!
