CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 118Indigenous Health, Education, and RightsIndigenous Peoples' Rights and LawIndigenous Cultures and History

Indigenous Peoples' Rights in Data: a contribution toward Indigenous Research Sovereignty

Open access
Hudson, Maui, Carroll, Stephanie Russo, Anderson, Jane, Blackwater, Darrah, Cordova-Marks, Felina M., Cummins, Jewel, David-Chavez, Dominique, Fernandez, Adam +8 more·2023·Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics
DOI 10.3389/frma.2023.1173805PMC PMC10192690
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Indigenous Peoples' right to sovereignty forms the foundation for advocacy and actions toward greater Indigenous self-determination and control across a range of domains that impact Indigenous Peoples' communities and cultures. Declarations for sovereignty are rising throughout Indigenous communities and across diverse fields, including Network Sovereignty, Food Sovereignty, Energy Sovereignty, and Data Sovereignty. Indigenous Research Sovereignty draws in the sovereignty discourse of these initiatives to consider their applications to the broader research ecosystem. Our exploration of Indigenous Research Sovereignty, or Indigenous self-determination in the context of research activities, has been focused on the relationship between Indigenous Data Sovereignty and efforts to describe Indigenous Peoples' Rights in data.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/frma.2023.1173805

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • AI data stewardship applies this approach to dataset collection for training AI models, especially when these have knowledge gaps about marginalized communities.

    “AI data stewardship applies this approach to dataset collection for training AI models, especially when these have knowledge gaps about marginalized communities (cf. [20, 59]).”

    From Engaging Communities Meaningfully in Defining Disability Representation for AI Image Generation (2026) · cites this paper as [59]

    The “Indigenous Data Sovereignty and research” section calls for Indigenous participation in data governance across the data lifecycle and explicitly identifies dataset diversity for AI as important. The “Right to self-determination” section describes Indigenous-led collection to fill community data gaps. The paper does not specifically discuss collecting datasets to train AI models or AI models’ knowledge gaps about marginalized communities generally. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Within the DAIS paradigm, AI is governed by Indigenous law and ethics rather than optimisation logics.

    “Within this paradigm, AI is governed by Indigenous law and ethics rather than optimisation logics (Hudson et al., 2023;Kukutai & Taylor, 2016).”

    From Towards a decolonial AI sovereignty model for indigenous educational settings (2026) · cites this paper as Hudson et al., 2023

    The Introduction says Indigenous data governance centers authority and ethics, and the Indigenous Data Sovereignty and research section says Indigenous Peoples’ laws and practices set expectations for research. The paper does not say that AI itself is governed under a DAIS paradigm or contrast Indigenous governance with optimisation logics; its AI discussion concerns data diversity. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Refusal is not withdrawal; it is an affirmative method to safeguard language, resist extractive infrastructures, and insist that infrastructural choices answer to Indigenous legal orders.

    “Refusal here is not withdrawal; it is an affirmative method to safeguard language, resist extractive infrastructures, and insist that infrastructural choices answer to Indigenous legal orders (Hudson et al., 2023).”

    From Towards a decolonial AI sovereignty model for indigenous educational settings (2026) · cites this paper as Hudson et al., 2023

    The 'Right to refuse' section describes an active, ongoing right to reject uses of Indigenous data, and 'Right to possess' places data under Indigenous legal control rather than exploitative institutional practices. The Discussion says Indigenous rights should inform evolving data infrastructures. The paper does not specifically describe refusal as a way to safeguard language, and it explicitly includes withdrawal of previously granted permission as one possible exercise of refusal. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Epistemic Sovereignty requires governance boards, binding agreements, and technical protocols granting communities authority over datasets, models, and deployment.

    “It requires governance boards, binding agreements, and technical protocols granting communities authority over datasets, models, and deployment (Christen & Anderson, 2019b;Hudson et al., 2023).”

    From Towards a decolonial AI sovereignty model for indigenous educational settings (2026) · cites this paper as Hudson et al., 2023

    The “Right to govern” section (page unavailable) supports community authority over data and participation in developing protocols. The “Right to possess” section (page unavailable) describes Data Governance Agreements as a means of bringing data under Indigenous governance. The cited paper does not establish governance boards or binding agreements as requirements, or specifically extend that authority to models and deployment. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • UNDRIP, the Nagoya Protocol, and the Global Indigenous Data Alliance have detailed numerous rights that Indigenous Peoples have in relation to data.

    “UNDRIP, the Nagoya Protocol, and the Global Indigenous Data Alliance have detailed numerous rights that Indigenous Peoples have in relation to data (United Nations General Assembly, 1993, 2007; UN Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, 2010; Hudson et al., 2023).”

    From Indigenous Peoples and research: self-determination in research governance (2023) · cites this paper as Hudson et al., 2023

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Duarte M. E. (2017). Network Sovereignty: Building the Internet Across Indian Country. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
  2. Kukutai T. Taylor J. (2016). Indigenous Data Sovereignty (1st ed.). Canberra ACT: ANU Press.
  3. SSIT/SC. (2023). Social Implications of Technology Standards Committee. P2890 Recommended Practice for Provenance of Indigenous Peoples' Data. IEEE Standards Association. Available online at: https://standards.ieee.org
  4. Wilson S. (2008). Research Is Ceremony: Indigenous Research Methods (First Edition). Fernwood Publishing. Available online at: https://fernwoodpublishing.ca/book/research-is-ceremony-shawn-wilson (accessed February 10, 2023).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Hudson, M., Carroll, S. R., Anderson, J., Blackwater, D., Cordova-Marks, F. M., Cummins, J., David-Chavez, D., Fernandez, A., Garba, I., Hiraldo, D., Jäger, M. B., Jennings, L. L., Martinez, A., Sterling, R., Walker, J. D., & Rowe, R. K.
Affiliations
  • University of Waikato (NZ)
  • University of Arizona (US)
  • New York University (US)
  • Colorado State University (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • McMaster University (CA)
  • Queen's University (CA)
Corresponding author
Hudson, Maui
ORCID
Venue
Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics
Publisher
Frontiers Media SA
Published
2023-05-04
Volume
8
Pages
1173805-1173805
ISSN
2504-0537 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3389/frma.2023.1173805
PMC
PMC10192690
OpenAlex
W4377565371
Cited by
107
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 46 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 6
FWCI
28.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Lincoln (University of Nebraska) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • UNC Libraries
Funders
Ministry for Business Innovation and Employment
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Indigenous Health, Education, and Rights
  • Social Sciences › Law › Indigenous Peoples' Rights and Law
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Indigenous Cultures and History
Keywords
Indigenous data sovereignty, indigenous rights, Indigenous self-determination, Indigenous data governance, Indigenous research ethics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review