{"id":3864,"date":"2026-02-09T16:22:41","date_gmt":"2026-02-09T16:22:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.imperial.ac.uk\/openaccess\/?p=3864"},"modified":"2026-02-13T09:09:11","modified_gmt":"2026-02-13T09:09:11","slug":"understanding-the-care-principles-why-they-matter-for-open-research-and-indigenous-data-sovereignty","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.imperial.ac.uk\/openaccess\/2026\/02\/09\/understanding-the-care-principles-why-they-matter-for-open-research-and-indigenous-data-sovereignty\/","title":{"rendered":"Understanding the CARE Principles: Why They Matter for Open Research and Indigenous Data Sovereignty"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\"Fb-Button\"\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>
<\/fb:like><\/div><\/div>

In recent years, conversations about data governance have broadened beyond technical standards and infrastructure. Increasingly, researchers, institutions, and communities are asking deeper questions: Who does data serve? Who benefits? Who has authority over its use, especially when it concerns Indigenous Peoples?<\/p>\n

The\u00a0<\/span><\/span>CARE Principles for Indigenous Data Governance<\/span><\/span><\/a>\u00a0provide an essential framework for addressing these questions. Developed a<\/span>longside\u00a0<\/span>the widely\u00a0<\/span>cited<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/span>FAIR Principles<\/span><\/span><\/a>, CARE shifts the focus from machines and metadata to\u00a0<\/span><\/span>people and purpose<\/span><\/span>.<\/span><\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

As part of<\/span>\u00a0International<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/span>Love Data Week 2026<\/span><\/span><\/a>, t<\/span>his\u00a0<\/span>blog\u00a0<\/span>post<\/span>\u00a0shares reflections on\u00a0<\/span>the CARE Principles, explains why they matter\u00a0and<\/span><\/span>\u00a0<\/span>explores what more intentional practices around support for CARE principles might look like.<\/span><\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Origins of\u00a0<\/span>the\u00a0<\/span>CARE<\/span> Principles<\/span><\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/h2>\n

As efforts to make\u00a0<\/span>research<\/span>\u00a0data more open and shareable have gained momentum over recent years, it is unsurprising that\u00a0<\/span>some of\u00a0<\/span>the most strongly\u00a0<\/span>supported<\/span>\u00a0principles ha<\/span>ve been<\/span>\u00a0those that have focused on data utility and purpose<\/span>,<\/span>\u00a0such as the Open Data Charter and the\u00a0<\/span><\/span>FAIR principles<\/span><\/span><\/a>.\u00a0<\/span><\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

In the article,<\/span><\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/span>Operationalizing the CARE and FAIR Principles for Indigenous data futures<\/span><\/span><\/a>\u00a0<\/span><\/span>the authors observed that<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>d<\/span>ata principles such as FAIR\u00a0<\/span>we<\/span>re\u00a0<\/span>aligned to\u00a0<\/span>an overall<\/span>\u00a0shift towards open science and open data,\u00a0<\/span>‘<\/span>that facilitate increased data sharing among entities while ignoring relationships, power differentials, and the historical conditions associated with the collection of data<\/span>\u2019<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>(Carroll et al., 2021)<\/span>.<\/span><\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

In\u00a0<\/span>data privacy discourse,\u00a0<\/span>some\u00a0<\/span><\/span>scholars<\/span><\/span><\/a>\u00a0have\u00a0<\/span>highlighted<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>that<\/span>\u00a0data<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>protection\u00a0<\/span>laws<\/span>,<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>despite being<\/span>\u00a0more\u00a0<\/span>oriented towards t<\/span>he indivi<\/span>dual<\/span>,<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>are<\/span>\u00a0similarly\u00a0<\/span>flawed<\/span>\u00a0and\u00a0<\/span>can perpetuate the myth of the \u201csovereign subject,\u201d a model that presumes <\/span>all\u00a0<\/span>individuals<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>are\u00a0<\/span>\u2018<\/span>inherently free, self-possessive, and equally capable of entering\u00a0<\/span>into contracts<\/span>\u2019<\/span>\u00a0(Weinberg, 2017)<\/span>.<\/span>\u00a0A\u00a0<\/span><\/span>long-read article<\/span><\/span><\/a>\u00a0by Privacy International\u00a0<\/span>(2024)\u00a0<\/span>further\u00a0<\/span>argues<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>that \u2018t<\/span>his model neglects the historical exploitation and exclusion of certain groups\u00a0<\/span>from being<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>r<\/span>ecognis<\/span>e<\/span>d<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>as full\u00a0<\/span>i<\/span>ndividuals<\/span>\u2019<\/span>.<\/span><\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

In\u00a0<\/span>September\u00a0<\/span>2019, following a year-long public discussion and building on Indigenous Data Sovereignty network activities, the Global Indigenous Data Alliance released the CARE Principles for Indigenous Data Governance, which\u00a0<\/span>aimed<\/span>\u00a0to<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>address\u00a0<\/span>some of these deep<\/span>er<\/span>-rooted<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>issue<\/span>s<\/span>.<\/span><\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

In open science and research, t<\/span>he CARE principles are<\/span>,<\/span>\u00a0comparatively<\/span>,<\/span>\u00a0lesser known<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>to their\u00a0<\/span>more technically<\/span>-oriented\u00a0<\/span>counterparts. W<\/span>hile the former were conceived to address a very particular <\/span>set of\u00a0<\/span>concer<\/span>ns<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>relating to<\/span> Indigenous Data Sovereignty (which draws on the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP))<\/span>\u00a0the<\/span>y<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>were<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>also\u00a0<\/span>intended to be viewed as complementary<\/span>, not distinct,<\/span>\u00a0to FAIR\u00a0<\/span>principles\u00a0<\/span><\/span>and<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>adhered to<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>simultaneously<\/span>,<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>in the relevant context.<\/span><\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

One\u00a0<\/span>possible explanation<\/span>\u00a0for<\/span>\u00a0the\u00a0<\/span>current\u00a0<\/span>perceived obscurity of CARE principles<\/span>\u00a0may be that it takes time to build trust and\u00a0<\/span>partnerships with indigenous scholars and communities<\/span>.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>T<\/span>his<\/span>\u00a0is often<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>considered to be\u00a0<\/span>significantly\u00a0<\/span>at odds with dominant research cultures<\/span>\u00a0that\u00a0<\/span>have<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>favour<\/span>ed<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>relatively\u00a0<\/span>fixed<\/span>\u00a0funding cycles<\/span>,<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>a\u00a0<\/span>precarity of work in early career research<\/span>\u00a0positions,<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>the\u00a0<\/span>continuing\u00a0<\/span>spectre<\/span>\u00a0of<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>\u201cpublish or perish\u201d\u00a0<\/span>and the rapid expansion of machine learning approaches that<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>accelerate data re-use<\/span>, more recently<\/span>\u00a0(Winker, M.A. et al. 2023).<\/span><\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\"A
Figure 1, Indigenous and Mainstream Data Principles, and Orientation toward Data, People, and Purpose (Carroll et al., 2020<\/a>)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

In their article, Carroll et al.\u00a0<\/span>(2021)\u00a0<\/span>a<\/span>rgue that \u2018the CARE Principles should be seen as a required dimension of open and FAIR data that ensures<\/span>\u00a0that<\/span>\u00a0the use of data aligns with Indigenous rights, is as open as determined by Indigenous communities, is purposeful, and enhances the wellbeing of Indigenous Peoples\u2019. This is particularly important\u00a0<\/span>in light of<\/span> the tension <\/span>they\u00a0<\/span>observed<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>between\u00a0<\/span>needing to\u00a0<\/span>protect Indigenous rights and interests in data while<\/span>\u00a0also<\/span>\u00a0encouraging FAIR data in a global research\u00a0<\/span>landscape\u00a0<\/span>that also supports open data<\/span>.<\/span><\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Defining<\/span> Indigenous Peoples and Indigenous Data:<\/span><\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/h2>\n

In order t<\/span>o<\/span>\u00a0gain an informed understanding of\u00a0<\/span>the\u00a0<\/span>CARE principles\u00a0<\/span>it is\u00a0<\/span>first\u00a0<\/span>essential<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>to\u00a0<\/span>understand\u00a0<\/span>what is meant by\u00a0<\/span>certain<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>key related<\/span>\u00a0terms<\/span>:<\/span><\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Indigenous Peoples:<\/span><\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/h3>\n

Firstly, t<\/span>he<\/span>\u00a0UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples\u00a0<\/span>(2007)\u00a0<\/span>does not include a<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>formal\u00a0<\/span>definition of <\/span>I<\/span>ndigenous\u00a0<\/span>P<\/span>eoples<\/span>\u00a0and many human rights documents have been equally cautious in\u00a0<\/span>proposing<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>one<\/span>,\u00a0<\/span>maintaini<\/span>ng<\/span>\u00a0instead that self-identification should be\u00a0<\/span>the fundamental criterion<\/span>. This is important<\/span>\u00a0not least\u00a0<\/span>because<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>of<\/span>\u00a0the<\/span>\u00a0plurality of\u00a0<\/span>umbrella terms <\/span>that\u00a0<\/span>may be\u00a0<\/span>used<\/span>\u00a0and preferred<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>b<\/span>y\u00a0<\/span>particular peopl<\/span>es<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>in s<\/span>pecific<\/span>\u00a0regions or contexts<\/span>.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

According to the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, the system has instead\u00a0worked towards developing\u00a0a modern understanding of the\u00a0term based on the following:<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n