Jessie Loyer–a liaison librarian at Mount Royal University who is Cree-Métis and a member of Michel First Nation–began her keynote talk for “Can we Decolonize Open? An Open Access Week Event” on October 22, 2019 by saying that if want to think about what it means to decolonize open access, we can look at the example of Rez Dogs. Rez dogs–dogs that live in Indigenous communities and reserves–are increasingly being picked up by well-meaning dog rescuers who assume that because the dogs are allowed to roam free, they are strays or without owners.
The altruistic impulse of these rescues is very similar, Loyer argued, to the motivations behind the Open Access movement in which it is often assumed that making information and resources openly accessible is beneficial and just for all. In a far-reaching and thought-provoking talk which you can view here, Loyer encouraged the audience to think about who makes decisions in open movements, who might be left out of these conversations (in particular, Indigenous communities), and what harms might be caused in the process of making materials open.
Below, we’ve compiled a selection of resources that Loyer referenced in her talk. From articles that examine the philosophical, political, and colonial contexts of the open movement, to projects that center Indigenous perspectives on ownership and access, Loyer’s resources provide excellent further reading for thinking critically about what it might mean to diversify and decolonize open.
Adam, T, Bali, M, Hodgkinson-Williams, C, and Morgan, T. (2019, February 26). Guest blog: Can we decolonize OER/Open? #DecolonizeOPEN. OER19: Recentering Open.
In a guest blog post for the conference OER19: Recentering Open, the authors explore the often unquestioned altruistic assumptions that drive the open movement and which prevent a critical examination of the colonial structures and philosophies the movement may reproduce. The authors also identify some practices that could participate in dismantling structural inequalities and move toward decolonizing open.Anderson, J. and Christen, K. (2012, December 3). Traditional Knowledge Licences and Labels. Arts Law Centre of Australia. https://www.artslaw.com.au/article/traditional-knowledge-licences-and-labels/
This article outlines the Traditional Knowledge License and Label initiative, which seeks to address concerns expressed by Indigenous peoples about what copyright and creative commons leave out in terms of Indigenous concepts of ownership.Cormack, C. 2019. Open Data. International Indigenous Librarians Forum keynote. https://slides.com/ranginui/open-data#.
A slide deck from Chris Cormack’s presentation on Indigenous Data Sovereignty from a Māori perspective.FNIGC. The First Nations principles of OCAP. https://fnigc.ca/ocap.
The OCAP™ principles were initially published by FNIGC in 2002 in order to articulate a set of practices that could guide research on and the collection of data from First Nations communities. This document outlines OCAP™’s elements of Ownership, Control, Access, and Possession by First Nations communities that can be used as a protocol in any management of First Nations information.Maestro, L., Dupont, S. and Friesen, A. (2019). Indigization at the cultural interface: Critiquing #OpenGLAM from an Indigenous perspective. BC Museums Association Roundup Magazine. Spring 2019. 5-9. https://issuu.com/bcmuseumsassn/docs/275_roundup_bcs_glam_sector_final_w.
This article explores the tensions between the value of openness being embraced by Galleries, Libraries, Archives, and Museums (GLAM), and cultural protocols in place in Indigenous communities for the protection and management of traditional knowledge through the example of Indigitization, a collaborative initiative between Indigenous communities and organizations, the Irving K. Barber Learning Centre, the Museum of Anthropology, Northern BC Archives (UNBC), and the School for Library, Archival and Information Studies that builds capacity in Indigenous information management. You can also read more about the Indigitization program here, a project Loyer highlighted as one that thinks critically about the questions of ownership and access around Indigenous cultural materials.Mills, A. (2017). Learning to Listen: Archival Sound Recordings and Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property. Archivaria, 83, 109-124. Retrieved from https://archivaria.ca/index.php/archivaria/article/view/13602. (not Open Access)
Mills article looks at the historical power imbalance present in archives, and the conflict between intellectual property laws and Indigenous legal orders through the example of field recordings of Indigenous oral histories.smith, s.e. (2017, Nov 7). We’re still here: Debbie Reese on native people telling their own stories. Bitch Media. https://www.bitchmedia.org/article/bitch-interview/debbie-reese-native-american-literature
An interview with the founder of the American Indians in Children’s Literature blog Dr. Debbie Reese that, among other things, discusses the need for Indigenous communities to decide what stories can and cannot be shared.Van Ineveld, M. (2017, January 25). UMSU’s problematic erasure of decades of Indigenous advocacy bolsters settler saviourism. The Manitoban. http://www.themanitoban.com/2017/01/umsus-problematic-erasure-decades-indigenous-advocacy-bolsters-settler-saviourism/30570/
An op-ed that Loyer used to help define the concept of settler saviourism–“what happens when non-Indigenous people use their voice to speak on behalf of, or over, Indigenous people without first consulting those communities”–and how such a position might apply in the unexamined altruistic assumptions around the concept of open access.Thank you to Jessie Loyer, for her talk and for kindly sharing her list of references. You can read more about her and her work here.
