The Arctic Working Group, based at Carleton and McMaster universities, is working to connect current knowledge of key issues of concern to Arctic Ocean coastal communities to broad questions of science and policy integration. The group holds as a key goal the empowerment of community voices in the Arctic region and is currently establishing collaborative activities that can support this work.
Research topics at Carleton during 2015/2016 were increasing partnerships for atlas expansion and development of a secondary data strategy for a metadata-base design. The Working Group is also involved in developing best practices for organizing ethics for research practices. The objectives are to have one or more studies exploring partnership building in the context of building an Arctic Ocean Atlas by expanding the existing SIKU Atlas and other projects of the Geomatics and Cartographic Research Centre (GCRC), and to develop a metadata-base design to be prepared as a model for OCP as a whole. At McMaster, with the engagement of a doctoral student in health policy, the Working Group has advanced discussion of community-level case studies, and participated in cross-working group activities. Outputs include presentations, journal articles, and development of guidelines for conducting ethical research as well as a metadata-base design framework. The Working Group is facilitating access to resources used in current and previous community engaged work for the benefit of the OceanCanada partnership.
Nancy Doubleday (Co-Lead), McMaster University
D. R. Fraser Taylor (Co-Lead), Carleton University
Amos Hayes, Carleton University
Sarah Newell, McMaster University
Kathryn Pringle, McMaster University
Dr. Nancy Doubleday: Arctic Working Group Co-Lead
Human knowledge of the polar region is a unique blend of Western scientific knowledge and local and indigenous knowledge. It is increasingly recognized that to exclude Traditional Knowledge from repositories of polar data would both limit the value of such repositories and perpetuate colonial legacies of exclusion and exploitation. However, the inclusion of Traditional Knowledge within repositories that are conceived and designed for Western scientific knowledge raises its own unique challenges. There is increasing acceptance of the need to make these two knowledge systems interoperable but in addition to the technical challenge there are legal and ethical issues involved. These relate to ‘ownership’ or custodianship of the knowledge; obtaining appropriate consent to gather, use and incorporate this knowledge; being sensitive to potentially different norms regarding access to and sharing of some types of knowledge; and appropriate acknowledgement for data contributors. In some cases, respectful incorporation of Traditional Knowledge may challenge standard conceptions regarding the sharing of data, including through open data licensing. These issues have not been fully addressed in the existing literature on legal interoperability which does not adequately deal with Traditional Knowledge. In this paper we identify legal and ethical norms regarding the use of Traditional Knowledge and explore their application in the particular context of polar data. Drawing upon our earlier work on cybercartography and Traditional Knowledge we identify the elements required in the development of a framework for the inclusion of Traditional Knowledge within data infrastructures.
The University of Ottawa’s Centre for Law, Technology and Society (CLTS), Samuelson-Glushko Canadian Internet Policy & Public Interest Clinic (CIPPIC), and Carleton University’s Geomatics and Cartographic Research Centre (GCRC) propose a licensing scheme available to traditional knowledge holders. The scheme aims to assist traditional knowledge holders communicate their expectations for appropriate use of their knowledge to all end users.
Contributing to “Coastal-grab.” Community Conservation Research Network; Tofino, BC.
Bridging water security, peace building and the geopolitics of transboundary water governance. International Studies Association; Atlanta, GA. (Panel organized with Dustin Garrick.)
If sustainability and peaceful co-existence are cross-scale problems, what implications and opportunities for Arctic regimes are implied? International Studies Association; Atlanta, GA.
Community mapping using nunaliit. Community Mapping Symposium. Concordia University; Montreal, QC.
Developing atlases for community priorities. National Museum of Denmark; Copenhagen, Denmark.
Indigenous place names mapping using nunaliit. Geographical Names Board of Canada; Ottawa, ON.
Using nunaliit for diverse and distributed knowledge management. International Polar Data Forum II. University of Waterloo; Waterloo, ON.
The portal as a tool to enable community and university collaboration in research. Arctic Net: Vancouver, BC.
Cybercartography and traditional Inuit knowledge: some legal and ethical issues. National Museum of Denmark; Copenhagen, Denmark.
Data rescue and preservation. International Polar Data Forum II. University of Waterloo; Waterloo, ON.
Pan-Arctic options. Holistic integration for Arctic coastal-marine sustainability. Belmont Forum; Ottawa, ON.
The trans-Atlantic platform for the social sciences and humanities. National Museum of Denmark; Copenhagen, Denmark.
Fraser Taylor and Teresa Scassa
Legal and ethical norms for incorporating traditional knowledge in polar data infrastructures. International Polar Data Forum II. University of Waterloo; Waterloo, ON.
Amos Hayes and Fraser Taylor
Geographic information and coastal zone management: an example from Nunavut. Coastal Zone Conference; Toronto, ON. (With Sarah Arnold.)