Concerns about secondary use of data and limited opportunities for benefit-sharing have focused attention on the tension that Indigenous communities feel between (1) protecting Indigenous rights and interests in Indigenous data (including traditional knowledges) and ( 2) supporting open data, machine learning, broad data sharing, and big data initiatives. The International Indigenous Data Sovereignty Interest Group (within the Research Data Alliance) is a network of nation-state based Indigenous data sovereignty networks and individuals that developed the 'CARE Principles for Indigenous Data Governance' (Collective Benefit, Authority to Control, Responsibility, and Ethics) in consultation with Indigenous Peoples, scholars, non-profit organizations, and governments. The CARE Principles are people-and purpose-oriented, reflecting the crucial role of data in advancing innovation, governance, and self-determination among Indigenous Peoples. The Principles complement the existing data-centric approach represented in the 'FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship' (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable). The CARE Principles build upon earlier work by the Te Mana Raraunga Maori Data Sovereignty Network, US Indigenous Data Sovereignty Network, Maiam nayri Wingara Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Data Sovereignty Collective, and numerous Indigenous Peoples, nations, and communities. The goal is that stewards and other users of Indigenous data will 'Be FAIR and CARE.' In this first formal publication of the CARE Principles, we articulate their rationale, describe their relation to the FAIR Principles, and present examples of their application.

No abstract

IntroductionAboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are Australia’s first peoples and have been connected to the land for ≥65 000 years. Their enduring cultures and values are considered critical to health and wellbeing, alongside physical, psychological and social factors. We currently lack large-scale data that adequately represent the experiences of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people; the absence of evidence on cultural practice and expression is particularly striking, given its foundational importance to wellbeing.Method and analysisMayi Kuwayu: The National Study of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Wellbeing (Mayi Kuwayu Study) will be a large-scale, national longitudinal study of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults, with linkage to health-related administrative records. The baseline survey was developed through extensive community consultation, and includes items on: cultural practice and expression, sociodemographic factors, health and wellbeing, health behaviours, experiences and environments, and family support and connection. The baseline survey will be mailed to 200 000 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults (≥16 years), yielding an estimated 16 000–40 000 participants, supplemented through face-to-face recruitment. Follow-up surveys will be conducted every 3–5 years, or as funding allows. The Mayi Kuwayu Study will contribute to filling key evidence gaps, including quantifying the contribution of cultural factors to wellbeing, alongside standard elements of health and risk.Ethics and disseminationThis study has received approval from national Human Research Ethics Committees, and from State and Territory committees, including relevant Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations. The study was developed and is conducted in partnership with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations across states and territories. It will provide an enduring and shared infrastructure to underpin programme and policy development, based on measures and values important to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Approved researchers can access confidentialised data and disseminate findings according to study data access and governance protocols.

In Australia and internationally, there are increasing calls for the use of strengths-based methodologies, to counter the dominant deficit discourse that pervades research, policy, and media relating to Indigenous health and wellbeing. However, there is an absence of literature on the practical application of strengths-based approaches to quantitative research. This paper describes and empirically evaluates a set of strategies to support strengths-based quantitative analysis. A case study about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander child wellbeing was used to demonstrate approaches to support strengths-based quantitative analysis, in comparison to the dominant deficit approach of identifying risk factors associated with a negative outcome. Data from Wave 8 (2015) of the Australian Longitudinal Study of Indigenous Children were analysed. The Protective Factors Approach is intended to enable identification of factors protective against a negative outcome, and the Positive Outcome Approach is intended to enable identification of factors associated with a positive health outcome. We compared exposure-outcome associations (prevalence ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), calculated using Poisson regression with robust variance) between the strengths-based and deficit approaches. In this case study, application of the strengths-based approaches retains the identification of statistically significant exposure-outcome associations seen with the standard deficit approach. Strengths-based approaches can enable a more positive story to be told, without altering statistical rigour. For Indigenous research, a strengths-based approach better reflects community values and principles, and it is more likely to support positive change than standard pathogenic models. Further research is required to explore the generalisability of these findings.