As is clear from the responses above, the question you pose, Che-Wei, is an excellent one that would not have been asked not so many years ago. I agree with Hugo that "research is research" - seeking for knowledge and sharing knowledge are human pursuits. Research is done in a cultural context, whether one uses Western paradigms and methodologies or Indigenous/decolonized approaches. Smith and many other proponents of Indigenous research paradigms don't deny the usefulness of Western methods, including the emphasis on empirical evidence. Instead, they call for us as researchers to place Western methods and paradigms into the appropriate cultural context, which includes the colonial project and the valorization of those same ways of knowing. Recently my colleagues and I had to respond to concerns that our graduate program, where students earn an MA in Indigenous Governance, is quite arduous in its requirements. We successfully argued that our students must be trained in Indigenous and Western paradigms and methodologies. It is exciting to watch these emerging scholars pushing the boundaries but they can only do so from an informed and contextual standpoint. Another important point to remember is that there is a healthy range of positions among Indigenous scholars/researchers/applied practitioners about what Indigenous research really is. Duane Champagne, for example, points out that all research questions do not have to be community-generated, which is counter to many descriptions of Indigenous research paradigms and methods. Other questions/issues that have come up, including in my own research, include: who speaks for Indigenous communities/who gives consent; problems with institutional ethics review boards; perceived legitimacy of Indigenous research paradigms re: funding, tenure and promotion, publications; Indigenous research in urban settings, etc.

Hi,

Very good question! I think research is research. However, when working with indigenous people, their (traditional) knowledge should be considered on equal footing with so-called "western" scientific knowledge. Both are equally good, it's just that they were developed and were validated through different channels. In addition, special care should be given to how data is shared and used. Aboriginal people in Canada have come up with the OCAP principles (Ownership, Control, Access, and Possession of data). This is an efficient way to decolonize research and to favour good partnerships. More info here:

http://www.naho.ca/documents/fnc/english/FNC_OCAPCriticalAnalysis.pdf

Hope that helps,

Hugo

Thank you Hugo for your helpful comments. The case of the Aboriginal Peoples in Canada is a powerful example. Happy to learn more from your good starting point.

I think your question is very interesting and academically provoking. The central tenet of the indigenous research paradigm as far as I know is based on the decolonisation agenda to the societies that had historically been oppressed and subdued under the onslaught of colonialism. The proponents of this paradigm therefore strive to bring to the forth the voices of the oppressed people in knowledge creation and production. This means that indigenous knowledge of the indigenous people which is currently undermined by the dominant knowledge should be seen as having equal value with Western or scientific knowledge. Moreover, their emphasis is based on the premise that the so called Western knowledge today which is used as a dominant form of knowledge throughout the world is also unique and indigenous to western societies. As a result, researchers cannot apply the same research methods used in western contexts in non-western societies. As Western knowledge contributes to world knowledge so does the indigenous knowledge.

Thanks Joseph for your insight. Can we interpret this argument as a cultural relativism? Based on your point, some disadvantaged indigenous groups do not share the due and legitimate right/channel to express their unique scholarly perspectives, knowledge systems, or standpoint. In mainstream academy, many indigenous research paradigms do not share the equal right and power to demonstrate their scholarly discourse.

I think cultural relativism certainly is an important concept in this discussion. Following-up on Joseph's post about decolonization, you might be interested in this well-cited book, written by Linda Tuhiwai Smith, a Maori researcher (a new edition was issued in 2012):

Smith, L. T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. Zed books.

Hugo, I very much appreciate your suggested readings. I just borrowed Prof. Smith's two works from the library and am reading them now. Hope to share more about my feedback on this topic, and look forward to other colleagues' perspectives.

As is clear from the responses above, the question you pose, Che-Wei, is an excellent one that would not have been asked not so many years ago. I agree with Hugo that "research is research" - seeking for knowledge and sharing knowledge are human pursuits. Research is done in a cultural context, whether one uses Western paradigms and methodologies or Indigenous/decolonized approaches. Smith and many other proponents of Indigenous research paradigms don't deny the usefulness of Western methods, including the emphasis on empirical evidence. Instead, they call for us as researchers to place Western methods and paradigms into the appropriate cultural context, which includes the colonial project and the valorization of those same ways of knowing. Recently my colleagues and I had to respond to concerns that our graduate program, where students earn an MA in Indigenous Governance, is quite arduous in its requirements. We successfully argued that our students must be trained in Indigenous and Western paradigms and methodologies. It is exciting to watch these emerging scholars pushing the boundaries but they can only do so from an informed and contextual standpoint. Another important point to remember is that there is a healthy range of positions among Indigenous scholars/researchers/applied practitioners about what Indigenous research really is. Duane Champagne, for example, points out that all research questions do not have to be community-generated, which is counter to many descriptions of Indigenous research paradigms and methods. Other questions/issues that have come up, including in my own research, include: who speaks for Indigenous communities/who gives consent; problems with institutional ethics review boards; perceived legitimacy of Indigenous research paradigms re: funding, tenure and promotion, publications; Indigenous research in urban settings, etc.

If I add to Julie's comments, I think that as with any other paradigm, there is growth and change within Indigenist research. As Hugo and Joseph have stated, the historical reality of how research (and the whole academic system) works has required a decolonization process to take place for Indigenist thought to be even considered in the Academy, much less be on equal footing. Now that we are reaching enough critical mass of Indigenist philosophers and researchers, we can move even further than fighting against in-equality. We can use Indigenist research paradigms to forward visions of what we would like our communities to be in the future and plan for positive growth of our cultures and philosophy, rather than solely focussing on avoiding attrition. Sometimes these visions will be divergent and I see that as a sign of maturation in how we are articulating and interpreting these millennia-old philosophies.

I now use the terms Indigenist and Indigenism to describe the paradigm that I’m working from. I think that this is important exactly because of what Che-Wei originally asked: to me, Indigenism describes a philosophy or worldview that anyone can choose to follow in their life or their research, whereas Indigenous describes something specifically for Indigenous peoples. An Indigenist paradigm is based on a reality that is relational – rather than just being in relationships, we ARE relationships. Indigenist researchers become accountable to the relationships that they develop and grow in the research process. So I would say that Indigenism can be generalized to other fields and to diverse researchers who choose this relational way of doing researchers – just as feminist philosophy can be applied beyond the field of women’s studies or by genders other than female.

I so appreciate Shawn bringing the terms Indigenist and Indigenism to our attention. So the Indigenist paradigm brings everyone into the circle and makes explicit the relationships between and relatedness of all living beings. This makes for ethical research and, for those who wish, ethical action. When Shawn then refers to feminist philosophy, I'm reminded that for the relationship between feminist thinkers, scholars, and activists and those of us working in an Indigenist paradigm, or even an Indigenous paradigm, has been significantly one-sided. That seems to be improving.

I totally agree Julie!

Perhaps another thing that Indigenist research has to offer is that having a reality based on relationship requires us to critically reflect on our what we ourselves bring into the research process / relationship. So to expose the myth of objectivity, we embrace our subjectivity through a more truthful emphasis on who we are - thus when I introduce myself as Cree from Opaskwayak I also recognize that being me carries certain privileges as well as disadvantages (both earned and unearned) as a man, as Cree, as having attained a certain level of education, etc. By recognizing all of these relationships and researcher lenses, rather than only one without the others, Indigenist research outcomes more truly reflect the the complexity of real life.

I would really like to see other researchers more fully introduce themselves and demonstrate some reflexivity in recognizing the influences of their own culture on research process and outcomes.

Thanks Julie and Shawn for your insightful comments and examples. It is good to know that Indigenous research paradigms have a specific standpoint. I agree that indigenous researchers should create their own special stance to claim their research paradigms. However, do indigenous research paradigms need specific criteria to legitimatize the validity of these perspectives? What are the essential elements? Are there any suggested readings for this issue?

For Julie, I very much appreciate your statement that "there is a healthy range of positions among Indigenous scholars/researchers/applied practitioners about what Indigenous research really is." This is a very important attitude toward indigenously relevant studies.

For Shawn, would you mind letting me and our researchgate audience know the definitions of the terms Indigenist and Indigenism? Are there any suggested references for us to study them? I hope we can use these great terms carefully, precisely, and appropriately.

I am so grateful to you all for these constructive comments. This is a very productive platform to share different viewpoints. I have learnt a lot from each of you, and hope to deepen this topic and explore brand-new ideas.

You might be interested in the paradigm at the center of all aspects of Dine College, the Navajo tribal college. Often just referred to as the SNBH paradigm, within the culture these letters stand for "Sa'ah Naaghai Bik'eh Hozhoon." Frank Morgan provided me a free translation of the phrase, "past old age, the one that walks there in ultimate balance and harmony or on the balanced path." The intention is for this paradigm to guide the teaching of all classes, employees' relations with each other, the governance of the college, and even the layout of the main Tsaile campus. A good start in learning about the college and the role of this paradigm in shaping the college would be to view the college's web site (www.dinecollege.edu) and to read and look through the college's catalog. I discuss this topic at some length in an article (whose title escapes me now) published in the now-defunct Journal of Navajo Education and in my book, Language Shift among the Navajos. In the latter, I also discuss how this paradigm can be used to guide academic research. I used it myself and heartily endorse it in all of my teaching at Dine College.

Thank you Deborah! We need more empirical evidence and real-world data to support the development of indigenous research paradigm.