Share
Two major events—sudden U.S. aggression towards Canada and the rapid growth of the AI industry—have converged over previous years to create a new focus among Canadian policymakers on digital sovereignty. Less discussed is how that priority can coexist with the government’s claims to be building reconciliation and Indigenous self-determination.
Concepts of sovereignty are distinct and are as varied as the Indigenous communities that exist from coast to coast to coast. I examine these questions with a framing I am most familiar with: through a Haudenosaunee or Rotinohshonni lens. However, explorations of First Nations’ digital sovereignty are distinctions-based conversations that need to be rooted in local protocols and rights-holding collective First Nations.
Conceptualizing what is ‘sovereignty’
Digital sovereignty is often viewed as a state’s right to a digital space that is controlled by and accessible to its citizens, reflects its stance and values, and is secured against the influence of other states. The First Nations Information Governance Centre (FNIGC) defines data sovereignty—and, by extension, First Nations sovereignty—as the “recognized right and legitimacy” of a First Nation “to exercise authority over its affairs, a right to self-government, non-intervention, and freedom from interference in internal affairs.”
As such, when it comes to understandings of sovereignty and Indigenous digital sovereignty, Canadians must appreciate that their assumptions and beliefs may not align with those held by Indigenous Nations. Kahnawà:ke Mohawk activist and scholar Gerald Taiaiake Alfred wrote in his 2009 book Peace, Power, Righteousness: An Indigenous Manifesto that modelling or achieving Indigenous sovereignty in a way that mirrors the settler state is not a pathway to nationhood or freedom. Instead, Alfred explains that ‘sovereignty’ in an Indigenous nationhood context does not take the simple forms that states like Canada and the United States have come to expect:
“Traditional indigenous nationhood stands in sharp contrast to the dominant understanding of “the state”: There is no absolute authority, no coercive enforcement of decisions, no hierarchy, and no separate ruling entity.”
First Nations’ digital sovereignty manifests in ways that reflect their own conceptions of governance, thereby actualizing their sovereignty. Realizing this in the digital space for First Nations becomes an important conversation that is not only technical but also a broader discussion about protocols, responsibilities, and rights.
The Earth layer
Benjamin H. Bratton, the author of The Stack: On Software and Sovereignty, created the concept of ‘the stack,’ that is, different layers that build the digital world.
Key concerns for First Nations appear throughout the stack, starting with the Earth layer, which is “the foundational layer” of the entire stack. There is no computation “without a planet, and no computational infrastructure without the transformation of matter into energy and energy into information.” As Canada begins its push toward their AI Sovereign Compute Strategy, First Nations are turning their attention to the impacts on the land. First Nations’ territories are vital for the Earth layer of the sovereign stack—it would not exist without First Nations’ lands.
The tensions between Canada’s race for sovereign digital infrastructure and First Nations’ sovereignty cannot be ignored when discussing this current moment. The Council of Canadians have produced a “Resisting Data Centre Development in Canada” toolkit where they address the Canadian federal government’s push for using land that is certainly Indigenous territory. One of the contributors to this toolkit, Jeff Doctor, an Impact Strategist, community organizer, and Cayuga citizen, notes that Canadian digital sovereignty “requires unfettered access to Indigenous land. Land which we still not only have a right to, but will actively resist any encroachment on or dispossession from.”
First Nations have serious concerns about the infinite-growth mindset of technology economies that rely on physical resources extracted from the land. Alfred describes in Peace, Power, Righteousness that traditional people “recognize a responsibility to participate in the economy with the intent of ensuring the long-term health and stability of the people and the land,” and that “development for development’s sake, consumerism, and unrestrained growth are not justifiable.” First Nations’ understandings of digital sovereignty encompass the health of the land—not just the location of digital data.
Data sovereignty and data territoriality
Data sovereignty is a subset of digital sovereignty which deals with the ownership of the data which powers the digital world. It is particularly relevant here because that data includes data from sovereign, rights-holding First Nations. But through digitization, Indigenous data risks becoming disconnected. Stephanie Russo Carroll, Ahtna and citizen of the Native Village of Kluti-Kaah, says that digitization “flattens knowledge” and changes it from our “lived human experience.” This makes us “less accountable to those data, to each other, to humanity, [and] to the planet.”
“By rebuilding data systems to keep origins, relationships, and responsibilities front and center,” writes Danica Pawlick-Potts, an Indigenous Data Sovereignty scholar from the Alexis Nakota Sioux First Nation, “universities and research organizations can shift from extractive habits to accountable, place based stewardship—supporting better research today and stronger relationships for future generations.”
First Nations digital sovereignty is not Canadian digital sovereignty in a different font; it is relational and situated within community-driven protocols and responsibilities. “Territorializing Data,” is a concept coined by Pawlick-Potts which explores how First Nations could create data “territories.” She describes territory not as a “container of space but rather a relational and strategic configuration through which authority over data is grounded, signaled, and enforced.” Pawlick-Potts emphasizes that these data territories are “relationship-defined,” and “they are constituted through ongoing relations with human and more-than-human kin, ancestors, and future generations rather than fixed solely by state.”
Territoriality could represent actionable, practical steps for digital system design that respect First Nations’ assertions of digital sovereignty. Pawlick-Potts is careful to say that “Territoriality is not sovereignty itself; rather, it is how sovereign authority is made actionable and enforceable within digital systems. Sovereignty defines the right, authority, and purpose; territoriality specifies the how. While sovereignty is expansive, political, and jurisdictional, territoriality is operational, relational, and mechanism-focused.”
Rational sovereignty
First Nations digital sovereignty is grounded not only in technical infrastructure but also in community-driven protocols, relational responsibilities, and a deep connection to land. In order to enact it, we need to move beyond settler-state frameworks through First Nations’ community perspectives, and the critical role of Indigenous protocols in shaping digital spaces. As digital technologies continue to shape our world, it is essential to support data governance models that are accountable, place-based, and respectful of First Nations’ rights and worldviews—something that could be explored through tangible actions that use technology with lower ecological impacts, or by situating territoriality in the design of digital systems.
To further understand and support the principles that guide First Nations information governance, readers are encouraged to learn more about the First Nations Principles of OCAP (Ownership, Control, Access, and Possession) stewarded nationally by the First Nations Information Governance Centre. These principles provide a foundation for ethical, respectful, and effective data stewardship rooted in First Nations’ self-determination, supporting First Nations in achieving data sovereignty within their own worldviews.
About the author
Skylee-Storm Hogan-Stacey
Skylee-Storm Hogan-Stacey is a senior research officer with the Data Sovereignty Research Collaborative at the First Nations Information Governance Centre (FNIGC).
