OCAP (First Nations)

OCAP (First Nations)
Name	OCAP
Full name	Ownership, Control, Access, and Possession
Type	Indigenous data sovereignty principle
Founded	1990s
Region	Canada
Headquarters	Ottawa, Ontario
Key people	First Nations Information Governance Centre

Contents

OCAP (First Nations) is an Indigenous data governance framework originating within Canadian Indigenous communities that asserts principles about data stewardship and cultural sovereignty. Developed in response to historical research practices affecting First Nations populations and institutions such as the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples and the Assembly of First Nations, OCAP informs how organizations including the First Nations Information Governance Centre and regional tribal councils manage information. The framework intersects with debates involving privacy law, intellectual property law, and international instruments like the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

Background and History

OCAP emerged amid 1990s conversations among leaders in organizations like the National Indian Brotherhood and the Assembly of First Nations who sought remedies to extractive research exemplified in cases associated with institutions such as the Indian Hospitals inquiry and academic studies from universities like the University of Toronto and McGill University. Influential events and reports, including work by the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples and the activities of the Native Women's Association of Canada, underscored mistrust of external researchers. The articulation of Ownership, Control, Access, and Possession was championed in forums convened by groups such as the First Nations Information Governance Centre and regional entities like the Manitoba Keewatinowi Okimakanak and Nishnawbe Aski Nation.

OCAP is defined by four interrelated principles: Ownership, Control, Access, and Possession. Ownership situates information about First Nations as collective property akin to concepts in Aboriginal title and communal stewardship found in traditions of the Haida Nation and Mi'kmaq Nation. Control reflects governance roles similar to powers exercised by institutions like band councils and organizations such as the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations. Access addresses rights comparable to provisions in statutes like the Access to Information Act (Canada) and provincial freedom of information regimes including Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (Ontario). Possession emphasizes data custodianship and practical custody, resonating with archival practice at institutions like the Canadian Museum of History and the Library and Archives Canada.

Implementation of OCAP involves community protocols, data-sharing agreements, and the establishment of governance bodies within entities like the First Nations Health Authority, Nishnawbe Aski Nation, and tribal councils across provinces such as British Columbia, Ontario, and Quebec. Mechanisms include ethical review processes modeled on procedures in the Tri-Council Policy Statement and local research ethics boards akin to those at the University of British Columbia or McMaster University. Funding and support frequently intersect with federal agencies like Indigenous Services Canada and research funders such as the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.

OCAP operates at the nexus of Indigenous rights jurisprudence exemplified by rulings from the Supreme Court of Canada in cases like Delgamuukw v British Columbia and statutory frameworks such as the Indian Act and provisions in provincial human rights codes like the Ontario Human Rights Code. Ethically, OCAP complements international norms in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and ethical guidelines from organizations such as the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the World Health Organization where Indigenous consent and benefit-sharing are emphasized. Tensions arise with privacy law administered under instruments including the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act and provincial privacy statutes.

OCAP is applied in health research with partners like the First Nations Health Authority and projects led by institutions such as the University of Alberta and the University of Manitoba, in environmental monitoring with agencies like Environment and Climate Change Canada and regional stewardship programs of the Council of the Haida Nation, and in cultural heritage work with museums including the Canadian Museum of History and archives such as Library and Archives Canada. Tools include community data portals, tribal registries, and data-sharing agreements modeled on protocols used by organizations like the First Nations Information Governance Centre and regional health authorities. OCAP-informed projects often engage funders and policy bodies such as the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Public Health Agency of Canada.

Critiques of OCAP arise from universities and research funders like the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council and federal departments including Statistics Canada which sometimes contend with operational constraints posed by community control over data. Debates involve conflicts with intellectual property regimes overseen by agencies like the Canadian Intellectual Property Office and with open data policies promoted by entities such as the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat. Some advocates for open science at institutions like the Wellcome Trust and the National Institutes of Health argue for broader data sharing, while Indigenous leaders tied to organizations such as the Assembly of First Nations emphasize sovereignty and consent.

OCAP has influenced policy and practice across health, legal, environmental, and cultural sectors, shaping protocols at bodies such as the First Nations Health Authority, prompting revisions to research ethics in universities like the University of British Columbia, and informing national dialogues involving Indigenous Services Canada and the Assembly of First Nations. Outcomes include strengthened community governance, new data infrastructures at organizations like the First Nations Information Governance Centre, and evolving jurisprudence in courts including the Supreme Court of Canada. Continued engagement with stakeholders such as the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, provincial ministries of health, and international institutions like the United Nations shapes OCAP’s trajectory.