R48317 — Indigenous Knowledge and Data: Overview and Issues for Congress

Indigenous peoples have inhabited North America for millennia, developing deep cultural, spiritual, and subsistence ties to the landscape. Due to their historical connections, many Indigenous peoples maintain Indigenous knowledge (IK) about their current and ancestral landscapes. There is no single definition of IK, and different Indigenous peoples and federal agencies may define the term differently. One Indigenous author explained that IK generally represents “deep spatial experiential knowledges embedded in a People’s language, stories, songs, ceremonies, and everyday customs and habits.” IK may be held by an Indigenous group, a particular part of the group, or individuals who have been specially taught or initiated. IK holders are determined in accordance with Indigenous peoples’ own customs, laws, and practices and may include elders, cultural practitioners, and/or spiritual leaders. IK may come in many forms. Traditional environmental or ecological knowledge (TEK) is a frequently cited form of IK that typically is based on a set of empirical observations about the local environment. TEK is both cumulative and dynamic, because it builds upon the experience of earlier generations and adapts to current conditions. Indigenous data is a newer term largely being used to reflect the increasing use of databases and data portals and the creation of datasets that capture IK collected by researchers and others. Indigenous data may include data about Indigenous people and territories in addition to forms of IK; these data may be collected by governments and other institutions. For the past several decades, some federal agencies—including those with natural resource and public health-related missions—have been collecting and using IK to varying degrees. These policies and projects have been largely disparate and up to agency staff discretion, causing some Indigenous groups to ask for government-wide guidance. Some Indigenous peoples and policymakers view the incorporation of IK into federal decisionmaking as a way to improve outcomes and diversify the body of knowledge that informs such decisions. Furthermore, some Indigenous peoples and federal agencies have claimed that IK can help federal agencies meet statutory mandates. At the same time, Congress and federal agencies may find it challenging to weigh some Indigenous peoples’ interest in including IK in federal decisionmaking, on the one hand, against other statutory mandates and congressional priorities, on the other hand. For example, the incorporation of IK into federal policy and decisionmaking may conflict with statutory requirements governing federal agency processes for considering information and making evidence-based decisions. Accurate, credible scientific information is important to policy development and decisionmaking processes, and there may be questions surrounding whether or how to verify the accuracy and credibility of IK shared with federal agencies. In addition, interest in promoting the transparency and accessibility of federal data to the public may conflict with some Indigenous peoples’ interest in Indigenous data sovereignty and Indigenous data governance, which involve control or ownership of IK. Indigenous peoples may want researchers to obtain free, prior, and informed consent prior to using IK. Although IK may be helpful in identifying potential impacts of federal actions, or generally informing federal decisionmaking, some Indigenous peoples may want to maintain the confidentiality of IK for various reasons. As part of its oversight role, Congress might consider IK’s role in federal decisionmaking and whether additional legislative direction might be needed to clarify potentially conflicting guidance. Congress may continue to consider whether, and in what circumstances, to encourage or require federal agencies to incorporate IK into federal decisionmaking. Currently, numerous statutes and executive mandates have described the role IK should play at some federal agencies, including in the formation of policy, conduct of research, and consideration as evidence in making decisions. In particular, some statutes reference IK in the context of federal agency management of natural and cultural resources. Congress could expand or reduce IK’s role in decisionmaking at these agencies and others. Additional issues to consider may include if or how to approach Indigenous data sovereignty, confidentiality, and protection.

Curated by CRS — every bill listed in this report's relatedMaterials. Edge type cited_in_report, gold confidence.

• HR 9695 — Tribal Heritage and American Bison, Grizzly Bear, and Wolf Restoration and Coexistence Act · 118th Cong
• HR 8790 — Fix Our Forests Act · 118th Cong
• HR 7146 — Partnerships for Agricultural Climate Action Act · 118th Cong
• S 4802 — Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2025 · 118th Cong
• S 3853 — Radiation Exposure Compensation Reauthorization Act · 118th Cong
• S 2756 — Streamlining Organic Research Act of 2023 · 118th Cong
• HR 1791 — Mountains to Sound Greenway National Heritage Act · 115th Cong