Our Knowledge Our Way

Every engagement begins with the recognised knowledge holders, Elders, practitioners, families and community structures that carry authority over the knowledge.

No researcher, investor, institution, government body or commercial partner may define, document, extract, commercialise or institutionalise Indigenous knowledge without community-led decision-making.

The Sovereign Circle supports this governance process but does not replace the authority of the communities and knowledge holders concerned.

Every community has its own systems of permission, responsibility, representation and accountability.

Decision-making must follow the appropriate customary structures and processes, including the recognised knowledge holders, traditional leadership, family structures, practitioner formations, imbizo, indaba or lekgotla, where applicable.

Community processes must not be forced into timelines determined by external partners.

Consent must be obtained before knowledge is accessed, documented, researched, shared or developed.

Consent must be given freely, based on clear and understandable information, and must apply only to the purposes agreed upon.

Consent is an ongoing process and may be reviewed or withdrawn where agreed conditions are not respected.

Indigenous knowledge must not be removed from its cultural context, disclosed beyond its agreed purpose or used to develop research, policy, intellectual property, products or services without proper authority.

Sacred, restricted, sensitive or collectively held knowledge requires additional protection and must not be documented or shared without explicit permission.

Where Indigenous knowledge contributes to a product, service, research programme or enterprise, clear agreements must define ownership, permissions, intellectual property, data use, branding, benefit-sharing and long-term value return.

Commercial opportunity must never override community authority or the right of a community not to commercialise its knowledge.

Communities must participate in deciding what constitutes fair benefit.

Benefits may include income, royalties, equity, employment, training, infrastructure, enterprise ownership, cultural revitalisation and institutional recognition.

Benefits must be negotiated with communities, not determined on their behalf.

Knowledge captured through research, archives, digital platforms, databases or institutional records remains subject to Indigenous authority.

The CARE Principles of Collective Benefit, Authority to Control, Responsibility and Ethics must guide how Indigenous data is collected, stored, accessed, interpreted and shared.

Digital systems must strengthen the governance of knowledge, not weaken it.

Partners must be transparent about their mandates, funding, commercial interests, research objectives and expected outcomes.

Roles, responsibilities, decision-making processes and dispute-resolution mechanisms must be agreed from the beginning.

Trust is built through continuing relationships and accountability, not through a single project or consultation.

Formal recognition, qualifications, standards, research programmes and policy inclusion must strengthen community governance and living knowledge systems.

Institutionalisation must not remove knowledge from its people, language, territory or cultural foundations.

The objective is to build institutions that recognise Indigenous knowledge on its own terms, rather than absorb it into external systems.

Language, land-based practice, healing systems, ecological knowledge, practitioner development and cultural institutions must be strengthened for those who come after us.

Success must be measured not only by what is produced today, but by what remains protected, practised, governed and available to the next seven generations.