As data sovereignty becomes an increasing priority for First Nations communities, leaders must carefully consider where and how their data is housed. The choice of a data storage solution is not just about technology—it’s about governance, long-term sustainability, and ensuring that data remains in the hands of the community for generations to come.
Technology companies may offer data storage on local servers or in the cloud, but this alone does not address critical questions about ownership, accessibility, security, and the ability to use the data effectively. Without careful planning, First Nations could find themselves with data they cannot analyze, share, or control on their own terms.
To make an informed decision, leaders should ask the following critical questions:
1. What is the most effective use of our data?
Data is a powerful tool that can inform decision-making, drive policy, and support health, education, economic development, and governance. However, its value is only realized when it is accessible and usable. Simply storing data on a server does not ensure it will be useful in the future.
Communities need to think about how their data will be used. Will they need it for tracking health trends, supporting land claims, or making economic decisions? If so, the chosen data system must allow for easy retrieval, analysis, and sharing among those who need it. A system that simply “holds” data without enabling meaningful use can be more of a burden than an asset.
2. Can we link our data to other relevant datasets?
One of the biggest advantages of data sovereignty is the ability to control and analyze information in ways that benefit the community. However, this often requires linking datasets across different areas, such as health, education, and land management and datasets received from different providers, such as municipal, provincial, federal and even universities. If a storage solution does not support data linkages, valuable insights could be lost. Leaders should ensure that the system they choose allows for this type of analysis and does not isolate their data in a way that limits its usefulness.
3. Will we be able to set and enforce data standards?
Data is only useful if it is structured and collected in a consistent way. When information is stored in multiple locations without standardized formats, it can become difficult—if not impossible—to analyze effectively.
A strong data system should allow First Nations to set and enforce their own data standards, ensuring consistency across different projects and departments. Leaders should ask whether the storage solution allows them to define how data is categorized, labelled, and formatted rather than relying on outside entities to impose their own rules.
4. Can different data formats be analyzed effectively?
First Nations data comes in many different forms: survey responses, oral histories, medical records, GIS (mapping) data, and more. A simple storage system that only supports basic spreadsheets may not be sufficient for the complexity of community data needs in the future.
Leaders should consider whether a data storage solution allows for the integration of various formats, such as audio recordings, images, geospatial data, and structured databases.
5. What security measures are in place?
Security is a fundamental concern when it comes to First Nations data. Many communities have faced breaches where sensitive data was accessed, shared, or even sold without consent. A storage system must provide strong security measures, including encryption, user access controls, and regular backups.
Leaders should also ask who will have access to the data. Will community members be able to control and manage access, or will an outside company or organization have oversight? If the data is stored on external servers, who is ultimately responsible for protecting it? A secure system should ensure that data remains protected from unauthorized access and potential misuse.
6. How does this solution ensure succession and knowledge transfer?
Data sovereignty is not just about the present—it’s about ensuring that future generations can continue to access and manage community data. If only a few individuals understand how to use a data system, valuable knowledge could be lost when they move on.
A strong data infrastructure should include plans for training and knowledge transfer. Leaders should consider how they will pass down expertise to younger generations and ensure that data governance remains within the community. Without proper planning, communities could find themselves with data they cannot access or interpret in the future.
7. What data governance agreements are in place?
Data governance refers to the policies and agreements that define who owns, controls, and has access to data. Many First Nations have encountered situations where external organizations—such as universities, governments, or research institutions—have collected data from their communities but retained ownership and control over it.
Before choosing a data storage solution, leaders must ensure that formal governance agreements are in place. These agreements should clearly state that First Nations retain full ownership, control, access, and possession (aligned with OCAP® principles). Without legal protections, there is a risk that community data could be used in ways that do not align with Indigenous values and priorities.
This is why contacting the Alberta First Nations Information Governance Centre would be an important first step when considering a data storage solution. We are mandated by the Assembly of Treaty Chiefs to address the unique information governance needs of all 48 First Nations in the region of Alberta.
Choosing a data storage solution is one of the most important decisions a First Nation can make when it comes to protecting and using its information. The right system should go beyond simply storing data—it should ensure that data remains secure, usable, and controlled by the community.
By carefully considering these key questions, First Nations leaders can make informed choices that uphold data sovereignty and support long-term self-determination. A strong, well-governed data system is not just about technology; it is about securing the future of First Nations knowledge, governance, and prosperity.
Case Example: The “Digital Filing Cabinet” Problem
A First Nation community was approached by a private IT company offering a data storage solution housed on a local server within the community. The proposal was marketed as a way to ensure data remained physically within the Nation’s jurisdiction, reinforcing the idea of data sovereignty.
However, upon closer examination, significant limitations became clear.
The server functioned only as a digital filing cabinet—it could store data files but provided no support for organizing, analyzing, or visualizing the data. Community members would still need to manually extract and process the data, limiting its practical use for decision-making.
The system lacked functionality to connect different datasets, such as linking health data with environmental or economic data. Without integration capabilities, data remained siloed and could not be used for comprehensive community planning.
The service provider did not offer training, technical support, or capacity building for data analysis. This meant that only those with advanced technical skills could extract and interpret the data, making it difficult for the community to develop long-term expertise in data governance.
While the data was physically stored on a local server, the company retained significant control over the system’s operation and maintenance. If the company ceased its services or changed its pricing model, the community risked losing access or facing unexpected costs.
The server solution did not include proper backup or disaster recovery options, meaning a hardware failure, cyberattack, or accidental deletion could result in permanent data loss.
Key Lesson: Storage Alone is Not Sovereignty
While keeping data on a local server may seem like a sovereignty-friendly solution, true data sovereignty requires more than just physical control—it requires the ability to use, analyze, and govern data in a way that benefits the community. First Nations should seek solutions that empower them to control, interpret, and act on their data, rather than settling for storage that simply keeps it in one place.
This case highlights why First Nations leaders need to ask critical questions before accepting any data storage proposal and contact the Alberta FNIGC before signing any agreement. Without considering long-term governance, usability, and analytical capacity, communities may find themselves with inaccessible data that does little to support self-determined decision-making.