![\"\"](\"https:\/\/world.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/indigenousscholarship.png\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
In the world of research and scholarship, being published in academic journals is crucial to both the advancement of knowledge and the careers of those involved.<\/p>\n
In particular, the peer review process that determines who and what is published is\u00a0integral<\/a>\u00a0to ensuring reliability and quality in academic research. As the University of British Columbia\u2019s Professor Sarah Hunt (from the Kwakwaka’wakw nation)\u00a0has said<\/a>, \u201cIt\u2019s really about who we cite in our work, whose work we hold up, which really validates and legitimises that as knowledge\u201d.<\/p>\n Unfortunately, for many Indigenous scholars, academic publishing and peer review present more of an uphill battle than for academics in general, in part due to the attitudes and practices of some reviewers.<\/p>\n It\u2019s true that\u00a0strides have been made<\/a>\u00a0towards decolonising academia in some places. Universities in Aotearoa New Zealand, the Pacific, Australia and Scandinavia, for example, have\u00a0sought to increase<\/a>\u00a0the number of Indigenous academics they employ and to support their research work.<\/p>\n But despite strong Indigenous cohorts within our southern hemisphere universities, Indigenous academics are\u00a0still a minority<\/a>. These universities also have\u00a0poor retention rates<\/a>\u00a0for Indigenous scholars.<\/p>\n The recent publication\u00a0Ng\u0101 Kete M\u0101tauranga: M\u0101ori scholars at the research interface<\/em>\u00a0highlighted numerous constraints facing M\u0101ori scholars, who comprise only 5% of academic staff at Aotearoa New Zealand\u2019s universities despite representing 17% of the general population.<\/p>\n As one of the editors, Professor Jacinta Ruru,\u00a0lamented<\/a>, \u201cM\u0101ori academics are lonely, isolated and struggling to be heard.\u201d<\/p>\n While issues of racism and unconscious bias within some of our higher learning institutions are\u00a0gradually being addressed<\/a>, there has been little attention given to decolonising academic publishing.<\/p>\n There are excellent journals, such as\u00a0MAI<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0AlterNative<\/a>, specifically focusing on Indigenous scholarship. But Indigenous scholars are working in a range of academic disciplines where there are strong pressures to publish in highly ranked \u201cmainstream\u201d journals.<\/p>\n Certainly, some mainstream journal editors actively solicit and support the publication of work by Indigenous scholars, persons of colour, those from the global south or others marginalised in the academy.<\/p>\n Yet there are still signs of various forms of discrimination in the reviewing process, some of which might go unnoticed or unaddressed because editors are overworked and stretched by the volume of submissions they must process.<\/p>\n In turn, editors rely on an overtaxed army of volunteer reviewers who take on what is often a thankless task. Moreover, staff at mainstream journals and publishing companies often lack Indigenous representation.<\/p>\n These reviewers hold immense power but are shielded from accountability by their anonymity. Editors themselves may lack insight into unconscious bias, unwittingly sweeping prejudice under carpets and inhibiting the potential of Indigenous scholars.<\/p>\n We are academics based at Aotearoa New Zealand and Australian Universities, and represent a mix of both Indigenous and non-Indigenous ancestry. Some of us collaborate on researching tourism as a means for sustainable development and social justice for Indigenous peoples, and others work on Indigenous sport as a tool for social development.<\/p>\n Our experiences and those of Indigenous colleagues we consulted exemplify the barriers often faced by researchers in the margins wanting to publish in mainstream journals.<\/p>\n In collecting these experiences of peer review from researchers in the fields of social science, health, business, social work and sport, we have identified a number of major areas of contention for Indigenous scholarship:<\/p>\n Lack of Indigenous content:<\/strong>\u00a0in subject-specific mainstream journals this can make it difficult to see research published. When two of the authors submitted an article for publication in one journal, for example, it was not possible to select \u201cIndigenous\u201d or \u201cpost-colonial\u201d as keywords. Further investigation revealed only a handful of authors had actually mentioned \u201cIndigenous\u201d in their writing.<\/p>\n Quality of Indigenous scholarship being questioned:<\/strong>\u00a0When those scholars suggested a special issue on Indigenous issues in the field it was rejected by the editorial board due to concerns it would not attract enough articles of sufficient quality to be worthy of publication in the journal.<\/p>\n Questioning legitimacy of Indigenous knowledge:<\/strong>\u00a0Another group of scholars was criticised by a reviewer for seeking lessons learned only from successful Indigenous enterprises, when the point had been to avoid the familiar negative framing of Indigenous experience. Reviewers regularly ask Indigenous scholars to cite other sources, often written by white male academics not directly relevant to the topic at hand but whose work is seen as authoritative \u2014 a practice dubbed \u201ccitational politics\u201d.<\/p>\n Stifling critiques of mainstream systems:<\/strong>\u00a0the Palestinian Arab scholar Ismael Abu-Saad\u00a0describes<\/a>\u00a0having an article rejected for apparently challenging the Israeli mainstream education system, which two of his reviewers supported. Noting that \u201cindigenous standpoints are in many cases still being excluded, ignored and usurped\u201d, he concluded:<\/p>\n The purportedly objective, blinded peer review process of manuscript submissions to scholarly journals may become a tool for maintaining Western dominance over the mainstream body of international academic literature and suppressing the emergence of oppositional viewpoints.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Questioning the value of Indigenous methodologies:<\/strong>\u00a0As one colleague explained, when you represent \u201cthe other\u201d you spend a lot of time explaining context and justifying your methodological approach. Applying Indigenous knowledge and methodology to mainstream academic work creates many points of tension.<\/p>\n Questioning the identity of Indigenous scholars:<\/strong>\u00a0Reviewers have questioned the ability of Indigenous scholars to be \u201cauthentically Indigenous\u201d when working within the academic mainstream, and queried their ability to remain true to their roots when collaborating with non-Indigenous scholars.<\/p>\n When this happened to the tourism authors of this article (despite having explained how we developed a balanced approach to working collaboratively on the research project), one of our Indigenous collaborators wrote:<\/p>\n The reviewer\u2019s somewhat demeaning comments about our Indigenous heritage made me feel quite tired \u2014 another nudge towards leaving academia \u2014 especially the comment that we \u2018are assimilated into Western ways and dominated by the non-Indigenous persons on the team\u2019.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Sadly, the\u00a0questions raised<\/a>\u00a0in 1999 by Professor Linda Tuhiwai Smith about \u201cwhat counts as legitimate research and who counts as legitimate researchers\u201d are still relevant. As another team of researchers (collaborating on Arctic issues)\u00a0found<\/a>, there was \u201clittle space within the standard peer review and editorial processes for Indigenous Peoples, their perspectives and knowledge\u201d.<\/p>\n International codes already exist in a number of disciplinary fields that encourage the academy to be more ethical, respectful, inclusive and responsive to Indigenous peoples.<\/p>\n For example, the Australian Institute for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies\u00a0Code of Ethics for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Research<\/a>\u00a0is an excellent tool for change, as is\u00a0Te Ara Tika \u2014 guidelines for M\u0101ori research ethics<\/a>.<\/p>\n These codes outline guidelines to inform practice, underpinned by the principles expressed in the\u00a0United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples<\/a>. But what are publishing companies, journal boards, editors and reviewers doing to honour such international conventions, codes and guidelines?<\/p>\n Here are some suggestions for editors and peer reviewers who want to support Indigenous scholarship and ensure Indigenous researchers are mentored or recognised as legitimate contributors within academia:<\/p>\n The value of Indigenous scholarship and knowledge is increasingly being recognised around the world, including the insight offered into climate change and human adaptation.<\/p>\n If we want to share in this knowledge, as well as uphold individual\u00a0mana<\/a>\u00a0and collective equity, supporting Indigenous scholars and Indigenous scholarship is essential. The suggested approaches here would go some way to supporting this.<\/p>\nThe problem with publishing<\/strong><\/h3>\n
Our own experiences<\/strong><\/h3>\n
Finding a way forward<\/strong><\/h3>\n
\n