The Moral Imperative of Subject Access to Indigenous Knowledge: Considerations and Alternative Paths. Sandy, H. M. & Bossaller, J. ECC: 0000000abstract bibtex How should libraries classify indigenous or traditional knowledge? This paper presents an argument against universal access and in favor of working with the people who produce the knowledge. Adopting the perspective that reliable subject access to indigenous knowledge is a moral imperative for libraries and other knowledge institutions, this paper explores obstacles to inclusive subject access as a social justice issue – more specifically, a cognitive justice issue. We begin by looking at universal classification supporting universal access. Next, we define indigenous people and traditional knowledge as incompatible with positivist worldviews supported in universal knowledge organization systems (KOSs) such as Library of Congress Classification (LCC) scheme, Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH), or Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) scheme. Organizing indigenous knowledge for use is then addressed, with examples of universal Western KOSs and specialized KOS initiatives presented and analyzed. In particular, we look at specialized KOSs supporting indigenous knowledge based on indigenous warrant, but also briefly survey schemes and vocabularies specialized for use by and for other marginalized groups as KOSs supporting the cognitive justice imperative. Finally, we look at options for access in light of the moral imperative that is reliable subject access and consider a number of innovative approaches. The use of Internetbased technologies permits the creation of robust ontologies that have the potential to support indigenous/specialized and universal access simultaneously. User-generated content (UGC) also can support reliable subject access in the web environment through the use of folksonomies, geographic information, or other content provided by end-users. Although technology offers a number of future paths, physical materials must still be considered. No matter the format of the item, one thing is clear: to provide reliable subject access to indigenous knowledge, the efforts undertaken must be a partnership between information professionals and indigenous peoples.
@article{sandy_moral_nodate,
title = {The {Moral} {Imperative} of {Subject} {Access} to {Indigenous} {Knowledge}: {Considerations} and {Alternative} {Paths}},
abstract = {How should libraries classify indigenous or traditional knowledge? This paper presents an argument against universal access and in favor of working with the people who produce the knowledge. Adopting the perspective that reliable subject access to indigenous knowledge is a moral imperative for libraries and other knowledge institutions, this paper explores obstacles to inclusive subject access as a social justice issue – more specifically, a cognitive justice issue. We begin by looking at universal classification supporting universal access. Next, we define indigenous people and traditional knowledge as incompatible with positivist worldviews supported in universal knowledge organization systems (KOSs) such as Library of Congress Classification (LCC) scheme, Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH), or Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) scheme. Organizing indigenous knowledge for use is then addressed, with examples of universal Western KOSs and specialized KOS initiatives presented and analyzed. In particular, we look at specialized KOSs supporting indigenous knowledge based on indigenous warrant, but also briefly survey schemes and vocabularies specialized for use by and for other marginalized groups as KOSs supporting the cognitive justice imperative. Finally, we look at options for access in light of the moral imperative that is reliable subject access and consider a number of innovative approaches. The use of Internetbased technologies permits the creation of robust ontologies that have the potential to support indigenous/specialized and universal access simultaneously. User-generated content (UGC) also can support reliable subject access in the web environment through the use of folksonomies, geographic information, or other content provided by end-users. Although technology offers a number of future paths, physical materials must still be considered. No matter the format of the item, one thing is clear: to provide reliable subject access to indigenous knowledge, the efforts undertaken must be a partnership between information professionals and indigenous peoples.},
language = {en},
author = {Sandy, Heather Moulaison and Bossaller, Jenny},
note = {ECC: 0000000},
keywords = {\#nosource, ⛔ No DOI found},
pages = {13},
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"ZNP7o58RpjX8qLLJ6","bibbaseid":"sandy-bossaller-themoralimperativeofsubjectaccesstoindigenousknowledgeconsiderationsandalternativepaths","author_short":["Sandy, H. M.","Bossaller, J."],"bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","title":"The Moral Imperative of Subject Access to Indigenous Knowledge: Considerations and Alternative Paths","abstract":"How should libraries classify indigenous or traditional knowledge? This paper presents an argument against universal access and in favor of working with the people who produce the knowledge. Adopting the perspective that reliable subject access to indigenous knowledge is a moral imperative for libraries and other knowledge institutions, this paper explores obstacles to inclusive subject access as a social justice issue – more specifically, a cognitive justice issue. We begin by looking at universal classification supporting universal access. Next, we define indigenous people and traditional knowledge as incompatible with positivist worldviews supported in universal knowledge organization systems (KOSs) such as Library of Congress Classification (LCC) scheme, Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH), or Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) scheme. Organizing indigenous knowledge for use is then addressed, with examples of universal Western KOSs and specialized KOS initiatives presented and analyzed. In particular, we look at specialized KOSs supporting indigenous knowledge based on indigenous warrant, but also briefly survey schemes and vocabularies specialized for use by and for other marginalized groups as KOSs supporting the cognitive justice imperative. Finally, we look at options for access in light of the moral imperative that is reliable subject access and consider a number of innovative approaches. The use of Internetbased technologies permits the creation of robust ontologies that have the potential to support indigenous/specialized and universal access simultaneously. User-generated content (UGC) also can support reliable subject access in the web environment through the use of folksonomies, geographic information, or other content provided by end-users. Although technology offers a number of future paths, physical materials must still be considered. No matter the format of the item, one thing is clear: to provide reliable subject access to indigenous knowledge, the efforts undertaken must be a partnership between information professionals and indigenous peoples.","language":"en","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Sandy"],"firstnames":["Heather","Moulaison"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Bossaller"],"firstnames":["Jenny"],"suffixes":[]}],"note":"ECC: 0000000","keywords":"#nosource, ⛔ No DOI found","pages":"13","bibtex":"@article{sandy_moral_nodate,\n\ttitle = {The {Moral} {Imperative} of {Subject} {Access} to {Indigenous} {Knowledge}: {Considerations} and {Alternative} {Paths}},\n\tabstract = {How should libraries classify indigenous or traditional knowledge? This paper presents an argument against universal access and in favor of working with the people who produce the knowledge. Adopting the perspective that reliable subject access to indigenous knowledge is a moral imperative for libraries and other knowledge institutions, this paper explores obstacles to inclusive subject access as a social justice issue – more specifically, a cognitive justice issue. We begin by looking at universal classification supporting universal access. Next, we define indigenous people and traditional knowledge as incompatible with positivist worldviews supported in universal knowledge organization systems (KOSs) such as Library of Congress Classification (LCC) scheme, Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH), or Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) scheme. Organizing indigenous knowledge for use is then addressed, with examples of universal Western KOSs and specialized KOS initiatives presented and analyzed. In particular, we look at specialized KOSs supporting indigenous knowledge based on indigenous warrant, but also briefly survey schemes and vocabularies specialized for use by and for other marginalized groups as KOSs supporting the cognitive justice imperative. Finally, we look at options for access in light of the moral imperative that is reliable subject access and consider a number of innovative approaches. The use of Internetbased technologies permits the creation of robust ontologies that have the potential to support indigenous/specialized and universal access simultaneously. User-generated content (UGC) also can support reliable subject access in the web environment through the use of folksonomies, geographic information, or other content provided by end-users. Although technology offers a number of future paths, physical materials must still be considered. No matter the format of the item, one thing is clear: to provide reliable subject access to indigenous knowledge, the efforts undertaken must be a partnership between information professionals and indigenous peoples.},\n\tlanguage = {en},\n\tauthor = {Sandy, Heather Moulaison and Bossaller, Jenny},\n\tnote = {ECC: 0000000},\n\tkeywords = {\\#nosource, ⛔ No DOI found},\n\tpages = {13},\n}\n\n","author_short":["Sandy, H. M.","Bossaller, J."],"key":"sandy_moral_nodate","id":"sandy_moral_nodate","bibbaseid":"sandy-bossaller-themoralimperativeofsubjectaccesstoindigenousknowledgeconsiderationsandalternativepaths","role":"author","urls":{},"keyword":["#nosource","⛔ No DOI found"],"metadata":{"authorlinks":{}}},"bibtype":"article","biburl":"https://api.zotero.org/groups/2649517/items?key=eXlH21iuTk2Asw9XoObiURDe&format=bibtex&limit=100","dataSources":["5oG7mZyyxYu5tJfzm"],"keywords":["#nosource","⛔ no doi found"],"search_terms":["moral","imperative","subject","access","indigenous","knowledge","considerations","alternative","paths","sandy","bossaller"],"title":"The Moral Imperative of Subject Access to Indigenous Knowledge: Considerations and Alternative Paths","year":null}