Indigenous scholars are leading initiatives to improve access to genetic and genomic research and health care based on their unique cultural contexts and within sovereign-based governance models created and accepted by their peoples. In the past, Indigenous peoples’ engagement with genomicresearch was hampered by a lack of standardized guidelines and institutional partnerships, resulting in group harms. This article provides a comparative analysis of research guidelines from Canada, New Zealand, Australia, and the United States that pertain to Indigenous peoples. The goals of the analysis are to identify areas that need attention, support Indigenous-led governance, and promote the development of a model research policy framework for genomic research and health care that has international relevance for Indigenous peoples.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


Literature Cited

  1. 1.
    Akst J. 2017. San people write ethical code for research. Scientist Mar. 21. https://www.the-scientist.com/the-nutshell/san-people-write-ethical-code-for-research-31810
    [Google Scholar]
  2. 2.
    Am. J. Med. Genet 2010. After Havasupai litigation, Native Americans wary of genetic research. Am. J. Med. Genet. A 152A:ix
    [Google Scholar]
  3. 3.
    Anderson I, Robson B, Connolly M, Al-Yaman F, Bjertness E et al. 2016. Indigenous and tribal peoples’ health (the Lancet-Lowitja Institute Global Collaboration): a population study. Lancet 388:131–57
    [Google Scholar]
  4. 4.
    Arbour L, Cook D. 2006. DNA on loan: issues to consider when carrying out genetic research with aboriginal families and communities. Community Genet 9:153–60
    [Google Scholar]
  5. 5.
    Atkins C, Reuffel L, Roddy J, Platts M, Robinson H, Ward R 1988. Rheumatic disease in the Nuu-Chah-Nulth native Indians of the Pacific Northwest. J. Rheumatol. 15:684–90
    [Google Scholar]
  6. 6.
    Bardill J. 2017. Comparing tribal research and specimens policies: models, practices, and principles. Int. Indig. Policy J. 8:44
    [Google Scholar]
  7. 7.
    Beaton A, Hudson M, Milne M, Port RV, Russell K et al. 2017. Engaging Maori in biobanking and genomic research: a model for biobanks to guide culturally informed governance, operational, and community engagement activities. Genet. Med. 19:345–51
    [Google Scholar]
  8. 8.
    Beaton A, Smith B, Toki V, Southey K, Hudson M 2015. Engaging Maori in biobanking and genetic research: legal, ethical, and policy challenges. Int. Indig. Policy J. 6:31
    [Google Scholar]
  9. 9.
    Burhansstipanov L, Bemis L, Dignan M, Dukepoo F 2001. Development of a genetics education workshop curriculum for Native American college and university students. Genetics 158:941–48
    [Google Scholar]
  10. 10.
    Bustamante CD, Burchard EG, De la Vega FM 2011. Genomics for the world. Nature 475:163–65
    [Google Scholar]
  11. 11.
    Bycroft C, Freeman C, Petkova D, Band G, Elliott LT et al. 2018. The UK Biobank resource with deep phenotyping and genomic data. Nature 562:203–9
    [Google Scholar]
  12. 12.
    Callaway E. 2017. South Africa's San people issue ethics code to scientists. Nature 543:475–76
    [Google Scholar]
  13. 13.
    Can. Inst. Health Res 2013. CIHR guidelines for health research involving Aboriginal people (2007–2010) Guidel. Doc., Can. Inst. Health Res Ottawa, Can: http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/29134.html
  14. 14.
    Can. Inst. Health Res 2018. Institute of Indigenous Peoples’ Health. Canadian Institutes of Health Research http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/8668.html
    [Google Scholar]
  15. 15.
    Can. Inst. Health Res., Nat. Sci. Eng. Res. Counc. Can., Soc. Sci. Humanit. Res. Counc. Can 2014. Tri-Council Policy Statement: ethical conduct for research involving humans Policy Doc., Secr. Responsible Conduct Res Ottawa, Can: http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/eng/policy-politique/initiatives/tcps2-eptc2/Default
  16. 16.
    Carl R. Woese Inst. Genom. Biology 2018. Summer internship for INdigenous peoples in Genomics (SING).. Carl R. Woese Institute for Genomic Biology https://sing.igb.illinois.edu
    [Google Scholar]
  17. 17.
    Chennells R, Steenkamp A. 2018. International genomics research involving the San people. Ethics Dumping: Case Studies from North-South Research Collaborations D Schroeder, J Cook, F Hirsch, S Fenet, V Muthuswamy 15–22 Cham, Switz: Springer
    [Google Scholar]
  18. 18.
    Claw KG, Anderson MZ, Begay RL, Tsosie KS, Fox K et al. 2018. A framework for enhancing ethical genomic research with Indigenous communities. Nat. Commun. 9:2957
    [Google Scholar]
  19. 19.
    Cochran PAL, Marshall CA, Garcia-Downing C, Kendall E, Cook D et al. 2008. Indigenous ways of knowing: implications for participatory research and community. Am. J. Public Health 98:22–27
    [Google Scholar]
  20. 20.
    Collins FS, Varmus H. 2015. A new initiative on precision medicine. N. Engl. J. Med. 372:793–95
    [Google Scholar]
  21. 21.
    Crump AD, Etz K, Arroyo JA, Hemberger N, Srinivasan S 2017. Accelerating and strengthening Native American health research through a collaborative NIH initiative. Prev. Sci. In press https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-017-0854-5
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  22. 22.
    Cunningham EH, Cameron VA, Evans J, Irvine V, Pitama S, Robertson P 2007. The development of guidelines for handling samples and specimens collected for research involving Maori. N.Z. Med. J. 120:U2785
    [Google Scholar]
  23. 23.
    Daley J. 2017. San people of South Africa issue code of ethics for researchers. Smithsonian Mar. 23. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/san-people-south-africa-issue-code-ethics-researchers-180962615
    [Google Scholar]
  24. 24.
    Dalton R. 2002. Tribe blasts ‘exploitation’ of blood samples. Nature 420:111
    [Google Scholar]
  25. 25.
    Drabiak-Syed K. 2010. Lessons from Havasupai Tribe v. Arizona State University Board of Regents: recognizing group, cultural, and dignitary harms as legitimate risks warranting integration into research practice. J. Health Biomed. Law 6:175–226
    [Google Scholar]
  26. 26.
    Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects, 82 Fed Reg. 7149 (Jan 19 2017.)
  27. 27.
    Final NIH Genomic Data Sharing Policy, 79 Fed Reg. 51345 (Aug 28 2014.)
  28. 28.
    First Nations Inf. Gov. Cent 2014. Ownership, Control, Access and Possession (OCAP™): the path to First Nations information governance White Pap., First Nations Inf. Gov. Cent Ottawa, Can:.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. 29.
    Francioli L, Tiao G, Karczewski K, Solomonson M, Watts N 2018. gnomAD v2.1. MacArthur Lab Oct. 17. https://macarthurlab.org/2018/10/17/gnomad-v2-1
    [Google Scholar]
  30. 30.
    Garrison NA. 2013. Genomic justice for Native Americans: impact of the Havasupai case on genetic research. Sci. Technol. Hum. Values 38:201–23
    [Google Scholar]
  31. 31.
    Harding A, Harper B, Stone D, O'Neill C, Berger P et al. 2012. Conducting research with tribal communities: sovereignty, ethics, and data-sharing issues. Environ. Health Perspect. 120:6–10
    [Google Scholar]
  32. 32.
    Harmon A. 2010. Havasupai case highlights risks in DNA research. New York Times Apr. 21. https://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/22/us/22dnaside.html
    [Google Scholar]
  33. 33.
    Harmon A. 2010. Indian tribe wins fight to limit research of its DNA. New York Times Apr. 21. https://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/22/us/22dna.html
    [Google Scholar]
  34. 34.
    Harmon A. 2012. DNA gatherers hit snag: tribes don't trust them. New York Times Dec. 10. https://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/10/us/10dna.html
    [Google Scholar]
  35. 35.
    Harry D, Howard S, Shelton BL 2000. Indigenous People, Genes and Genetics: What Indigenous People Should Know About Biocolonialism, Indigenous Peoples Council on Biocolonialism Wadsworth, NV: Indig. Peoples Counc. Biocolon.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. 36.
    Hart S, Sobraske K. 2003. Investigative report concerning the medical genetics project at Havasupai Unpubl. Investig. Rep., available at Ariz. State Univ. Law Libr., Phoenix
  37. 37.
    Health Res, Counc N.Z 2010. Guidelines for researchers on health research involving Māori Guidel. Doc., Health Res. Counc. N.Z Auckland:
  38. 38.
    Hēnare M. 2003. The changing images of nineteenth century Māori society: from tribes to nation PhD Thesis, Victoria Univ. Wellington Wellington, N.Z:.
  39. 39.
    Hiratsuka VY, Brown JK, Dillard DA 2012. Views of biobanking research among Alaska native people: the role of community context. Prog. Community Health Partnersh. 6:131–39
    [Google Scholar]
  40. 40.
    Hiratsuka VY, Brown JK, Hoeft TJ, Dillard DA 2012. Alaska Native people's perceptions, understandings, and expectations for research involving biological specimens. Int. J. Circumpolar Health 71:18642
    [Google Scholar]
  41. 41.
    Hook GR. 2009. “Warrior genes” and the disease of being Māori. MAI Rev 2009:2 http://www.review.mai.ac.nz/mrindex/MR/article/view/222/243.html
    [Google Scholar]
  42. 42.
    Hudson M. 2009. Changing genes: science and being Maori. MAI Rev 2009:2 http://www.review.mai.ac.nz/mrindex/MR/article/view/250/254.html
    [Google Scholar]
  43. 43.
    Hudson M, Beaton A, Milne M, Port W, Russell K et al. 2016. He tangata kei tua: guidelines for biobanking with Māori Guidel. Doc., Māori Indig. Gov. Cent., Univ. Waikato Hamilton, N.Z: https://www.waikato.ac.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/321535/He-Tangata-Kei-Tua-Biobanking-Guidelines.pdf
  44. 44.
    Hudson M, Beaton A, Milne M, Port W, Russell K et al. 2016. Te mata ira: guidelines for genomic research with Māori Guidel. Doc., Māori Indig. Gov. Cent., Univ. Waikato Hamilton, N.Z: https://www.waikato.ac.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/321534/Te-Mata-Ira-Genome-Research-Guidelines.pdf
  45. 45.
    Hudson M, Milne M, Reynolds P, Russell K, Smith B 2010. Te ara tika: guidelines for Māori research ethics: a framework for researchers and ethics committee members Guidel. Doc., Health Res. Counc. N.Z Auckland:
  46. 46.
    Hudson M, Southey K, Uerata L, Beaton A, Milne M et al. 2016. Key informant views on biobanking and genomic research with Maori. N.Z. Med. J. 129:29–42
    [Google Scholar]
  47. 47.
    Hudson M, Wilcox P, Smith B, Beaton A, Milne M, Russell K 2018. (C)ELSI‐us: reducing friction with indigenous communities in genomic research. Am. Anthropol. 120:330–32
    [Google Scholar]
  48. 48.
    Indig. Peoples Counc. Biocolon 2000. Indigenous Research Protection Act. Indigenous Peoples Council on Biocolonialism http://www.ipcb.org/publications/policy/files/irpa.html
    [Google Scholar]
  49. 49.
    Indig. Sci. Technol. Soc 2018. SING Canada 2018. Indigenous Science, Technology, and Society http://indigenoussts.com/sing-canada/sing-canada-2018
    [Google Scholar]
  50. 50.
    Jacobs B, Roffenbender J, Collmann J, Cherry K, Bitsoi LL et al. 2010. Bridging the divide between genomic science and indigenous peoples. J. Law Med. Ethics 38:684–96
    [Google Scholar]
  51. 51.
    James R, Tsosie R, Sahota P, Parker M, Dillard D et al. 2014. Exploring pathways to trust: a tribal perspective on data sharing. Genet. Med. 16:820–26
    [Google Scholar]
  52. 52.
    Jarquín PB. 2012. Data sharing: creating agreements in support of community-academic partnership Guidel. Doc., Community Health Data Monit. Comm Colo. Clin. Transl. Sci. Inst Aurora, CO:
  53. 53.
    Kowal E, Anderson I. 2012. Genetic research in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities: continuing the conversation Discuss. Pap., Lowitja Inst Carlton: Aust .
  54. 54.
    Leggat M, Cameron V. 2017. Kaupapa Maori research protocols information sheet: Multi-Ethnic New Zealand Study of Acute Coronary Syndromes (MENZACS Study) Inf. Sheet, Fac. Med. Health Sci., Univ Auckland, Auckland:
  55. 55.
    McInnes RR. 2011. 2010 Presidential Address: culture: the silent language geneticists must learn—genetic research with indigenous populations. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 88:254–61
    [Google Scholar]
  56. 56.
    McMahon R, LaHache T, Whiteduck T 2015. Digital data management as indigenous resurgence in Kahnawà:ke. Int. Indig. Policy J. 6:36
    [Google Scholar]
  57. 57.
    Mello MM, Wolf LE. 2010. The Havasupai Indian tribe case—lessons for research involving stored biologic samples. N. Engl. J. Med. 363:204–7
    [Google Scholar]
  58. 58.
    Merriman T, Cameron V. 2007. Risk-taking: behind the warrior gene story. N.Z. Med. J. 120:U2440
    [Google Scholar]
  59. 59.
    Mills MC, Rahal C. 2019. A scientometric review of genome-wide association studies. Commun. Biol. 2:9
    [Google Scholar]
  60. 60.
    Natl. Congr. Am. Indians 2006. Supporting the Havasupai Indian Tribe in their claim against the Arizona Board of Regents regarding the unauthorized use of blood samples and research Resolut. SAC-06-019, Natl. Congr. Am. Indians Washington, DC:
  61. 61.
    Natl. Congr. Am. Indians 2012. Genetics research and American Indian and Alaska Native communities. National Congress of American Indians http://genetics.ncai.org
    [Google Scholar]
  62. 62.
    Natl. Congr. Am. Indians 2018. Support of US indigenous data sovereignty and inclusion of tribes in the development of tribal data governance principles Resolut. KAN-18-011, Natl. Congr. Am. Indians Washington, DC:
  63. 63.
    Natl. Congr. Am. Indians Policy Res. Cent 2009. Research that benefits native people: a guide for tribal leaders Curric. Doc., Natl. Congr. Am. Indians Washington, DC:
  64. 64.
    Natl. Ethics Advis. Comm 2018. Draft national ethical standards for health and disability research: consultation document Consult. Doc., Minist. Health Wellington, N.Z:.
  65. 65.
    Natl. Health Med. Res. Counc 2018. Ethical Conduct in Research with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples and Communities: Guidelines for Researchers and Stakeholders Canberra: Commonw. Aust.
  66. 66.
    Natl. Health Med. Res. Counc., Aust. Res. Counc., Univ. Aust 2018. National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research: 2007 (Updated 2018) Canberra: Commonw. Aust.
  67. 67.
    Natl. Hum. Genome Res. Inst 1996. Report of the International Strategy Meeting on Human Genome Sequencing held at the Princess Hotel, Southampton, Bermuda, on 25th–28th February 1996. Available from Duke Univ. Libr., Durham, NC. http://hdl.handle.net/10161/7715
  68. 68.
    Need AC, Goldstein DB. 2009. Next generation disparities in human genomics: concerns and remedies. Trends Genet 25:489–94
    [Google Scholar]
  69. 69.
    Nordling L. 2017. San people of Africa draft code of ethics for researchers. Science Mar. 17. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aal0933
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  70. 70.
    Pacheco CM, Daley SM, Brown T, Filippi M, Greiner KA, Daley CM 2013. Moving forward: breaking the cycle of mistrust between American Indians and researchers. Am. J. Public Heath 103:2152–59
    [Google Scholar]
  71. 71.
    Pearson CR, Parker M, Fisher CB, Moreno C 2014. Capacity building from the inside out: development and evaluation of a CITI ethics certification training module for American Indian and Alaska Native community researchers. J. Empir. Res. Hum. Res. Ethics 9:46–57
    [Google Scholar]
  72. 72.
    Peters AA, Coulthart MB, Oger JJF, Waters DJ, Crandall KA, Baumgartner AA 2000. HTLV Type I/II in British Columbia Amerindians: a seroprevalence study and sequence characterization of an HTLV type IIa isolate. AIDS Res. Hum. Retrovir. 16:883–92
    [Google Scholar]
  73. 73.
    Petit C. 1998. Trying to study tribes while respecting their cultures: Hopi Indian geneticist can see both sides. SFGate Feb. 19. https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Trying-to-Study-Tribes-While-Respecting-Their-3012825.php
    [Google Scholar]
  74. 74.
    Popejoy AB, Fullerton SM. 2016. Genomics is failing on diversity. Nature 538:161–64
    [Google Scholar]
  75. 75.
    Rainie SC, Rodriguez-Lonebear D, Martinez A 2017. Policy Brief: Data Governance for Native Nation Rebuilding (Version 2) http://usindigenousdata.arizona.edu/sites/usindigenousdata/files/spotlight/files/policy_brief_data_governance_for_native_nation_rebuilding_v0.5_1.pdf
  76. 76.
    Reardon J. 2005. Race to the Finish: Identity and Governance in an Age of Genomics Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  77. 77.
    Reardon J. 2009. “Anti-colonial genomic practice?” Learning from the Genographic Project and the Chacmool Conference. Int. J. Cult. Property 16:205
    [Google Scholar]
  78. 78.
    Roberts L. 1991. A genetic survey of vanishing peoples. Science 252:1614–17
    [Google Scholar]
  79. 79.
    Rochford TS. 2012. Ten reasons why genetics does not explain health disparities between Māori and non-Māori. New Genet. Soc. 31:99–110
    [Google Scholar]
  80. 80.
    Rubin P. 2004. Indian givers. Phoenix New Times May 27. https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/indian-givers-6428347
    [Google Scholar]
  81. 81.
    Rural Adv. Found. Int 1993. Patents, indigenous peoples, and human genetic diversity RAFI Commun., Rural Adv. Found. Int Ottawa, Can:.
    [Google Scholar]
  82. 82.
    Sahota PC. 2014. Body fragmentation: Native American community members’ views on specimen disposition in biomedical/genetics research. AJOB Empir. Bioethics 5:19–30
    [Google Scholar]
  83. 83.
    Schuster SC, Miller W, Ratan A, Tomsho LP, Giardine B et al. 2010. Complete Khoisan and Bantu genomes from southern Africa. Nature 463:943–47
    [Google Scholar]
  84. 84.
    Sharp RR, Foster MW. 2002. Analysis of research guidelines on the collection and use of human biological materials from American Indian and Alaskan Native communities. Jurimetrics 42:165–86
    [Google Scholar]
  85. 85.
    Simmonds S. 2015. A framework for Māori review of research in district health boards Rep., Auckland Waitematā Dist Health Boards and Cap. Coast Dist. Health Board Wellington, N.Z:.
  86. 86.
    SING Aotearoa 2018. Summer internship for INdigenous Genomics Aotearoa. SING Aotearoa https://www.singaotearoa.nz
    [Google Scholar]
  87. 87.
    TallBear K. 2007. Narratives of race and indigeneity in the Genographic Project. J. Law Med. Ethics 35:412–24
    [Google Scholar]
  88. 88.
    TallBear K. 2009. Commentary. Int. J. Cult. Property 16:189–92
    [Google Scholar]
  89. 89.
    Taniguchi NK, Taualii M, Maddock J 2012. A comparative analysis of indigenous research guidelines to inform genomic research in indigenous communities. Int. Indig. Policy J. 3:16
    [Google Scholar]
  90. 90.
    Taualii M, Davis EL, Braun KL, Tsark JU, Brown N et al. 2014. Native Hawaiian views on biobanking. J. Cancer Educ. 29:570–76
    [Google Scholar]
  91. 91.
    Te Mana Raraunga 2018. Principles of Māori data sovereignty Brief 1, Te Mana Raraunga. Available at https://www.temanararaunga.maori.nz/new-page-2
  92. 92.
    TELUS 2018. Mshkikiininiikwe: building the northern biobank. YouTube July 10. https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=9&v=BI6Kc8zPw6c
    [Google Scholar]
  93. 93.
    Tupara H. 2012. Ethics and health research: decision making in Aotearoa New Zealand. AJOB Prim. Res. 3:40–52
    [Google Scholar]
  94. 94.
    UN Gen. Assem 2008. United Nations declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples Decl. A/RES/61/295, UN New York:
  95. 95.
    US Indig. Data Sovereignty Netw 2019. About us. US Indigenous Data Sovereignty Network http://usindigenousdata.arizona.edu/about-us-0
    [Google Scholar]
  96. 96.
    Wade L. 2018. Bridging the gap. Science 361:1304–7
    [Google Scholar]
  97. 97.
    Walter M, Lovett R, Bodkin Andrews G, Lee V 2018. Indigenous data sovereignty briefing paper 1 Brief. Pap. 1, Miaim nayri Wingara Data Sover Group and Aust. Indig. Gov. Inst Acton: Aust .
  98. 98.
    Ward RH, Frazier BL, Dew-Jager K, Pääbo S 1991. Extensive mitochondrial diversity within a single Amerindian tribe. PNAS 88:8720–24
    [Google Scholar]
  99. 99.
    Ward RH, Redd A, Valencia D, Frazier B, Pääbo S 1993. Genetic and linguistic differentiation in the Americas. PNAS 90:10663–67
    [Google Scholar]
  100. 100.
    Ward T. 2011. The right to free, prior, and informed consent: indigenous peoples’ participation rights within international law. J. Hum. Rights 10:54–84
    [Google Scholar]
  101. 101.
    Warren-Mears V. 2012. Principles and models for data sharing agreements with American Indian/Alaska Native communities Pap., Natl. Congr. Am. Indians Washington, DC: http://genetics.ncai.org/files/Principles%20and%20Models%20for%20Data%20Sharing%20Agreements.pdf
  102. 102.
    West KM, Hopkins SE, Hopper KJ, Mohatt GV, Boyer BB 2013. Found in translation: decoding local understandings of genetics and heredity in a Yup'ik Eskimo community. Public Underst. Sci. 22:80–90
    [Google Scholar]
  103. 103.
    Winickoff DE. 2008. From benefit sharing to power sharing: partnership governance in population genomics research Work. Pap., Univ. Calif Berkeley:
  104. 104.
    Wiwchar D. 2000. Genetic researcher uses Nuu-chah-nulth blood for unapproved studies in genetic anthropology. Ha-Shilth-Sa Sept. 21. https://hashilthsa.com/archive/news/2013-07-22/genetic-researcher-uses-nuu-chah-nulth-blood-unapproved-studies-genetic-anth
    [Google Scholar]
  105. 105.
    Wiwchar D. 2004. Nuu-chah-nulth blood returns to west coast. Ha-Shilth-Sa 31:25 Dec. 16 1, 3
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error