In simple terms, Indigenous Cultural Intellectual Property asks the question: "Who has the right to know, use, share, record, interpret, benefit from, or commercialise Indigenous knowledge and culture?" When people hear the words "intellectual property", they often think of patents, copyright, trademarks or commercial inventions. But for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples, knowledge is not always owned or protected in those Western legal categories.
Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property, often shortened to ICIP, is a broader way of talking about First Peoples' rights to their cultural heritage, traditional knowledge and cultural expressions. Terri Janke describes ICIP as ':grounded in Indigenous peoples' right to self-determination, and it can include cultural practices, languages, stories, plant knowledge, spiritual knowledge, cultural objects, environmental resources, ancestral remains, genetic materials, sites of significance, and documentation of Indigenous heritage and histories".
In simple terms, ICIP asks: "Who has the right to know, use, share, record, interpret, benefit from, or commercialise Indigenous knowledge and culture?"
That question matters deeply in science. Many scientific fields work with biological materials, environmental knowledge, place-based knowledge, archival records, data, samples, technologies and research partnerships. Some of this work may intersect with Indigenous knowledge systems, even when researchers do not immediately recognise it. For example, a project involving native plants may not only involve chemistry or biology; it may also involve cultural knowledge, Country, custodianship, histories of use, community protocols, and rights to decide how that knowledge is accessed and represented.
"ICIP is not just about protecting knowledge after research has happened. It is about changing how research starts - who sets the questions, who governs the process, and who benefits from the outcomes.", said ANSTO affiliated researcher Dr Alana Gall.
One of the challenges is that Australian intellectual property law does not fully protect ICIP, accorindg to Dr Gall. Copyright, patents and other legal tools may protect some things, but they often do not recognise collective custodianship, oral knowledge, intergenerational knowledge, cultural responsibilities, or knowledge that should not be publicly disclosed. Terri Janke and Company note that these gaps can leave Indigenous cultural heritage open to exploitation, and Arts Law similarly explains that ICIP covers all aspects of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples' traditional knowledge and cultural expressions.
ICIP is also recognised internationally. Article 31 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples states that Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their cultural heritage, traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions, including sciences, technologies, seeds, medicines, knowledge of fauna and flora, oral traditions, designs, and visual and performing arts.
For research organisations, this means ICIP is not an "add on" at the end of a project. It needs to be considered from the beginning: in project design, ethics, governance, consent, data management, authorship, attribution, benefit-sharing, publication and commercialisation.
CSIRO's ICIP Principles provide a useful research-sector example. They recognise that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples are custodians of their ICIP; that ICIP rights may be individual or collective; that free, prior and informed consent is required for the use of ICIP; and that benefits arising from the use or commercialisation of ICIP should be shared fairly and equitably with the relevant custodians or source communities.
This is particularly important where research may lead to products, patents, databases, commercial partnerships or public-facing resources. ICIP reminds us that "access" to knowledge is not the same as permission to use it, and permission for one purpose is not permission for every future purpose. It also reminds us that some knowledge is not meant to be extracted, published, digitised, commercialised or made open access.
"When science works with Indigenous knowledge, it is not just working with information. It is working with Country, story, responsibility and relationships that have been held and tested across generations. ICIP helps remind us that knowledge cannot be separated from the people and places it comes from," said ANSTO environmental chemist Mr Brett Rowling.
Indigenous experts in ICIP stress that respecting ICIP does not stop science. It makes science better. It supports stronger partnerships, clearer expectations, better research governance, and more trustworthy outcomes. It also helps prevent extractive practices where Indigenous knowledge contributes value, but Indigenous peoples do not have control, recognition or benefit.
In practice, respecting ICIP means asking better questions early. "Whose knowledge is involved?", "Who are the right people to speak for it?", "What permissions are needed?", "What cultural protocols apply?", "How will knowledge be recorded, stored and shared?", "What should remain confidential?", "Who will be acknowledged?", "Who will benefit?" and "What happens if the research leads to commercial opportunities?".
During National Reconciliation Week, these questions are especially important. Reconciliation is not only about awareness or goodwill. It is also about changing systems, relationships and everyday practices. In science, respecting ICIP is one practical way to move towards research that is more ethical, more relational, and more accountable to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples, cultures and Country.
Resources
- Terri Janke, True Tracks: Respecting Indigenous Knowledge and Culture
- CSIRO, Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property Principles
Brett Rowling has two recent publications in the Australian Journal of Chemistry, as part of the special issue 'Elevating Indigenous Knowledge systems in chemical science: Australia & New Zealand.'
The first paper, co-authored with Alana Gall, Andrew Goodman, Katherine Locock, Andrea Bugarcic, Manu Caddie, Maui Hudson, Chris Bourke, Mike Stephens, Elder Theresa Sainty, Zayana Gal, and Patricia Adjei, explores 'Using Indigenous and traditional medicine knowledge in research and development for drug discovery: hypothetical case vignettes'. This work presents vignette-based case studies outlining best-practice for Indigenous-led research and development involving Cultural Medicines and Indigenous Knowledge and is the centre piece of the special issue.
The second paper in which Brett Rowling is lead author, 'Centring Wiannamatta (mother place): the story of the environmental persistence of tri-butyl phosphate within a legacy waste site' is a multidisciplinary investigation. It features a two-ways knowing approach that replicates Indigenous Peoples' worldviews in which all things should be considered in holistic way. "This is especially imperative when studying Country," he said.
The guest editorial team is encouraging anyone who is collaborating with Indigenous researchers to consider submitting a manuscript to this special issue to use the following link.
