Decoloniality and Information Systems: Making Local Contexts Relevant to IS Research
本文作为信息系统期刊特刊的社论，解释了殖民性如何影响信息系统领域，提出了成功去殖民研究的三个标准，并介绍了特刊中的四篇论文，旨在推动信息系统研究重视本地知识和去殖民化方法。
During the colonial era,1 roughly from 1400s to 1914, Europeans “gained control of 84 percent of the globe and they ruled colonies on every other inhabited continent” (Hoffman 2015, 2). Today, 17 colonies remain.2 Historians, anthropologists and sociologists have time and again shown that Eurocentric science and technology played an instrumental role in supporting the political needs of the colonial administration, from Africa (Goody 1982) and the Indian subcontinent (Kumar 2006; MacLeod and Kumar 1995), to the Americas (Vickers 2008). An unfortunate aspect of colonial project was that the technology transfer from the West to the colonies was made for political purposes. Another more subtle but still critical consequence was that the introduction and application of Eurocentric technologies also directly and indirectly subordinated local epistemologies and Indigenous3 thought, making the colonies epistemically dependent on the colonisers. Some colonies gained independence through war (e.g., the 13 American colonies in 1776), but many remained under European control both politically and ideologically until well after World War II, when war-torn European countries could not afford to maintain tight control over their colonies. As countries gained their independence, many citizens sought to distance themselves from their former colonisers and return to the national and cultural identities, lifestyles and ways of knowing their ancestors had embraced prior to colonialisation. This process is referred to as decolonialisation. While colonialism refers to the historical period of direct political and economic control by colonial powers, coloniality refers to the persistence of colonial power relations, embedded in contemporary institutions, values, social hierarchies, and, importantly for researchers, knowledge. Given that the purpose of colonial enterprise is control, the colonial view of the production of knowledge is “‘mentally divorced’ from the local setting” in which it operates and ignores “local requirements” and “local knowledge” (Kumar 2006, 8–12). It attempts to erase local knowledge in every form and replace it with colonial epistemic structures (de Sousa Santos 2015; Satia 2020). Thus, dominant Eurocentric epistemologies served as the foundation on which fields of knowledge grew throughout the world. It is not surprising then that one legacy of colonialism is new forms of coloniality vis-à-vis the dominance of Eurocentric thought in academic discourse, including IS academic literature (Banerjee 2022; Chughtai 2023). In this editorial, we seek to explain what coloniality is and how it relates to the IS field. We then explain why we organised a special issue on this topic for Information Systems Journal (ISJ) and why this journal cares about decoloniality. We provide a brief history of decolonial research and then introduce its core tenets. From these tenets, we develop three criteria for successful decolonial research. Criteria 1 stipulates that decolonial IS researchers engage deeply with the local context. Criteria 2 requires researchers to unpack the focal problem that exists as a legacy of colonialisation. Criteria 3 involves the development of a strategy or a solution that is decolonial in nature, meaning that it incorporates a local or Indigenous philosophy to restructure or reformulate a problematic colonial structure or practice. After articulating these criteria, we introduce the four papers accepted to the special issue on decoloniality and IS and explain how each of those meet the three criteria. We conclude with a call for decolonial research in the IS field. Decolonial research provides critique of the entrenched colonial matrix of power, enabling not only the expansion but the fundamental reimagining of scientific knowledge. This approach diverges sharply from traditional methodologies that, despite their claims to neutrality, often reproduce colonial biases and power imbalances. Decolonial researchers consider the colonial influence of conventional frameworks, prompting them to forge knowledge systems that prioritise local knowledge. Unlike traditional methods, which frequently position the researcher as a neutral observer, decolonial research involves active, reciprocal engagement between researcher and participant, especially with voices historically marginalised or silenced (Grosfoguel 2007; Thambinathan and Kinsella 2021). Here, the act of research becomes an act of mutual transformation, where knowledge production is inseparable from the socio-cultural dynamics in which it unfolds. Decolonial approaches often have emancipatory goals; they seek not only to understand but to actively transform oppressive structures and foster spaces of conviviality and pluriversality—environments where multiple ways of knowing are valued and can be considered simultaneously, without a colonial hierarchy. A decolonial transformative approach challenges researchers to confront the power structures that underlie the very systems they study. In doing so, they are tasked with cultivating a research environment that does not merely acknowledge diverse perspectives but actively resists homogenisation and oversimplification (e.g., see de Sousa Santos 2015; Mohanty 2003). Decolonial research emerges not just as a method but as a profound intellectual and political exercise involving collective reimagining of IS and through IS. The task of decolonial research is to undo the doings of colonialism. A complete reversal of these structures is neither realistic nor desirable; thus, decolonial scholarship critically examines the applicability and appropriateness of concepts developed within Eurocentric epistemological frameworks, particularly when these are applied to local contexts with histories of oppression and colonial control. While many insights from Eurocentric thought hold value, decolonial research suggests scrutinising the contextual relevance of such insights within settings where knowledge relationships have been historically defined by asymmetry and domination, potentially leading to the adoption of Eurocentric knowledge frameworks that do not fit the context. Instead of imposing external frameworks, decolonial research seeks to revive and legitimise local epistemic traditions, knowledge systems and philosophies that authentically reflect local communities' values, histories and needs. It involves a deliberate shift toward methodologies and theoretical frameworks rooted in the local, allowing communities to reclaim agency over their knowledge practices. By engaging directly with Indigenous and local intellectual traditions, decolonial research fosters epistemic plurality and strives for an inclusive, transformative, restorative outcomes. Decolonial research begins with epistemic orientation, where researchers critically examine their positionality and reflexivity, questioning the ontological and epistemological assumptions driving their research. The aim is to cultivate a decolonial relational ethic that critiques, transforms, and, to some degree, adapts colonial hierarchies of knowledge to meet local needs. In the methodological framework stage, methods are chosen to prioritise reciprocity, co-creation and accountability to the communities involved. Rather than imposing conventional frameworks, decolonial research aligns with participatory, narrative and Indigenous methodologies that honour local forms of knowledge, e.g. ancestral and metaphysical. This stage includes extensive consultation with the community to ensure the research aligns with their needs and values. During data collection and analysis, researchers employ methods such as ethnography, participatory design, in-depth case studies, storytelling, oral history, critical hermeneutics and observation, valuing local insights as legitimate sources of knowledge. Here, analysis prioritises meaning-making processes rooted in the focal context over external standards of validity and generalisability. Finally, in the dissemination stage, decolonial research replaces extractive models of knowledge sharing. Beyond journal and book publications, findings are often also shared in ways that directly benefit the community. The latter prioritises non-textual forms, such as oral presentations or community events, thereby closing the research loop in a way that upholds the agency and autonomy of the researched community. Though this sort of research has not traditionally been a focus in ISJ, we see value in adding this perspective to the repertoire of research approaches IS scholars have at their disposal. We developed this special issue to provide a platform for both novice and experienced researchers seeking to showcase their critical Indigenous and decolonial research. This special issue aims to feature decolonial approaches in IS scholarship, challenging the uncritical acceptance of the dominance of Eurocentric frameworks and opening space for perspectives grounded in local, context-specific knowledge. By encouraging contributions that centre non-European and Indigenous knowledge systems, we hope to promote a more inclusive, nuanced understanding of IS that reflects the communities we serve. Qualitative IS research has historically overlooked non-European theories and methodologies. Although some IS researchers are increasingly engaging with issues of colonialism, two major challenges remain. First, researchers studying topics related to decoloniality often lack theoretical and methodological tools that fully align with decolonial perspectives. As a result, their work may unintentionally reinforce the Eurocentric frameworks they aim to question. Second, scholars conducting research in decolonial contexts—such as Indigenous communities or non-Western societies—frequently draw on concepts that do not resonate with or accurately reflect local knowledge and historical meanings. An Indigenous community may also contest research findings (for a relevant case of Havasupai, see Dalton 2004; Garrison 2013) or interpret the findings differently than the researchers. This is not a critique of scholars working in these contexts but rather a reflection of the limited decolonial resources within our field. When Eurocentric frameworks dominate, they can perpetuate what decolonial scholars refer to as epistemic violence. This occurs when the authority of Western perspectives is legitimised over local or Indigenous ways of knowing, either because researchers overlook alternative epistemologies or because they lack the means to engage with them effectively. Many foundational concepts in IS research, such as the “IT artefact,” were developed within Western contexts. While these concepts may work well in their original settings, they can lose relevance or even take on a distorted meaning in non-Western environments. In some cultures and languages, there may be no direct translation for such terms. Such translation challenges reveal the inherent limitations of universal conceptualisations. When researchers treat IS concepts as universally applicable, they often fail to account for the unique social, political and colonial histories that shape other communities' perspectives. Without critically examining the complex interplay between theory and context, it is easy to assume that widely used concepts are universally valid. Yet, because a legacy of colonialisation is the colonialisation of knowledge, it is worth considering how that legacy continues to shape research paradigms, including in IS. This special issue is an intentional step toward that end. By shifting the focus to local epistemologies and context-specific we hope to foster a research environment that diverse perspectives and knowledge production influence research on social technology and While Eurocentric philosophies have in these they have also a epistemologies and This is a that Eurocentric knowledge to be and or local knowledge, such as ancestral as and Such of alternative methods of knowing does not benefit but the researchers and the insights researchers The of this special issue are critically of this and are about the in knowledge that can from a more and local approach to research. In a case of our as the of colonial by a epistemic by colonial We call for an intentional of local and Indigenous not as perspectives but as transformative that assumptions Chughtai An step in this involves researchers often lack the to the of even they its the of in the of This is to the Indigenous An from this is that it for more and the of Indigenous local context in for Indigenous Another is the case of in and The the of colonial legacy and local but of critical This reflects a even when scholars are of colonial they lack the theoretical frameworks to them effectively. The of decoloniality has for As decolonial perspectives IS researchers can them to and the epistemic of our field. after decolonial research in a with and the role of technology in As critical researchers we have the tools and to examine and explain these colonial and to foster a more intellectual In the of studies, scholars have that theories and concepts developed European are often considered to be and original without a that this knowledge is through the political of (Banerjee ISJ, other researchers are to at the local contexts with an to local some of value systems in and cultural and of and approaches to and 2022; In to more research in this we provide a brief history of decolonial research. academic work on (e.g., for the of for a new and and a for By the academic literature on of both colonial and decolonial thought more nuanced and (e.g., and cultural to and economic of colonialisation social and and and 2021). The the to be for the of as countries their Today, the academic decoloniality literature is and research on the and of to Indigenous and such as rather than on European and In decolonial methods communities that seek to return to traditional and relevant and Decolonial research how colonial of in the and how systems approaches can theories (Banerjee In systems, decolonial research a of including and the and of and can be as decolonial on their engagement with of decolonial research. Decolonial research and be universally is no but it under the of critical research 2023). It is to that decolonial scholarship is critical of traditional critical and approaches because those often within Western epistemological frameworks 2023). Decolonial researchers, in often what refers to as a “local approach to critical a decolonial project may by researchers to not only but structures of colonial epistemic domination, and Indigenous and local knowledge While frequently in the decolonial decolonial scholarship these contexts and it researchers to which of these are relevant to their unique we some of the of decoloniality. of the of the was the that the of colonial to the of the world. This to the of a world. The and multiple structures in over a period of not with the of the over the We to under the power we from a period of to the period of (Grosfoguel the of colonial forms of in the Decolonial researchers the framework to and critique the of coloniality on of contemporary such as and power The of concepts refers to the that particularly those from European thought, are and diverse social and cultural contexts Decolonial this that the of universal concepts is often rooted in Eurocentric knowledge systems that non-European knowledge and perspectives and refers to this as of a form of epistemic violence. Decolonial scholars the of that concepts are from within the colonial matrix of power, making their to problematic (Grosfoguel In challenges the of a universal and knowledge by that multiple each with their ways of knowing, and this to the of where many directly the perspective that a way of and is not merely a theoretical but an in research requires a shift in such that diverse forms of knowledge and ways of are in decolonial research involves an intentional from Eurocentric frameworks, a shift toward Indigenous epistemologies This is a critical act of challenging the of European thought and the coloniality embedded in knowledge than adding within European frameworks, epistemic researchers to the of knowledge for alternative that from and Indigenous Thus, epistemic involves that for the epistemic independence of the It is a a decoloniality that and local on their without influence by the epistemic hierarchies that have historically local ways of involves the of Indigenous and local which often prioritise and epistemologies may hold insights relevant to local may be in the of and research in local contexts the of knowledge by academic and research with a to the local context that the knowledge authentically reflects the of local that are more and of community needs by on local researchers can of dominant methodologies or Indigenous ways of refers to the power dynamics by colonialism that to shape relationships between colonisers and the well the of colonial (Grosfoguel dynamics influence of social including relationships and knowledge production (e.g., 2021). The of colonial is to the theoretical framework of which examines the of colonial and in the world. a of and perspectives. It that the of colonialism are neither nor but often by local contexts. It also the diverse ways in which communities have to and colonial to for and the of alternative and ways of occurs when a focal is or because researchers used to develop theory or interpret data in a way that suggests the is or problematic despite alternative This may be by the knowledge, or perspectives of focal When the and resources are or it is for the to local and values. when local languages, and are they be by a colonial the colonial to the the to and and 2021). to to their and When lack and and 2021). In colonial both the and the colonisers are by the oppressive The oppression when their is challenges by that they have value or than of the It is easy for to the oppression of the but a of is that the also a of oppression when in their and a view that them from the of relationships with from the also 2021). The colonisers and also fail to to their they of or lifestyles of violence. theory suggests that there are the and colonisers can take to themselves and their This process involves working to themselves and each other by understanding of how are a problem that is to this or what the power to the focal and working to a solution While research on how to within the social decolonial research by that an structure and it in a way that reflects how the have colonialisation had research suggests that to promote to the of the and the rather than of As researchers to this and researchers for and role as this of research to promote in a decolonial are increasingly and While research often on involving resources such as are also of to decolonial researchers, and of to IS in the context of refers to the valuing of the epistemic of of the is to by knowledge the of epistemic and decolonial approach to epistemic is by and local community and knowledge may to the of the (e.g., that the production of knowledge in and is a complex and that to many of and can be in a of In to social and epistemic other of and such as restorative and political by decolonial researchers. to promote decolonial may many of with the of not only for or but also dominant understanding of what means and how it in is no for conducting and doing decolonial research. on the of decolonial we develop a foundation for about what is in a decolonial This foundational framework the criteria by which to the special issue were Criteria Decolonial approaches the researcher to engage deeply with the local context. themselves in Indigenous knowledge systems, local philosophies and histories to their as these insights are foundational to a decolonial By actively engaging with local researchers and imposing external This the work is relevant and the epistemic of the communities a foundation for transformative meet this researchers can work to understand the colonial matrix of power, the of engage in epistemic and themselves with local and Indigenous Criteria Decolonial research by the colonial legacy it seeks to It is to unpack the focal problem and the of what and for this requires researchers to explain which colonial structure or is an oppressive of epistemological and the research can meet this by the of the colonial experienced by the focal community as well as the that perpetuate colonial Criteria Decolonial research is when the researchers develop a strategy or solution that can be to restructure or reformulate the problematic colonial structure or to align with the local or Indigenous philosophy that they as their engagement with the local context. a decolonial strategy or solution is not merely a theoretical it as a that of epistemic or even reproduce colonial hierarchies of knowledge. decolonial research of of by epistemic were in to our call for papers and four the criteria to be in the special of these papers to a understanding of how IS researchers can engage with communities in contexts to promote and epistemic by valuing local In the and focus on in the problem of structures in that can perpetuate colonial power dynamics and fail to account for the needs and perspectives of local communities in the The on philosophy as a decolonial and shared The a science research approach to develop for This involves on and then them to account for The to decolonial scholarship by to in It critique to for more and work the by the of considering power dynamics and local knowledge in and a solution on an Indigenous In the and examine the cultural that when are in Indigenous the of as a case study. This the for to to a form of colonialism by Indigenous cultures and Western meaning in is as a decolonial philosophy such as mutual and reciprocity, and The a narrative with to understand how these with practices. work to decolonial scholarship by the for to the and of that are more and to decolonial scholarship in the by for Indigenous knowledge and in the development of technologies to ensure that does not at the of cultural In the and examine a IS the in through a decolonial It the problem of IS that may not account for local knowledge systems and power The the concepts of and conviviality as decolonial The the of multiple and diverse conviviality and relationships between diverse The the project through these on methodological and The to decolonial scholarship by these frameworks to the and provides insights how decolonial IS can be and a framework to examine IS from a decolonial perspective and for researchers in decolonial approaches in IS research. In the and focus on the development of a in a to IS research and through the of The the problem of the dominant Eurocentric perspective in IS that often alternative epistemologies and historical by philosophies of the developed in knowledge The a to examine how the social in with epistemic plurality and epistemic in both research and practice. social for epistemic and plurality by that are not by or cultural It Indigenous traditions, with their local local resources and local knowledge, in The to decolonial scholarship by social to the IS community. It also how the inherent from the of diverse epistemologies in a can be in IS research and work to the by that social and epistemic provide for approaches where multiple epistemologies It is our hope that this special issue research that or oppressive structures and that are a legacy of colonialisation and to replace them with structures and that align with the and needs of the local community. Such research not only how colonial are embedded in or to IS design, and but also how IS can be used as a for emancipatory and decolonial We with a of that such research be with complex social systems and epistemologies that may or and the value of We researchers not to for of local or colonial value systems, and not to seek to power dynamics such that the we IS researchers to for that of a by structures and that are for the local context. In the of and for have been Eurocentric models without of the models by local We researchers to consider multiple local and some This researchers to act decoloniality when the local provide the for We are to the to develop this special issue and throughout the other to the development of this special We particularly to our and We are also to many without it not have been to this step is not to this as no new data were or in this study.