Following cultural protocols vital to success of Indigenous research partnerships in Pacific communities

By Ron Rocky Coloma

Indigenous Pacific leaders and scientists are reshaping how climate and environmental research is conducted across Oceania by prioritizing trust, reciprocity and long-term relationships over short-term data collection efforts.

That message emerged from a recent regional discussion hosted by the ITD Alliance Oceania Regional Network, where Indigenous iTaukei Fijian peacebuilding practitioner Adi Vasulevu Merewalesi Levu and Australian-based Brazilian marine scientist Dr. Leo Dutra reflected on nearly a decade of collaboration across Pacific Island communities.

The conversation centered on how Indigenous knowledge systems and scientific research can work together in Pacific communities facing climate change, marine resource pressures and development challenges.

Levu said meaningful partnerships in Oceania require researchers and institutions to move at the pace of communities themselves.

Levu said one of the most important lessons from years of community engagement work in Fiji and the broader Pacific is that outside organizations cannot simply enter communities expecting immediate participation.

“Our people would commit to the engagement if visiting leaders and those coming in for external activities followed the proper cultural protocols,” she said. “That was one thing I felt was very important.”

Levu is a co-founder of the Pacific Center for Peacebuilding and Transcend Oceania, organizations focused on justice, nonviolence and community-led development in the Pacific. Her work has included mediation, trauma-informed healing and restorative justice initiatives across Fiji, the Solomon Islands and Vanuatu.

Dutra, a senior research scientist with CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere in Australia, said his own approach to science shifted after years of working alongside Indigenous and local communities in Australia and the Pacific.

Originally trained as a biophysical marine scientist studying coral reefs, Dutra later moved into ecological economics and community-centered research.

“I wanted to do a little bit more than just detecting changes and trying to attribute those changes to humans, and then figuring out what to do with that information,” Dutra said.

Their partnership began in Fiji in 2016 after a mutual colleague connected them while Dutra was preparing to work with communities near the University of the South Pacific.

Levu recalled that one of Dutra’s first questions was how peacebuilding could relate to marine science and research.

“I responded from the perspective of peacebuilding and as a peacebuilder,” she said. “Wherever potential conflicts exist, peacebuilding is relevant.”

She explained that environmental and marine research projects can quickly intersect with resource conflicts, power relations and community tensions if researchers fail to understand local governance structures or cultural expectations.

That understanding became central to several collaborative projects they later carried out in Fiji, including work involving coral reef mapping, blue carbon ecosystems and climate adaptation.

Levu and Dutra said the success of any partnership depends on whether the institution view Pacific communities as equal partners rather than research sites.

Dutra said communities often have their own calendars, priorities and responsibilities that outside organizations must respect.

“It’s not about us pushing because we have a set agenda and our funding body requests a report by a particular day,” Dutra said. “We need to be flexible.”

He added that researchers should be able to clearly explain, in practical terms, why their work matters to communities.

“‘How does that fit in?’” Dutra said Levu often asks him when discussing potential projects. “If I cannot articulate that, then it’s not necessary because I cannot explain in plain language why that is important for them.”

One example discussed concerned a Fijian coastal community dealing with waste and plastics washing into local waters from nearby urban areas.

Levu said women in the community eventually became deeply involved in recycling and reusing plastics after researchers took time to engage properly with village leadership and local groups.

Throughout the discussion, Levu repeatedly emphasized that consent in Pacific communities is not a one-time signature on a form but an ongoing process built through dialogue and trust.

She described how entering a village in Fiji often requires formal cultural protocols before discussions about research can even begin.

“I cannot say yes right now or next week or next month,” Levu said, recalling early discussions about a blue carbon project in Fiji. “We need to build the trust first.”

The speakers also discussed growing conversations around Indigenous data sovereignty and ownership of cultural and environmental knowledge.

Levu said many Indigenous Pacific communities already possess generations of ecological knowledge rooted in lived experience.

“The Indigenous users of the resources have information that is qualitative references and which is in their blueprint of indigeneity,” she said.

Dutra said researchers must clearly explain how information will be used and ensure communities approve findings before they are shared publicly.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Whatever you are taking, we need to come back first and ask them to make sure that’s what they want us to communicate externally,” Dutra said.

Levu also stressed that Pacific communities should not be viewed as passive recipients of outside expertise.

Instead, she said, communities themselves often drive engagement once trust is established.

“When we engage in the right way for them, they also give their full commitment,” Levu said. “Their leaders take on the leading role to inform them that, ‘Hey, this is important for us.’”

Subscribe to

our digital

monthly issue