Libraries and Indigenous Cultural Protocols: Insights from the UQ Library ICIP Framework Project

Libraries hold some of the most significant collections of Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property (ICIP) in the country. From manuscripts and artworks to recordings, photographs, and Indigenous data, these collections preserve knowledge that is deeply connected to culture, Country, and community. As libraries digitise more of their holdings and make them accessible online, their responsibilities around cultural safety, lawful access, and Indigenous authority grow more complex.

To support this work, Terri Janke and Company partnered with the University of Queensland Library (UQL) to develop an ICIP Protocol Framework. The Framework provides a culturally informed, practical approach to managing Indigenous materials across UQL’s collections and systems, ensuring that ICIP is respected, protected, and handled with community authority at every step.

Libraries and the management of ICIP materials

Libraries at state, national, and university levels hold extensive collections that contain Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property. These materials span manuscripts, artworks, recordings, oral histories, ephemera, maps, photographs, and increasingly, Indigenous data generated through academic research. Many of these items hold deep cultural meaning and may include knowledge that is sacred, gender-restricted, or culturally sensitive.

A number of significant works in library holdings were created during periods where Indigenous peoples’ rights were not recognised. As a result, some legacy materials were published or collected without proper consent or cultural authority. Charles Mountford’s Nomads of the Desert, for example, includes secret and sacred knowledge of the Pitjantjatjara people and continues to sit on shelves and in online catalogues despite its sensitivities.

Digitisation and online discovery tools have further shifted the role of libraries. Catalogue records, digitised books, and scanned manuscripts travel well beyond the controlled physical space of a reading room. This increases the risk of culturally sensitive material being accessed or reused in ways that conflict with community interests. Together, these realities place libraries at a complex intersection of cultural authority, community rights, intellectual property law, and public access mandates.

Case Study: University of Queensland Library

The University of Queensland Library is one of Australia’s major research libraries, with extensive collections that include Indigenous materials across manuscripts, published works, photographs, recordings, and digital archives. Recognising the cultural responsibilities attached to these holdings, UQL engaged Terri Janke and Company to develop an ICIP Protocol Framework that would guide staff in managing Indigenous materials in culturally appropriate ways.

The project was shaped through collaboration with key UQL staff, including Lesley Acres, Manager Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Services and Collections, Mia Strasek-Barker, Manager Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Services and Collections, Caitlin Murphy, Manager, Strategic Initiatives, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Services and Collections and Copyright Officer James Lewandowski-Cox. Their leadership ensured that cultural authority and Indigenous governance remained central throughout the process.

Developing the ICIP Protocol Framework

Part 1: Purpose and Introduction

The framework opens by explaining why ICIP matters in a library context; the responsibilities of libraries as custodians; the role of Indigenous peoples as knowledge holders and decision-makers; and the relationship between ICIP, Indigenous Data Sovereignty, and copyright.

Part 2: ICIP at the Library

This mapped how ICIP appears in library holdings and systems, including historical and contemporary collections, manuscripts, recordings, and visual works; digitised materials and metadata; cataloguing practices that may reproduce harm or misattribution; and Indigenous data held through academic and institutional collecting.

Part 3: Protocols Guided by True Tracks®

The protocols were organised around the True Tracks principles, giving staff a culturally clear pathway for decisions about access and restriction levels; community consultation; attribution and cultural authority; use of warnings and contextual notes; procedures for managing sensitive items; when to return, repatriate, or share knowledge back to communities, and outreach as both collecting and giving back.

Part 4: Consent Form Usage Guide

We created three tailored consent forms for different ICIP scenarios in library practice (collection, access, and management). To make this usable at scale, we also produced a staff flowchart guiding when to use which form, step‑by‑step consent documentation instructions, and clear escalation points for cultural advice through the Indigenous collections lead.

AI Guidance: Managing New and Emerging Risks

AI has quickly become part of university research ecosystems, and libraries are encountering AI tools in cataloguing, metadata generation, discovery services, and research support. Recognising this emerging risk, the Framework includes preliminary AI guidance.

The guidance acknowledges the potential benefits of AI while emphasising key limitations:

• Sensitive or restricted material must never be uploaded into AI systems

• AI models lack transparency around training data and accuracy

• AI cannot assess cultural authority, community permissions, or reputability of sources

• Ingestion of research data into AI models may count as “prior publication,” affecting PhD submissions and licensing obligations

The guidance also recognises that universities cannot realistically prohibit AI entirely. Instead, culturally informed boundaries are necessary to keep ICIP safe while allowing staff and researchers to navigate evolving technologies responsibly.

Conclusion

As libraries continue to expand digital access to their collections, the need for culturally informed governance of Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property has never been more pressing. Libraries are not neutral repositories; they are active custodians of knowledge that is inseparable from culture, Country, and community. Managing ICIP therefore requires more than legal compliance; it demands respect for Indigenous authority, accountability for past collecting practices, and care in how knowledge is described, shared, and used.

If this work is of interest to you, we are hosting a Law Way focused on libraries and archives. Find out more here https://events.humanitix.com/law-way-r-handling-access-requests