Skip to main content
v2026.11,610 entries · CC-BY 4.0
LAC HealthLaboratory & Research SupplyReagents, PPE & instruments — chain-of-custody documented.Fast, traceable sourcing built for regulated research environments, from bench consumables to instrumentation.Shop lac.us CodeCASRAIlac.us

Direct comparison

FAIR vs CARE Data Principles Compared

FAIR governs technical data reusability; CARE governs Indigenous Peoples' authority over their data. Complementary principles, not alternatives.

Ask about FAIR vs CARE Data Principles Compared

Answers are drawn from this comparison and the rest of the CASRAI corpus, with a link to every source.

Answers are AI-generated from CASRAI’s own published pages and can be wrong, so check the linked sources before relying on one; your question is logged without personal data — never sold, never used to train a third-party model — to show us what CASRAI is missing, so please do not type personal or confidential details. How we use this

How do FAIR, CARE compare side by side?

The table below compares FAIR, CARE across 8 procurement-relevant dimensions, from acronym through relationship to each other.

Side-by-side comparison

DimensionFAIRCARE
AcronymFindable, Accessible, Interoperable, ReusableCollective Benefit, Authority to Control, Responsibility, Ethics
Published2016 (Wilkinson et al., Scientific Data)Introduced 2019, published 2020, by the Global Indigenous Data Alliance (GIDA)
What it governsTechnical/infrastructural data quality and machine-actionable reuseIndigenous Peoples' rights, authority, and interests over data concerning them
Silent onWhether data should be shared, restricted, or by whose authorityTechnical formatting, metadata standards, machine-readability
Stewarded byBroad research-data community (GO FAIR, Research Data Alliance, funders)Global Indigenous Data Alliance (GIDA)
Applies toResearch data generallyIndigenous data specifically — data about Indigenous Peoples, lands, resources, and knowledge
When they conflictPushes toward maximal openness by defaultTakes precedence for Indigenous data — community authority governs access regardless
Relationship to each otherNecessary but not sufficient for ethical Indigenous data governanceA required complement to FAIR, not a replacement for it

Common questions

Common questions about FAIR vs CARE

Are FAIR and CARE alternatives to choose between?

+

No. They answer different questions about the same dataset — FAIR asks whether it is technically reusable, CARE asks who has authority over it and why. Applying "FAIR and CARE" together is the standard recommendation, not a choice of one over the other.

Can a dataset be FAIR without being CARE-compliant?

+

Yes, and that is precisely the gap CARE was created to close — a dataset can be technically findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable while still failing to respect Indigenous Peoples' rights to govern data about themselves.

Who authored the CARE Principles?

+

The Global Indigenous Data Alliance (GIDA), which introduced them in 2019 and published the formal principles in 2020, building on decades of Indigenous data sovereignty advocacy.

Referenced across the research world

University of Cambridge logoColumbia University logoCrossref logoUniversity of Edinburgh logoHarvard University logoUniversity of Oxford logoPrinceton University logoStanford School of Medicine logoUniversity College London logoORCID logoUniversity of Cambridge logoColumbia University logoCrossref logoUniversity of Edinburgh logoHarvard University logoUniversity of Oxford logoPrinceton University logoStanford School of Medicine logoUniversity College London logoORCID logo
  • University of Cambridge logo
  • Columbia University logo
  • Crossref logo
  • University of Edinburgh logo
  • Harvard University logo
  • University of Oxford logo
  • Princeton University logo
  • Stanford School of Medicine logo
  • University College London logo
  • ORCID logo

View CASRAI adoption →