Purpose

This study examines the content, development, and conceptual framework of Linda Tuhiwai Smith’s decolonizing thought, particularly as articulated in her seminal work Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples. This research investigates her critique of Western knowledge systems and the relationships among Smith’s decolonizing paradigm, Indigenous knowledge sovereignty, and educational reform, while reassessing the significance of her framework within global Indigenous scholarship and its implications for Indigenous education in Taiwan.

Design/methodology/approach

Using a literature analysis approach, this study systematically examined the content of the first, second, and third editions of Decolonizing Methodologies (1999, 2012, 2021) and drew on related academic critiques and applications of her methodological framework, particularly Kaupapa Māori research, the Indigenous research agenda with its “twenty-five Indigenous projects,” and her educational sovereignty initiatives, across diverse cultural and institutional settings. The analysis encompassed theoretical foundations, methodological characteristics, action-oriented practices, and contemporary articulations.

Findings/results

This study finds that Smith presents a robust critique of Western research practices, showing how they inherit and reproduce colonial power through categorization, objectification, and epistemic violence. Drawing on Said’s Orientalism and Foucault’s theory of power/knowledge, she demonstrates how Western scholarly traditions have constructed a “cultural archive” that authorizes and perpetuates colonial perspectives. By contrast, Smith develops a decolonizing methodology grounded in Indigenous self-determination, relational ethics (manaakitanga, aroha), and communal accountability. By articulating Kaupapa Māori as a culturally grounded research paradigm, she reclaims Indigenous decision-making agency over knowledge production. The study also underscores how Smith broadens the scope of research ethics by incorporating emotional, spiritual, and collective dimensions into scholarly inquiry. Her vision of Indigenous educational sovereignty, evident in initiatives such as Te Kōhanga Reo and Kura Kaupapa Māori, embodies a dual strategy that integrates institutional reform with the construction of autonomous systems. She also critiques the neoliberal commodification of Indigenous knowledge within universities and argues that research findings should be returned to, and enacted within, Indigenous communities.

Originality/value

Although widely cited, Smith’s work is often reduced to theoretical critique. This study demonstrates the holistic, praxis-oriented nature of her decolonizing framework, particularly in relation to education, cultural continuity, and the redistribution of power. It underscores the adaptability of her ideas beyond Aotearoa/New Zealand to other Indigenous contexts globally, including Taiwan, while critically engaging with ongoing debates on essentialism, institutional co-optation, and neoliberal reappropriation.

Implications for policy/practice

This study recommends that educators and policymakers prioritize research and pedagogical practices grounded in Indigenous knowledge systems, promote curriculum design and teacher training centered on Indigenous languages, and challenge the unidirectional norms of mainstream research paradigms by emphasizing knowledge reciprocity and intergenerational transmission. For Taiwan in particular, Smith’s framework offers critical insights for evaluating the depth of decolonization in Indigenous experimental education and safeguarding tribal authority over curriculum design under the Education Act for Indigenous Peoples and the three experimental education acts.