Launching on 25 September 2025!

We are delighted to share some behind-the-scenes insight into how the GloCo glossary came to life. This project is more than a collection of terms: it is a collaborative effort that brings together different voices, skills, and perspectives. The glossary has been developed in close partnership with Kenyan web designers Mutanu Kyany’a (Digital Curator) and Mercy Kabiria (UI/UX Designer), whose expertise has been essential in shaping the platform. Their work combines technical innovation with a strong commitment to accessibility and representation, ensuring that the glossary is not only functional but also responsive to the communities it seeks to serve.

An Open and Evolving Glossary

The GloCo glossary is open to everyone! Please join us and feel free to contribute. Everybody is welcome to propose words and definitions. Also, the glossary is in process. We will update, expand, etc.

Indeed, creating an online glossary involves answering many questions and facing many challenges. These questions are not only conceptual, but also technical and practical. At times, these dimensions even overlap.

Partnership with Gaston Berger University

As a first step, we were lucky to establish a partnership with the Gaston Berger University in Senegal. In 2025, they hosted a major conference where our team could meet with their experts, professors, and students, in order to talk about heritage in Africa. The Gaston Berger University is now a full partner and cooperator.

The question of where to host the website also arose. Web-designer Mutanu Kyany’a suggested hosting the site in Africa to contribute to the decolonisation of the digital space. However, this solution is still under discussion, not least because of the risks identified by other African partners.

Mutanu Kyany’a and Alisa Santikarn during the conference held at the Gaston Berger University in Senegal.

Debating Aesthetics and Representation

From the very first meetings, aesthetic choices were debated: Mutanu had proposed red/brown, but the team thought this risked conveying a reductive representation of Africa as a land of natural resources. However, Mutanu pointed out that she had reached this option based on the most prominent colour featured in the photos we had provided for the glossary up to that point. The question of representation was at the heart of the project's graphic design.

Avoiding Extraction: The Challenges of Creating the GloCo Glossary

Beyond the technical and aesthetic aspects, a fundamental question permeates the entire project: How can we prevent the extraction of knowledge all over again?

Nigerian researcher Toyin Falola has highlighted the dynamics of persistent inequalities in scientific production. Even when researchers in the Global North distance themselves from the racist ideologies of colonial collections, they can still use, publish and capitalize on data collected in unequal contexts. Local researchers can also reproduce these extraction dynamics by appropriating community knowledge without recognising its origin. The project therefore questions the mechanisms of knowledge collection and circulation, and seeks to establish genuinely collaborative research methods inspired by current museum protocols, which require the consent of the relevant communities for any use of their knowledge.

Field Surveys and Power Relations

Honoré Tchatchouang Ngoupeyou, one of our first colleagues on the GloCo project, worked with teams in Cameroon, Benin and Senegal. His teams conducted field surveys, primarily in the Bamiléké region. The people consulted chose the words and definitions, some of whom are mentioned in the final bibliography. Despite this participatory and inclusive approach, however, power relations, particularly those linked to financial resources, language and academic visibility, still exist.

A Vodounsi dancer during a procession of Sakpata Vodun followers in the village of Agonkanmey, Lokossa (Benin). Photo taken by Crystallin Montcho.

Categorisation and Regional Perspectives

We also grappled with the issue of categorisation and how to group entries for the usability of the site without pigeonholing. Initial categories such as 'art' or 'ritual', for example, seemed too similar to Western anthropological classifications. Organising by country posed problems due to colonial borders. We therefore opted for regional groupings and, where possible, adopted local placenames. For instance, Ruby Satele Asiata recommended using 'Moana' instead of 'Pacific'. While this approach enhances local perspectives, it may make navigation less intuitive for an outside audience. We thought an interactive map would help to clarify this. However, while we deliberately chose a map without visible borders, we still need to add coordinates to place pins on the backend, and, therefore, still have to make a choice of where to place something on the map, perhaps still repeating colonial borders even if not as obviously visible on the frontend.

Can Everything Be Shown?

The question of illustrations was also discussed. In Benin, photographer Crystallin Montcho has documented festivals, particularly those associated with Voodoo. In other cases, such as Ruby Satele Asiata's Moana definitions of funeral rites, those involved refused to be photographed, preferring sound recordings in the local language instead. Can everything be shown? Some ritual objects are sacred, and their inner composition must remain secret. These cultural requirements complicate the work of conservators and call scientific practices such as X-ray analysis into question.

*Tolegba de Wadon.* Image taken by Crystallin Montcho in Adjarra (Benin).

An Inclusive and Accessible Glossary?

Another issue for debate is the dissemination of data. Open access is now presented as good scientific practice and is imposed by the European Research Council (ERC), which is funding this project. However, this free availability can be problematic when it comes to knowledge or artefacts which were not historically intended for public display or manipulation. Some artefacts, which are sometimes considered taboo, have been collected without consent in contexts of violence.

At the end of the day, language is probably the major issue we are facing. While the majority of those consulted wanted to keep words in Indigenous and local languages, definitions are primarily written in French and English — the colonial languages that still structure research hierarchies. The limitations of automatic translation software pose a challenge to this ambition. This impacts predominantly oral languages as well as those without robust technical support for writing, some languages are auto-translated better than others, creating an unintended hierarchy in terms of accessibility. As a project that centres on the importance of language and inclusivity, and sourcing entries where authors have chosen the words they use with care, issues surrounding auto-translation and the politics and ethics of AI language tools remain a significant barrier.

Who Is the Glossary For?

These limitations raise an essential question: Who is this glossary intended for? Is it intended to translate Indigenous and local knowledge and make it accessible to Western museum professionals or international elites? If so, how can we claim to be taking a decolonial approach? We are currently working to expand the target audience and conceive of the glossary as a living, evolving archive rather than a static repository.

Please feel free to share, criticize, and take part!

The Glossary launches 25 September 2025.

The GloCo Glossary: Between Technics, Pragmatics, and Politics