Send message to Authors

Paper short abstract

AI governance is often framed through ethical and techno-solutionist models presented as neutral and universal. This paper argues that such approaches reproduce epistemic injustice and digital colonialism, and advances epistemic sovereignty as a decolonial alternative.

Paper long abstract

Artificial Intelligence (AI) governance is dominated by regulatory frameworks that foreground ethical principles. While these approaches are presented as neutral and progressive, this paper argues that they reproduce deep epistemic and structural inequalities when transposed uncritically into Global South contexts. Anchored in ethical determinism and technological solutionism, prevailing AI governance regimes tend to obscure the historical and cultural conditions that shape the production of AI. This paper contends that such approaches perpetuate epistemic injustice and entrench forms of digital colonialism. Wherein Global South societies become sites of data extraction and experimentation while they remain marginal to decision-making and lack equal control over technological design and governance. The asymmetrical distribution of regulatory costs and benefits raises critical questions about whose interests AI governance ultimately serves and whether existing frameworks meaningfully address issues of economic dependency and infrastructural inequality. Against this background, the paper advances the concept of epistemic sovereignty as a normative and political horizon for decolonising AI governance in the Global South. This paper further examines how AI governance is shaped by transnational technology corporations, international standards bodies, and Global North research institutions, while the Global South states, communities, and knowledge producers are marginalised. This mirrors colonial extractive relations where value is generated from Global South resources without meaningful participation or benefit-sharing. In doing so, the paper exposes how tech-solutionist approaches to AI governance obscure power asymmetries and legitimise dependency under the guise of innovation and development.