Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This article argues AI must align with Indigenous data sovereignty to benefit Indigenous peoples equitably, highlighting governance frameworks.
This article argues that artificial intelligence (AI) will not benefit Indigenous peoples equitably unless grounded in Indigenous data sovereignty and Indigenous governance of AI systems. In Australia and comparable nation-states, data ecosystems have long served as instruments of colonial control, determining what knowledges are valued, how people are categorized, and who benefits. As AI systems are built upon these foundations, they risk deepening and automating colonial logics. Indigenous data sovereignty offers a powerful counter framework, asserting the rights of Indigenous peoples to govern the creation, interpretation, and use of data concerning themselves, their communities, and their lands. This article examines how applying Indigenous governance to data and AI systems could alleviate unintended harms and create more equitable benefits within digital technologies. Rather than treating AI as neutral or benevolent, it is positioned as a contested domain where Indigenous resurgence confronts colonial continuity, advancing governance frameworks enabling just, accountable, and equitable futures.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Prehn et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: