AI Governance and the Global South Voice

Context: International stakeholders met in Geneva during the first UN Global Dialogue on AI to discuss global AI governance. Experts urged India to reclaim its leadership role for the Global South instead of ceding influence to advanced economies.

About AI Governance and the Global South Voice:

What it is?

• AI governance for the Global South represents an international diplomatic and regulatory effort to place equity, inclusivity, and real-world domestic harms at the center of the global technology discourse.
• Historically, global AI summits hosted by Western nations have focused on far-off, existential, and catastrophic risks.

Key Data and Strategic Facts on the AI Ecosystem:

• The Silicon Supply Chain Alignment: India joined the Pax Silica initiative, aligning with the US-led semiconductor ecosystem and supporting open, innovation-friendly chip manufacturing and technology standards.
• The Global Openness Score: India’s lower Visa Openness Index reflects restrictive access systems, highlighting how closed digital ecosystems can similarly limit innovation, collaboration, and developer participation.
• Severe Structural R&D Spending Gaps: India spends only 65% of GDP on R&D, far below major economies, limiting indigenous innovation, advanced technology development, and global competitiveness.
• The Bulk Compute Packaging Target: India’s semiconductor sector currently focuses mainly on chip assembly and testing (OSAT), with facilities like Sanand assembling about 20 crore chips annually using imported technology.

The Imperative Need for Global South-Led AI Governance:

• Preventing Predatory Resource and Data Extraction: Strong regulations are needed to stop foreign AI firms from using local data and indigenous knowledge without consent or equitable benefit-sharing.
• Mitigating Disproportionate Local Externalities: Large AI infrastructure projects often consume vast land, water, and electricity, creating environmental and social costs for developing countries.
• Shielding Users from Immediate Social Harms: Countries need effective laws to address AI-driven risks such as algorithmic bias, misinformation, hate speech, and deepfake content.
• Ensuring Fair Local Economic Value Accrual: AI-generated economic gains should benefit local economies instead of flowing mainly to multinational technology companies headquartered abroad.
• Preserving Independent Strategic Autonomy: Developing nations should reduce dependence on foreign AI platforms and APIs to protect technological sovereignty during geopolitical or commercial disruptions.

Key Initiatives Taken So Far:

• The India AI Impact Summit: The summit promoted inclusive, ethical, and development-oriented AI governance, emphasizing the priorities of developing economies.
• The UN Global Dialogue on AI: The Geneva dialogue brought countries together to discuss common international principles for responsible AI governance and cooperation.
• The AI Strategic Dialogue Pacts: Frameworks like the Hiroshima AI Process and New Delhi Declaration encourage trusted AI development, safety standards, and international collaboration.
• The Launch of the Sarvam Language Models: Sarvam demonstrates India’s capability to build advanced AI models trained on Indic languages, strengthening digital inclusion and linguistic diversity.

Key Challenges in Establishing Equitable Governance:

• The Strategic Middle Power Dilemma: India must balance partnerships with advanced economies while continuing to represent the interests of the Global South.
• A High Vulnerability to Single-Vendor Monopolies: Heavy dependence on a few global chip and cloud providers creates supply-chain risks and weakens technological resilience.
• A Lack of High-Performance Domestic Compute: Limited access to powerful computing infrastructure restricts India’s ability to develop competitive frontier AI foundation models.
• The US Disinterest in Multilateral Rules: The United States generally prefers flexible domestic regulation over binding global AI governance frameworks, slowing international consensus.
• Widespread Local Community Displacements: Rapid expansion of AI infrastructure can lead to land acquisition disputes and community displacement without proper consultation and compensation.

Way Forward:

• Reasserting Technical Leadership at Geneva: India should lead Global South countries in shaping AI governance based on fairness, digital sovereignty, and public interest.
• Pooling Compute and Data Resources: Developing countries can establish shared computing facilities, data repositories, and interoperable AI platforms to reduce dependence on Big Tech.
• Mandating Local Value and Data Accrual: Policies should ensure AI-generated revenues and economic benefits are fairly shared within domestic economies.
• Enforcing Strict Local Data Scraping Guardrails: Foreign AI firms should obtain licenses and provide fair compensation before using local datasets or indigenous knowledge for AI training.
• Rebalancing the National Hardware Mix: India should diversify semiconductor partnerships by combining domestic manufacturing, open-source technologies, and multiple global suppliers.

Conclusion:

While strategic agreements like Pax Silica offer near-term economic benefits, prioritizing foreign corporate profits over local user protections risks repeating past social media monopolies. Ultimately, by using the Geneva dialogue to build a unified Global South coalition, India can establish balanced governance standards that protect public safety and secure digital sovereignty for developing nations.