Africa: AI Is Fuelling the 'Digital Colonisation' of Africa, Warns UN Scientist

Lead

The United Nations has launched its first global panel on artificial intelligence, responding to mounting concerns that the technology could deepen global inequalities — particularly in Africa, where AI systems are largely imported after being developed and shaped elsewhere. The panel, comprising around 40 experts from 37 countries, was approved by the UN General Assembly in February and held its inaugural meeting in March. Members serve in their personal capacity for a three-year term.

The initiative aims to help governments understand artificial intelligence as its influence rapidly expands across economies, politics, and daily life, and to address what the UN describes as a growing "knowledge gap" around the technology. Comparable in ambition to the IPCC climate change panel, the body is designed to deliver independent scientific advice and periodic assessments of AI's risks and impacts, at a time when a small number of companies, mostly in the United States and China, dominate the field.

Coverage Comparison

Reporting from RFI and AllAfrica highlights the panel's creation as a response to the concentration of AI development in a few corporate hands and the potential for the technology to exacerbate existing inequalities. Both outlets emphasize the warning from Senegalese researcher Adji Bousso Dieng, a member of the panel, that Africa must develop its own AI capabilities or risk permanent dependence on others.

The coverage underlines the panel's role as an independent scientific voice, free from government or institutional influence, aimed at rebalancing AI governance and ensuring that benefits are shared globally rather than hoarded by a few actors. The story has been picked up by multiple outlets, reflecting broad international interest in AI governance and its implications for developing regions.

Key Claims

• UN Panel Mandate: The panel's goal, as stated by Adji Bousso Dieng, is to "produce rigorous scientific analysis to guide public decisions." She emphasized that the panel does not work for any government or institution, and its purpose is to ensure AI governance and access to opportunities are not concentrated in the hands of a few.

• Digital Colonisation Warning: Dieng warned that without its own AI development, Africa risks becoming a consumer rather than creator, repeating the pattern seen with natural resources where the continent exported raw materials only to import finished products.

• Data Exploitation Concerns: The reports point to practices where companies go to countries like Kenya to label data used for training AI systems, often under unfair working conditions and without proper legal frameworks. Data is used without compensation, with large corporations benefiting financially while Africans receive little or no payment for their contributions.

• Knowledge Gap: The UN has identified a growing "knowledge gap" around AI, which the panel aims to close by providing accessible, scientifically grounded information to governments worldwide.

Perspectives

Supporters of the UN Initiative: The panel is seen as a crucial step toward democratizing AI governance. Proponents argue that an independent scientific body can help level the playing field, giving developing nations a voice and access to expertise that is currently monopolized by tech giants in the US and China.

Critics and Skeptics: Some observers may question whether a UN advisory panel can have meaningful impact given the rapid pace of AI development and the immense resources of private corporations. There is skepticism about whether recommendations will translate into binding regulations or whether they will remain purely advisory.

African Researchers and Advocates: There is strong resonance with Dieng's warning. Many African scholars and technologists have long called for local AI development that reflects the continent's languages, cultures, and realities, arguing that systems trained primarily on Western data are ill-suited to African contexts and can perpetuate biases.

Industry Perspective: Tech companies may view such panels with caution, wary of increased regulation and oversight. However, some acknowledge the value of international guidelines that could provide clarity and consistency across jurisdictions.