Global AI governance debates have long been dominated by frameworks and philosophies formulated in the Global North, where regulatory priorities are shaped by advanced infrastructure, corporate dominance, and geopolitical influence. In the Global South, the stakes are different: The risks are not just about algorithmic biases, but digital exclusion, technological dependency, and local contextualization.
However, engaging the perspectives of the Global South is not just a matter of fairness, it is a strategic imperative for the Global North as well. Without Southern perspectives, governance frameworks may become unsustainable, incompatible with the diverse realities of technology adoption, and ultimately, fragile. Technologies that ignore local needs often face slow adoption, growing resistance, or unintended harms. Conversely, when AI systems are designed with Southern contexts in mind, they become more resilient, adaptable, and scalable.
It's time to ask: What if governance was shaped not only by those who create the technology, but also by those who will bear its consequences? What does the Global North gain when it truly listens?
Beyond Adoption: Toward Ethical Adaptation
In many developing countries, AI is still viewed through a binary lens: Adoption or underdevelopment. But this framework misses a critical dimension: Adaptation.
Adaptation requires not only technical skills, but a cultural understanding, an ethical foundation, and a social imagination. It means embedding technology within society's values, norms and needs, rather than imposing external frameworks that may not be appropriate.
It's not just for the Global South, it's crucial for the North as well. Ethical adaptation facilitates cross-cultural adoptions, minimizes unintended harms, and ensures that technologies are scalable without obliterating diversity. It also helps mitigate social risks that are often overlooked in top-down implementations, such as public distrust, backlash, and resistance to what is perceived as technological imperialism. When these social risks materialize, they are not confined within borders, but affect global supply chains, market readiness, and brand legitimacy.
By investing in ethical adaptation, developers and companies in the Global North can secure more stable, faster, and socially acceptable pathways for technology adoption. It enhances the sustainability of innovation by making systems more responsive to diverse realities. It creates a sense of shared responsibility, transforming governance from a top-down process to a collaborative endeavor in which both parties share outcomes and consequences.
The Global South should not be reduced to a market or a field of experimentation, but should be seen as a source of wisdom, offering alternative models of community care and contextual intelligence that enrich global debates on governance.
The role of contemplative networks: A case from Indonesia
To bridge this gap, so-called "reflective networks" have emerged - quietly but powerfully. One such initiative is the Indonesian Applied Digital Economy and Regulation Network (IADERN), which grew out of the realization that traditional governance tools - often designed based on assumptions from the Global North - were failing to deal with the complex realities of the Global South.
This is critical, because most discussions about AI and emerging technologies are still confined to closed circles: full of technical jargon, policies isolated from communities, or frameworks disconnected from local infrastructure, cultural values, and institutional readiness. The result is an organizational vacuum: Governance is either too abstract to apply, or too rigid to adapt.
Rather than replicating global models, IADERN focuses on what it calls "broadening the depth": Building trust between academia, government, civil society, and the creative sectors. It functions not just as a think tank, but as a translation zone, where AI ethics, blockchain regulation, and digital public policy are humbly and sensitively shaped by the local context, and then reinterpreted to fit the global context.
Their model is not about leading from the center, but listening from the margins - and co-creating frameworks that work because they are locally rooted.
Global Recognition, Local Resonance
This context-based approach has attracted global attention:
IADERN has contributed to white papers with organizations in Australia and China
She participated in research with academic partners from India
She was invited to speak in Dubai about smart mobility and blockchain technologies
She is a contributor to Brown's World Affairs Journal, which is read by policymakers around the world
But perhaps its deepest impact is at home: Media outreach to simplify AI for local communities, collaborating with ministries to develop policies based on an understanding of risk, and translating complex systems into narratives that the public can understand. She has also participated in workshops, advisory sessions, and capacity building with industry stakeholders - providing practical, real-world insights on AI adoption and digital transformation in various sectors. This includes developing recommendations for AI and cybersecurity risk management in collaboration with the National Cybersecurity and Cryptography Agency (BSSN) in Indonesia, and preparing simplified AI guides for state employees in collaboration with the Ministry of Communication and Information.
This proximity to transformations on the ground enables IADERN to be both an observer and a participant in the design of context-sensitive governance.
These efforts don't make headlines - but they build resilience.
Why global frameworks need interlocutors from the South
The world doesn't need more templates coming from above. It needs bridges of dialog - actors who are able to navigate between high politics and on-the-ground insight. The Global South, when it speaks from its own reality, becomes more than a recipient, it becomes a resetter of the global order.
In this setting, the role of interdisciplinary actors - combining research, advocacy, storytelling, and community insight - is central. They not only participate in policymaking, they contribute to its design.
This is precisely why the future of emerging technologies - especially AI - should involve bottom-up ethical adaptation. When local contexts shape the governance of AI, the technology becomes more humane, sustainable, and safe. It enhances rather than replaces our humanity. As global concerns grow about the unchecked development of AI and the disruption it may cause to economies or social harmony, Global South models that emphasize inclusion, trust, and reflection can help mitigate these risks before they turn into waves of global disapproval.
Toward a pluralistic future
We cannot build trustworthy AI if we ignore the traditions of trust outside the West. We cannot ensure inclusive governance if we exclude the contexts that define inclusion itself.
The future of AI governance will not only be written in Brussels or Silicon Valley, it must also be written in Jakarta, Nairobi, and Medellin.
This is all the more urgent as the race for AI dominance between China and the United States accelerates - a race that is technologically advanced but often neglects governance safeguards and risk management protocols. In their rush to the top, ethics is often the first casualty.
Therefore, the way forward must begin not with domination, but with dialog. Not by molds, but by trust.
Toho Nugraha
Expert in digital business and metaverse
Director of the Indonesian Digital Economy and Regulation Network (IADERN)
comments