Contesting Digital Sovereignty: Untangling a Complex and Multifaceted Concept

In case you are realizing the DeepSeek success story is just an example of how China has achieved #DigitalSovereignty through a very complex set of policies and initiatives, you might be interested in our new book on “Digital Sovereignty in the BRICS countries”, where we analyze how the BRICS members have attempted to build their technological autonomy (sometimes successfully, sometimes failing, sometimes not even realizing it, and how they are influencing global digital governance, reshaping digital cooperation in the Global Majority.

The volume was produced by the CyberBRICS Project of the Center for Technology and Society at FGV Law School and is available in open access on the Cambridge University Press website: https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/digital-sovereignty-in-the-brics-countries/introduction/88A1164945DC955023BB812CA88FEABC

In the book we adopted an agnostic approach to study how the BRICS countries are constructing digital sovereignty narratives, policies and actions. We decided to scrutinise the BRICS approaches not only because they offer telling illustrations of how Global South leaders are constructing their digital sovereignty, but also because their approaches are increasingly influencing and shaping the thinking of their regional and international partners, thus having direct or indirect impact.

Our findings are particularly relevant for:

1) #GlobalSouth countries, where BRICS strategies are increasingly viewed as models for achieving technological autonomy, fostering innovation, and increasing control (in a good or bad way) on digital/#AI technologies
2) European countries where policymakers are now freaking out realising they are totally dependent on US technology and have clearly failed to prepare for weaponisation of tech on which they rely: Sadly, the lesson is that, when you are digitally colonised you simply lose your freedom to choose, and even if you have very elaborated laws, they are useless if the software and hardware infrastructure you rely upon is controlled by others and can be weaponised against you.
3) Anyone interested in understanding what are the different nuances of digital sovereignty (we identify seven different conceptions including personal, commons-driven, corporate, state and supranational digital sovereignty) and, most importantly, that digital sovereignty does not necessarily mean being isolated in digital autarchy: On the contrary, it frequently means reclaiming agency, self-determination over digital technologies and capacity to understand, develop and regulate effectively such technologies

A short abstract on “Digital Sovereignty in the BRICS Countries: A Global South Perspective” may be found at: https://cambridgeblog.org/2024/12/digital-sovereignty-in-the-brics-countries-a-global-south-perspective/

Table of Content where all chapters can be freely downloaded separately at: https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/digital-sovereignty-in-the-brics-countries/27E9FD7E4579C76C8D4BA52F7670B431

I would also like to wholeheartedly thank all co-authors (I am sure some are in this list) for their fantastic contributions: Wanshu Cong, Venkatesh Hariharan and Sarayu Natarajan, Vashishtha Doshi and Henrique Estides Delgado, Tales Tomaz, Johannes Thumfart, Enrico Calandro, Stefano Calzati, Olga Bronnikova, Françoise Daucé, Ksenia Ermoshina, Valéry Kossov, Benjamin Loveluck, Francesca Musiani, Bella Ostromooukhova, Perrine Poupin, Anna Zaytseva.

\1. Jiang M, Belli L. Introduction: Contesting Digital Sovereignty: Untangling a Complex and Multifaceted Concept. In: Jiang M, Belli L, eds. Digital Sovereignty in the BRICS Countries: How the Global South and Emerging Power Alliances Are Reshaping Digital Governance. Communication, Society and Politics. Cambridge University Press; 2025:1-38.