| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstPaper" |
|---|
| | | -- By KavisaraManeepun - 24 Mar 2025
Introduction | |
<
< | In the 19th century, colonial powers sought natural resources; however, in the 21st century, they seek data.
As well.
Nowadays, big tech companies control digital infrastructure and global data flows, often at the expense of developing countries in Global South. Companies like Google, Huawei, and Microsoft collect massive user data to expand their economic ??
while controlling key internet infrastructure.
"Infrastructure" needs definition. Telecommunications infrastructure is more usually controlled by local forms of corrupt interaction between private wealth and state organs, including military.
As developing nations rely more on these external digital platforms, they face risks of privacy violations, limiting their technological sovereignty. This paper examines how data extraction, weak regulations and imbalance of power lead to data colonialism. It argues that developing nations should increase local’s awareness, enforce data localization, and strengthen legal protections to rely less on foreign platforms. | >
> | In the 19th century, colonial powers sought natural resources; however, in the 21st century, they seek data as well. Nowadays, big tech companies control global data flows and digital infrastructure such as cloud platform, undersea cables and data centers, often at the expense of developing countries in Global South. Companies like Google, Huawei, and Microsoft collect massive user data to expand their economic power while controlling key internet infrastructure. As developing nations rely more on these external digital platforms, they face risks of privacy violations, limiting their technological sovereignty. This paper examines how data colonization impacts the Global South and questions whether common solutions like localization would truly restore digital sovereignty, or it just shift control from foreign actors to domestic ones without deeper system of surveillance and exploitation. | | | What is Data Colonialism?
Under the past colonial, the colonialism refers to the control of physical land, labor and natural resources. Today, with new technology, a new form of colonial has been emerged, known as a “data colonialism”. Under this concept, data represents as a new form of resource appropriation dominated by at least two poles of colonial powers: Western and Chinese tech giants. These two tech giants create communication networks with the sole aim of collecting data, profiting from it, and retaining it as raw material for data analytics .
Notes
:
| | |
Infrastructure and Surveillance | |
<
< | Global South countries, including South Asia, Latin America, and Africa, use tech giant companies’ digital platforms, such as Google cloud storage, Amazon internet, or Huawei AI, to store their data. However, because their data resides on external servers, these Global South countries lack complete control over their own information. Therefore, the data that is stored, collected, and used by Global South’s citizens will be used for the benefit of the powerful nations rather than their own, vulnerable to foreign surveillance and corporate appropriation. | >
> | Global South countries, including South Asia, Latin America, and Africa, use tech giant companies’ digital platforms, such as Google cloud storage, Amazon internet, or Huawei AI, to store and manage their national data. However, the external ownership of these infrastructures means that these countries maintain none or minimal control of how their citizens’ information is access, used or profited from. The lack of control has generated rising concern about surveillance activities, digital exploitation and dependency issues. | | | | |
<
< |
Why does it matter where the servers are? Thinking that through will give rise to questions about whether conrrol by state power has somehow come to be identified, misleadingly, as freedom, will it not?
One case of tech giant’s dominance is the supply of surveillance technologies from China to Zimbabwean. The Zimbabwean government installed facial recognition technology from Cloudwalk in public spaces to monitor activists . This has been done with a lack of legislation regulating what happens to the collected data.
But this is a problem of dictatorship, not colonialism, right?
Moreover, Zimbabwe also has a nationwide rollout of mobile phone telecommunications equipment from Huawei. While concerns around the security of this communication equipment have seen by the United States leading a call for banning usage, Zimbabwe was tied with this tech giant company and ignoring the fact that in China itself, these technologies were used to steal data from the Uyghur community . The mentioned cases reflect what happened in the past colonial times, where the profits and control remain in powerful hands, while the costs in terms of loss of autonomy and privacy are borne by the poorer nations.
Notes
:
:
| | | | |
<
< |
But Huawei is doing business in Zimbabwe, as elsewhere in Africa, because it is making equipment for sale at prices that would otherwise be unobtainable. So the choice is not between buying from China or Sweden, certainly not between buying foreign or locally-produced telecommunications equipment, but rather between having a mobile net or not having one. Shouldn't the basic economics of all this be explained to the reader?
| >
> | China’s export of surveillance technology to Zimbabwe shows how data colonialism operates alongside authoritarianism. The Zimbabwe government installed China’s Cloudwalk facial recognition systems to monitor activists , even though there are no clear laws regulating how the data is used. This allows foreign companies to profit from surveillance in countries with weak legal protections, without facing accountability. Also, Zimbabwe’s use of Huawei telecom infrastructure follows a similar pattern. The government continues to rely on Huawei despite the fact that the company’s security practices have led to restrictions in countries like the United States . While this decision is largely driven by cost (Huawei offers affordable technology that other providers may not) this affordability creates long-term dependency. When essential digital infrastructure comes mainly from foreign companies with little transparency, control and profit stay with those companies, while poorer nations bear the cost in lost of privacy and autonomy. | | |
Legal Gaps and Public Unawareness |
|