In an era where digital technologies influence nearly every aspect of modern life, the question of who controls these technologies has become increasingly urgent. The dominance of a handful of tech giants—primarily U.S.-based companies like Amazon, Microsoft, and Google, along with Chinese counterparts such as Alibaba and Tencent—has created a global digital ecosystem that centralizes power, restricts competition, and undermines democratic governance. This reality has sparked growing calls for digital sovereignty, a concept that seeks to empower nations and communities to reclaim control over their digital futures.
The policy paper Reclaiming Digital Sovereignty: A Roadmap to Build a Digital Stack for People and the Planet[1] offers a comprehensive framework for achieving this goal. Authored by a coalition of academics and policy experts, the document outlines a transformative vision for digital governance that prioritizes democracy, ecological sustainability, and social equity. Below, we explore the key proposals of this roadmap and their implications for reshaping the global digital order.
The case for digital sovereignty
At its core, digital sovereignty is about enabling political entities—whether nations, regions, or communities—to autonomously govern the digital assets and services that shape their societies. This is not merely a matter of national pride or economic strategy; it is a prerequisite for democracy itself. Without control over critical digital infrastructure, platforms, and data flows, governments cannot effectively protect their citizens’ rights or ensure equitable access to technological benefits. Today’s digital landscape is dominated by monopolistic corporations that wield extraordinary power over economies and societies. For instance, Amazon, Microsoft, and Google control nearly 70% of the global cloud market[2] [3]. Similarly, Meta (formerly Facebook) owns substantial portions of undersea internet cables. This concentration of power stifles innovation, exacerbates inequality, and enables pervasive surveillance [3] [4].
The authors argue that addressing these challenges requires more than incremental reforms. Instead, they propose a bold agenda centered on building a public-led digital stack—a comprehensive ecosystem of digital infrastructure and services designed to serve the public good rather than private profit [5].
Building a public-led digital stack and its limitations
The concept of a „digital stack” refers to the interconnected layers of technology and governance that enable digital services. These include physical infrastructure (e.g., data centers and undersea cables), software platforms (e.g., search engines and social networks), and regulatory frameworks. The paper advocates for transforming this stack into a public good through international cooperation and state-led initiatives. Key proposals include:
Public Infrastructure as a Service: Establishing publicly owned data centers and cloud services to reduce dependence on private providers like Amazon Web Services. These facilities would be governed by democratic institutions to ensure transparency and accountability [2] [5].
Universal Platforms: Developing public alternatives to dominant platforms such as Google Search or Amazon Marketplace. These platforms would prioritize user privacy, accessibility, and ecological sustainability [1] [3].
A Public Marketplace: Creating an open marketplace where startups and small businesses can offer digital services without being locked into Big Tech ecosystems [5].
Open Standards and Interoperability: Mandating the use of open protocols to ensure compatibility across systems and prevent vendor lock-in [1].
While well-intentioned, the complete de-privatization of digital services is not necessarily the most pragmatic approach to achieving digital sovereignty. Beyond the enormous capital required to de-privatize the digital stack, a significant issue arises: the abandonment of the private sector could result in a misalignment of values and approaches to democracy between Western states and major tech corporations.
The key lies in urging a shared interest in competing with capable, state-sponsored authoritarian enterprises. When the private sector is granted the flexibility and encouragement to innovate, it can advance the goals of democratically aligned states by outperforming authoritarian rivals.[6] Any effort to disrupt the technology market must proceed with caution to avoid undermining the industry, which could lead to big tech perceiving the state as an obstacle to their ability to compete and potentially turning them against it.
A sovereign research agenda
The rapid advancement of technologies like artificial intelligence (AI) has intensified the need for independent research agendas that prioritize public interest over corporate profit. The paper proposes establishing public knowledge networks led by international or regional research agencies [1] [7]. These networks would focus on solving collective problems—such as climate change or public health crises—through interdisciplinary collaboration.
Governments are encouraged to:
– Fund open-access research initiatives.
– Attract talent from Big Tech by offering competitive resources and ethical working conditions.
– Evaluate new technologies based on their ethical, ecological, economic, and social impacts before adopting them.
This approach seeks to democratize innovation while addressing the ecological footprint of digital technologies.
Ecological internationalism
Digital sovereignty cannot be achieved in isolation; it requires global cooperation grounded in ecological responsibility. The paper calls for an ecological internationalism that rejects both techno-nationalism and corporate hegemony. One promising avenue is the creation of a Digital Non-Aligned Movement (DNAM)—a coalition of states committed to providing universal access to non-commercial digital services [8].
Regulation and taxation
Rather than dismantling the private sector, fostering digital sovereignty requires a balanced approach that includes targeted regulatory measures to address Big Tech’s dominance. The paper outlines several strategies to achieve this goal:
– Anti-monopoly policies: Blocking mergers that consolidate market power and limit competition.
– Data governance frameworks: Mandating that companies share certain datasets with public institutions to ensure transparency and support democratic oversight.
– Digital taxes: Levying taxes on tech giants based on revenues generated in each jurisdiction to ensure fair contributions to public resources.
– Algorithmic accountability: Requiring corporations to address the societal impacts of their algorithms and demonstrate adherence to ethical standards. [3] [4] [5]
By integrating regulatory oversight with innovation-driven policies, democratically aligned states can foster a competitive digital ecosystem that supports their values and counters authoritarian rivals.
Expanding human rights in the digital sphere
A democratic approach to digital sovereignty must prioritize human rights. The paper emphasizes robust safeguards against surveillance, censorship, and algorithmic discrimination. Specific recommendations include prohibiting AI applications that infringe on fundamental rights (e.g., predictive policing), establishing independent institutions for content moderation on social media platforms, and promoting digital literacy programs [9].
Conclusion
The roadmap outlined in Reclaiming Digital Sovereignty represents an ambitious vision for transforming our digital future. Its success depends on coordinated action by governments, civil society organizations, and international bodies. By reclaiming control over our digital destinies, we can build a more democratic, equitable, and sustainable world—one where technology truly serves people and the planet.
[1] https://www.ucl.ac.uk/bartlett/public-purpose/sites/bartlett_public_purpose/files/reclaiming-digital-sovereignty.pdf
[2] https://www.tietoevry.com/siteassets/files/tech-services/tech-services-digital-sovereignty-whitepaper-v1-2023.pdf
[3] https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/LSB/LSB10889
[4] https://openfuture.pubpub.org/pub/public-digital-infra-fund-whitepaper/release/2
[5] https://pluralpolicy.com/blog/big-tech-regulations/
[6] https://therepublicjournal.com/journal/the-rise-of-tech-enabled-states/
[7] https://www.weforum.org/stories/2025/01/europe-digital-sovereignty/
[8] https://www.ideology-theory-practice.org/blog/technology-and-internationalism
[9] https://www.humanrights.dk/files/media/document/Tech-giants.pdf
