Technological Sovereignty is national policies asserting domestic capability + decision-making over AI infrastructure: compute on shore, domestic foundation models, talent retention, export-control reciprocity. Specifically NOT 'sovereign AI' (which focuses on deployment restrictions) — sovereignty here is about productive capacity. Across 26 tracked AI-governance instruments, 3 address this topic explicitly, 6 via general principles, and 17 are silent.
Definition and scope
National policies asserting domestic capability + decision-making over AI infrastructure: compute on shore, domestic foundation models, talent retention, export-control reciprocity. Specifically NOT 'sovereign AI' (which focuses on deployment restrictions) — sovereignty here is about productive capacity.
The cross-jurisdiction picture below shows how each of 26 tracked instruments treats this topic. The patterns vary substantially — and 17 regimes are silent, leaving gaps that future policy work could address.
Historical primacy & cross-jurisdiction tension
First addressed by UK Pro-Innovation Approach to AI Regulation (White Paper) on (implicit). Subsequent regimes have either codified, diverged from, or remained silent on this baseline.
- Forum-shoppingExecutive Order 14110 on Safe, Secure, Trustworthy AI↔Executive Order 14179 — Removing Barriers to American Leadership in AI
- Forum-shoppingInterim Measures for Generative AI Service Management↔OECD AI Principles (Recommendation)
- Forum-shoppingAfrican Union Continental AI Strategy↔Council of Europe Framework Convention on AI
Cross-jurisdiction coverage
Silent regimes — gap signal
Instruments that do not address Technological Sovereignty — candidates for future policy work.
- Executive Order 14179 — Removing Barriers to American Leadership in AIUS
- OECD AI Principles (Recommendation)OECD
- Council of Europe Framework Convention on AIcouncil_of_europe
- NIST AI Risk Management FrameworkUS
- Bletchley Declaration on AI Safetyglobal
- Seoul Declaration on Safe, Innovative and Inclusive AIglobal
- NIST AI RMF Generative AI ProfileUS
- California SB-1047: Safe and Secure Innovation for Frontier AI Models ActUS
- India Digital Personal Data Protection Act + AI Advisory (MEITY)IN
- Brazil AI Bill (PL 2338/2023)BR
- Anthropic Responsible Scaling Policy (RSP) v2US
- OpenAI Preparedness FrameworkUS
- Google DeepMind Frontier Safety FrameworkUS
- Meta Frontier AI FrameworkUS
- UK-US AI Safety Institute Memorandum of Understandingglobal
- White House Voluntary AI CommitmentsUS
- Japan METI AI Guidelines for BusinessJP
Related topics
Topics with similar coverage patterns across the tracked instruments.
References
- EU-AIA-2024: Recitals 1-5 + EU competence framing; AI Office establishes EU capacity
- US-EO-14110: §4.8 + CHIPS Act overlap (BIS export controls, domestic compute)
- UK-WHITEPAPER-2023: Sovereign-capability framing in UK AI Action Plan (2025) — not in 2023 white paper
- CN-GENAI-2023: Art. 4 + national-strategy alignment; domestic-AI doctrine explicit
- G7-HIROSHIMA: Adoption-by-developer framing; G7 carries implicit sovereignty assumptions
- UN-RES-2024: Calls for bridging digital divides — adjacent to but not sovereignty
- ASEAN-AI-GUIDE-2024: Guide framing emphasises ASEAN-bloc capacity-building over external dependency
- AU-AI-STRATEGY-2024: AU Strategy §4 (continental compute + data infrastructure + skill-formation)
- SG-MODEL-AI-2024: AI Verify Foundation positions Singapore as an interoperable AI-assurance hub
Take this further — sign up free
Save, compare, or get alerts when Technological Sovereignty changes. Policy Window is the analyst workbench layered on top of this wiki — free for researchers, civil society, and verified policymakers.
9 instruments tracked.