CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 148Decolonial Thought and EpistemologiesEthics and Social Impacts of AILatin American Cultural Politics

Artificial Intelligence in the Colonial Matrix of Power

Open access
Muldoon, James, Wu, Boxi A·2023·Philosophy & Technology
DOI 10.1007/s13347-023-00687-8
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Drawing on the analytic of the “colonial matrix of power” developed by Aníbal Quijano within the Latin American modernity/coloniality research program, this article theorises how a system of coloniality underpins the structuring logic of artificial intelligence (AI) systems. We develop a framework for critiquing the regimes of global labour exploitation and knowledge extraction that are rendered invisible through discourses of the purported universality and objectivity of AI. ​​Through bringing the political economy literature on AI production into conversation with scholarly work on decolonial AI and the modernity/coloniality research program, we advance three main arguments. First, the global economic and political power imbalances in AI production are inextricably linked to the continuities of historical colonialism, constituting the colonial supply chain of AI . Second, this is produced through an international division of digital labour that extracts value from majority world labour for the benefit of Western technology companies. Third, this perpetuates hegemonic knowledge production through Western values and knowledge that marginalises non-Western alternatives within AI’s production and limits the possibilities for decolonising AI. By locating the production of AI systems within the colonial matrix of power, we contribute to critical and decolonial literature on the legacies of colonialism in AI and the hierarchies of power and extraction that shape the development of AI today.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s13347-023-00687-8

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • ImageNet, the most used image database, is comprised of 60% Western sources images (US: 45%) and only 2.2% from China and India.

    “To illustrate, ImageNet, the most used image database, is comprised of 60% Western sources images (US: 45%) and only 2.2% from China and India [38], pp.14-15).”

    From A taxonomy of epistemic injustice in the context of AI and the case for generative hermeneutical erasure (2025) · cites this paper as [38]

    Section 6 (p. 15) reports that 45% of ImageNet images came from the US, over 60% from a selection of Western countries, and 1% and 1.2% from China and India respectively. It calls ImageNet foundational and globally utilised, but does not establish that it is the most used image database; it also says over 60%, not exactly 60%. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Hegemony resides in the implicit aspiration to universal validity present in the claim to objectivity that algorithmic knowledge asserts, which invalidates other claims to knowledge and ways of knowing.

    “As Joseph Bremer The facet of 'hegemony' resides, as Muldoon & Wu [38], pp.15-16) think, in the implicit aspiration to universal validity present in the claim to objectivity that algorithmic knowledge asserts, which invalidates other claims to knowledge and ways of knowing.”

    From A taxonomy of epistemic injustice in the context of AI and the case for generative hermeneutical erasure (2025) · cites this paper as Muldoon & Wu [38]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 86 · Cited by 148

Research works printed but not linked: 67

  1. Abraham, D. (2017). The elements of power: Gadgets, guns, and the struggle for a sustainable future in the rare metal age . Yale University Press.
  2. Adas, M. (1989). Machines as the measure of men: Science, technology, and ideologies of Western dominance . Cornell University Press.
  3. Ali, S. H. (2014). Social and environmental impact of the rare earth industries. Resources, 3 (1), 123-134. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ resou rces3 010123
  4. Avila, R. (2018). Digital Sovereignty or Digital Colonialism .' Sur - International Journal on Human Rights. Retrieved February 6, 2023, from https:// sur. conec tas. org/ en/ digit al- sover eignty- or- digit al- colon ialism/. Accessed 12 Nov 2023
  5. Bechmann, A., & Bowker, G. C. (2019). Unsupervised by any other name: Hidden layers of knowledge production in artificial intelligence on social media. Big Data & Society, 6 (1). https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 20539 51718 819569
  6. Bechmann, A., & Geoffrey, C. B. (2019). Unsupervised by Any Other Name: Hidden Layers of Knowledge Production in Artificial Intelligence on Social Media. Big Data & Society, 6 (1). https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 20539 51718 8195
  7. Bergman, A. S., Hendricks, L. A., Rauh, M., Wu, B., Agnew, W., Kunesch, M., Duan, I., Gabriel, I., & Isaac, W. (2023). Representation in AI Evaluations. In Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency .
  8. Bhambra, G. K. (2014). Postcolonial and decolonial dialogues. Postcolonial Studies, 17 (2), 115-121. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 13688 790. 2014. 966414
  9. Birhane, A., Isaac, W., Prabhakaran, V., Diaz, M., Elish, M. C., Gabriel, I., & Mohamed, S. (2022). Power to the people? Opportunities and challenges for participatory AI. Proceedings of the 2022 ACM conference on Equity & Access in Algorithms, Mechanisms, and Optimization, 6 , 1-8. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1145/ 35516 24. 35552 90
  10. Birhane, A., Prabhu, V. U., & Kahembwe, E. (2021). Multimodal datasets: misogyny, pornography, and malignant stereotypes . ArXiv.Retrieved August 28, 2023, from https:// arxiv. org/ abs/ 2110. 01963. Accessed 12 Nov 2023
  11. Birhane, A., Prabhu, V., Han, S., & Boddeti, V. N. (2023). On Hate Scaling Laws For Data-Swamps . ArXiv. Retrieved August 28, 2023, from https:// arxiv. org/ abs/ 2306. 13141. Accessed 12 Nov 2023
  12. Brevini, B. (2020). Black Boxes, Not Green: Mythologizing artificial intelligence and omitting the environment. Big Data & Society, 7 (2). https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 20539 51720 93514
  13. Buolamwini, J., & Gebru, T. (2018). Gender shades: Intersectional accuracy disparities in commercial gender classification. Proceedings of the 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability and Transparency, 81 , 77-91.
  14. Casilli, A. (2017). Digital labour studies go global: Toward a digital decolonial turn. International Journal of Communication, 11 , 21.
  15. Coleman, D. (2018). Digital colonialism: The 21st century scramble for Africa through the extraction and control of user data and the limitations of data protection laws note. Michigan Journal of Race & Law, 24 (2), 417-440.
  16. Coronil, F. (1997). The magical state: Nature, money, and modernity in Venezuela . University of Chicago Press. Couldry, N., & Mejias, U. A. (2019). The costs of connection: how data is colonizing human life and appropriating it for capitalism . Stanford University Press.
  17. Crawford, K. (2021). Atlas of AI: Power . Yale University Press.
  18. Cruz, C. C. (2021). Decolonizing philosophy of technology: Learning from bottom-up and top-down approaches to decolonial technical design. Philosophy & Technology, 34 (4), 1847-1881. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s13347- 021- 00489-w
  19. Dauvergne, P. (2022). Is artificial intelligence greening global supply chains? Exposing the political economy of environmental costs. Review of International Political Economy, 29 (3), 696-718. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 09692 290. 2020. 18143 81
  20. Escobar, A. (2007). Worlds and knowledges otherwise. Cultural Studies, 21 (2-3), 179-210. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 09502 38060 11625 06
  21. Fei, F., Tambe, T., Dilkina, B., & Plumptre, A. J. (2019). Artificial intelligence and conservation . Cambridge University Press.
  22. Forsythe, D. (2001). Studying those who study us: An anthropologist in the world of artificial intelligence . Stanford University Press.
  23. Fuchs, C. (2014). Digital labour and Karl Marx . Routledge.
  24. Gago, V., & Mezzadra, S. (2017). A Critique of the Extractive Operations of Capital: Toward an Expanded Concept of Extractivism. Rethinking Marxism, 29 (4), 574-591. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 08935 696. 2017. 14170 87
  25. Giuliano, R. (2020). Echoes of myth and magic in the language of artificial intelligence. AI & Society, 35 (4), 1009-1024. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s00146- 020- 00966-4
  26. Graham, M., & Dittus, M. (2022). Geographies of Digital Exclusion: Data and Inequality . Pluto Press.
  27. Grosfoguel, R. (2007). The epistemic decolonial turn. Cultural Studies, 21 (2-3), 211-223. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 09502 38060 11625 14
  28. Hao, K. (2022). A New Vision of AI for the People . MIT Technology Review . Retrieved August 29, 2022, from https:// www. techn ology review. com/ 2022/ 04/ 22/ 10503 94/ artificial- intel ligen ce- for- the- people/. Accessed 12 Nov 2023
  29. Hatton, E. (2017). Mechanisms of invisibility: Rethinking the concept of invisible work. Work, Employment & Society, 31 (2), 336-351. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 09500 17016 674894
  30. Heikkilä, M. (2022). How it feels to be sexually objectified by an AI . Technology Review. Retrieved August 27, 2023, from https:// www. techn ology review. com/ 2022/ 12/ 13/ 10648 10/ how- it- feels- tobe- sexua lly- objec tified- by- an- ai/. Accessed 12 Nov 2023
  31. Irani, L. (2019). Chasing innovation . Princeton University Press.
  32. Jasanoff, S. (2004). The idiom of co-production. In S. Jasanoff (Ed.), States of knowledge: The co-production of science and the social order (pp. 12-23). Routledge.
  33. Kaplan, A., & Haenlein, M. (2020). Rulers of the World, Unite! The challenges and opportunities of artificial intelligence. Business Horizons, 63 (1), 37-50.
  34. Kemper, J., & Kolkman, D. (2019). Transparent to whom? No algorithmic accountability without a critical audience. Information, Communication & Society, 22 (14), 2081-2096. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. bushor. 2019. 09. 003
  35. Kiggins, R. D. (2015). The political economy of rare earth elements: Rising powers and technological change . Palgrave Macmillan.
  36. Kwet, M. (2019a). Digital Colonialism: South Africa's Education Transformation in the Shadow of Silicon Valley . PhD dissertation, Rhodes University.
  37. Lugones, M. (2016). The coloniality of gender. In W. Harcourt (Ed.), The Palgrave Handbook of Gender and Development: Critical Engagements in Feminist Theory and Practice. Palgrave Macmillan UK.
  38. Maldonado-Torres, N. (2007). On the coloniality of being: Contributions to the development of a concept. Cultural Studies, 21 (2-3), 240-270. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 09502 38060 11625 48
  39. McQuillan, D. (2022). Resisting AI: an anti-fascist approach to artificial intelligence . Policy Press.
  40. Mezzadra, S., & Neilson, B. (2017). On the multiple frontiers of extraction: Excavating contemporary capitalism. Cultural Studies, 13 (2-3), 1-20. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 09502 386. 2017. 13034 25
  41. Miceli, M., & Posada, J. (2022). The data-production Dispositif. Proceedings of the ACM on HumanComputer Interaction, 6. https:// doi. org/ 10. 48550/ arXiv. 2205. 11963
  42. Mignolo, W. D. (2007). Introduction: Coloniality of power and de-colonial thinking. Cultural Studies, 21 (2-3), 155-167. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 09502 38060 11624 98
  43. Mignolo, W. D. (2011). The darker side of western modernity: Global futures . Duke University Press.
  44. Mignolo, W. D. (2012). Local histories/global designs: Coloniality, Subaltern knowledges, and border thinking . Princeton University Press.
  45. Mignolo, W. D., & Walsh, C. E. (2018). On decoloniality: Concepts, analytics . Duke University Press.
  46. Mohamed, S., Png, M.-T., & Isaac, W. (2020). Decolonial AI: Decolonial theory as sociotechnical foresight in artificial intelligence. Philosophy & Technology, 33 , 659-684. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s13347- 020- 00405-8
  47. Mumford, D. (2022). Data colonialism: Compelling and useful, but whither epistemes? Information, Communication & Society, 25 (10), 1511-1516. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 13691 18X. 2021. 19861 03
  48. Newlands, G. (2021). Lifting the curtain: Strategic visibility of human labour in AI-as-a-Service. Big Data & Society, 8 (1), 205395172110160. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 20539 51721 10160 26
  49. Noble, S. (2018). Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism . New York University Press.
  50. Pasquinelli, M., & Joler, V. (2021). The Nooscope manifested: AI as instrument of knowledge extractivism. AI & Society., 36 , 1263-1280. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s00146- 020- 01097-6
  51. Png, M.-T. (2022). At the tensions of South and North: Critical roles of global south stakeholders in AI governance. Proceedings of the 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability and Transparency . https:// doi. org/ 10. 1145/ 35311 46. 35332 00
  52. Prabhu, V. U., & Birhane, A. (2020). Large image datasets: A pyrrhic win for computer vision?. arXiv . Retrieved August 27, 2023, https:// arxiv. org/ abs/ 2006. 16923. Accessed 12 Nov 2023
  53. Quijano, A. (2000). Coloniality of power and eurocentrism in Latin America. International Sociology, 15 (2), 215-232. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 02685 80900 01500 2005
  54. Quijano, A. (2007). Coloniality and modernity/rationality. Cultural Studies, 21 (2-3), 168-178. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 09502 38060 11643 53
  55. Raji, I. D., Bender, E. M., Paullada, A., Denton, E., & Hanna, A. (2021). AI and the everything in the whole wide world benchmark . arXiv. Retrieved August 28th, 2023, from arXiv:2111.15366. · arXiv
  56. Ricaurte, P. (2019). Data epistemologies, the coloniality of power, and resistance. Television & New Media, 20 (4), 350-365. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 15274 76419 831640
  57. Ricaurte, P. (2022). Ethics for the majority world: AI and the question of violence at scale. Media, Culture & Society, 44 (4), 726-745. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 01634 43722 10996 12
  58. Robbins, S., & van Wynsberghe, A. (2022). Our new artificial intelligence infrastructure: Becoming locked into an unsustainable future. Sustainability, 14 (8), 4829. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ su140 84829
  59. Schwartz, R., Dodge, J., Smith, N., & Etzioni, O. (2020). Green AI. Communications of the ACM, 63 (12), 54-63. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1145/ 33818 31
  60. Seaver, N. (2017). Algorithms as culture: Some tactics for the ethnography of algorithmic systems. Big Data & Society, 4 (2). https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 20539 51717 738104
  61. Srnicek, N. (2022). Data, compute, labor. In M. Graham & F. Ferrari (Eds.), Digital work in the planetary market. Oxford University Press.
  62. Star, S. L. (1999). The ethnography of infrastructure. American Behavioural Scientist, 43 (3), 377-391. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 00027 64992 19553 26
  63. Stephany, F., Kässi, O., Rani, U., & Lehdonvirta, V. (2021). Online Labour Index 2020: New ways to measure the world's remote freelancing market. Big Data & Society, 8 (2). https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 20539 51721 104324
  64. Strubell, E., Ganesh, A., & Mccallum, A. (2019). Energy and Policy Considerations for Deep Learning in NLP . Proceedings of the 57th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  65. Thatcher, J., O'Sullivan, D., & Mahmoudi, D. (2016). Data colonialism through accumulation by dispossession: New metaphors for daily data. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 34 (6), 990-1006.
  66. Vinuesa, R., Azizpour, H., Leite, I., Balaam, M., Dignum, V., Domisch, S., Felländer, A., Langhans, S. D., Tegmark, M., & Nerini, F. F. (2020). The role of artificial intelligence in achieving the sustainable development goals. Nature Communications, 11 (1), 233. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1038/ s41467- 019- 14108-y
  67. Westra, L., & Lawson, B. (2001). Faces of environmental racism: Confronting issues of global justice (2nd ed.). Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

Authors
Muldoon, J., & Wu, B. A.
Affiliations
University of Essex (GB)
Corresponding author
Muldoon, James
ORCID
Venue
Philosophy & Technology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2023-12
Volume
36
Issue
4
ISSN
  • 2210-5433 (ISSN-L)
  • 2210-5441
DOI
10.1007/s13347-023-00687-8
OpenAlex
W4389795326
Cited by
148
References
86
Citations by year
2026: 78 · 2025: 53 · 2024: 17
FWCI
181.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Philosophy & Technology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Open Access at Essex (University of Essex) (acceptedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Decolonial Thought and Epistemologies
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Latin American Cultural Politics
Keywords
artificial intelligence, colonial matrix of power, Aníbal Quijano, coloniality, decolonial AI, digital labor, knowledge extraction, coloniality of modernity, power imbalance, non-Western knowledge

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review