Cited by 26Ethics and Social Impacts of AIDecolonial Thought and EpistemologiesAfrican cultural and philosophical studies

Decolonial AI as Disenclosure

Open access
Mollema, Warmhold Jan Thomas·2024·Open Journal of Social Sciences

Abstract

The development and deployment of machine learning and artificial intelligence (AI) engender “AI colonialism”, a term that conceptually overlaps with “data colonialism”, as a form of injustice. AI colonialism is in need of decolonization for three reasons. Politically, because it enforces digital capitalism’s hegemony. Ecologically, as it negatively impacts the environment and intensifies the extraction of natural resources and consumption of energy. Epistemically, since the social systems within which AI is embedded reinforce Western universalism by imposing Western colonial values on the global South when these manifest in the digital realm is a form of digital capitalism. These reasons require a new conceptualization of AI decolonization. First this paper draws from the historical debates on the concepts of colonialism and decolonization. Secondly it retrieves Achille Mbembe’s notion of decolonization as disenclosure to argue that the decolonization of AI will have to be the abolishment of political, ecological and epistemic borders erected and reinforced in the phases of its design, production, development of AI in the West and drawing from the knowledge from the global South. In conclusion, it is discussed how conceiving of decolonial AI as form of disenclosure opens up new ways to think about and intervene in colonial instantiations of AI development and deployment, in order to empower “the wretched of AI”, re-ecologise the unsustainable ecologies AI depends on and to counter the colonial power structures unreflective AI deployment risks to reinforce.

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 · 10.4236/jss.2024.122032

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • Decolonial work begins with 'disenclosure', the process of unmaking the epistemic and material structures that allow Indigenous knowledge to be extracted in the name of openness.

    “As Mollema (2024b) suggests, decolonial work begins with “disenclosure,” which is the process of unmaking the epistemic and material structures that allow Indigenous knowledge to be extracted in the name of openness.”

    From Preventing AI extractivism: the case for braiding indigenous data justice with ABS for stronger AI data governance (2026) · cites this paper as Mollema (2024b)

    Section 5, “Decolonization as Disenclosure” (page unavailable), defines disenclosure as bringing down colonial barriers in land, body, and mind. Section 7.3, “Epistemic Disenclosure of AI” (page unavailable), extends this to barriers to non-dominated epistemological access. The paper does not describe disenclosure specifically as preventing the extraction of Indigenous knowledge in the name of openness; that part of the claim is unsupported. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 44 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. wbiee763 · DOI
  2. Couldry, N., & Mejias, U. A. (2019). The Costs of Connection: How Data Is Colonizing Human Life and Appropriating it for Capitalism. Stanford University Press. https://www.sup.org/books/title/?id=28816
  3. Fanon, F. (1963). The Wretched of the Earth (C. Farrington, Trans.). Grove Press.
  4. Fanon, F. (2008). Black Skin, White Masks (C. L. Markmann, Trans.). Pluto Press.
  5. W. J. T. Mollema DOI: 10.4236/jss.2024.122032 602 Open Journal of Social Sciences
  6. Latour, B. (2018). Down to Earth: Politics in the Climatic Regime (C. Porter, Trans.). Pol- ity Press. http://www.bruno-latour.fr/node/754?ref=gaian.systems
  7. Mills, C. W. (1998). Blackness Visible: Essays on Philosophy and Race. Cornell University Press. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7591/j.ctt1tm7j79 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mollema, W. J. T.
Affiliations
Utrecht University (NL)
Corresponding author
Mollema, Warmhold Jan Thomas
Venue
Open Journal of Social Sciences
Published
2024
Volume
12
Issue
02
Pages
574-603
ISSN
  • 2327-5952 (ISSN-L)
  • 2327-5960
OpenAlex
W4392249698
Cited by
26
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 3
FWCI
10.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Open Journal of Social Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Decolonial Thought and Epistemologies
  • Social Sciences › Education › African cultural and philosophical studies
Keywords
decolonial AI, data colonialism, Achille Mbembe, decolonization, digital capitalism, Western universalism, Global South, energy consumption, resource extraction, AI ethics

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