Tribal sovereignty in the era of artificial intelligence is a growing concern for the 574 federally recognized tribes in the United States, which also wrestle with access to digital technology. About 20 percent of Indian Country residents do not have access to the Web, compounding challenges as tribes find their way in an A.I. dominated future where data is the new soil on which sovereign rights are claimed.
As artificial intelligence technologies proliferate, tribal nations face some particular challenges to their data sovereignty — the right of tribes to govern data that come from within their borders. In addition, AI could provide more visibility to tribal communities but also risks distributing misinformation and destabilizing tribal ownership of cultural knowledge. But indigenous data sovereignty demands that tribal nations retain control over data originating in their communities, and yet many AI systems extract and use this data without adequate consultation or consent.
While AI poses substantial threats to tribal self-governance, it also presents hopeful prospects. Research has consistently demonstrated that when tribes are engaged in self-governance contracts and compacts, there are better public management outcomes than when the federal government is involved, and AI can strengthen tribal institutions 21. Furthermore, AI language technology can help preserve languages, personal education systems, and mitigate bias in current AI systems. At the end of the day, tribal leaders aren’t ringing such alarms to call for an outright rejection of the tech, but demanding that AI development respect Indigenous sovereignty and that tribal nations be included in the development of policies that affect their communities.
How does AI encroach on tribal data sovereignty?
Indigenous data sovereignty represents a fundamental right increasingly threatened by artificial intelligence systems. This concept defines the inherent rights of tribal nations to control data about their communities, peoples, lands, and resources—regardless of who possesses it [1]. Data for indigenous peoples encompasses more than just numbers and includes stories, ceremonies, language, and medicinal knowledge often held for thousands of years [2].
“Data is the equivalent of our land and our natural resources,” says Karaitiana Taiuru, a Maori ethicist. “If Indigenous peoples don’t control their own data, they will continue to be colonized in this information age” [3]. This sovereignty is rooted in the inherent right of tribes to govern their people, lands, and resources as recognized in the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples [4].
AI companies freely harvest and wield tribal data without proper consent or compensation. These systems learn by consuming large volumes of data, often appropriating Indigenous languages, traditional knowledge, and oral histories without consent [1]. A striking case is represented by Lionbridge, a tech company which hired Indigenous speakers in order to train AI language models, with ambiguous or absent agreements concerning data ownership [5]. Furthermore, AI art has the potential to be mass produced without Indigenous collaboration or control [6].
Therefore, even native artists such as Tufan Chakma remain vulnerable to copyright violation. “Simply too many times to face that regret,” he said, adding that all he could do in return was write Facebook posts or tracking down the people who misappropriated his work directly [6].
The dangers go beyond economic ruin. AI technologies also propagate false information about Indigenous people [7]. They can misunderstand or actively neglect Indigenous cultures, languages and regions — and spread yet more stereotypes [1]. However, as noted by Anishinaabe Robotics Inventor Danielle Boyer, these processes ‘threaten to transform/erase our understanding rather than save it’ [8].
This kind of digital extractivism mirrors the earlier modes of exploitation. “It’s like those extractive histories of the past just keep repeating themselves. AI and our data are just another example of that,” said Rusty Pickens, a Chickasaw Nation member [8].
Why Tribal Leaders Want to Sit in the AI Policy Driver’s Seat
“I don’t believe the world will tolerate us not having thought through safety and the risks and the potential downsides of this.” Equally, she added, “I don’t think the world will come up pretty hard on us as individuals and as a sector if we don’t look seriously at some of these implications, particularly in terms of equity and trust — those are huge issues for the world.” — Satya Nadella, Microsoft CEO
On paper, the federal government recognizes tribal sovereignty, but in reality, native communities are noticeably absent from crucial AI policy conversations. This digital marginalization is only the most recent episode in a long history of oppression.
Lack of tribal consultation in federal AI frameworks
Federal AI frameworks are developed even as tribes have legal obligations for government-to-government consultation as sovereign entities [9], creating barriers to tribal input. The United States has a well-defined legal relationship with American Indian tribes providing them comparable rights to other nations, including consultation [9]. However, within IT the reality for some indigenous communities is that they have no direct control over technology affecting their resources, cultural objects and sacred places [10].
“Indigenous people have constantly warned users of AI to tread carefully even as it relentlessly goes berserk in the battlegrounds of knowledge generation” as stated in one advocacy report [11]. But those voices are often not heard in policy making.
Federally-recognized tribes commonly retain interests in activities that extend beyond their present reservation boundary and into ancestral lands [9]. Consultation should consequently not be circumscribed by geography particularly in light of AI’s transnational dimension.
Calls for Indigenous-led AI regulation
Tribal elders are calling for inclusion in AI governance bodies. AI isn’t just a tool, Pickens further states, “AI revolves around culture and respect. It’s infrastructure. Just as with electric power, water, or the internet. It’s a human right now. Therefore our policy had to be consistent with that” [12].
Indigenous advocates specifically call for:
- Application of principles of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to the development and use of AI
- Application of OCAP(ownership, control, access, possession) for AI governance [1]
- Indigenous stewardship in developing ethical AI frameworks
“Indigenous people should not be seen as enfranchised from digital policy, only capable of benefiting from it as a side effect of their existence,” says one policy document [1]. True leadership also means structural change, giving Indigenous peoples decision-making power- not just periodic consultation [1].
Past examples of exploitation in tech and science
A history of exploitation is useful for framing contemporary tribal concerns. Biopiracy (the theft of Indigenous biological knowledge) provides a comparison to modern data expropriation [4]. Eldin notes that corporations regularly source knowledge of this nature following tribal help only to later own patents regarding it, without acknowledging any such [4].
Indigenous knowledge systems are particularly disadvantaged in patent law, which demands “novelty” and “nonobviousness” – aspects that tend to ignore hundreds of years of traditional innovation [4]. Likewise, large language model-trained AI systems functionally echo the colonial experience by reproducing dominant language heritage by repeating and elevating dominant linguistic narratives [11].
“The extractive process of AI, which relies on the ingestion of huge amounts of online text, mirrors and exacerbates colonial extractivism” as one research report observes [11]. This digital extractivism perpetuates relations of exploitation and feeds into digital colonization of vulnerable peoples [11].
For the most part, tribal leaders are not looking to block technology outright, but for ethical development that respects their sovereignty. But as Pickens counsels: “Let’s stop right now and think. This ‘move fast and break things’ mentality is completely wrong” [12].
Can AI Be Aligned to Indigenous Values and Ethics?
Ethical considerations of AI adoption in Indigenous context require frameworks built from tribal values. Recent initiatives seek to work on this crucial technology-sovereignty interface.
Status of CARE principles and AI Indigenous ethics
CARE Principles (Collective Benefit, Authority to Control, Responsibility, Ethics) were created by Indigenous data sovereignty advocates to reinforce the FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) data frameworks [13]. While CARE’s principles do not address the technical concerns of FAIR, they are focused on people and purpose, emphasizing the means through which data can advance Indigenous innovation and self-determination [14]. These principles collectively support Indigenous data as contributing to community wellbeing, embracing the jurisdiction of tribes for their data, equitable relationships with data stewards, and putting Indigenous ethics at the centre of data life-cycles [15].
How tribes are crafting their own AI frameworks
Tribes across Indian Country are increasingly developing culturally based AI governance models. The value of relationality, consent, and responsibility for land [16] was reflected in protocols for AI developed within the Indigenous AI Working Group. Then there is Te Hiku Media, a company that, in collaboration with NVIDIA, developed a better than 90% accurate te reo Māori language speech recognition capability – succeeding precisely because it was Indigenous-led [1].
The Cherokee Nation made history in August 2024 by becoming one of the first tribal nations to implement a comprehensive AI policy, establishing guidelines for responsible AI use while prioritizing the protection of the Cherokee language and culture [21]. Their policy specifically mandates that any AI applications involving the Cherokee language must receive backing and incorporation from Cherokee fluent speakers, ensuring that cultural preservation remains under Indigenous control. The tribe has established an AI governance committee to oversee all implementations and has begun cautiously deploying AI in various departments, including developing a secure, closed-source AI model trained on tribal knowledge and cultural branding to assist with communications while maintaining cultural authenticity.
Many communities today are promoting privacy preserving AI systems such as the federated learning methods where models can be trained without moving sensitive tribal data outside community borders [13]. The Cherokee Nation’s approach exemplifies this principle through their emphasis on data sovereignty and their requirement that AI tools align with Cherokee values while maintaining strict oversight by employees who understand cultural communities, language, and values.
Enforcement of ethical AI standards – “ethical AI” is often used as buzz phrase but the practical implementation of ethical codes across Artificial Intelligence is much more challenging than it seems.
The application of Indigenous ethical frameworks on the ground is extremely challenging. Existing AI governance architectures are rooted essentially in Western philosophical connotations promoting technological determinism and individualism at the expense of communal rights [3]. This mismatch causes a strain between the open data advocacy movements and camp of tribes claiming control of their knowledge [14]. The Cherokee Nation’s policy addresses this challenge directly by establishing clear prohibitions against AI use without quality review measures and creating a governance structure that ensures Cherokee people remain “at the helm” of decisions involving their language and culture, as Principal Chief Chuck Hoskin Jr. emphasized [21].
Moreover, more than 70 different ethical regulations exist in different domains, which fragment a uniform coverage of ethics [3]. Unless indigenous communities have real control over AI policy, ethical standards will continue to be hard to uphold. The Cherokee Nation’s approach demonstrates that tribal sovereignty can extend into digital realms, with their policy serving as a model for how Indigenous nations can embrace technological advancement while maintaining cultural integrity and community trust.
What Does AI Mean For Tribal Nations?
“AI is all around us, it sounds like we are in a world of God, but it still takes time for we humans to adapt. As with other technologies, AI is a two-edged sword.” — Li Qiang, premier of The State Council of the People’s Republic of China
In addition to the challenges AI poses, tribal nations throughout North America are also finding opportunities for economic growth, governance and leadership through the strategic use of technology.
AI for development: Innovation, entrepreneurialism and policy.
For most tribal businesses, AI has very real business applications already. At Skokomish Indian Tribal Enterprises, in Washington State, financial automation software has been taking over invoicing duties, slashing the margin for errors and liberating staff for higher-value work such as inventory management [8]. Similarly, the Mohegan tribe in Connecticut uses artificial intelligence to study customer behavior, to optimize promotions, and to make guest visits more enjoyable [8]. AI also assists Indigenous entrepreneurs to grow their businesses with this automatic marketing and customer engagement freeing up time to concentrate on growth strategies [17]. Kama.ai founder Brian Ritchie, envisions a wide range of potential applications for AI — from creative tools that support entrepreneurs in marketing to customer-facing solutions that can engage directly on behalf of a business. His company develops responsible AI platforms designed to help businesses communicate with their customers effectively. By delegating certain tasks to AI, he noted, entrepreneurs can free up time to focus on more strategic priorities [17].
Improving tribal governance through automation.
The benefits of AI for tribal enterprises are many and diverse. Health: In the area of healthcare, AI can help with detection of diseases, better health record keeping, and medical emergency response [18]. For tribal legal systems, AI tools simplify the process systems of research and document review just as they do that for mainstream legal systems, such as the Cherokee Nation’s Legal Agent that merges treaty law, tribal codes, and court opinions into one AI-facilitated research system [19]. In addition, AI to simplify workplace tasks, extend access to service, and lower costs through predictive analytics [18].
Training the next generation of native AI leaders
Indigenous-designed education initiatives are appearing across North America. Indigenous Pathfinders in AI, a joint initiative of Mila and Indspire fosters AI professionals from Indigenous communities via workshops, joint projects, along with paid summer experiences [6]. In this program, participants work in teams to build Artificial Intelligence for the community and to contextualize indigenous knowledge within technology [6]. Relatedly, the CIFAR- supported online Indigenous Perspectives in AI modules are now mandatory for trainees enrolled in AI programs across the Pan-Canadian AI Strategy [20]. These initiatives focus on Indigenous ways of engaging with AI development helps make sure that technology supports the needs of the community and maintains cultural values.
Conclusion
The convergence of AI and tribal sovereignty is a significant inflection point for us 574 federally recognized Tribes in the U.S. With the rapid progression of AI technologies, tribes are confronted by both the threats to their data sovereignty and the possibilities for community empowerment. The demand for Indigenous-led AI governance frameworks has never been higher.
Extractive patterns have long played to the detriment of tribal communities. Thus, the current revolution in AI without due tribal consultation reflects earlier exploitation. The unauthorized gathering of Indigenous knowledge — from languages to stories to traditional practices — represents the continuation of this distressing history. Yet, for tribal leaders, their attention is not on outright rejection of technology, but on the condition that development upholds their inherent sovereign rights.
The CARE principles provide the frame from which to begin to imagine ethical AI in Indigenous contexts. These principles are counterintuitive to Western-centric philosophies of individual rights, but they prioritize collective good and tribal data authority. Furthermore, across North America tribes are formulating their own unique culturally rooted AI governance frameworks that are informed by tradition but accommodate technology.
AI may well offer significant opportunities for tribal nations, despite numerous hurdles. There may be potential positives such as economic growth through hitting the optimization curve due to business development, better governance through administrative efficiency and educational outcomes that promote the education of the next generation of native AI leaders. Tribal entities already use AI technologies to help optimize financial transactions, enhance customer experiences and increase efficiency with the legal process.
The way forward will depend on genuine, authentic inclusion of tribal perspectives in AI policy making. Even though there may be lip service paid to the form of sovereignty used in the U.S. in federal recognition of tribes, indigenous people are still marginalized from essential technology conversations that will have a direct impact on their futures. Instead, tribal leaders are demanding structural changes that put Indigenous communities at decision-making tables, as opposed to just the occasional consultation.
The question for tribal nations, then, is not whether to engage with artificial intelligence but how to make sure that when they do, they are setting the terms. Data sovereignty is the next frontier in defense of tribal self-determination. For this reason, Indigenous insight must shape AI, mixing the thousands of years of traditional wisdom and the new technologies to develop systems which will genuinely serve all.
References
[1] – https://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/may-2025/ai-indigenous-data/
[2] – https://www.paubox.com/blog/data-sovereignty-for-tribal-nations
[3] – https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202410.2112/v2
[4] – https://ipmall.law.unh.edu/sites/default/files/hosted_resources/PLANT_PATENT_ARTICLES/biopiracy_and_indigenous_knowledges.pdf
[5] – https://www.americanbar.org/groups/international_law/resources/newsletters/artificial-intelligence-indigenous-cultural-appropriation/
[6] – https://mila.quebec/en/ai4humanity/learning/indigenous-pathfinders-in-ai
[7] – https://theconversation.com/ai-affects-everyone-including-indigenous-people-its-time-we-have-a-say-in-how-its-built-239605
[8] – https://tribalbusinessnews.com/sections/economic-development/14922-tribes-finding-practical-uses-for-ai-accounting-analytics-and-grant-writing
[9] – https://www.gsa.gov/resources/native-american-affairs/governmenttogovernment-engagement
[10] – https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/report-improving-tribal-consultation-and-tribal-involvement-jan-2017.pdf
[11] – https://www.arts.ubc.ca/news/indigenous-data-stewardship-stands-against-extractivist-ai/
[12] – https://www.ohchr.org/en/stories/2025/08/indigenous-sovereignty-ai-era
[13] – https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/20539517251349170
[14] – https://www.gida-global.org/care
[15] – https://datascience.codata.org/articles/10.5334/dsj-2020-043
[16] – https://www.culturalsurvival.org/news/indigenous-peoples-and-ai-defending-rights-shaping-future-technology
[17] – https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/adv/article-how-ai-can-transform-indigenous-entrepreneurship-and-aid-in-cultural/
[18] – https://aipi.asu.edu/blog/2025/07/tribal-sovereignty-age-ai-exploring-opportunities-and-risks-tribal-nations
[19] – https://www.forbes.com/sites/ronschmelzer/2025/08/17/cherokee-nation-shows-how-ai-governance-can-be-sovereign/
[20] – https://cifar.ca/cifarnews/2024/06/18/indigenous-perspectives-in-ai/
