Who Gets to Shape AI? Why Latin American Voices Matter in the AI Revolution
Artificial intelligence is becoming one of the defining technological transformations of our generation. We talk about computing power, data centres, fibre networks, algorithms, automation, and the economic opportunities AI could create.
But behind the technology sits a more fundamental question: who gets to shape it?
United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres recently warned that the question is no longer whether AI will transform our world, but whether “we will govern this transformation together – or let it govern us”.
Putting people at the centre of AI raises another question: whose perspectives are represented when these technologies are designed, trained, governed, and deployed?
AI is Not Culturally Neutral
Artificial intelligence does not develop independently of society. Humans decide which problems deserve attention, what becomes training data, which languages receive investment, what constitutes acceptable behaviour, and ultimately what technological success looks like.
UNESCO’s Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence identifies diversity and inclusiveness as core values for AI development. It also warns that AI can reproduce and amplify existing biases, potentially affecting human rights and equality.
Research demonstrates why this matters. In their Gender Shades study, Joy Buolamwini and Timnit Gebru identified significant disparities in commercial gender-classification systems. The systems they examined had error rates of up to 34.7 per cent for darker-skinned women, compared with 0.8 per cent for lighter-skinned men.
Their findings illustrate that technology designed to appear neutral can still reflect social biases.
Different experiences also produce different questions. A native English speaker may not immediately recognise limitations experienced by someone interacting with technology in Spanish, Portuguese, or an Indigenous language. A development team without people with disabilities may overlook barriers immediately apparent to those who experience them.
Representation is not simply a diversity objective; it can also influence the quality of technology.
Latin America Cannot Simply Consume the AI Revolution
This question is particularly important for Latin America.
The consequences of AI will be global, but its development is not equally distributed. UNESCO has warned that AI development is concentrated among a relatively small number of countries and companies, whose teams may notreflect the cultural diversity of the world their technologies will affect.
Latin American scholar Paola Ricaurte examines these questions of knowledge and power. In her work on feminist AI governance, Ricaurte asks how governance can become more democratic, participatory, and responsive to communities that have historically held less influence over technological development.
Latin America businesses will integrate AI,, governments will regulate it, universities will research it, and future generations will grow up interacting with it.
But we should not accept a future in which the region predominantly consumes technologies designed elsewhere.
For Latin Americans already working in the global technology sector, this creates both an opportunity and a responsibility.
As a Salvadoran working in Australia’s technology and connectivity sector, I increasingly see geographical distance from Latin America as a reason to bring my cultural perspective into professional conversations, rather than separate it from my work.
Latin American engineers, researchers, entrepreneurs, academics, communicators, policymakers, and executives working around the world cannot represent the region’s enormous diversity on their own.. But we can help ensure Latin America is not absent from the conversation.
We can ask whether supposedly global technologies account for societies beyond their primary markets and whether Spanish, Portuguese, Indigenous languages, and culturally specific datasets receive sufficient consideration.
The Latin American diaspora can help connect technology developers with communities that deserve a greater say in how these technologies evolve.
Representation Must Go Further
Latin American representation alone is not enough.
There is no single Latin American experience. The region is diverse in its racial, ethnic, cultural, linguistic, socioeconomic, gender, and sexual identities.
Safiya Umoja Noble’s Algorithms of Oppression examines how digital systems can reproduce racial and gender inequalities, while Kate Crawford’s Atlas of AI explores the wider political, economic, environmental, and social structures underpinning AI..
Meaningful participation must include women, LGBTQ+ people, Indigenous Peoples, Afro-Latin communities, people with disabilities, migrants, and people from different socioeconomic and linguistic backgrounds.
No single person can speak for an entire community, and no small,relatively homogeneous group should be expected to speak for humanity.
A Seat at the Table
For Latin Americans working in the global technology sector, being in the room is only the beginning. We need to speak, ask difficult questions, bring our cultural experiences into professional conversations, and create opportunities for others to participate.
If artificial intelligence is to serve humanity, people from all backgrounds must have a seat at the table where its future is being shaped.
BIO: Danis Cruz is a Strategic Communications and Engagement Specialist, works professionally in the technology and connectivity sector at Senko Advance Components Inc and serves as Director of Communications at the Australia–Latin America Emerging Leaders Dialogue. Website: daniscruz.weebly.com
Content Disclaimer
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views or opinions of the Australia Latam Emerging Leaders Dialogue or his employer.