Artificial Intelligence is no longer a futuristic promise. It is already reshaping how economies function, how states govern, and how societies distribute power. From auto-mated hiring systems to predictive policing, from gene-rative content tools to AI-assisted diagnostics, the tech-nology is quietly embedding itself into everyday life.
The central question confronting the world today is not whether AI will transform society, it already is. The real question is far more consequential: will AI democratize opportunity, or will it deepen inequality, between nations, within societies, and across generations?
For Pakistan and much of the Global South, this is not a theoretical debate. It is a matter of economic resilience, social justice, and political sovereignty.
The Promise: AI as a Tool for Democratization
Advocates of AI argue that it could become the great equalizer, particularly for countries that have historically struggled with limited infrastructure and institutional capacity.
AI-driven tools can lower barriers in education by offering personalized learning, real-time translation, and remote access to quality instruction. In healthcare, AI-assisteddiagnostics promise early detection and decision support in systems facing acute shortages of doctors and specialists. In agriculture, machine-learning models can help predict weather patterns, manage water scarcity, and improve crop yields, critical for climate-vulnerable countries like Pakistan.
This optimism aligns with the idea of technological “leapfrogging,” frequently cited in development discourse. AI, in theory, allows countries to bypass stages of industrial development that took richer nations decades to achieve.
Yet global evidence suggests that technology alone does not deliver equality.
Technology Mirrors Power, It Does Not Neutralize It
The United Nations Development Programme makes this point explicit in its flagship Human Development Report 2023/24: “Breaking the Gridlock: Reimagining Cooperation in a Polarized World.” The report warns that frontier technologies such as AI are likely to widen gaps between and within countries unless deliberate governance mechanisms are put in place.
AI disproportionately benefits countries with advanced digital infrastructure, skilled workforces, reliable electricity, and strong regulatory institutions. Those without these foundations risk becoming dependent users of systems designed elsewhere.
Pakistan sits at this fault line. While it has a growing tech sector and a young population, digital access remains uneven, AI governance frameworks are underdeveloped, and public sector readiness is limited. Without strategic intervention, AI risks reinforcing long-standing structural inequalities rather than correcting them.
Data Colonialism: The New Extractive Economy
One of the most critical insights emerging from global research is the concept of data colonialism, the idea that data has become the new raw material extracted from developing societies.
The World Development Report 2021: “Data for Better Lives” by the World Bank highlights how countries with weak data governance often provide vast quantities of data without retaining control over its economic value.
Pakistan generates enormous volumes of data through biometric identification systems, mobile connectivity, social media use, and informal digital labor. Yet ownership, processing power, and intellectual property rights largely reside outside the country. This mirrors older extractive economic models, where raw resources flowed outward while value accumulation occurred elsewhere.
Without data sovereignty frameworks, Pakistan risks becoming a data supplier rather than a digital innovator.
Jobs: The Real Risk Is Polarization, Not Elimination
Public discourse often frames AI as a job-destroyer. Global evidence suggests a more nuanced reality. The International Labour Organization’s report “Generative AI and Jobs: A Global Analysis” finds that AI is more likely to reshape and polarize work than eliminate it entirely. High-skill workers gain productivity and income, while low-skill and routine workers, who dominate labor markets
in countries like Pakistan, face displacement without adequate reskilling pathways.
This risk is compounded in economies with large informal sectors and weak social protection systems. AI-driven efficiency gains may increase overall output while simultaneously widening income inequality.
Bias in Code, Bias in Society
AI systems inherit the biases embedded in their training data. Academic research and policy analysis repeatedly show that algorithmic systems often disadvantage women, ethnic minorities, linguistic communities, and low-income groups.
This concern is echoed in UNESCO’s “Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence,” which warns that unregulated AI can reinforce discrimination, erode human rights, and undermine social cohesion—particularly in developing countries with fragile institutions. In Pakistan, where gender disparities and rural-urban divides are deeply entrenched, biased AI systems in hiring, credit scoring, welfare targeting, or policing could institutionalize exclusion under the guise of technological efficiency.
AI, Governance, and the Risk of Surveillance
AI is increasingly used in governance to improve efficien-cy, detect fraud, and manage public services. When deployed responsibly, such tools can strengthen transpa-rency and service delivery. However, the Brookings Institution’s policy paper “AI in the Global South: Oppor-tunities and Challenges Toward Inclusive Governance” cautions that in countries with weak accountability mech-anisms, AI can just as easily expand surveillance, profiling, and state control. For Pakistan, this dual-use nature of AI presents a critical governance challenge. Without clear legal and ethical safeguards, AI could centralize power rather than empower citizens.
Who Sets the Rules of AI?
A recurring concern across global reports is the marginal role of developing countries in shaping AI governance.
The World Trade Organization, in its discussions on AI, trade, and inequality, has highlighted how digital standards and AI-related trade rules are increasingly shaped by advanced economies. Developing countries often lack the leverage to influence these frameworks, yet are expected to comply with them.
This imbalance matters. Rules written without Global South perspectives risk ignoring local realities, cultural contexts, and development priorities.
Can AI Still Democratize Opportunity?
Despite these risks, global research does not suggest that inequality is inevitable.
The Center for Global Development’s analysis “Three Reasons Why AI May Widen Global Inequality” also ma-kes an implicit counter-argument: policy choices matter.
Where governments invest in education, digital literacy, open-source tools, and public-interest AI, technology can expand access rather than restrict it.
For Pakistan, democratization would require:
• Integrating AI literacy into education and workforce training
• Developing data protection and data ownership laws
• Supporting local AI startups and research institutions
• Using AI strategically in health, education, agriculture, and climate resilience
AI must be treated as a public policy issue, not merely a private sector opportunity.
A Choice, Not a Technological Fate
The global evidence is clear. AI will not automatically democratize opportunity. Left to market forces alone, it is more likely to concentrate power, wealth, and decision-making in the hands of those who already possess them.
As the OECD report “AI and the Future of Work” emphasizes, inequality is not an accidental by-product of AI, it is a foreseeable outcome unless actively countered.
For Pakistan and the broader Global South, the stakes are profound. AI can either widen historic fractures or beco-me a tool for inclusive growth, dignity, and resilience.
The future of AI is not written in code alone. It will be written in policy choices, ethical frameworks, and political will.
The question is no longer whether AI will change the world. It is who that change will serve.
