Credible Sovereignty: Operationalizing AI Governance Across Infrastructure, Data, and Models: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Claims of AI sovereignty are increasingly invoked but operational control remains uneven. Claims to control are made through national models, sovereign clouds, data localization mandates, and procurement rules; however, whether such claims translate into demonstrable control over how AI systems are run, inspected, and contested remains poorly understood. This paper introduces credible sovereignty, the gap between declared and demonstrable control in deployment, as a conceptual lens for analyzing AI governance to examine how this gap is opened and closed across infrastructure, data, and model supply chains. Using a PRISMA-guided social-science corpus and machine learning-based BERTopic modeling, validated through topic diversity and topic separation diagnostics and triangulated through close reading, the analysis identifies four governance logics through which sovereignty is contested: data infrastructure and legitimacy frameworks; techno-bloc diplomacy and infrastructure politics; European regulatory sovereignty; and community-driven sovereignty in the Global South. Across these logics, sovereignty is enacted less through national capabilities than through proxy mechanisms—certification regimes, procurement clauses, cloud governance, and deployment architectures—each carrying trade-offs between autonomy, dependence, and accountability. Rereading the corpus through an Antecedents–Decisions–Outcomes lens yields a testable research agenda: antecedents that push actors toward sovereignty seeking; design and governance choices that translate ambition into implementation; and outcomes—resilience, inclusion, accountability—against which sovereign AI programs should be assessed. This paper reframes sovereignty as a layered operational capability rather than a discursive claim and links computational synthesis to a normative construct that applies across jurisdictions and scales.