Research on AI governance and digital sovereignty cited in a House of Commons Library briefing for policymakers.
Research from the Bennett School of Public Policy is helping inform parliamentary debate on digital sovereignty. Work by Bennett researchers is cited in a House of Commons Library research briefing published on 6 March 2026, which supports policymakers in both the House of Commons and the House of Lords.
The briefing draws on research exploring how governments can meaningfully exercise control over digital technologies, highlighting analysis on the limits of simple “access” to AI systems and on the evolving approach to digital sovereignty within the European Union.
The first piece of evidence relates to debates around digital sovereignty and ‘big tech’. The briefing looks at how to achieve digital sovereignty where views differ greatly because there is no agreement on what digital sovereignty looks like or what its key outcomes should be. It states that Bennett academics caution against seeing access in binary terms and quotes research by Dr Aleksei Turobov that simply having access to AI systems isn’t enough for a government to truly be in control. If a government can’t inspect how the AI works, challenge the rules it operates under, or force systems to work together, then it doesn’t really have power over it. That situation makes the government dependent and vulnerable on whoever built or controls the AI.
“Academics at Cambridge University’s Bennett School of Public Policy caution against seeing access in binary terms: The risk is that access without enforcement power creates structural vulnerability: a government that cannot audit the algorithms managing its energy grids, contest the terms governing its healthcare data, or require interoperability across public services has not acquired sovereignty through AI.”
Related work by Turobov, Carrapico and Farrand in Governance (2026) shows that EU digital sovereignty works as an “umbrella concept” – a deliberately broad idea – the Commission, Council and Parliament each use it to address different challenges, held together by a shared grounding in data protection. That common anchor, they argue, is what turned a contested political slogan into an accepted part of the EU’s governing.
The second reference features in the section on digital sovereignty and how the European Union is actively investing in technologies, infrastructure, and policy to reduce dependence on foreign tech companies and strengthen digital sovereignty, while recognising that full independence from global tech ecosystems is neither practical nor necessary. It links to work by affiliated researcher Tanya Filer and co-author Paolo Turrini that says Europe must move beyond equating digital sovereignty with technological control and instead engage it as a lever for regional resilience and growth rooted in integrated digital, energy, and defence innovation.
Together, these references demonstrate how Bennett School research is helping shape evidence-based discussion within the UK Parliament on the governance of emerging digital technologies.
The views and opinions expressed in this post are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the Bennett Institute for Public Policy.
