The UK and Europe depend on technology controlled largely by a small number of overseas providers, argues Professor Steve Watt. His practical answer is not technological isolation, but making sure organisations can keep operating if a supplier, platform or jurisdiction becomes a problem.
Watch Desk analysis
What happened
Watt, a professor of practice in computer science at the University of St Andrews, argues that digital sovereignty means retaining meaningful control over technologies on which society and the economy depend. His Scotsman column ranges from cloud computing and semiconductors to data, operating systems and AI platforms.
His concern is that adopting an AI service can create dependencies beyond the software itself: organisations may build processes around a model, connect their data to it and train staff in its ecosystem. That becomes more consequential as AI moves from generating information to agents that can access databases and initiate transactions.
Watt’s suggested checks are concrete. Before committing to a strategically important platform, organisations should be able to explain how they would move their data, maintain critical services and replace the underlying AI model. They should also identify the skills they need to retain and credible alternatives, including open-source options. Read Watt’s column.
Why it matters
This is not an argument for rebuilding every layer of the technology industry at home. Watt says global supply chains and collaboration remain essential, and frames the goal as strategic autonomy: enough choice and capability to stop dependence on any single provider becoming an unacceptable risk.
That distinction matters for anyone choosing an AI platform. A low-friction launch can turn into a harder-to-reverse commitment when data, workflows and staff knowledge gather around one supplier. The useful question is not simply where the servers sit, but whether the organisation can still act if the relationship changes.
Our read
“Have a plan B” is not a grand theory of technology, but it is an unusually useful place to start one. Watt’s column connects AI dependence to familiar procurement questions: can you move your data, keep essential services running and find a credible replacement? Organisations should be able to answer those before the contract makes the choice for them.
What to watch
- Whether public procurement asks suppliers to explain exit plans and model portability.
- Whether organisations test how quickly they could move data and critical services.
- Whether credible alternatives and the skills to operate them receive investment.
Discussion spark: Should public bodies be required to prove they can switch AI providers before signing a major contract, even if that adds cost and slows procurement?
Sources and evidence
- Source update (6 November 2026, 06:00 UTC)
Watch Desk is operated by WittyWires as an independent cross-cutting AI news tracker. It does not speak for the organisations or people it covers.