This review examines the legal, voluntary, and technical mechanisms that govern the ownership of nonpersonal agricultural data generated by IoT-enabled farm machinery, sensors, and related systems. Given that this data is not subject to personal data protection legislation such as General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), its governance presents distinct challenges requiring alternative governance approaches. Drawing on 63 peer-reviewed studies published over the last decade, this review proposes an integrated conceptual framework comprising legal enforcement, voluntary governance, and technical enforcement mechanisms. A distinctive contribution of the study is to show that data ownership in agriculture becomes meaningful at the moment of data sharing, where rights claims are made visible, contested, or constrained, and that these three governance pathways must be understood jointly rather than in isolation. The analysis demonstrates that although farmers generate vast quantities of nonpersonal data, no existing legal framework explicitly grants them ownership, leaving ownership to be ambiguously allocated or de facto transferred through contracts in ways that limit their ability to contest access or downstream use. Technical mechanisms promise automated enforcement and accountability but risk codifying existing power asymmetries when the encoded rules reflect opaque or exclusionary terms. We argue for a shift from “ownership” to “data sovereignty” understood as the sustained capacity to define, monitor, and revoke conditions of data use. Achieving this requires three interlinked pillars: enforceable baseline access and use rights for farmers, accessible and preferably open-source technical infrastructure, and participatory governance arrangements.

Governments across the world are leveraging artificial intelligence (AI) to render services to citizens. Emerging economies are not left behind in this transformation but remain a gaping distance behind in their integration into public-sector service delivery compared to the private sector. To ensure the effective integration of AI services by government agencies to serve citizens, it is necessary to understand the constellation of factors driving user adoption of AI. Therefore, this study answers the question: how can government-initiated AI services be successfully accepted by citizens? Leveraging non-probability sampling, a snowball sample of 245 tertiary student-workers from across Ghana was surveyed to solicit their knowledge, attitudes, readiness, and use intentions towards AI-enabled government services. The data were analysed using FsQCA and complemented by PLS-SEM to confirm the findings. The findings reveal four unique configurations, summarised into two broad groups; AI enthusiasts and AI sceptics that drive AI adoption in government services. Positive readiness factors, such as knowledge of AI and optimism towards AI, characterise AI enthusiasts. In contrast, those described as AI sceptics still adopt government AI services despite their reservations and general distrust. AI sceptics are a delicate group that sit at the boundary between adoption and rejection, requiring special attention and strategies to orient them towards adoption. The study recommends effective education and trust-building strategies to foster AI adoption in government services. The findings are essential for driving the efficient implementation of AI-enabled services among working-class citizens in emerging economies.

Narratives shape public perceptions and policymaking around emerging technologies like quantum technologies (QTs), yet what narratives develop across different societal domains remains underexplored. This study analyzes narratives about QTs in 36 government documents, 163 business reports, and 2023 media articles published over the past 23 years, using a mixed-methods approach that combines topic modeling with qualitative thematic analysis. We find that the dystopian or utopian extremes associated with technologies such as artificial intelligence are largely absent from discourse about QTs. Media coverage tends to cover a broad range of topics, while business and government narratives emphasize technical milestones, economic competitiveness, and national security, frequently at the expense of questions about ethics, equity, and accessibility. We discuss the implications of this focus, particularly the risk that an emphasis on zero-sum geopolitical competition could foster a more closed and fragmented innovation ecosystem.