Why Australia Should Treat Population Data as a Sovereign Resource
- Gov+AI
- Aug 15
- 2 min read
In Australia, mineral resources are considered sovereign assets, with royalties paid by companies that extract them. In the digital age, population-scale data has become just as valuable—especially when analysed by artificial intelligence (AI)—yet there is no equivalent mechanism to ensure Australians benefit when that data is monetised.
Population data should be treated as a sovereign resource because it is a valuable national asset which is being used by large companies to generate substantial economic returns. Just as countries benefit financially from natural resources, treating population data as an owned, monetisable asset allows its economic value to be realised by companies and governments.
Large AI platforms use aggregated personal data to predict behaviour, tailor advertising, and maximise engagement, generating substantial private profit. In 2024, Facebook (Meta), Google (Alphabet), Amazon, and Netflixs had a combined revenue of over $US1.5 trillion.[1] Tech led companies such as these have been identified as playing a central role in the growing wealth gap in our society - where extreme wealth is concentrated among a few companies and billionaires who gather up our data, organize it and turn out products like perfectly targeted ads.[2]
While AI presents many opportunities and benefits to society, it is also is responsible for harms, most of which governments are left to fund the response or mitigations services for. For example, AI-driven content algorithms can promote body image issues, especially among young people, contributing to eating disorders that put a high demand and cost on Australia’s health system. AI is increasingly used to generate fake sexual images, leading to more harm, and consequently more reports and police investigations. Generative AI can amplify extremist propaganda, making radicalised recruitment faster and harder to detect. Intelligence agencies report rising risks, requiring greater investment in counter-radicalisation programs and online monitoring. AI automation is predicted to replace millions of tasks, while governments will be forced to subsidise retraining and provide welfare support.
Designating population data as a sovereign resource would allow a data mining royalty—a levy on large scale companies extracting and monetising Australian population data. The funds could directly support the public services now burdened by AI’s impact: mental health programs, police resources, national security, and workforce transition.
Without targeted revenue capture, Australians bear the social and economic costs of AI’s growth while corporations retain the profits. Implementing a data mining royalty would align digital commerce with the principles applied to the resources sector: entities that derive profit from assets collectively owned by Australians should contribute an equitable share to the public good.
