Decentralised Agentic Governance: A Methodology for Community-Owned Linguistic Datasets and Knowledge Synthesis

Authors

  • Vadym Riznyk Independent Researcher, Flensburg, Germany

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.23726/cij.2026.1829

Keywords:

Quadratic Voting, Agentic Governance, Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAO), Linguistic Commons, Knowledge Hypergraphs, AI Ethics

Abstract

The rapid expansion of Large Language Models (LLMs) has intensified concerns regarding centralised data extraction and the erosion of linguistic sovereignty. Current industrial paradigms largely treat language as a raw resource, harvested at scale with limited regard for cultural context or community agency. This paper proposes a methodological shift from passive data extraction to active knowledge co-creation through a triadic framework integrating human contributors, autonomous AI agents, and decentralised governance mechanisms. By combining Agentic Scaffolding — an AI-assisted interaction layer that guides rather than replaces human contributors — with DAO-based validation, the framework enables communities to collectively produce, validate, and govern high-fidelity linguistic data. The resulting system establishes the foundation for a community-owned Linguistic Commons designed to support future integration with advanced knowledge structures such as Knowledge Hypergraphs while preserving cultural integrity, transparency, and community sovereignty.

References

Bender, E. M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A., & Shmitchell, S. (2021). On the dangers of stochastic parrots: Can language models be too big? In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 610–623). ACM.

Berge, C. (1989). Hypergraphs: Combinatorics of finite sets. North-Holland.

Buterin, V., Hitzig, Z., & Weyl, E. G. (2019). Liberal Radicalism: A Flexible Design For Philanthropic Matching Funds. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3243656

Carroll, S. R., Garba, I., Figueroa-Rodríguez, O. L., et al. (2020). The CARE Principles for Indigenous Data Governance. Data Science Journal, 19(1): 43.

Couldry, N., & Mejias, U. A. (2019). Data colonialism: Rethinking big data’s relation to the contemporary subject. Television & New Media, 20(4): 336–349.

Delacroix, S., & Lawrence, N. D. (2019). Bottom-up data trusts: Disturbing the “one size fits all” approach to data governance. International Data Privacy Law, 9(4): 236–252.

Feigenbaum, E. A. (1977). The art of artificial intelligence. In Proceedings of IJCAI-77 (pp. 1014–1029).

Jobin, A., Ienca, M., & Vayena, E. (2019). The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1: 389–399.

Lalley, S. P., & Weyl, E. G. (2018). Quadratic voting. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2003531

Mozilla Foundation. (2019). Common Voice: A citizen-powered voice dataset. Retrieved from https://commonvoice.mozilla.org

Nekoto, W., Marivate, V., Matsila, T., et al. (2020). Participatory research for low-resourced machine translation: A case study in African languages. Findings of EMNLP 2020, 2144–2160.

Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2): 89–100.

Published

2026-09-16

How to Cite

Riznyk, V. (2026). Decentralised Agentic Governance: A Methodology for Community-Owned Linguistic Datasets and Knowledge Synthesis. CERN IdeaSquare Journal of Experimental Innovation, 10(2), 177–185. https://doi.org/10.23726/cij.2026.1829

Issue

Section

Part 3: Co-Creating with Machines

Categories