This Article is sponsored by Phicus
An artificial intelligence model born in Latin America.
That is the ambition of Latam-GPT, a collaborative project that seeks to develop a language system with roots in the culture, history and diversity of the continent.
With the promise of offering an inclusive and representative approach to the region, the model has aroused expectations, but also questions. Is it really a step toward technological sovereignty or just a regional version of models controlled by global giants?
A longing for technological independence
By: Gabriel E. Levy B.
In a very short time, artificial intelligence has established itself as one of the most transformative tools of the digital age.
However, its development is dominated by corporations and governments in the United States, China and Europe, leaving Latin America in the role of consumer rather than creator.
Latam-GPT arises as a response to this reality.
Promoted by Chile’s National Center for Artificial Intelligence (Cenia) and supported by more than 30 institutions from different countries, the project aims to change the region’s relationship with AI.
It is a large-scale language model, comparable to OpenAI’s ChatGPT, which seeks to capture the particularities of Latin American Spanish and Portuguese, in addition to integrating local knowledge into its training.
The project was announced at the Action Summit on Artificial Intelligence, which took place on February 10 and 11 in Paris, and is a large-scale language model, similar to Chat-GPT or DeepSeek, whose main objective is to “reflect the culture, language and history” of the region. offering “more accurate and representative information of local contexts”.
The initiative is not minor.
For its development, 8 terabytes of information from virtual libraries and documents from public and private organizations have been gathered.
In addition, the University of Tarapacá in Chile has invested in a supercomputer to train the model, with the aim of reducing Latin America’s technological dependence on foreign powers.
But is it really a break from the dominance of the tech giants or just an adaptation of the same model with a new name?
A model that responds to the reality of Latin America
One of the main arguments of the promoters of Latam-GPT is the need to have an AI that understands the context and particularities of Latin America.
According to the manager of Cenia, Rodrigo Durán, the current models “although they are of high quality, their understanding of the Latin American context could be enriched and perfected.”
Much of the existing artificial intelligences have been trained in English and reflect the cultural biases of the countries where they were developed. Research such as that of Kate Crawford, in Atlas of AI, has shown how AI models replicate and amplify structural inequalities.
In this sense, Latam-GPT is presented as an alternative to prevent Latin America from lagging behind in the development of artificial intelligence and its applications.
But the creation of a regional linguistic model is not only a matter of cultural representation.
It also has practical implications.
An AI system better trained in the Latin American reality could improve applications in education, health, and public policy, areas where technological and access to information gaps remain deep.
However, the project also faces challenges.
In technical terms, training language models requires a level of computational processing and energy resources that few countries in the region can afford.
In addition, access to quality data and the diversity of local dialects and expressions could hinder its development and accuracy.
Really a path to technological sovereignty?
One of the deepest questions about Latam-GPT is whether it will really achieve technological independence for Latin America or if, deep down, it continues to replicate a development model controlled by external interests.
Ulises A. Mejías, an expert in technology and power, has warned about the illusion of sovereignty that these projects can generate. Together with researcher Nick Couldry, Mejías has put forward the theory of data colonialism, arguing that the digitization of information does not necessarily empower peripheral regions, but can reinforce their dependence on major technological powers.
In that sense, Mejías questions whether Latam-GPT really proposes a new way of understanding artificial intelligence or if it simply adapts OpenAI and Google’s model for a regional market without questioning the economic and political principles behind these systems.
Will it be a tool to improve the lives of people in Latin America or just an opportunity to compete in the same game designed by the technological powers?
Recent history shows that the region has relied on foreign technology in most of its digital developments.
Companies such as MercadoLibre or Rappi, although successful, operate within logics established by Silicon Valley.
If Latam-GPT fails to generate its own infrastructure and ecosystem, it could end up being just a Latin American version of a model created in the Global North.
Case studies: infrastructure, environmental impact and access
The development of Latam-GPT has required significant investment.
It is estimated that the initial financing, provided by Cenia of Chile and CAF (Development Bank of Latin America and the Caribbean), exceeds 500 thousand dollars.
In addition, the University of Tarapacá has allocated 4.5 million dollars in the purchase of a supercomputer capable of training the model.
This level of investment raises questions about the sustainability of the project.
How will it be financed in the long term? Will other countries be able to provide similar resources to expand it?
Another critical aspect is the environmental impact.
Studies such as those by David A. Patterson have shown that training a language model can generate a considerable carbon footprint.
In the case of Latam-GPT, its creators have assured that the infrastructure of the University of Tarapacá will work with renewable energy, reducing CO₂ emissions. However, energy consumption remains high, and it is not yet clear how its expansion will be managed without affecting the region’s natural resources.
Finally, there is the issue of access.
While the model is presented as “public and open,” the question remains as to how accessible it will actually be.
In conclusion, a first step with many open questions
Latam-GPT represents an unprecedented effort in the region to develop its own artificial intelligence model.
Its promise to reflect Latin America’s cultural and linguistic diversity is compelling and could mark a milestone in the continent’s technological history.
However, the project faces crucial challenges: financing, environmental impact, accessibility and, above all, the possibility of falling into the same logic of technological dependence that it aims to overcome.
The central question remains whether this AI will actually serve to strengthen Latin America’s autonomy or whether, in the end, it will be just a local adaptation of an already established global model.
The future of Latam-GPT will depend not only on its technical capacity, but also on its real impact on society.
If it manages to become a useful and accessible tool for all, it could be the beginning of a new digital era for the region. If not, it could remain as another failed attempt to break with global technological hegemony.
