The paper argues that AI leaderboards are ill-suited for the Global South because they lack independent governance, conflict‑of‑interest policies, and mechanisms for metric evolution. It highlights that high‑quality regional benchmarks already exist—IndicSUPERB, MILU, and LAHAJA for India; IrokoBench for Africa; AlGhafa for Arabic—but are excluded from global leaderboards due to institutional design. A consultation with 58 Indian AI practitioners shows a clear preference for formal governance and disclosure‑based conflict management, leading the authors to propose regional leaderboards with independent governance as the solution.
arXiv:2607. 14782v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Grounded in human rights-based frameworks such as the UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of AI, the Global Index on Responsible AI (GIRAI) examines how countries translate responsible AI commitments into enforceable protections, institutional capacity, and redress mechanisms.
The essay reviews Matthijs Maas’s framework for global AI governance, highlighting the rapid, border‑less development of AI and the fragmented, non‑binding international responses. It argues that governance cannot rely on a single institutional blueprint but must account for the varied powers of states, international bodies, and private firms. The central challenge is shaping an evolving architecture amid actors with differing incentives and no shared plans.
The Global Index on Responsible AI 2026 (GIRAI) 2nd Edition refines its predecessor by distinguishing between framework existence and implementation, expanding from three to five thematic areas, and adding granular variables for framework quality. It evaluates responsible AI governance across five dimensions—Inclusion and Diversity, Ethics and Sustainability, Labour and Skills, Trust and Safety, and Use of AI in Public Service—using 38 indicators organized into three pillars: AI Policy, CSO Engagement, and Enabling Conditions, plus a separate Use of Unacceptable Risk AI penalty. Data from 135 country-level researchers and secondary sources are normalized to a 100-point scale, weighted by pillar importance, and used to facilitate systematic cross‑national comparisons for policymakers, civil society, and AI developers.
arXiv:2608. 11891v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Governments increasingly fund indigenous foundation models to strengthen national AI capability, digital sovereignty, and multilingual computing.
arXiv:2608. 02996v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Latin America is missing a foundational layer for native AI development: the benchmark layer.
arXiv:2606. 01417v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Turkey's e-Government Gateway (e-Devlet) serves over 68 million registered users with more than 9,200 government services, and is increasingly integrating artificial intelligence into citizen-facing applications such as chatbot assistants and eligibility assessments.
arXiv:2608. 12278v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Artificial intelligence tools for education and language support are increasingly framed as scalable responses to access gaps in under-resourced communities.
arXiv:2606. 26099v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in artificial intelligence (AI) governance analysis across national and international organisations.
arXiv:2608. 12320v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: This article reviews and updates the framework for accountability in AI based on account- ability ecosystems.
arXiv:2608. 19278v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The most capable general-purpose AI (GPAI) models are mostly built in two jurisdictions, the United States and China, but the risks they carry land globally.