Governments worldwide have responded to the rapid expansion of AI by publishing national and regional AI strategies. Comparing national and regional AI strategies to identify their convergences and divergences can uncover their common practices, understand regional variations, and provide policy designers a comprehensive set of policy design elements for their ongoing AI strategy developments.
arXiv:2608. 11006v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Governments worldwide have responded to the rapid expansion of AI by publishing national and regional AI strategies.
arXiv:2606. 07536v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Frontier artificial intelligence is reshaping all aspects of society, from economic output or military capability to democratic institutions.
arXiv:2608. 15417v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Governments use laws, institutions, funding programs and nonbinding guidance to shape how AI is developed and used.
Governments use laws, institutions, funding programs and nonbinding guidance to shape how AI is developed and used. Comparing these national approaches is difficult. A binding rule and a detailed volu...
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 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:2607. 02955v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We argue that AI systems used in conducting foreign policy tasks - broadly enacting 'statecraft' - should be a priority test case for technical AI governance research.
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.
arXiv:2606. 07245v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: AI sovereignty is the extent to which a nation independently controls its artificial intelligence (AI) technologies.
arXiv:2608. 13272v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: A small number of firms based in two states produce the most capable frontier AI models.
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.
Our latest report reveals stark differences in advanced AI adoption across countries and outlines new initiatives to help nations capture productivity gains from AI.