Global Index Score
43.75
Israel's index score lands +11.7 against the Middle East average (32.1) and -8.4 against High income peers (52.1). It scores ahead of 70% of the 135 economies assessed this edition. Published score 43.8 reflects a URAI adjustment from 48.1 (3 government-misuse evidence items on file). The profile rests on 47 documented evidence items spanning policy frameworks, government initiatives and civil society activity.
GIRAI evaluates countries across five core dimensions that capture the social, ethical, and institutional impacts of artificial intelligence.
AI Policy
39.54
Avrg. Score
26.13
Enabling Conditions
59.89
Avrg. Score
52.95
Civil Society Engagement
63.84
Avrg. Score
13.39
52.17
Index Score
32.56
Avrg. Dimension score
Israel runs +19.6 against the regional average (32.6) on Inclusion and Diversity. Strongest indicators: Cultural and Linguistic Diversity (63.6), Children's Rights (30.7). Weakest: Gender Equality (9.1). This dimension ranks 34th globally — ahead of the country's overall position (41st). 7 evidence items on file, including "National Program for Artificial Intelligence (Israel)" and 3 other documented items.
47.96
Index Score
31.58
Avrg. Dimension score
Israel runs +16.4 against the regional average (31.6) on Ethics and Sustainability. Strongest indicators: Transparency and Explainability (71.2), Human Oversight and Determination (62.5). Weakest: Environmental Impact (0.0), Fairness and Non-discrimination (53.4). This dimension ranks 40th globally — ahead of the country's overall position (41st). 14 evidence items on file, including "National Program for AI" and 2 other documented items.
45.02
Index Score
34.73
Avrg. Dimension score
Israel runs +10.3 against the regional average (34.7) on Labour and Skills. Strongest indicators: AI Literacy (66.4), Reskilling/Upskilling Initiatives (54.5). Weakest: Labour Protections (0.0). This dimension ranks 51st globally — behind the country's overall position (41st). 4 evidence items on file, including "National Program for Artificial Intelligence (Israel)" and 1 other documented items.
44.07
Index Score
36.90
Avrg. Dimension score
Israel runs +7.2 against the regional average (36.9) on Trust and Safety. Strongest indicators: Impact Assessments (53.4), Safety and Security (52.6). Weakest: Access to Redress and Remedy (18.2), AI-facilitated Misinformation and Violence (21.0). This dimension ranks 48th globally — behind the country's overall position (41st). 11 evidence items on file, including "Privacy and Data Security in the Use of Deepfake Technology (Israel)" and 2 other documented items.
51.14
Index Score
28.75
Avrg. Dimension score
Israel runs +22.4 against the regional average (28.7) on AI Use in Public Service. Strongest indicators: Public Procurement (49.4), Public Disclosure of Government Algorithmic Systems (40.9). Weakest: Public Sector Skills Development (29.2). This dimension ranks 22nd globally — ahead of the country's overall position (41st). 11 evidence items on file, including "AI Trainings Senior Staff 2025".
Explore how country performance, scores, and governance indicators have changed between GIRAI editions.
14 indicators
Israel was not included in the 2024 GIRAI edition. The 2024 column is unavailable for this country; only 2026 evidence is shown below.
| Indicator | 2024 Edition | 2026 Edition |
|---|---|---|
| Gender Equality | — | No Framework |
| Children's Rights | — | Non-Binding Framework |
| Cultural and Linguistic Diversity | — | Non-Binding Framework |
| Fairness and Non-discrimination | — | Non-Binding Framework |
| Transparency and Explainability | — | Non-Binding Framework |
| Human Oversight and Determination | — | Non-Binding Framework |
| Labour Protections | — | No Framework |
| Reskilling/Upskilling Initiatives | — | Non-Binding Framework |
| Safety and Security | — | Non-Binding Framework |
| Access to Redress and Remedy | — | No Framework |
| Impact Assessments | — | Non-Binding Framework |
| Public Sector Skills Development | — | Non-Binding Framework |
| Public Procurement | — | Non-Binding Framework |
| Government Mechanisms for CSO Inclusion in AI Policy and Governance | — | No Framework |
Indicator definitions changed between editions; this table compares evidence presence and status, not directly comparable scores. A — indicates the item is not applicable or was not assessed for that edition.
Explore how countries and regions perform across GIRAI's governance dimensions, scores, and structural indicators.
| Indicator | Israel | Middle East |
|---|---|---|
| Inclusion and Diversity7 | ||
APGender Equality | 9.1 | 25.2 |
APChildren's Rights | 30.7 | 15.8 |
APCultural and Linguistic Diversity | 63.6 | 30.0 |
CSOCivil Society Engagement in Inclusion and Diversity | 76.9 | 10.8 |
ECEgalitarian Democracy | 64.4 | 22.4 |
ECSocioeconomic Inclusion in Connectivity | 78.2 | 62.7 |
ECGender Inclusion in Connectivity | 95.3 | 87.7 |
| Ethics and Sustainability6 | ||
APFairness and Non-discrimination | 53.4 | 36.3 |
APTransparency and Explainability | 71.2 | 41.0 |
APHuman Oversight and Determination | 62.5 | 36.7 |
APEnvironmental Impact | 0.0 | 13.7 |
CSOCivil Society Engagement in Ethics and Sustainability | 76.9 | 16.9 |
ECEnvironmental Performance | 13.8 | 16.6 |
| Labour and Skills6 | ||
APLabour Protections | 0.0 | 6.3 |
APReskilling/Upskilling Initiatives | 54.5 | 49.4 |
APAI Literacy | 66.4 | 29.8 |
CSOCivil Society Engagement in Labour and Skills | 30.8 | 11.3 |
ECLabour Rights | 27.2 | 28.1 |
ECPopulation Digital Readiness | 91.2 | 82.0 |
| Trust and Safety11 | ||
APSafety and Security | 52.6 | 38.2 |
APAccess to Redress and Remedy | 18.2 | 22.0 |
APImpact Assessments | 53.4 | 35.7 |
APAI-facilitated Misinformation and Violence | 21.0 | 12.0 |
CSOCivil Society Engagement in Trust and Safety | 39.6 | 8.4 |
ECData Protection and Privacy | 50.2 | 53.7 |
ECData Sharing and Access | 87.5 | 57.5 |
ECConsumer Protection | 59.5 | 80.2 |
ECCybersecurity | 93.5 | 80.9 |
ECRule of Law | 67.5 | 55.1 |
ECGlobal Peace | 15.0 | 59.2 |
| AI Use in Public Service7 | ||
APPublic Sector Skills Development | 29.2 | 37.5 |
APPublic Disclosure of Government Algorithmic Systems | 40.9 | 4.1 |
APPublic Procurement | 49.4 | 17.4 |
CSOGovernment Mechanisms for CSO Inclusion in AI Policy and Governance | 95.0 | 19.6 |
ECCivil Society Oversight | 72.2 | 41.0 |
ECPublic Service Delivery | 74.2 | 80.3 |
ECRight to Information | 31.0 | 28.5 |
| Score adjustment | ||
URAIUnacceptable Risk AI Systems | ×0.913 government-misuse items | ×0.98Regional average |
Evidence related to government use of AI systems associated with unacceptable-risk categories.
According to foreign press releases the IDF is using an AI based system to select target for bombing during the Gaza War. There are no details if this is an unacceptable use as such but the number of targets it has produced is directly linked to a rise in civilian casualties.
View Trusted SourceBased on publications this system implemented the use of cameras (and maybe other elements such as drones) located around the occupied territories and combined algorithmic system to allow both for online and archival retrieval of identities based on facial recognition. This mass surveillance system being used by the IDF for all the West Bank (Occupied territories) caused Microsoft to disconnect the IDF from its online services.
View Trusted SourceThe Israel Police implemented an algorithmic system that was aimed at recommending probable drug smugglers at the International Airport based on a secretive algorithmic process. According to the petition there was a high risk that the system included data as to sexual preferences (proxy if not direct). A petition was handed and the court was later updated that use of the system was stopped. No reason was given.
View Trusted SourceA breakdown of the structural factors shaping this country's score.
National AI strategies, laws, and oversight mechanisms that establish formal governance structures.
Contribution to overall score
49%
Participation of academia, advocacy groups, and non-state actors in shaping governance and ensuring accountability.
Contribution to overall score
13%
Institutional capacity, rule of law, digital readiness, and labour protections that enable effective governance.
Contribution to overall score
37%
28 pieces of evidence assessed across 47 indicator cases — laws, policies, strategies, and institutional actions in Israel.