Global Index Score
45.81
New Zealand's index score lands +12.8 against the Asia and Oceania average (33.0) and -6.3 against High income peers (52.1). It scores ahead of 72% of the 135 economies assessed this edition. The profile rests on 41 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
29.94
Avrg. Score
25.65
Enabling Conditions
84.48
Avrg. Score
55.27
Civil Society Engagement
25.05
Avrg. Score
17.68
40.78
Index Score
33.21
Avrg. Dimension score
New Zealand runs +7.6 against the regional average (33.2) on Inclusion and Diversity. Strongest indicators: Cultural and Linguistic Diversity (46.2), Children's Rights (9.1). Weakest: Gender Equality (0.0). This dimension ranks 47th globally — behind the country's overall position (39th). 8 evidence items on file, including "Responsible AI Guidance for the Public Service: GenAI (New Zealand)" and 3 other documented items.
53.20
Index Score
31.00
Avrg. Dimension score
New Zealand runs +22.2 against the regional average (31.0) on Ethics and Sustainability. Strongest indicators: Fairness and Non-discrimination (48.5), Transparency and Explainability (48.5). Weakest: Environmental Impact (0.0), Human Oversight and Determination (47.7). This dimension ranks 29th globally — ahead of the country's overall position (39th). 11 evidence items on file, including "Algorithm Charter for Aotearoa New Zealand" and 3 other documented items.
50.12
Index Score
36.03
Avrg. Dimension score
New Zealand runs +14.1 against the regional average (36.0) on Labour and Skills. Strongest indicators: Reskilling/Upskilling Initiatives (61.7), AI Literacy (44.3). Weakest: Labour Protections (0.0). This dimension ranks 38th globally — ahead of the country's overall position (39th). 7 evidence items on file, including "AI resource series for educators" and 1 other documented items.
38.82
Index Score
38.45
Avrg. Dimension score
New Zealand runs +0.4 against the regional average (38.4) on Trust and Safety. Strongest indicators: Impact Assessments (47.7), Safety and Security (37.5). Weakest: Access to Redress and Remedy (10.6), AI-facilitated Misinformation and Violence (11.4). This dimension ranks 63rd globally — behind the country's overall position (39th). 10 evidence items on file, including "Deepfake Digital Harm and Exploitation Bill (New Zealand)" and 3 other documented items.
46.16
Index Score
30.02
Avrg. Dimension score
New Zealand runs +16.1 against the regional average (30.0) on AI Use in Public Service. Strongest indicators: Public Disclosure of Government Algorithmic Systems (48.3), Public Procurement (41.5). Weakest: Public Sector Skills Development (9.1). This dimension ranks 32nd globally — ahead of the country's overall position (39th). 5 evidence items on file, including "Algorithm Charter for Aotearoa New Zealand" and 4 other documented items.
Explore how country performance, scores, and governance indicators have changed between GIRAI editions.
14 indicators
| Indicator | 2024 Edition | 2026 Edition |
|---|---|---|
| Gender Equality | No Framework | No Framework |
| Children's Rights | No Framework | No Framework |
| Cultural and Linguistic Diversity | Non-Binding Framework | Non-Binding Framework |
| Fairness and Non-discrimination | Non-Binding Framework | Non-Binding Framework |
| Transparency and Explainability | Non-Binding Framework | Non-Binding Framework |
| Human Oversight and Determination | Non-Binding Framework | Non-Binding Framework |
| Labour Protections | No Framework | No Framework |
| Reskilling/Upskilling Initiatives | No Framework | Non-Binding Framework |
| Safety and Security | No Framework | Non-Binding Framework |
| Access to Redress and Remedy | No Framework | Draft |
| Impact Assessments | Non-Binding Framework | Non-Binding Framework |
| Public Sector Skills Development | No Framework | No Framework |
| Public Procurement | Non-Binding Framework | Non-Binding Framework |
| Government Mechanisms for CSO Inclusion in AI Policy and Governance | No Framework | Non-Binding 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 | New Zealand | Asia and Oceania |
|---|---|---|
| Inclusion and Diversity7 | ||
APGender Equality | 0.0 | 24.5 |
APChildren's Rights | 9.1 | 27.8 |
APCultural and Linguistic Diversity | 46.2 | 25.9 |
CSOCivil Society Engagement in Inclusion and Diversity | 30.8 | 15.4 |
ECEgalitarian Democracy | 85.8 | 33.2 |
ECSocioeconomic Inclusion in Connectivity | 85.0 | 49.2 |
ECGender Inclusion in Connectivity | 95.7 | 78.0 |
| Ethics and Sustainability6 | ||
APFairness and Non-discrimination | 48.5 | 26.1 |
APTransparency and Explainability | 48.5 | 33.5 |
APHuman Oversight and Determination | 47.7 | 26.2 |
APEnvironmental Impact | 0.0 | 18.0 |
CSOCivil Society Engagement in Ethics and Sustainability | 46.1 | 20.8 |
ECEnvironmental Performance | 86.0 | 40.9 |
| Labour and Skills6 | ||
APLabour Protections | 0.0 | 7.7 |
APReskilling/Upskilling Initiatives | 61.7 | 41.4 |
APAI Literacy | 44.3 | 39.0 |
CSOCivil Society Engagement in Labour and Skills | 30.8 | 18.6 |
ECLabour Rights | 78.8 | 39.0 |
ECPopulation Digital Readiness | 93.3 | 71.3 |
| Trust and Safety11 | ||
APSafety and Security | 37.5 | 33.8 |
APAccess to Redress and Remedy | 10.6 | 23.2 |
APImpact Assessments | 47.7 | 27.9 |
APAI-facilitated Misinformation and Violence | 11.4 | 25.5 |
CSOCivil Society Engagement in Trust and Safety | 17.6 | 13.6 |
ECData Protection and Privacy | 66.8 | 56.4 |
ECData Sharing and Access | 37.5 | 68.3 |
ECConsumer Protection | 64.6 | 72.3 |
ECCybersecurity | 81.8 | 76.8 |
ECRule of Law | 93.2 | 48.2 |
ECGlobal Peace | 99.0 | 68.4 |
| AI Use in Public Service7 | ||
APPublic Sector Skills Development | 9.1 | 32.0 |
APPublic Disclosure of Government Algorithmic Systems | 48.3 | 11.1 |
APPublic Procurement | 41.5 | 14.8 |
CSOGovernment Mechanisms for CSO Inclusion in AI Policy and Governance | 0.0 | 20.0 |
ECCivil Society Oversight | 87.7 | 47.9 |
ECPublic Service Delivery | 86.0 | 76.9 |
ECRight to Information | 90.2 | 39.6 |
| Score adjustment | ||
URAIUnacceptable Risk AI Systems | No penalty | ×0.98Regional average |
A 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
39%
Participation of academia, advocacy groups, and non-state actors in shaping governance and ensuring accountability.
Contribution to overall score
5%
Institutional capacity, rule of law, digital readiness, and labour protections that enable effective governance.
Contribution to overall score
55%
29 pieces of evidence assessed across 41 indicator cases — laws, policies, strategies, and institutional actions in New Zealand.