2024全球人工智能治理评估指数报告

Citation Information: Yi Zeng, Enmeng Lu, Xin Guan, Cunqing Huangfu, Zizhe Ruan, Ammar Younas,Kang Sun, XuanTang, Yuwei Wang , Hongjie Suo, Dongqi Liang, Zhengqiang Han, Aorigele Bao, Xiaoyang Guo, JinWang, Jiawei Xie&Yao Liang. (2024).AI Governance InternationaL Evaluation Index (AGILE In-dex)2024.Center for Long-term Artificial Intelligence (CLAI);International Research Center for AIEthics andGovernance, Instituteof Automation, Chinese Academy of Sciences.https://agile-in-dex.ai/ Website information: https://agile-index.ai/ Institutesinformation:Center for Long-term Artificial Intelligence (CLAI)https://long-term-ai.center/International Research Center for AI Ethics and Governance,Institute of Automation, Chinese Academy of Scienceshttps://ai-ethics-and-governance.institute/ Fundinginformation: This research was supported by theNational Science and Technology Major Projectof China (GrantNo.2022ZD0116202). Contact information: Please contactcontact@long-term-ai.cnfor more informationorwith any comments. Report Version: This versionof report(v1.0.2c)wasoriginallyreleased onFebruary4th,2024. Copyrightinformation:Copyright © 2024 Center for Long-term Artificial Intelligence-All Rights Reserved. Executive Summary The rapid advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology is profoundly transforming humansociety and concurrently presenting a series of ethical, legal, and socialissues. The effective govern-ance of AI hasbecome a crucial global concern.During the past year, theextensivedeployment ofgenerative AI, particularly large language models, marked a new phase in AI governance.Continuousefforts are being madeby theinternational communityinactively addressing the novel challengesposed by these AI developments.As consensus on international governance continues to be establishedand put into action, the practical importance of conducting a global assessment of the state of AI gov-ernance is progressively coming to light. In this context,the Center for Long-term Artificial Intelligence (CLAI), in collaboration with theInternational Research Center for AI Ethics and Governance hosted attheInstitute of Automa-tion, Chinese Academy of Sciences, jointly initiated the development of the AI GovernanceIn-ternationaLEvaluation Index (AGILE Index).The index is utilized to delve into the status of AIgovernanceto datein 14 countries for the first batch of evaluation.The aim is to depict the currentstate of AI governance in these countries through data scoring, assist them in identifying their govern-ance stageanduncoveringgovernance issues, and ultimately offer insights for the enhancement oftheir AI governance systems. Adhering to the design principle, "the level of governance should match the level of development,"theinaugural evaluation of the AGILE Index commences with an exploration of four foundational pillars:the development level of AI, the AI governance environment, the AI governance instruments, and theAI governance effectiveness.It covers 39 indicators across 18 dimensions to comprehensively as-sess the AI governance level of 14 representative countries globally.The countriesevaluatedin-clude the Group ofSeven (G7, namely the United States, United Kingdom, France, Germany, Japan,Canada, Italy), theBRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa), and representativecountries from specific regions (Singapore, the United Arab Emirates), totalling 14 countries. Thefirst AGILE Index evaluation reveals many noteworthy findings: Overall， 1.The United States, which scoring slightly above 70, heads the first tier, followed by China,Singapore, Canada, Germany, and the United Kingdom, all scoring above 60.(Page 17)2.There is a strong positive correlation between AGILEIndexscore and the per capita GDP.(Page17)3.BRICS countries show slightly better performance in effective governance.(Page18)4.Differences in the governance environment categorize 14 countries’ score distributionintothree types. Singapore, Canada, Germany, Japan, and France scored more evenly in all pillars.(Page19) In terms ofAIdevelopment, 1.The United States exhibits notable performance in the field of AI development compared toothercountries.(Page22)2.China exhibits significant progress in AI development alongside opportunities for furtherAIinfrastructure enhancement.(Page23)3.Beyond the UnitedStatesand China, a global mosaic of strengths emerges. (Page23) In terms ofAIgovernance environment, 1.There was a sharp 12-fold increase indocumentedAI risk incidents in 2023, underscoring thepressing needfor AI governanceto keep pace with rapid technological advancements.(Page25)2.Among the 14 evaluated countries, especially the USA, face a significant proportion of docu-mented AI risk incidents globally, highlighting the collective pressure on AI governanceworldwide.(Page26)3.Although high-income countries often demonstrate a higher level of preparedness for AI gov-ernance, it's important to recognize the opportunity for all