Global Index Score
42.74
China Hong Kong Special Administrative Region's index score lands +9.8 against the Asia and Oceania average (33.0) and -9.4 against High income peers (52.1). It scores ahead of 69% of the 135 countries and jurisdictions assessed this edition. The profile rests on 25 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
35.00
Avrg. Score
25.65
Enabling Conditions
67.51
Avrg. Score
55.27
Civil Society Engagement
14.89
Avrg. Score
17.68
47.67
Index Score
33.21
Avrg. Dimension score
China Hong Kong Special Administrative Region runs +14.5 against the regional average (33.2) on Inclusion and Diversity. Strongest indicators: Cultural and Linguistic Diversity (50.0), Gender Equality (39.4). Weakest: Children's Rights (39.4). This dimension ranks 41st globally — ahead of the country's overall position (43rd). 6 evidence items on file, including "Ethical Artificial Intelligence Framework (Hong Kong)" and 3 other documented items.
29.28
Index Score
31.00
Avrg. Dimension score
China Hong Kong Special Administrative Region runs -1.7 against the regional average (31.0) on Ethics and Sustainability. Strongest indicators: Fairness and Non-discrimination (40.9), Human Oversight and Determination (39.4). Weakest: Environmental Impact (0.0), Transparency and Explainability (38.6). This dimension ranks 77th globally — behind the country's overall position (43rd). 3 evidence items on file, including "Ethical Artificial Intelligence Framework (Hong Kong)".
41.66
Index Score
36.03
Avrg. Dimension score
China Hong Kong Special Administrative Region runs +5.6 against the regional average (36.0) on Labour and Skills. Strongest indicators: AI Literacy (46.2), Labour Protections (37.9). Weakest: Reskilling/Upskilling Initiatives (9.1). This dimension ranks 59th globally — behind the country's overall position (43rd). 6 evidence items on file, including "AI for Science Education Funding Programme" and 2 other documented items.
54.75
Index Score
38.45
Avrg. Dimension score
China Hong Kong Special Administrative Region runs +16.3 against the regional average (38.4) on Trust and Safety. Strongest indicators: Safety and Security (50.0), AI-facilitated Misinformation and Violence (40.3). Weakest: Access to Redress and Remedy (37.9), Impact Assessments (40.1). This dimension ranks 40th globally — ahead of the country's overall position (43rd). 6 evidence items on file, including "Ethical Artificial Intelligence Framework (Hong Kong)" and 2 other documented items.
40.34
Index Score
30.02
Avrg. Dimension score
China Hong Kong Special Administrative Region runs +10.3 against the regional average (30.0) on AI Use in Public Service. Strongest indicators: Public Procurement (39.8), Public Disclosure of Government Algorithmic Systems (38.6). Weakest: Public Sector Skills Development (9.1). This dimension ranks 39th globally — ahead of the country's overall position (43rd). 4 evidence items on file, including "Ethical Artificial Intelligence Framework (Hong Kong)".
Explore how country performance, scores, and governance indicators have changed between GIRAI editions.
14 indicators
| Indicator | 2024 Edition | 2026 Edition |
|---|---|---|
| Gender Equality | Non-Binding Framework | Non-Binding Framework |
| Children's Rights | Non-Binding Framework | Non-Binding 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 | Non-Binding Framework |
| Reskilling/Upskilling Initiatives | No Framework | No Framework |
| Safety and Security | Non-Binding Framework | Non-Binding Framework |
| Access to Redress and Remedy | Non-Binding Framework | Non-Binding Framework |
| 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 | 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 | China Hong Kong Special Administrative Region | Asia and Oceania |
|---|---|---|
| Inclusion and Diversity7 | ||
APGender Equality | 39.4 | 24.5 |
APChildren's Rights | 39.4 | 27.8 |
APCultural and Linguistic Diversity | 50.0 | 25.9 |
CSOCivil Society Engagement in Inclusion and Diversity | 15.4 | 15.4 |
ECEgalitarian Democracy | 24.5 | 33.2 |
ECDevice Affordability | 79.2 | 49.2 |
ECGender Gap in Mobile Internet | 100.0 | 78.0 |
| Ethics and Sustainability7 | ||
APFairness and Non-discrimination | 40.9 | 26.1 |
APTransparency and Explainability | 38.6 | 33.5 |
APHuman Oversight and Determination | 39.4 | 26.2 |
APEnvironmental Impact | 0.0 | 18.0 |
CSOCivil Society Engagement in Ethics and Sustainability | 0.0 | 20.8 |
ECLow-Carbon Energy Share | 1.0 | 40.9 |
ECRule of Law | 75.3 | 48.2 |
| Labour and Skills6 | ||
APLabour Protections | 37.9 | 7.7 |
APReskilling/Upskilling Initiatives | 9.1 | 41.4 |
APAI Literacy | 46.2 | 39.0 |
CSOCivil Society Engagement in Labour and Skills | 10.3 | 18.6 |
ECLabour Rights & Compliance | 48.5 | 39.0 |
ECSkills & Literacy | 98.1 | 71.3 |
| Trust and Safety10 | ||
APSafety and Security | 50.0 | 33.8 |
APAccess to Redress and Remedy | 37.9 | 23.2 |
APImpact Assessments | 40.1 | 27.9 |
APAI-facilitated Misinformation and Violence | 40.3 | 25.5 |
CSOCivil Society Engagement in Trust and Safety | 8.8 | 13.6 |
ECData Protection and Privacy | 91.8 | 56.4 |
ECData Sharing and Access | 93.8 | 68.3 |
ECConsumer Protection | 96.0 | 72.3 |
ECCybersecurity | 99.8 | 76.8 |
ECGlobal Peace | 95.5 | 68.4 |
| AI Use in Public Service7 | ||
APPublic Sector Skills Development | 9.1 | 32.0 |
APPublic Disclosure of Government Algorithmic Systems | 38.6 | 11.1 |
APPublic Procurement | 39.8 | 14.8 |
CSOGovernment Mechanisms for CSO Inclusion in AI Policy and Governance | 40.0 | 20.0 |
ECCivil Society Accountability | 31.6 | 47.9 |
ECPublic Service Delivery | 77.7 | 76.9 |
ECAccess to Public Information | 79.1 | 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
49%
Participation of academia, advocacy groups, and non-state actors in shaping governance and ensuring accountability.
Contribution to overall score
3%
Institutional capacity, rule of law, digital readiness, and labour protections that enable effective governance.
Contribution to overall score
47%
Explore how 135 countries are governing artificial intelligence through the world's most comprehensive evidence-based Responsible AI Index.
13 pieces of evidence assessed across 25 indicator cases — laws, policies, strategies, and institutional actions in China Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.
