Global Index Score
29.24
Libya's index score lands +7.5 against the Africa average (21.8) and -2.6 against Upper middle income peers (31.9). It scores ahead of 43% of the 135 countries and jurisdictions assessed this edition. The profile rests on 17 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
31.99
Avrg. Score
13.69
Enabling Conditions
32.53
Avrg. Score
42.48
Civil Society Engagement
2.93
Avrg. Score
9.31
35.36
Index Score
16.68
Avrg. Dimension score
Libya runs +18.7 against the regional average (16.7) on Inclusion and Diversity. Strongest indicators: Gender Equality (58.3), Children's Rights (37.1). Weakest: Cultural and Linguistic Diversity (0.0). This dimension ranks 55th globally — ahead of the country's overall position (78th). 2 evidence items on file, including "National Charter for the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence (Libya)" and 1 other documented items.
25.47
Index Score
23.38
Avrg. Dimension score
Libya runs +2.1 against the regional average (23.4) on Ethics and Sustainability. Strongest indicators: Fairness and Non-discrimination (40.1), Human Oversight and Determination (40.1). Weakest: Environmental Impact (37.9), Transparency and Explainability (39.4). This dimension ranks 86th globally — behind the country's overall position (78th). 4 evidence items on file, including "National Charter for the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence (Libya)".
42.96
Index Score
23.30
Avrg. Dimension score
Libya runs +19.7 against the regional average (23.3) on Labour and Skills. Strongest indicators: AI Literacy (68.9), Reskilling/Upskilling Initiatives (67.4). Weakest: Labour Protections (0.0). This dimension ranks 56th globally — ahead of the country's overall position (78th). 5 evidence items on file, including "Artificial Intelligence National Policy (Libya)" and 1 other documented items.
20.29
Index Score
26.36
Avrg. Dimension score
Libya runs -6.1 against the regional average (26.4) on Trust and Safety. Strongest indicators: Safety and Security (46.0), Access to Redress and Remedy (37.1). Weakest: AI-facilitated Misinformation and Violence (0.0), Impact Assessments (0.0). This dimension ranks 108th globally — behind the country's overall position (78th). 4 evidence items on file, including "National Charter for the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence (Libya)" and 1 other documented items.
22.14
Index Score
19.73
Avrg. Dimension score
Libya runs +2.4 against the regional average (19.7) on AI Use in Public Service. Strongest indicators: Public Sector Skills Development (67.4), Public Disclosure of Government Algorithmic Systems (0.0). Weakest: Public Procurement (0.0). This dimension ranks 85th globally — behind the country's overall position (78th). 2 evidence items on file, including "Artificial Intelligence National Policy (Libya)".
Explore how country performance, scores, and governance indicators have changed between GIRAI editions.
14 indicators
| Indicator | 2024 Edition | 2026 Edition |
|---|---|---|
| Gender Equality | No Framework | Non-Binding Framework |
| Children's Rights | No Framework | Non-Binding Framework |
| Cultural and Linguistic Diversity | No Framework | No Framework |
| Fairness and Non-discrimination | No Framework | Non-Binding Framework |
| Transparency and Explainability | No Framework | Non-Binding Framework |
| Human Oversight and Determination | No 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 | Non-Binding Framework |
| Impact Assessments | No Framework | No Framework |
| Public Sector Skills Development | No Framework | Non-Binding Framework |
| Public Procurement | No Framework | No 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 | Libya | Africa |
|---|---|---|
| Inclusion and Diversity7 | ||
APGender Equality | 58.3 | 8.6 |
APChildren's Rights | 37.1 | 8.5 |
APCultural and Linguistic Diversity | 0.0 | 12.6 |
CSOCivil Society Engagement in Inclusion and Diversity | 0.0 | 7.7 |
ECEgalitarian Democracy | 12.9 | 28.7 |
ECDevice Affordability | 49.8 | 23.5 |
ECGender Gap in Mobile Internet | 100.0 | 47.2 |
| Ethics and Sustainability7 | ||
APFairness and Non-discrimination | 40.1 | 21.5 |
APTransparency and Explainability | 39.4 | 18.1 |
APHuman Oversight and Determination | 40.1 | 24.2 |
APEnvironmental Impact | 37.9 | 7.1 |
CSOCivil Society Engagement in Ethics and Sustainability | 0.0 | 9.9 |
ECLow-Carbon Energy Share | 0.0 | 44.3 |
ECRule of Law | 12.2 | 34.1 |
| Labour and Skills6 | ||
APLabour Protections | 0.0 | 2.8 |
APReskilling/Upskilling Initiatives | 67.4 | 25.4 |
APAI Literacy | 68.9 | 27.8 |
CSOCivil Society Engagement in Labour and Skills | 10.3 | 10.3 |
ECLabour Rights & Compliance | 28.9 | 32.4 |
ECSkills & Literacy | 68.8 | 41.4 |
| Trust and Safety10 | ||
APSafety and Security | 46.0 | 14.2 |
APAccess to Redress and Remedy | 37.1 | 20.7 |
APImpact Assessments | 0.0 | 12.2 |
APAI-facilitated Misinformation and Violence | 0.0 | 6.6 |
CSOCivil Society Engagement in Trust and Safety | 4.4 | 5.2 |
ECData Protection and Privacy | 0.0 | 56.5 |
ECData Sharing and Access | 12.5 | 46.8 |
ECConsumer Protection | 0.0 | 76.1 |
ECCybersecurity | 66.5 | 64.8 |
ECGlobal Peace | 44.0 | 52.2 |
| AI Use in Public Service7 | ||
APPublic Sector Skills Development | 67.4 | 19.7 |
APPublic Disclosure of Government Algorithmic Systems | 0.0 | 0.0 |
APPublic Procurement | 0.0 | 6.5 |
CSOGovernment Mechanisms for CSO Inclusion in AI Policy and Governance | 0.0 | 13.6 |
ECCivil Society Accountability | 58.0 | 57.2 |
ECPublic Service Delivery | 10.7 | 55.7 |
ECAccess to Public Information | 17.9 | 18.6 |
| Score adjustment | ||
URAIUnacceptable Risk AI Systems | No penalty | ×1.00Regional 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
66%
Participation of academia, advocacy groups, and non-state actors in shaping governance and ensuring accountability.
Contribution to overall score
1%
Institutional capacity, rule of law, digital readiness, and labour protections that enable effective governance.
Contribution to overall score
33%