On July 17, 2026, at the Global AI Governance and Sustainable Development: Challenges and Responses forum of the 2026 World Artificial Intelligence Conference (WAIC 2026), the report by the research team of the Center for Global AI Innovative Governance, Global AI Governance Index (2026)——Perspectives from the Global South and Capacity Building (herein after the Report), was officially released.
The Report was written by the research team ofthe Center for Global AI Innovative Governance. Professor Chen Zhimin, Executive Director of the Center for Global AI Innovative Governance and Vice President of Fudan University, served as chief expert. Core team members included Gao Qiqi, researcher at the Center for Global AI Innovative Governanceand Professor at the School of International Relations and Public Affairs,Fudan University; Yao Xu, Secretary-General of the Center for Global AI Innovative Governance and Associate Professor at the Fudan Development Institute; Wang Zhongyuan, Associate Professor at the Institute for Advanced Study in Social Sciences, Fudan University; and Wang Lingxiang, engineer at the Comprehensive Laboratory of National Development and Intelligent Governance,Fudan University.
The Report is divided into four parts: introduction, index structure design and data sources, data presentation, and conclusion. It holds that the core contradictions of global AI governance are concentrated in the contradiction between technological emergence and the governance deficit, the contradiction between national sovereignty and global governance, and the contradiction between super-power and the Global South.Based on the two core concepts of balance and gradation, the Report constructsan AI governance index that gives equal weight to four dimensions: capability,responsibility, inclusiveness, and sustainability, with eleven second-levelindicators and thirty-seven third-level indicators beneath them, systematically measuring 40 representative economies worldwide. The original contribution ofthis index system lies in establishing inclusiveness and sustainability asfirst-level indicators, and incorporating into the measurement system such factors as the supply of open-weight models, the multilingual capabilities ofmodels, and digital-infrastructure assistance to countries of the Global South, thereby bringing the perspective of the Global South into the assessment of AI governance.
The Report's measurement results show that global AI governance presents a clearly tiered pattern: the United States ranksfirst with 77.5 points and China second with 71.4 points, forming the firsttier; France, Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany, India, and Japan score inthe range of 45 to 58 points, forming the second tier; and the mean across the full sample is 39.3 points. At the same time, the strengths in global AI governance are highly dispersed: the top spot in the thirty-seven third-level indicators is shared among eleven countries, and no single country can monopolize them all, showing that progress in global AI governance depends on the joint contribution of multiple actors.
In this global picture, China holds a firm second place with 71.4 points, one of the few economies to enter the top tierand the only major developing country among them. China is highly balanced across all four dimensions, with no obvious weaknesses; it ranks first worldwide in the inclusiveness dimension with 75.1 points, and takes first place in twelve of the thirty-seven indicators. The Report holds that, taken together, these data sketch out a distinctive development path: transcending a mere contest of capability through balanced development, guarding against risks through responsible governance, and benefiting the whole world through inclusive sharing. This is precisely the Chinese approach to AI governance that the Report reveals.
The Report stresses that today, when global AI capabilities are highly concentrated and the technology divide risks widening,such a path grounded in balance and inclusiveness offers useful inspiration for building a fairer and more equitable global AI governance system. Looking ahead, as artificial general intelligence draws near, the urgency of global collaboration will grow by the day; only by transcending closure with openness, replacing monopoly with sharing, and resolving risks through collaboration can AI truly become a common good for all humanity.
Original link: 
Global Al Governance Index (2026)——Perspectives from the Global South and Capacity Building.pdf
