Country Profile on AI Governance: Burkina Faso

Mean of all 10 indicator scores. West Africa mean 1.70 · all 54 states mean 1.76.

1. S1.1

   National AI strategy existence

   Score 1 / 4

   No adopted national AI strategy. Burkina Faso began consultations in August 2025 to draft a National AI Action Plan covering 2026–2028. AI policy was in drafting stage as of June 2026.

   Note: Action Plan (2026–2028) in drafting; not yet formally adopted

   Sources biometricupdate.com (opens in a new tab)

2. S1.2

   Strategy adoption date

   Score 0 / 4

   National AI Action Plan not yet adopted. Draft expected to cover 2026–2028. Launch consultation held 27 August 2025.

   Note: N/A, plan not yet adopted; target 2026

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: none (adoption date). No formally adopted national AI strategy.

   Sources iafrica.com (opens in a new tab)

3. S1.3

   Political commitment signals

   Score 2 / 4

   Minister of Digital Transition and Secretary General Dr Borlli Michel Somé personally launched the August 2025 consultation workshop. Dr Yaya Traoré (Permanent Secretary for Innovation) led proceedings. Transitional government (Capt. Ibrahim Traoré) has endorsed digital transformation as a national priority. 2026 digital budget doubled to 61 billion FCFA ($109.4m).

   Note: Formal ministerial statement made; no presidential directive specifically on AI

   Sources ecofinagency.com (opens in a new tab)

4. S1.4

   Dedicated AI budget allocation

   Score 1 / 4

   2026 digital ministry budget doubled to 61 billion FCFA (~$109m), but no ring-fenced AI governance budget line identified. AI funding embedded in broader digital transformation budget.

   Note: Embedded in digital budget; no dedicated AI line item

   Sources ecofinagency.com (opens in a new tab)

5. S1.5

   AU Continental AI Strategy alignment

   Score 1 / 4

   No formal alignment process with AU Continental AI Strategy documented. Burkina Faso is aware of AU AI Strategy but no alignment mechanism in place.

   Note: Awareness only; alignment process not initiated

   Sources columncontent.com (opens in a new tab)

6. S1.6

   Multi-stakeholder consultation

   Score 2 / 4

   August 2025 workshop brought together government, private sector, academics and civil society. Multi-stakeholder consultation formally conducted as part of AI Action Plan drafting process.

   Note: Formal consultation held; ongoing mechanism not yet codified

   Sources iafrica.com (opens in a new tab)

7. S1.7

   Sector prioritisation

   Score 2 / 4

   Draft AI Action Plan covers six focus areas: infrastructure, data governance, human capital, legal/ethical frameworks, innovation/entrepreneurship, and international cooperation. Health and agriculture explicitly named as priority sectors.

   Note: Specific sectors named but detailed roadmaps not yet published

   Sources ecofinagency.com (opens in a new tab)

8. S1.8

   Implementation roadmap

   Score 1 / 4

   Provisional roadmap for 2026–2028 indicated during consultation workshop. No formally adopted phased plan with milestones or accountability mechanisms yet.

   Note: Generic timeline only; plan not yet adopted

   Sources iafrica.com (opens in a new tab)

9. S1.9

   Monitoring and evaluation framework

   Score 1 / 4

   No M&E framework for AI governance. Broader digital strategy (iAfrica 2018–2027) has monitoring components but no AI-specific M&E.

   Note: Planned as part of Action Plan; not yet established

   Sources biometricupdate.com (opens in a new tab)

10. S1.10

    Strategy review mechanism

    Score 1 / 4

    No built-in review mechanism established. Action Plan not yet adopted. Ad hoc approach only.

    Note: Not yet established

Mean of all 10 indicator scores. West Africa mean 1.18 · all 54 states mean 1.32.

1. G2.1

   AI-specific legislation

   Score 1 / 4

   No AI-specific legislation. Burkina Faso's AI Action Plan will include a legal and ethical framework but this is not yet drafted. Cybercrime law and data protection law apply generally to digital systems.

   Note: No AI legislation; framework being planned

   Sources iafrica.com (opens in a new tab)

2. G2.2

   Data protection law status

   Score 3 / 4

   Law No. 001-2021/AN on protection of personal data is enacted and operational. Burkina Faso was the first French-speaking sub-Saharan country with an operative DPA (CIL, established 2007). Updated law passed March 2021.

   Note: Enacted and enforced; CIL issuing resolutions and enforcement actions

   Sources dataprotection.africa (opens in a new tab)

3. G2.3

   DPA AI mandate

   Score 2 / 4

   CIL (Commission de l'Informatique et des Libertés) is the DPA. No explicit AI mandate but CIL has been active - issuing resolutions on direct marketing, third-party data sharing, and warning against personal data dissemination on social media (2025). Informal AI engagement occurring.

   Note: Informal AI engagement; no formal AI mandate

   Sources techhiveadvisory.africa (opens in a new tab)

4. G2.4

   DPA staffing and budget

   Score 2 / 4

   CIL is operational and active; held 10th and 11th Ordinary Sessions in 2024. Staff and budget figures not publicly disclosed. CIL is funded by the state and has issued enforceable resolutions. Fine up to 20,000,000 FCFA (~$37,757) documented.

   Note: Staff/budget figures not publicly available

   Scoring basis Fellow score kept; no raw value for the threshold.

   Sources techhiveadvisory.africa (opens in a new tab)

5. G2.5

   AI regulatory body existence

   Score 1 / 4

   No dedicated AI governance body. AI Action Plan proposes an institutional/legal framework but not yet established. Ministry of Digital Transition acts as de facto AI coordination body.

   Note: Proposed in forthcoming Action Plan; not yet operational

   Sources iafrica.com (opens in a new tab)

6. G2.6

   Institutional design model

   Score 1 / 4

   No formal AI regulatory model established. DPA-led approach for data issues; no hybrid or sector-specific AI governance framework. AI Action Plan will define institutional model.

   Note: To be defined in forthcoming Action Plan

7. G2.7

   Malabo Convention ratification

   Score 1 / 4

   Burkina Faso signed the Malabo Convention but has NOT ratified it. It is listed as a signatory (party) but not among the 16+ ratifiers.

   Note: Signed only; not ratified - important governance gap

   Sources en.wikipedia.org (opens in a new tab)

8. G2.8

   Enforcement actions taken

   Score 1 / 4

   No AI-related enforcement actions documented. CIL has taken action on personal data violations (NGO suspension, social media circular) but not AI-specific enforcement.

   Note: No AI-specific enforcement; data protection enforcement active

   Sources techhiveadvisory.africa (opens in a new tab)

9. G2.9

   Extraterritorial provisions

   Score 1 / 4

   No extraterritorial AI provisions. Data Protection Law 2021 requires data controllers to ensure cross-border transfers have adequate protection. No AI-specific extraterritorial framework.

   Note: Under consideration; not yet enacted

   Sources dlapiperdataprotection.com (opens in a new tab)

10. G2.10

    IP framework for AI

    Score 1 / 4

    No IP framework review for AI-generated content. National IP framework not yet updated for AI era.

    Note: Not initiated

Mean of the 8 scored indicators; 2 carry no score. West Africa mean 1.40 · all 54 states mean 1.51.

No score: 1 not applicable, 1 context only.

1. I3.1

   Data center count

   Score 2 / 4

   3 data centres in Burkina Faso as of 2024 (Internet Society). Plans to establish Tier III national data centre under ANPTIC roadmap (announced November 2025). Mini data centres planned for 2026 rollout.

   Note: 3 existing commercial/government facilities; Tier III national DC planned

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 3 (data centres).

   Sources pulse.internetsociety.org (opens in a new tab)

2. I3.2

   Data center capacity (MW)

   Score 1 / 4

   Total data centre capacity not publicly reported. Existing facilities are small-scale. Tier III national facility planned but not yet operational. Estimated total capacity under 5 MW.

   Note: Very limited; exact MW not disclosed

   Scoring basis Fellow score kept; no raw value for the threshold.

   Sources datacentresafrica.com (opens in a new tab)

3. I3.3

   Submarine cable landing points

   ○N/A: Does not apply to this country

   Burkina Faso is landlocked with no submarine cable landing points. Internet connectivity relies on terrestrial links to coastal countries (Côte d'Ivoire, Ghana, Togo) and satellite.

   Note: Zero submarine cable landing points; landlocked connectivity constraint

   Scoring basis Not applicable; excluded from the pillar mean. Landlocked: excluded from P3 (geography is not governance).

   Sources pulse.internetsociety.org (opens in a new tab)

4. I3.4

   International bandwidth (Gbps)

   Score 1 / 4

   International bandwidth severely constrained by landlocked geography. 2 active IXPs (Internet Exchange Points). 270 km of optical fiber deployment planned for 2026.

   Note: Low bandwidth; expanding; exact Gbps not publicly reported

   Scoring basis Fellow score kept; no raw value for the threshold.

   Sources pulse.internetsociety.org (opens in a new tab)

5. I3.5

   Hyperscaler presence

   Score 1 / 4

   No hyperscaler (AWS/Azure/Google) local infrastructure confirmed. Orange and MTN provide cloud-adjacent services but no full local cloud zones. Plans for sovereign cloud announced.

   Note: No hyperscaler local presence

   Sources datacentresafrica.com (opens in a new tab)

6. I3.6

   GPU/HPC access

   Score 1 / 4

   No GPU/HPC facility. University of Ouagadougou and 2iE have limited computing resources. National AI Action Plan aims to address infrastructure gaps. No commercial GPU-as-a-service available domestically.

   Note: No HPC access; planned in AI Action Plan

   Sources iafrica.com (opens in a new tab)

7. I3.7

   Data localisation provisions

   Score 1 / 4

   No data localisation law. Draft AI Action Plan mentions data governance as a pillar. Data Protection Law 2021 has limited cross-border transfer provisions but no localisation mandate.

   Note: No localisation requirements; planned in AI Action Plan

   Sources dig.watch (opens in a new tab)

8. I3.8

   Cross-border data flow framework

   Score 2 / 4

   Data Protection Law 2021 requires CIL authorisation for international data transfers and adequacy checks. AFAPDP Francophone RCE framework applies. ECOWAS Supplementary Act provides regional framework.

   Note: Regional and bilateral frameworks apply; no comprehensive standalone framework

   Sources dlapiperdataprotection.com (opens in a new tab)

9. I3.9

   Foreign AI surveillance spending

   ○Context only: Context flag outside the score

   Security context: Burkina Faso under military junta has documented use of surveillance technologies. Russian-linked Wagner/Africa Corps present. AI-enabled surveillance spending not publicly disclosed. Freedom House and others flag surveillance concerns.

   Note: Unconfirmed/unknown; security situation raises concerns

   Scoring basis Context flag; outside the score.

   Sources 2021-2025.state.gov (opens in a new tab)

10. I3.10

    Sovereign cloud initiatives

    Score 1 / 4

    Sovereign cloud creation announced in ANPTIC roadmap (November 2025 Digital Week). National data platform planned. Not yet operational.

    Note: Planned; construction not yet initiated

    Sources datacentresafrica.com (opens in a new tab)

Mean of all 10 indicator scores. West Africa mean 1.14 · all 54 states mean 1.20.

1. H4.1

   AI researchers per million

   Score 1 / 4

   No official AI researcher count. Burkina Faso AI Readiness Index score of 29.8/100 (Oxford Insights 2024), below Sub-Saharan African average of 32.7. Very limited AI research capacity. 2iE and University of Ouagadougou are main institutions.

   Note: Estimated <10/million; no official data

   Scoring basis Fellow score kept; no raw value for the threshold.

   Sources ecofinagency.com (opens in a new tab)

2. H4.2

   DPA staff with AI competency

   Score 1 / 4

   CIL staff with AI technical competency: estimated 0–1. CIL is active on data protection but no documented AI-specific technical capacity.

   Note: Virtually no AI technical capacity in DPA

   Scoring basis Fellow score kept; no raw value for the threshold. Raw value 0.5 falls between threshold bands; fellow score kept.

   Sources dataprotection.africa (opens in a new tab)

3. H4.3

   University AI programs

   Score 0 / 4

   University of Ouagadougou/Thomas Sankara and 2iE (Institut International d'Ingénierie de l'Eau et de l'Environnement) offer some IT/computer science programmes but no dedicated AI/ML degree programmes confirmed.

   Note: No dedicated AI degree programmes; general CS available

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 0 (universities). Raw value read from the evidence: "no dedicated AI/ML degree programmes confirmed". Checked against the evidence on 7 October 2026: confirmed.

   Sources iafrica.com (opens in a new tab)

4. H4.4

   African-authored AI publications

   Score 2 / 4

   Very limited AI publications with Burkina Faso-affiliated authors. AI Action Plan aims to strengthen research. Annual AI publications estimated at fewer than 10.

   Note: Nascent; no official count

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. 23.7 papers/yr ÷ 23.55m people = 1.01 per million (floors applied).

   Sources ecofinagency.com (opens in a new tab)

5. H4.5

   AI patents filed

   Score 0 / 4

   No AI-related patents filed domestically. IP system not adapted for AI. Very limited innovation ecosystem.

   Note: No documented AI patents

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 0 (AI patent applications/year).

6. H4.6

   K-12 CS education

   Score 1 / 4

   Computer science and ICT taught in some secondary schools but not as a mandatory nationwide subject. Digital literacy gaps are a key challenge identified in the AI Action Plan.

   Note: Limited ICT in schools; not mandatory

   Sources iafrica.com (opens in a new tab)

7. H4.7

   AI workforce training programs

   Score 1 / 4

   No government-supported AI reskilling/upskilling programmes at scale. Draft AI Action Plan lists human capital development as a pillar but no active programmes yet.

   Note: Planned; not yet operational

   Sources iafrica.com (opens in a new tab)

8. H4.8

   Labour transition policy

   Score 1 / 4

   No labour transition policy for AI. Broader labour framework does not address AI. Under discussion as part of AI Action Plan development.

   Note: Not initiated

9. H4.9

   Informal economy AI assessment

   Score 1 / 4

   No government assessment of AI's impact on informal economy published. AI Action Plan acknowledges inclusive development goals.

   Note: Not conducted

10. H4.10

    African language NLP coverage

    Score 0 / 4

    Ministry of Digital Transition launched initiative in March 2026 to develop NLP resources for 4 national languages: Moore, Dioula, Fulfuldé, and Gulmancema. Workshop began 24 March 2026 with linguists, journalists, AI specialists.

    Note: 4 languages in active NLP development; not yet fully operational

    Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 0 of 3 (languages supported / major languages), normalised 0. 0% of major domestic languages. Raw value read from the evidence: "4 languages in active NLP development; not yet fully operational" [NLP resources for Moore, Dioula, Fulfulde, Gulmancema being built (March 2026); denominator. Listed for second-edition review: The Thresholds sheet lists Mossi and Dyula as covered by NLLB-200, which gives at least 2 of 3 major languages. The count used follows the profile text.

    Sources techafricanews.com (opens in a new tab)

Mean of all 10 indicator scores. West Africa mean 1.04 · all 54 states mean 1.05.

1. N5.1

   AI companies count

   Score 1 / 4

   Very limited AI startup ecosystem. Burkina Faso not among the African 'Big Four' (Nigeria, Kenya, SA, Egypt) for AI investment. Security situation and political instability have constrained ecosystem development.

   Note: Fewer than 10 AI-focused startups estimated; ecosystem nascent

   Scoring basis Fellow score kept; no raw value for the threshold.

   Sources techinafrica.com (opens in a new tab)

2. N5.2

   Private AI investment (USD)

   Score 1 / 4

   Minimal documented private AI investment. Burkina Faso accounted for a negligible share of Africa's $600m+ AI funding in 2024. Security/political environment deters FDI.

   Note: Estimated <$1 million in dedicated AI investment annually

   Scoring basis Fellow score kept; no raw value for the threshold.

   Sources africanexponent.com (opens in a new tab)

3. N5.3

   AI incubators/accelerators

   Score 0 / 4

   No AI-specific incubators or accelerators identified. Burkina Faso Tech Hub (Ouagadougou) exists but focus is not AI-specific. Operations constrained by security context.

   Note: General tech hubs exist; no AI-specific programmes

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 0 (incubators/accelerators). Raw value read from the evidence: "No AI-specific incubators or accelerators identified." Checked against the evidence on 7 October 2026: confirmed.

4. N5.4

   Regulatory sandbox (AI)

   Score 1 / 4

   No AI regulatory sandbox. AI Action Plan identifies regulatory framework as a future pillar. No fintech sandbox comparable to other West African countries.

   Note: Not planned in near term

5. N5.5

   Government AI procurement

   Score 1 / 4

   Government procurement of AI solutions is ad hoc at best. No formal AI procurement framework. Digital transformation initiatives underway but primarily infrastructure-focused.

   Note: No formal AI procurement framework

   Sources datacentresafrica.com (opens in a new tab)

6. N5.6

   AI safety evaluation capacity

   Score 1 / 4

   No AI safety testing facility. 2iE has some research capacity. National AI Action Plan mentions innovation support. No accredited evaluation labs.

   Note: No capacity

7. N5.7

   ISO/IEC 42001 adoption

   Score 1 / 4

   No ISO/IEC 42001 adoption documented. No evidence of awareness in public sector.

   Note: Unknown/unaware

8. N5.8

   Standards body AI competency

   Score 1 / 4

   ABNORM (Agence Burkinabè de Normalisation, de la Métrologie et de la Qualité) is the standards body. No AI technical committee established.

   Note: Standards body exists; no AI focus

9. N5.9

   AI risk assessment frameworks

   Score 1 / 4

   No AI risk assessment frameworks in use. AI Action Plan will address legal/ethical framework but nothing enacted.

   Note: None established

   Sources iafrica.com (opens in a new tab)

10. N5.10

    University-industry AI partnerships

    Score 1 / 4

    No formal university-industry AI partnerships documented. Security context limits foreign university partnerships. 2iE has some international links (France).

    Note: Informal at best

Mean of all 10 indicator scores. West Africa mean 1.21 · all 54 states mean 1.26.

1. E6.1

   Algorithmic impact assessment

   Score 1 / 4

   No algorithmic impact assessment requirements. AI Action Plan will include ethical framework but not yet drafted.

   Note: Planned; not yet enacted

   Sources iafrica.com (opens in a new tab)

2. E6.2

   Bias audit requirements

   Score 1 / 4

   No bias audit requirements. AI Action Plan consultation discussed ethics and bias as topics.

   Note: Not established

   Sources iafrica.com (opens in a new tab)

3. E6.3

   Transparency obligations

   Score 1 / 4

   No transparency requirements for AI. Data Protection Law 2021 includes general transparency obligations for data processing.

   Note: General data transparency only; no AI-specific mandate

   Sources dataprotection.africa (opens in a new tab)

4. E6.4

   Citizen redress mechanism

   Score 2 / 4

   Citizens can file complaints with CIL under Data Protection Law. CIL has imposed enforcement actions. No AI-specific complaint channel.

   Note: DPA complaint channel functional; no AI-specific mechanism

   Sources techhiveadvisory.africa (opens in a new tab)

5. E6.5

   Judicial AI remedy

   Score 1 / 4

   Courts can hear digital rights cases under general law. No AI precedent cases documented. Justice system capacity constrained.

   Note: No AI jurisprudence

6. E6.6

   AI advisory body diversity

   Score 1 / 4

   No formal AI advisory body. August 2025 workshop included diverse stakeholders but was a one-time consultation, not a standing body.

   Note: No advisory body established

   Sources iafrica.com (opens in a new tab)

7. E6.7

   Global AI governance participation

   Score 2 / 4

   AI Action Plan consultation explicitly referenced AI as a tool for sovereignty and local solutions. Dr Somé stated AI should 'deliver concrete solutions for all citizens'. African/local identity referenced through national language NLP initiative (Moore, Dioula, Fulfuldé, Gulmancema).

   Note: African sovereignty and local values substantively referenced

   Sources iafrica.com (opens in a new tab)

8. E6.8

   Civil society AI engagement

   Score 1 / 4

   CIL engaged in ad hoc consultations. No formal civil society advisory role in AI governance. Security context limits civil society space generally.

   Note: Limited civil society space under military governance

   Sources techhiveadvisory.africa (opens in a new tab)

9. E6.9

   African ethical framework reference

   Score 2 / 4

   AI Action Plan documentation explicitly frames AI as a tool for national sovereignty, inclusion, and local solutions. Local language NLP initiative strongly reflects cultural grounding.

   Note: African values substantively present; not codified as foundational framework

   Sources allafrica.com (opens in a new tab)

10. E6.10

    Youth participation

    Score 1 / 4

    Youth included in August 2025 workshop (multi-stakeholder event) but no formal youth AI governance mechanism. Security context constrains civic engagement.

    Note: Ad hoc inclusion at best

    Sources iafrica.com (opens in a new tab)

Mean of the 9 scored indicators; 1 carries no score. West Africa mean 1.66 · all 54 states mean 1.55.

No score: 1 not applicable.

1. R7.1

   AU AI Strategy alignment

   Score 1 / 4

   No formal AU Continental AI Strategy alignment process initiated. Burkina Faso is aware of AU AI Strategy. Security/political context has disrupted regional engagement.

   Note: Awareness only; alignment not initiated

   Sources columncontent.com (opens in a new tab)

2. R7.2

   Kigali Declaration endorsement

   Score 3 / 4

   No evidence of Kigali AI Declaration endorsement. Burkina Faso under military junta has significantly reduced multilateral engagement.

   Note: Not endorsed; political context a barrier

   Scoring basis Official signatory list applied. Signatory of the Africa Declaration on AI (Kigali, 4 April 2025), C4IR list: "Endorsed" = 3.

   Sources c4ir.rw (opens in a new tab)

3. R7.3

   REC AI governance coordination

   Score 1 / 4

   Burkina Faso WITHDREW from ECOWAS in January 2024 (along with Mali and Niger). This significantly limits REC-level AI governance coordination.

   Note: ECOWAS withdrawal is a critical governance gap; AES (Alliance of Sahel States) formed instead

   Sources 2021-2025.state.gov (opens in a new tab)

4. R7.4

   Cross-border AI agreements

   Score 1 / 4

   No bilateral AI governance agreements. Some bilateral digital cooperation with India and France documented. ECOWAS withdrawal limits regional AI agreements.

   Note: No AI-specific agreements; general digital cooperation with India/France

   Sources biometricupdate.com (opens in a new tab)

5. R7.5

   Election integrity AI provisions

   Score 1 / 4

   No specific legal provisions on AI in elections. Electoral process suspended since 2022 coup; no elections held under military junta. AI-generated disinformation incidents documented.

   Note: No elections since 2022; AI disinformation noted as risk

   Sources brookings.edu (opens in a new tab)

6. R7.6

   Disinformation response framework

   Score 1 / 4

   No formal disinformation response framework. AI avatars spreading disinformation documented. Junta has internet/media restrictions in place. CIL issued social media data warning.

   Note: Ad hoc restrictions; no AI disinformation legislation

   Sources brookings.edu (opens in a new tab)

7. R7.7

   AI election incidents documented

   ○N/A: Does not apply to this country

   AI avatar disinformation incidents documented in Burkina Faso, cited by Brookings (2025). Security and conflict context creates active AI misuse environment. 2 confirmed incidents.

   Note: At least 2 documented AI disinformation incidents

   Scoring basis Not applicable; excluded from the pillar mean. No national election or referendum in the reference window (R7.7 rule, thresholds.csv).

   Sources brookings.edu (opens in a new tab)

8. R7.8

   Platform content moderation

   Score 1 / 4

   No formal platform content moderation requirements. Government has imposed internet shutdowns and media restrictions. No engagement with platforms on AI-specific moderation.

   Note: No engagement; government uses blunt instrument of shutdowns

9. R7.9

   Geneva Dialogue participation

   Score 1 / 4

   No confirmed participation in Geneva Dialogue on AI Governance (July 2026). Burkina Faso's diplomatic isolation under junta limits multilateral AI engagement.

   Note: Not confirmed; political isolation a barrier

10. R7.10

    G20/multilateral AI engagement

    Score 1 / 4

    Burkina Faso is not G20 member. Withdrew from ECOWAS. Forming Alliance of Sahel States (AES) with Mali and Niger, limited AI governance dimension. Engagement in AU AI forums limited.

    Note: Significantly reduced multilateral engagement under junta

    Sources 2021-2025.state.gov (opens in a new tab)

Mean of all 10 indicator scores. West Africa mean 0.63 · all 54 states mean 0.78.

1. M8.1

   AI governance budget disbursed

   Score 0 / 4

   No dedicated AI governance budget line. 2026 digital ministry budget is 61 billion FCFA ($109.4m), doubled from 2025, but covers all digital activities. No AI governance-specific disbursement documented.

   Note: No AI governance budget line; embedded in broad digital budget

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value read from the evidence: "No AI governance budget line; embedded in broad digital budget" [2026 digital ministry budget $109.4m covers all digital activities]. Checked against the evidence on 7 October 2026: confirmed.

   Sources ecofinagency.com (opens in a new tab)

2. M8.2

   Health AI regulation

   Score 1 / 4

   No AI health regulation. AI Action Plan names health as a priority sector. No guidelines or legislation enacted. Healthcare system severely strained by ongoing conflict.

   Note: Under discussion in AI Action Plan; no enacted guidance

3. M8.3

   Health AI devices approved

   Score 0 / 4

   No AI health device approval framework. Medical device regulation limited. No formal approvals documented.

   Note: None

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 0 (authorised devices). Raw value read from the evidence: "No formal approvals documented." Checked against the evidence on 7 October 2026: confirmed.

4. M8.4

   Government AI system registry

   Score 0 / 4

   No government registry of AI systems. AI Action Plan will propose governance mechanisms but none yet established.

   Note: None

5. M8.5

   AI governance M&E reports

   Score 0 / 4

   No published M&E reports on AI governance. AI Action Plan not yet adopted; implementation not started.

   Note: No reports published

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 0 (reports).

6. M8.6

   Agriculture AI governance

   Score 1 / 4

   AI Action Plan names agriculture as a priority sector. No sector-specific AI agriculture guidelines or legislation. Conflict has severely disrupted agricultural governance capacity.

   Note: Under discussion; severely constrained by security context

   Sources ecofinagency.com (opens in a new tab)

7. M8.7

   Financial services AI governance

   Score 1 / 4

   No central bank AI guidance specific to financial services. Banking sector disrupted by security crisis. No sector-specific AI financial regulation.

   Note: Nascent; conflict constrains financial sector development

8. M8.8

   Education AI governance

   Score 1 / 4

   No AI in education governance. AI Action Plan mentions skills and training. Schools disrupted by conflict, over 6,500 schools closed due to insecurity as of 2025.

   Note: Severely constrained by security/conflict context

9. M8.9

   Measurable governance outcomes

   Score 1 / 4

   Documented AI misuse incident: AI avatars spreading disinformation in Burkina Faso (Brookings 2025). No protective AI governance outcomes documented. Anecdotal evidence only.

   Note: No protective outcomes; AI governance framework does not yet exist

   Sources brookings.edu (opens in a new tab)

10. M8.10

    WHO AI health guidance adoption

    Score 1 / 4

    WHO Ethics and Governance of AI for Health guidance not formally adopted. AI Action Plan includes health as a priority sector. Awareness likely given international engagement.

    Note: Not adopted; awareness assumed from international engagement