Country Profile on AI Governance: Chad

Mean of all 10 indicator scores. Central Africa mean 1.40 · all 54 states mean 1.76.

1. S1.1

   National AI strategy existence

   Score 2 / 4

   National Digital Strategy 2020-2030 adopted with AI provisions; UNESCO RAM completed for Chad; UNESCO observatory notes 'sectoral strategies in which digital technology plays a fundamental role' serving as operational basis for a national AI roadmap

   Note: Digital strategy exists with AI dimension; standalone national AI strategy still under development using the RAM as a technical foundation

   Sources unesco.org (opens in a new tab)

2. S1.2

   Strategy adoption date

   Score 0 / 4

   National Digital Strategy 2020-2030 adopted; AI-specific standalone strategy not yet formally adopted as of June 2026

   Note: No standalone AI strategy adoption date; digital strategy serves as interim framework

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

   Sources unesco.org (opens in a new tab)

3. S1.3

   Political commitment signals

   Score 2 / 4

   MCENDA (dedicated Ministry for Digital Economy and Digital Innovation) established; ARCEP Chad engaged with ITU at GSR-25 Riyadh (September 2025); Chad participated in UNESCO RAM process

   Note: Ministry-level engagement documented; no presidential AI directive confirmed

   Sources techafricanews.com (opens in a new tab)

4. S1.4

   Dedicated AI budget allocation

   Score 1 / 4

   No ring-fenced national AI budget found; digital economy activities embedded within MCENDA/ICT ministry budget; no multi-year AI allocation confirmed

   Note: Tight fiscal environment; UNESCO and ITU technical assistance is primary AI investment channel

5. S1.5

   AU Continental AI Strategy alignment

   Score 2 / 4

   Chad ratified the AU Malabo Convention (original 15 ratifiers, entered force June 2023); UNESCO RAM completed; ARCEP-ITU engagement (GSR-25, Sept 2025) references AU digital transformation targets

   Note: Malabo ratification demonstrates formal AU alignment process; full AU AI strategy alignment not independently confirmed through AU reporting

   Sources diplomacy.edu (opens in a new tab)

6. S1.6

   Multi-stakeholder consultation

   Score 2 / 4

   UNESCO RAM consultations (2024) included diverse stakeholders from government, civil society, and private sector; UNESCO observatory explicitly notes stakeholder consultations identified infrastructure as the 'cornerstone constraint' for AI

   Note: RAM-driven multi-stakeholder consultation documented; permanent ongoing consultation mechanism not yet institutionalised

   Sources unesco.org (opens in a new tab)

7. S1.7

   Sector prioritisation

   Score 2 / 4

   National Digital Strategy 2020-2030 identifies priority sectors; UNESCO RAM includes sector-level AI readiness analysis; no standalone AI-specific sector roadmaps published

   Note: Generic sectoral priority identification within digital strategy; no sector-specific AI roadmaps confirmed

   Sources unesco.org (opens in a new tab)

8. S1.8

   Implementation roadmap

   Score 1 / 4

   Digital Strategy 2020-2030 contains a general implementation roadmap; AI roadmap described as 'operational basis' by UNESCO but not yet adopted as a formal AI action plan

   Note: General digital roadmap exists; AI-specific phased implementation plan is pending

   Sources unesco.org (opens in a new tab)

9. S1.9

   Monitoring and evaluation framework

   Score 1 / 4

   No AI-specific M&E framework published; ARCEP Chad is developing a market observatory for ICT sector as part of ITU partnership (GSR-25, Sept 2025)

   Note: ICT regulatory observatory under development; AI-specific M&E not yet planned

   Sources techafricanews.com (opens in a new tab)

10. S1.10

    Strategy review mechanism

    Score 1 / 4

    ITU technical assistance engagement (GSR-25, Sept 2025) supports review capacity building; no formal AI strategy review mechanism gazetted; MCENDA/ADETIC provide general ICT review function

    Note: Implicit review function via ITU partnership; no adaptive AI governance mechanism established

    Sources techafricanews.com (opens in a new tab)

Mean of all 10 indicator scores. Central Africa mean 1.31 · all 54 states mean 1.32.

1. G2.1

   AI-specific legislation

   Score 1 / 4

   No AI-specific law enacted; AI governance under discussion via National Digital Strategy 2020-2030; cybercrime provisions exist within the digital framework

   Note: Under discussion; digital strategy serves as de facto governance framework pending a specific AI law

2. G2.2

   Data protection law status

   Score 2 / 4

   Chad ratified the Malabo Convention (which requires DPA establishment); data protection provisions exist within the digital governance framework; status of a standalone comprehensive national data protection law unclear from public sources

   Note: Malabo ratification mandates DPA establishment; standalone data protection law status requires direct verification via government gazette; scored 2 (developing) conservatively

   Sources diplomacy.edu (opens in a new tab)

3. G2.3

   DPA AI mandate

   Score 1 / 4

   DPA establishment required by Malabo Convention ratification; operational status of a DPA in Chad not confirmed from public sources as of June 2026; no AI-specific mandate documented

   Note: Malabo Convention mandates DPA; implementation not confirmed from open sources; critical capacity gap

4. G2.4

   DPA staffing and budget

   Score 0 / 4

   No published data on DPA staff count or AI competency; DPA operational status itself unconfirmed

   Note: Cannot assess without confirmed DPA establishment

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

5. G2.5

   AI regulatory body existence

   Score 1 / 4

   MCENDA + ADETIC + ANSICE provide centralised ICT/digital governance; UNESCO observatory identifies these as 'promoting a comprehensive and integrated vision' reducing institutional fragmentation; no dedicated AI regulatory body

   Note: Ministerial and agency-level ICT governance institutions exist with AI oversight potential; no standalone dedicated AI regulatory or advisory body confirmed

   Sources unesco.org (opens in a new tab)

6. G2.6

   Institutional design model

   Score 2 / 4

   Centralised model: MCENDA + ADETIC + ANSICE consolidates digital governance; UNESCO RAM explicitly identifies the centralised institutional architecture as a strength, reducing fragmentation and enabling a 'comprehensive and integrated vision'

   Note: Centralised institutional model noted as governance strength in UNESCO RAM; DPA-led AI oversight planned under Malabo obligations

   Sources unesco.org (opens in a new tab)

7. G2.7

   Malabo Convention ratification

   Score 4 / 4

   Chad was one of the original 15 Malabo Convention ratifiers; the AU Convention on Cybersecurity and Personal Data Protection entered into force on 8 June 2023 after Chad and 14 other states ratified

   Note: ADVANCED, Full Malabo ratification; among the strongest regulatory governance signals in Central Africa alongside Gabon and Republic of Congo

   Sources diplomacy.edu (opens in a new tab)

8. G2.8

   Enforcement actions taken

   Score 1 / 4

   Cybercrime provisions exist within Chad's digital governance framework; no AI-specific enforcement actions documented; ARCEP Chad has telecom sector regulatory authority

   Note: General digital regulatory enforcement capacity exists; AI-specific enforcement absent

9. G2.9

   Extraterritorial provisions

   Score 1 / 4

   Partial extraterritorial coverage within Chad's digital governance framework; Malabo Convention provides a regional multilateral framework for cross-border data issues

   Note: Malabo-based partial coverage; no confirmed standalone extraterritorial AI provision

10. G2.10

    IP framework for AI

    Score 0 / 4

    No review of IP legislation for AI-generated content identified; OAPI (Organisation Africaine de la Propriete Intellectuelle), headquartered in Yaounde, covers Chad for intellectual property

    Note: OAPI provides regional IP framework; domestic AI-specific IP review not initiated

Mean of the 8 scored indicators; 2 carry no score. Central Africa mean 1.20 · all 54 states mean 1.51.

No score: 1 not applicable, 1 context only.

1. I3.1

   Data center count

   Score 0 / 4

   Very limited commercial data center infrastructure; N'Djamena-based facilities not confirmed at Tier 1+ level; government ICT systems rely primarily on facilities in Cameroon and externally hosted services

   Note: Landlocked geography severely limits data center development; no confirmed commercial Tier data center

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 0 (data centres). Raw value read from the evidence: "no confirmed commercial Tier data center" [absence of confirmed commercial DC]. Checked against the evidence on 7 October 2026: confirmed.

2. I3.2

   Data center capacity (MW)

   Score 0 / 4

   No published MW capacity data for Chad data centers; infrastructure assessed as pre-Tier level

   Note: Cannot quantify; infrastructure severely constrained

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

3. I3.3

   Submarine cable landing points

   ○N/A: Does not apply to this country

   Chad is landlocked with no submarine cable landing points; connectivity relies on fibre backhaul through Cameroon (via SAT-3/WACS cables), Nigeria, and satellite systems

   Note: Structural infrastructure constraint; international connectivity entirely dependent on terrestrial fibre through neighbouring countries

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

4. I3.4

   International bandwidth (Gbps)

   Score 1 / 4

   Very low internet penetration (estimated 15-22% as of 2024-25); heavily dependent on satellite and limited fibre links transiting Cameroon; mobile internet is primary access channel

   Note: Among the least-connected countries in the region; ARCEP Chad developing monitoring capacity via ITU partnership

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

5. I3.5

   Hyperscaler presence

   Score 0 / 4

   No confirmed AWS, Azure, Microsoft, or Google Cloud local infrastructure in Chad; no hyperscaler regional point-of-presence confirmed

   Note: Structural barrier; no hyperscaler has committed to Chad infrastructure as of June 2026

6. I3.6

   GPU/HPC access

   Score 0 / 4

   No national HPC or GPU facility confirmed; no academic computing facility identified for AI research; University of N'Djamena has very limited computing resources

   Note: Severe constraint for AI research and development

7. I3.7

   Data localisation provisions

   Score 1 / 4

   Malabo Convention ratification requires a data localisation framework; specific implementation of localisation obligations not confirmed from public sources

   Note: Malabo-mandated; domestic implementation not yet operationally confirmed from open sources

   Sources diplomacy.edu (opens in a new tab)

8. I3.8

   Cross-border data flow framework

   Score 2 / 4

   Malabo Convention ratification (June 2023) provides a multilateral framework for cross-border data flows; cybercrime provisions in digital framework address some cross-border digital offences

   Note: Malabo provides the regional multilateral framework; bilateral AI-specific data flow agreements not confirmed

   Sources diplomacy.edu (opens in a new tab)

9. I3.9

   Foreign AI surveillance spending

   ○Context only: Context flag outside the score

   No documented government spending on foreign AI surveillance systems; risk flagged by regional security context (Sahel/Lake Chad Basin conflicts) but no procurement evidence found

   Note: Absence of evidence; surveillance procurement data, if any, likely not publicly available

   Scoring basis Context flag; outside the score. Raw value read from the evidence: "No documented government spending on foreign AI surveillance systems" [notes: data, if any, likely not public].

10. I3.10

    Sovereign cloud initiatives

    Score 0 / 4

    No national sovereign cloud initiative identified; all government digital services rely on externally hosted or Cameroon-based infrastructure

    Note: Infrastructure development needed; no confirmed timeline or investment for sovereign cloud

Mean of all 10 indicator scores. Central Africa mean 0.69 · all 54 states mean 1.20.

1. H4.1

   AI researchers per million

   Score 0 / 4

   Severely constrained; UNESCO RAM notes digital infrastructure as the 'cornerstone constraint' for AI development; no official AI researcher count published; University of N'Djamena has very limited AI/ML research capacity

   Note: Estimated fewer than 5 dedicated AI researchers nationally; no per-million statistic published

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

   Sources unesco.org (opens in a new tab)

2. H4.2

   DPA staff with AI competency

   Score 0 / 4

   DPA operational status itself unconfirmed; no published data on AI-competent staff within any regulatory authority

   Note: Cannot assess without confirmed DPA establishment

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

3. H4.3

   University AI programs

   Score 0 / 4

   University of N'Djamena has a Faculty of Exact and Applied Sciences with computer science programs; no confirmed dedicated AI or ML degree program; Universite Adam Barka de Abeche also has science programs

   Note: General CS education exists; dedicated AI/ML university programme not confirmed

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

4. H4.4

   African-authored AI publications

   Score 1 / 4

   Very limited AI publications; Chad's UNESCO RAM report (2024) is itself one of the most substantive domestic AI research outputs; no annual count of AI publications from Chadian institutions found

   Note: RAM report as proxy; no structured AI publication database for Chad available

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. 4.0 papers/yr ÷ 20.30m people = 0.20 per million (floors applied).

   Sources unesco.org (opens in a new tab)

5. H4.5

   AI patents filed

   Score 0 / 4

   No AI-related patents filed in Chad identified; OAPI (African IP Organisation) covers Chad but no AI patent statistics found

   Note: Patent filing infrastructure exists via OAPI; AI patent activity absent

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 0 (AI patent applications/year). Raw value read from the evidence: "No AI-related patents filed in Chad identified". Checked against the evidence on 7 October 2026: confirmed.

6. H4.6

   K-12 CS education

   Score 0 / 4

   No confirmed mandatory K-12 computer science or digital literacy curriculum; National Digital Strategy 2020-2030 references digital literacy goals but implementation not confirmed

   Note: Planned in digital strategy; not yet implemented

7. H4.7

   AI workforce training programs

   Score 1 / 4

   ITU engagement via ARCEP Chad (GSR-25, Sept 2025) includes capacity-building components; UNESCO RAM process involved training government officials; no government-scale AI workforce programme confirmed

   Note: International capacity-building (ITU/UNESCO) is primary training vehicle; no domestic government-funded AI skills programme at scale

   Sources techafricanews.com (opens in a new tab)

8. H4.8

   Labour transition policy

   Score 0 / 4

   No formal government framework for AI and labour market transition identified; informal economy represents majority of Chad's workforce; no assessment commissioned

   Note: Under discussion at most; no evidence of formal policy process

9. H4.9

   Informal economy AI assessment

   Score 0 / 4

   No government assessment of AI's impact on Chad's informal economy found; informal sector represents 80%+ of employment

   Note: Critical gap given scale of informal economy in Chad

10. H4.10

    African language NLP coverage

    Score 0 / 4

    Arabic (official) and Chadian Arabic have some NLP research; French is dominant in digital services; Sara and other Chadian languages have very limited NLP coverage; no sovereign LLM or domestic NLP tool confirmed

    Note: Regional Chadian Arabic NLP tools may exist; Sara, Ngambay, Maba and other major languages have minimal NLP coverage

    Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 0 of 2 (languages supported / major languages), normalised 0. 0% of major domestic languages. Raw value read from the evidence: "Regional Chadian Arabic NLP tools may exist" ["may exist" not confirmed; Sara/Ngambay minimal; denominator (set by the editors, not taken from the profile text). Checked against the evidence on 7 October 2026: confirmed.

Mean of all 10 indicator scores. Central Africa mean 0.67 · all 54 states mean 1.05.

1. N5.1

   AI companies count

   Score 1 / 4

   Very few AI companies confirmed; N'Djamena tech scene is nascent; mobile money and fintech (Orange Money, Airtel Money) represent the most tech-advanced commercial sector; no AI company registry

   Note: Estimated fewer than 10 tech-adjacent firms with AI components; dedicated pure-AI companies not confirmed

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

2. N5.2

   Private AI investment (USD)

   Score 0 / 4

   Minimal private AI investment documented; no VC or angel investment specifically targeting AI in Chad identified; international donor funding (ITU, UNESCO, World Bank) is primary source of digital investment

   Note: Investment severely constrained by infrastructure gaps and limited ecosystem

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

3. N5.3

   AI incubators/accelerators

   Score 0 / 4

   One or two general technology hubs or co-working spaces in N'Djamena; no dedicated AI-specific accelerator or incubator confirmed

   Note: General entrepreneurship support exists; AI-specific acceleration infrastructure absent

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

4. N5.4

   Regulatory sandbox (AI)

   Score 0 / 4

   No AI-specific regulatory sandbox identified; no digital financial services sandbox confirmed despite growing mobile money sector

   Note: Sandbox model not yet adopted in Chad

5. N5.5

   Government AI procurement

   Score 1 / 4

   Ad hoc government procurement of ICT systems; no formal domestic AI procurement preference policy identified; ARCEP Chad procures regulatory tools via international partners

   Note: Informal/ad hoc procurement; no domestic developer preference policy

6. N5.6

   AI safety evaluation capacity

   Score 0 / 4

   No AI safety testing or evaluation facility identified; ANSICE has ICT security oversight but no AI safety-specific mandate or capacity

   Note: Critical gap; ANSICE may have potential for AI security oversight with capacity building

7. N5.7

   ISO/IEC 42001 adoption

   Score 0 / 4

   No evidence of ISO/IEC 42001 (AI Management System) adoption; national standards body has no confirmed AI-specific work

   Note: Standards ecosystem for AI not yet developed in Chad

8. N5.8

   Standards body AI competency

   Score 0 / 4

   National standards body (ONAC) exists but has no confirmed AI-specific technical committee or working group

   Note: Standards body exists; AI technical capacity absent

9. N5.9

   AI risk assessment frameworks

   Score 1 / 4

   UNESCO RAM (2024) constitutes the most comprehensive risk assessment for AI in Chad; no sector-specific or cross-sector mandatory AI risk assessment framework exists

   Note: RAM as voluntary external assessment; no regulatory AI risk framework domestically

   Sources unesco.org (opens in a new tab)

10. N5.10

    University-industry AI partnerships

    Score 0 / 4

    No formal university-industry AI partnerships confirmed; University of N'Djamena has no documented joint AI research programmes with private sector

    Note: University-industry collaboration nascent; AI-specific partnerships not documented

Mean of all 10 indicator scores. Central Africa mean 1.16 · all 54 states mean 1.26.

1. E6.1

   Algorithmic impact assessment

   Score 0 / 4

   No algorithmic impact assessment requirement identified; data protection provisions under Malabo Convention obligations may partially address automated decision risks but no AIA mechanism established

   Note: Malabo ratification creates indirect pressure for data protection impact assessments; no AIA requirement established

2. E6.2

   Bias audit requirements

   Score 0 / 4

   No bias audit requirements identified for any sector or risk level; no regulatory guidance issued

   Note: Critical gap; AI bias risks are high in contexts with limited governance capacity

3. E6.3

   Transparency obligations

   Score 1 / 4

   Malabo Convention ratification creates transparency obligations for data processing; no broader AI system transparency obligation found

   Note: Malabo-based transparency provisions only; sector-specific or AI-specific transparency rules absent

   Sources diplomacy.edu (opens in a new tab)

4. E6.4

   Citizen redress mechanism

   Score 1 / 4

   Malabo Convention requires DPA complaint mechanisms; DPA operational status unclear; no dedicated AI complaint channel exists

   Note: Legal pathway implied by Malabo; operational delivery uncertain given unconfirmed DPA status

   Sources diplomacy.edu (opens in a new tab)

5. E6.5

   Judicial AI remedy

   Score 0 / 4

   No AI-specific judicial precedent documented; courts available for general disputes but no established AI jurisdiction or case law

   Note: Court system exists but untested on AI-specific disputes

6. E6.6

   AI advisory body diversity

   Score 0 / 4

   No national AI advisory body with documented membership or diversity criteria; MCENDA + ADETIC governance does not constitute a formal multi-stakeholder AI advisory body

   Note: Institutional capacity constraint; advisory body formation would require significant capacity building

7. E6.7

   Global AI governance participation

   Score 2 / 4

   UNESCO RAM completed for Chad (2024), UNESCO is an active multilateral partner; ARCEP Chad engaged with ITU at GSR-25 (Riyadh, September 2025); Chad listed in UNESCO RAM completed countries registry

   Note: Active ITU and UNESCO multilateral engagement documented; not a GPAI member or OECD AI Policy Observatory member

   Sources techafricanews.com (opens in a new tab)

8. E6.8

   Civil society AI engagement

   Score 1 / 4

   UNESCO RAM consultations included civil society participation; no permanent formal civil society AI governance mechanism established

   Note: Event-based consultation via RAM process; no standing civil society advisory role in AI governance

   Sources unesco.org (opens in a new tab)

9. E6.9

   African ethical framework reference

   Score 1 / 4

   UNESCO RAM process explicitly grounds AI governance recommendations in local Chadian context; no specific African ethical framework (Ubuntu, etc.) explicitly named in policy documents

   Note: Local context acknowledged via UNESCO RAM; no formal integration of African ethical principles in digital governance documents

   Sources unesco.org (opens in a new tab)

10. E6.10

    Youth participation

    Score 0 / 4

    No formal mechanism for youth participation in AI governance identified; youth represented in civil society but no structured AI governance advisory role

    Note: Youth demographic is significant (median age ~17 years) but no formal AI governance channel established

Mean of all 10 indicator scores. Central Africa mean 1.34 · all 54 states mean 1.55.

1. R7.1

   AU AI Strategy alignment

   Score 2 / 4

   UNESCO RAM completed (2024), primary AU AI alignment process; Malabo Convention ratification (original 15 ratifiers); ARCEP Chad-ITU engagement (GSR-25) references AU digital transformation targets

   Note: Alignment process underway via UNESCO/Malabo channels; formal AU AI Technical Committee engagement not confirmed

   Sources unesco.org (opens in a new tab)

2. R7.2

   Kigali Declaration endorsement

   Score 3 / 4

   No confirmed endorsement of the Kigali Declaration on AI Governance found for Chad

   Note: Likely under consideration; no public endorsement documentation found

   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 2 / 4

   ECCAS member (Economic Community of Central African States); cybersecurity provisions reference ECCAS standards; no confirmed dedicated AI-specific ECCAS governance coordination

   Note: Active ECCAS membership; digital governance coordination at CEMAC level; AI-specific coordination not confirmed

4. R7.4

   Cross-border AI agreements

   Score 2 / 4

   Malabo Convention ratification provides a multilateral framework for cross-border data governance; no bilateral AI-specific governance cooperation agreements confirmed

   Note: Malabo as multilateral cross-border framework; bilateral AI agreements not confirmed

   Sources diplomacy.edu (opens in a new tab)

5. R7.5

   Election integrity AI provisions

   Score 0 / 4

   No specific legal or institutional provisions addressing AI use in elections found; CENI (national electoral commission) has no documented AI framework

   Note: 2024 elections held without documented AI governance provisions

6. R7.6

   Disinformation response framework

   Score 0 / 4

   No formal government framework for AI-generated disinformation identified; ANSICE has some cybersecurity capacity but no AI disinformation mandate

   Note: Disinformation risk is high in fragile Sahel context; governance response absent

7. R7.7

   AI election incidents documented

   Score 0 / 4

   No publicly documented AI-related election interference incidents in Chad

   Note: 2024 elections held; no AI-specific interference documented in public sources

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Scored on documented institutional response, not incident count. Raw value read from the evidence: "Disinformation risk is high in fragile Sahel context; governance response absent" [incidents: 0; R7.6 ANSICE has no disinformation mandate]. Checked against the evidence on 7 October 2026: confirmed.

8. R7.8

   Platform content moderation

   Score 0 / 4

   No formal government engagement with social media platforms on AI content moderation for Chadian context found

   Note: Internet shutdowns documented in past elections; AI content moderation framework absent

9. R7.9

   Geneva Dialogue participation

   Score 0 / 4

   No confirmed Chadian delegation to UN Global Dialogue on AI Governance (July 2026); participation not registered in public sources

   Note: Capacity constraints likely prevent active multilateral AI governance participation

10. R7.10

    G20/multilateral AI engagement

    Score 1 / 4

    Not a G20 or BRICS member; ITU (GSR-25, Sept 2025) and UNESCO engagement are primary multilateral AI/digital governance channels

    Note: Observer-level multilateral engagement via ITU and UNESCO; no leadership or active membership in major multilateral AI bodies

    Sources techafricanews.com (opens in a new tab)

Mean of all 10 indicator scores. Central Africa mean 0.60 · all 54 states mean 0.78.

1. M8.1

   AI governance budget disbursed

   Score 0 / 4

   No AI governance budget disbursement data found; UNESCO and ITU technical assistance is primary investment channel; no government AI budget line confirmed

   Note: International organisations (UNESCO, ITU, World Bank) fund AI-relevant activities; no domestic government AI governance budget confirmed

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

2. M8.2

   Health AI regulation

   Score 0 / 4

   No health AI regulation identified; no AI-specific provisions in health sector legislation; general health data governance framework absent

   Note: WHO and USAID programmes operate in Chad but no AI health governance framework established

3. M8.3

   Health AI devices approved

   Score 0 / 4

   No AI health device or tool formally approved; no regulatory approval mechanism for health AI exists

   Note: Health system capacity constraints preclude AI device regulation

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 0 (authorised devices).

4. M8.4

   Government AI system registry

   Score 0 / 4

   No government registry of AI systems in use identified; government digital systems not publicly catalogued

   Note: Basic e-government systems exist but are not catalogued in an AI registry

5. M8.5

   AI governance M&E reports

   Score 0 / 4

   UNESCO RAM country report (2024) constitutes a governance assessment document; no government-published AI M&E report found

   Note: External assessment (UNESCO RAM) is the only published governance-relevant report; government M&E cycle not established

   Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 0 (reports). Raw value read from the evidence: "no government-published AI M&E report found" [UNESCO RAM excluded]. Checked against the evidence on 7 October 2026: confirmed.

   Sources unesco.org (opens in a new tab)

6. M8.6

   Agriculture AI governance

   Score 0 / 4

   No AI governance provisions specific to agriculture identified; agriculture sector (80%+ rural population) receives no AI-specific governance framework despite being the dominant economic sector

   Note: Critical gap given agriculture's centrality to Chad's economy and the food security context in the Sahel

7. M8.7

   Financial services AI governance

   Score 0 / 4

   BEAC (Banque des Etats de l'Afrique Centrale) is regional central bank; no Chad-specific or BEAC-level AI guidance for financial services found; mobile money growing (Orange Money, Airtel Money) without AI governance framework

   Note: Fintech mobile money sector is active but unregulated from an AI governance perspective

8. M8.8

   Education AI governance

   Score 0 / 4

   No AI governance provisions specific to education identified; national education system does not reference AI in curriculum or policy documents

   Note: Under discussion at most; no formal education AI policy process

9. M8.9

   Measurable governance outcomes

   Score 0 / 4

   No measurable AI governance outcomes documented; UNESCO RAM provides a diagnostic baseline but no evidence of AI governance producing protective or developmental outcomes

   Note: Pre-implementation stage; RAM baseline established but no governance outcomes to measure

   Sources unesco.org (opens in a new tab)

10. M8.10

    WHO AI health guidance adoption

    Score 0 / 4

    No formal adoption of WHO Ethics and Governance of AI for Health guidance found; no documented alignment process or awareness programme

    Note: WHO operates health programmes in Chad but no AI health governance alignment confirmed