Africa AI Governance Index 2026 · Country profile on AI governance

Country Profile on AI Governance: Niger

Niger scores 0.73 out of 4 on the Africa AI Governance Index 2026. It sits in the Nascent tier and ranks 42 of 54 states.

Region
West Africa
Version
1.2 · 7 October 2026
Evidence reference date
30 June 2026
Overview

Niger at a glance

How to read this profile

The Index is diagnostic. It measures formal governance instruments, not capability. Composite differences under about 0.1 are not meaningful.

Country

Population (2024)
27.0 million
Region
West Africa
Regional economic communities
None of the seven blocs tracked. Left the Economic Community of West African States on 29 January 2025.
Geography
Landlocked

Governance status

  • National AI strategy S1.1

    1 / 4

  • Data protection law G2.2

    3 / 4

  • AI regulatory body G2.5

    0 / 4

  • Malabo Convention ratification G2.7

    2 / 4

  • Kigali Declaration endorsement R7.2

    3 / 4

Scores are indicator scores on the 0–4 key in the method section, not maturity tiers.

Headline assessment

Niger scores 0.73 out of 4 on the Africa AI Governance Index 2026. It sits in the Nascent tier and ranks 42 of 54 states. The score rests on 76 of 80 indicators scored from the fellow country profile. The strongest pillar is Regional Integration (1.11). The weakest is Implementation & Impact (0.10). The West Africa mean is 1.27. The mean for all 54 states is 1.33.

Strongest pillar
Regional Integration1.11 / 4Emerging
Weakest pillar
Implementation & Impact0.10 / 4Nascent

Indicators scored: 76 / 80

Pillar scores

Pillar scores at a glance

Each pillar is scored from 0 to 4 as the mean of its scored indicators.

Bar chart of Niger's eight pillar scores out of 4, compared with the West Africa mean and the mean of all 54 states. The same figures are listed beside each bar and in the table below.
  • Niger score
  • West Africa mean
  • All 54 states mean
  1. P1Strategy & Vision
    0.80Nascent

    West Africa: 1.70
    All 54 states: 1.76

  2. P2Governance & Regulation
    1.00Emerging

    West Africa: 1.18
    All 54 states: 1.32

  3. P3Infrastructure & Data
    1.00Emerging

    West Africa: 1.40
    All 54 states: 1.51

  4. P4Human Capital
    0.60Nascent

    West Africa: 1.14
    All 54 states: 1.20

  5. P5Innovation & Ecosystem
    0.33Nascent

    West Africa: 1.04
    All 54 states: 1.05

  6. P6Ethics & Inclusion
    0.70Nascent

    West Africa: 1.21
    All 54 states: 1.26

  7. P7Regional Integration
    1.11Emerging

    West Africa: 1.66
    All 54 states: 1.55

  8. P8Implementation & Impact
    0.10Nascent

    West Africa: 0.63
    All 54 states: 0.78

  9. Composite (weighted)
    0.73Nascent

    West Africa: 1.27
    All 54 states: 1.33

View the pillar scores as a table
Niger pillar scores on the Africa AI Governance Index 2026
PillarBasisWeightScore (0–4)MaturityWest Africa meanAfrica mean
P1 Strategy & VisionMean of 10/10 indicators15%0.80Nascent1.701.76
P2 Governance & RegulationMean of 10/10 indicators15%1.00Emerging1.181.32
P3 Infrastructure & DataMean of 8/10 indicators15%1.00Emerging1.401.51
P4 Human CapitalMean of 10/10 indicators15%0.60Nascent1.141.20
P5 Innovation & EcosystemMean of 9/10 indicators10%0.33Nascent1.041.05
P6 Ethics & InclusionMean of 10/10 indicators10%0.70Nascent1.211.26
P7 Regional IntegrationMean of 9/10 indicators10%1.11Emerging1.661.55
P8 Implementation & ImpactMean of 10/10 indicators10%0.10Nascent0.630.78
Composite (weighted)—100%0.73Nascent1.271.33
Country report

What the scores say about Niger

Niger scores 0.73 out of 4 on the Africa AI Governance Index 2026, which places it in the Nascent tier at rank 42 of 54. Of 80 indicators, 76 carry a score. Regional Integration is the strongest pillar at 1.11 and Implementation and Impact is the weakest at 0.10. The composite sits below the West Africa mean of 1.27 and the Africa mean of 1.33. The evidence explains the profile: Niger has a personal data protection law and is scored as a signatory of the Africa Declaration on AI, but the profile identifies no adopted national AI strategy, no AI-specific law and no AI budget, and the data protection authority was reported dissolved on 8 June 2026.

P1Strategy & Vision0.80 / 4Nascent

Strategy and Vision scores 0.80, in the Nascent tier, with all 10 indicators scored. The profile records that the government established committees for digital infrastructure governance and national digital development policy (S1.3, score 2), and that national digital policy development involved committee structures and consultations (S1.6, score 2). Niger is developing digital transformation policies, but no formally adopted National AI Strategy was identified (S1.1, score 1). A digital development roadmap exists but is not AI-specific (S1.8, score 1), and AI sector priorities are not clearly defined (S1.7, score 1). The strategy adoption date scores 0 because no adopted strategy was found (S1.2). No dedicated AI budget (S1.4, score 0) and no AI-specific monitoring framework (S1.9, score 0) were identified.

See the 10 indicators for Strategy & Vision

P2Governance & Regulation1.00 / 4Emerging

Governance and Regulation scores 1.00, in the Emerging tier, with all 10 indicators scored. Niger has a Personal Data Protection Law, Law No. 2017-28 (G2.2, score 3). The profile records the Malabo Convention as signed, with limited implementation evidence (G2.7, score 2). The data protection authority, the Haute Autorité de Protection des Données à caractère Personnel, was reported dissolved by Decree No. 2026-310/PRN/PM of 8 June 2026. The scores for its AI mandate (G2.3, score 1) and for its staffing and budget (G2.4, score 1) are retained and under second-edition review. No staff count or budget was found. No AI-specific law (G2.1, score 0), dedicated AI authority (G2.5, score 0) or AI-related intellectual property amendment (G2.10, score 0) was identified.

See the 10 indicators for Governance & Regulation

P3Infrastructure & Data1.00 / 4Emerging

Infrastructure and Data scores 1.00, in the Emerging tier, with 8 of 10 indicators scored. Personal data legislation contains provisions on data handling and transfers (I3.7, score 2) and governs cross-border flows (I3.8, score 2). No commercial data centre was verified; a government data centre of about FCFA 9 billion was reported 13% complete in March 2025, and the score of 1 is retained under second-edition review (I3.1). No hyperscaler infrastructure was found (I3.5, score 1) and no sovereign cloud is operational (I3.10, score 1). No data centre capacity figure (I3.2, score 0) or AI computing facility (I3.6, score 0) was found. Submarine cable landing points are not applicable to landlocked Niger (I3.3), and surveillance spending is context only (I3.9).

See the 10 indicators for Infrastructure & Data

P4Human Capital0.60 / 4Nascent

Human Capital scores 0.60, in the Nascent tier, with all 10 indicators scored. The profile records ICT education in the secondary curriculum, though not nationwide or AI-focused (H4.6, score 2). Universities offer computing and ICT programmes, and dedicated AI programmes remain limited (H4.3, score 1). The publications indicator rests on 4.3 papers a year, or 0.16 per million people (H4.4, score 1). Digital skills and coding initiatives operate through non-governmental and innovation organisations (H4.7, score 1). No reliable statistic on AI researchers (H4.1, score 0), no documented AI patent activity (H4.5, score 0), no AI labour transition framework (H4.8, score 0) and no government assessment of AI in the informal economy (H4.9, score 0) were identified.

See the 10 indicators for Human Capital

P5Innovation & Ecosystem0.33 / 4Nascent

Innovation and Ecosystem scores 0.33, in the Nascent tier, with 9 of 10 indicators scored. The profile records a small number of startups applying AI in fintech, agritech and education (N5.1, score 1) and limited venture capital aimed at AI, mostly at seed stage (N5.2, score 1). Innovation hubs and entrepreneurship centres operate in Niamey but are not AI-specific (N5.3, score 0). No AI regulatory sandbox (N5.4, score 0), government AI procurement framework (N5.5, score 0), AI testing facility (N5.6, score 0), ISO/IEC 42001 adoption (N5.7, score 0) or AI technical committee in the standards body (N5.8, score 0) was identified. University and industry AI partnerships are not scored because no verified evidence was found (N5.10).

See the 10 indicators for Innovation & Ecosystem

P6Ethics & Inclusion0.70 / 4Nascent

Ethics and Inclusion scores 0.70, in the Nascent tier, with all 10 indicators scored. The profile records that citizens can submit privacy complaints through the Data Protection Authority (E6.4, score 2). General transparency obligations exist under data protection law and are not AI-specific (E6.3, score 1). Civil society takes part informally in digital rights discussions (E6.8, score 1), and young people are involved through innovation programmes (E6.10, score 1). Niger participates in international digital governance discussions with limited AI-specific engagement (E6.7, score 1). No algorithmic impact assessment requirement (E6.1, score 0), bias audit framework (E6.2, score 0) or reference to African ethical frameworks (E6.9, score 0) was identified, and there are no known AI court precedents (E6.5, score 0).

See the 10 indicators for Ethics & Inclusion

P7Regional Integration1.11 / 4Emerging

Regional Integration scores 1.11, in the Emerging tier, with 9 of 10 indicators scored. Niger is scored as a signatory of the Africa Declaration on AI, made in Kigali on 4 April 2025 (R7.2, score 3). The profile records participation in regional digital policy discussions (R7.3, score 2) and awareness of the African Union digital transformation agenda, with no formal AI alignment process found (R7.1, score 1). The government addresses misinformation generally, not AI-generated content (R7.6, score 1). No AI-specific bilateral agreement (R7.4, score 0) or AI election framework (R7.5, score 0) was identified. The election incidents indicator is not applicable, because Niger has held no national vote since the presidential run-off of 21 February 2021 (R7.7).

See the 10 indicators for Regional Integration

P8Implementation & Impact0.10 / 4Nascent

Implementation and Impact scores 0.10, in the Nascent tier, with all 10 indicators scored. One indicator scores above 0: general fintech regulation exists and is not AI-specific (M8.7, score 1). The other nine indicators score 0. The profile identifies no AI budget (M8.1), no AI health regulation (M8.2), no public approvals of AI health devices (M8.3), no AI registry (M8.4) and no AI governance reports (M8.5). It identifies no AI governance framework for agriculture (M8.6) or education (M8.8), no documented governance outcomes (M8.9) and no formal adoption of World Health Organization guidance on AI in health (M8.10).

See the 10 indicators for Implementation & Impact

Indicator evidence

Evidence by pillar

Evidence and score for each of the 80 indicators, with sources. Scores use the 0–4 indicator score key in the method section, which is a different scale from the maturity tiers. “Not scored” means nothing could be determined, or a score had no supporting evidence: the indicator is left out of the pillar mean rather than counted as 0. “N/A” and “Context only” sit outside the score.

P1 · Weight 15% of composite

Strategy & Vision

0.80 / 4Nascent

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

    Niger is developing digital transformation policies, but no formally adopted National AI Strategy was identified.

    Sources lesahel.org (opens in a new tab)

  2. S1.2

    Strategy adoption date

    Score 0 / 4

    No adopted national AI strategy found.

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

    Sources lesahel.org (opens in a new tab)

  3. S1.3

    Political commitment signals

    Score 2 / 4

    Government established committees for digital infrastructure governance and national digital development policy.

    Note: High-level ministerial leadership and institutional actions demonstrate a clear, formal commitment to AI development

    Sources nigerdiaspora.net (opens in a new tab)

  4. S1.4

    Dedicated AI budget allocation

    Score 0 / 4

    No dedicated AI budget identified

    Note: While programs like the 3MTT and the National AI Fund exist, they rely heavily on external partnerships and broader digital economy allocations rather than a dedicated national AI budget line

  5. S1.5

    AU Continental AI Strategy alignment

    Score 1 / 4

    General participation in AU digital initiatives but limited evidence of formal AI alignment.

    Note: Nigeria actively participates in AU digital economy and AI working groups to ensure regional alignment.

  6. S1.6

    Multi-stakeholder consultation

    Score 2 / 4

    National digital policy development involved committee structures and consultations.

    Sources lesahel.org (opens in a new tab)

  7. S1.7

    Sector prioritisation

    Score 1 / 4

    Digital transformation priorities mentioned, but AI sector priorities not clearly defined.

    Sources lesahel.org (opens in a new tab)

  8. S1.8

    Implementation roadmap

    Score 1 / 4

    Digital development roadmap exists but not AI-specific.

    Sources lesahel.org (opens in a new tab)

  9. S1.9

    Monitoring and evaluation framework

    Score 0 / 4

    No AI-specific M&E framework identified.

  10. S1.10

    Strategy review mechanism

    Score 0 / 4

    No AI-specific M&E framework identified.

P2 · Weight 15% of composite

Governance & Regulation

1.00 / 4Emerging

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

  1. G2.1

    AI-specific legislation

    Score 0 / 4

    No AI-specific law identified.

    Sources wtlgovernance.com (opens in a new tab)

  2. G2.2

    Data protection law status

    Score 3 / 4

    Personal Data Protection Law (Law No. 2017-28).

    Sources wtlgovernance.com (opens in a new tab)

  3. G2.3

    DPA AI mandate

    Score 1 / 4

    Data Protection Authority exists but no explicit AI mandate identified.

    Scoring basis Listed for second-edition review: The score of 1 rests on an authority that was reported dissolved on 8 June 2026.

    Editor's note, 7 October 2026: The data protection authority was reported dissolved by Decree No. 2026-310/PRN/PM of 8 June 2026. The score is retained and listed for second-edition review.

    Sources journalduniger.com (opens in a new tab)wtlgovernance.com (opens in a new tab)

  4. G2.4

    DPA staffing and budget

    Score 1 / 4

    Authority exists; staffing data unavailable.

    Scoring basis Fellow score kept; no raw value for the threshold. Listed for second-edition review: The authority was reported dissolved on 8 June 2026, before the evidence reference date. A score of 1 assumes an authority exists.

    Editor's note, 7 October 2026: The profile note for this row described Nigeria's data protection commission and is removed. Niger's data protection authority, the Haute Autorité de Protection des Données à caractère Personnel, was reported dissolved by Decree No. 2026-310/PRN/PM of 8 June 2026. No staff count or budget was found. The score is retained and listed for second-edition review.

    Sources journalduniger.com (opens in a new tab)beninwebtv.bj (opens in a new tab)

  5. G2.5

    AI regulatory body existence

    Score 0 / 4

    No dedicated AI authority found.

    Sources wtlgovernance.com (opens in a new tab)

  6. G2.6

    Institutional design model

    Score 1 / 4

    Data protection-led governance approach.

    Sources wtlgovernance.com (opens in a new tab)

  7. G2.7

    Malabo Convention ratification

    Score 2 / 4

    Signed but implementation evidence limited.

    Sources au.int (opens in a new tab)

  8. G2.8

    Enforcement actions taken

    Score 1 / 4

    Limited evidence of AI-related enforcement.

  9. G2.9

    Extraterritorial provisions

    Score 1 / 4

    Partial coverage through data protection law.

  10. G2.10

    IP framework for AI

    Score 0 / 4

    No AI-related IP amendments identified.

    Note: No evidence found

P3 · Weight 15% of composite

Infrastructure & Data

1.00 / 4Emerging

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 1 / 4

    No commercial colocation or carrier-neutral data centre in Niger was verified. A government national data centre of about FCFA 9 billion, built to a Tier III design, was reported 13% complete in March 2025.

    Scoring basis Fellow score kept; no raw value for the threshold. Listed for second-edition review: No commercial facility was verified. A score of 1 requires at least one.

    Editor's note, 7 October 2026: The profile text named Nigerian operators and is removed. The score is retained and listed for second-edition review.

    Sources wearetech.africa (opens in a new tab)

  2. I3.2

    Data center capacity (MW)

    Score 0 / 4

    No publicly documented national data center capacity found.

    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

    Niger is landlocked and has no direct submarine cable landing point.

    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

    Internet connectivity relies on terrestrial regional links.

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

  5. I3.5

    Hyperscaler presence

    Score 1 / 4

    No local infrastructure from major cloud hyperscalers identified.

  6. I3.6

    GPU/HPC access

    Score 0 / 4

    No national AI computing facility identified.

  7. I3.7

    Data localisation provisions

    Score 2 / 4

    Personal data legislation contains provisions on data handling and transfers.

  8. I3.8

    Cross-border data flow framework

    Score 2 / 4

    Governed through personal data protection legislation.

  9. I3.9

    Foreign AI surveillance spending

    Context only: Context flag outside the score

    No documented national expenditure identified.

    Scoring basis Context flag; outside the score. Raw value read from the evidence: "No documented national expenditure identified."

  10. I3.10

    Sovereign cloud initiatives

    Score 1 / 4

    Government digital transformation efforts discussed but no operational sovereign cloud.

P4 · Weight 15% of composite

Human Capital

0.60 / 4Nascent

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 0 / 4

    No reliable national statistic identified.

    Note: Further academic review needed.

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

  2. H4.2

    DPA staff with AI competency

    Score 0 / 4

    No public information available.

    Note: Requires institutional inquiry.

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

  3. H4.3

    University AI programs

    Score 1 / 4

    Universities offer computing and ICT programmes, but dedicated AI programmes remain limited.

    Note: Emerging Area

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

  4. H4.4

    African-authored AI publications

    Score 1 / 4

    Some participation in regional AI and ICT research.

    Note: Low Volume

    Scoring basis Threshold applied. 4.3 papers/yr ÷ 27.03m people = 0.16 per million (floors applied).

  5. H4.5

    AI patents filed

    Score 0 / 4

    No documented AI patent activity identified.

    Note: Verification needed

    Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 0 (AI patent applications/year). Raw value read from the evidence: "No documented AI patent activity identified." Checked against the evidence on 7 October 2026: confirmed.

  6. H4.6

    K-12 CS education

    Score 2 / 4

    ICT education exists in secondary education curriculum.

    Note: Not nationwide AI-focused.

  7. H4.7

    AI workforce training programs

    Score 1 / 4

    Digital skills and coding initiatives operate through NGOs and innovation organisations.

    Sources gabera.org (opens in a new tab)

  8. H4.8

    Labour transition policy

    Score 0 / 4

    No AI labour-transition framework identified.

    Note: No evidence found.

  9. H4.9

    Informal economy AI assessment

    Score 0 / 4

    No government assessment identified.

    Note: No evidence found.

  10. H4.10

    African language NLP coverage

    Score 1 / 4

    Limited digital language resources exist for French and some local languages.

    Note: Early-stage ecosystem.

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

P5 · Weight 10% of composite

Innovation & Ecosystem

0.33 / 4Nascent

Mean of the 9 scored indicators; 1 carries no score. West Africa mean 1.04 · all 54 states mean 1.05.

No score: 1 not scored (excluded from the mean).

  1. N5.1

    AI companies count

    Score 1 / 4

    Small number of startups applying AI in fintech, agritech and education sectors.

    Note: Early-stage ecosystem.

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

  2. N5.2

    Private AI investment (USD)

    Score 1 / 4

    Limited venture capital investment specifically targeting AI.

    Note: Mostly seed-stage funding.

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

  3. N5.3

    AI incubators/accelerators

    Score 0 / 4

    Innovation hubs and entrepreneurship centres operate in Niamey.

    Note: Not AI-specific.

    Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 0 (incubators/accelerators). Raw value read from the evidence: "Not AI-specific." [only general hubs described]. Checked against the evidence on 7 October 2026: confirmed.

  4. N5.4

    Regulatory sandbox (AI)

    Score 0 / 4

    No AI regulatory sandbox identified.

    Note: None found

  5. N5.5

    Government AI procurement

    Score 0 / 4

    No evidence of formal government AI procurement framework.

    Note: No evidence found

  6. N5.6

    AI safety evaluation capacity

    Score 0 / 4

    No dedicated AI testing facility identified.

    Note: No evidence found

  7. N5.7

    ISO/IEC 42001 adoption

    Score 0 / 4

    No evidence of adoption identified.

    Note: No evidence found

  8. N5.8

    Standards body AI competency

    Score 0 / 4

    No AI technical committee identified.

    Note: No evidence found

  9. N5.9

    AI risk assessment frameworks

    Score 1 / 4

    Some ICT collaborations between universities and innovation hubs.

    Note: Limited AI focus

  10. N5.10

    University-industry AI partnerships

    Not scored: Excluded from the pillar mean

    No verified evidence found

    Scoring basis Not determined; excluded from the pillar mean.

P6 · Weight 10% of composite

Ethics & Inclusion

0.70 / 4Nascent

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

  1. E6.1

    Algorithmic impact assessment

    Score 0 / 4

    No AI-specific requirement identified.

    Note: No evidence found

  2. E6.2

    Bias audit requirements

    Score 0 / 4

    No AI bias audit framework identified.

    Note: No evidence found

  3. E6.3

    Transparency obligations

    Score 1 / 4

    General transparency obligations exist under data protection law.

    Note: Not AI-specific.

  4. E6.4

    Citizen redress mechanism

    Score 2 / 4

    Citizens can submit complaints through the Data Protection Authority.

    Note: Available for privacy complaints.

  5. E6.5

    Judicial AI remedy

    Score 0 / 4

    Courts may hear disputes under existing legal framework.

    Note: No known AI precedents.

  6. E6.6

    AI advisory body diversity

    Score 1 / 4

    No national AI advisory body identified.

    Note: No found

  7. E6.7

    Global AI governance participation

    Score 1 / 4

    Participates in international digital governance discussions.

    Note: Limited AI-specific engagement.

  8. E6.8

    Civil society AI engagement

    Score 1 / 4

    Civil society involved in broader digital rights discussions.

    Note: Informal participation.

  9. E6.9

    African ethical framework reference

    Score 0 / 4

    No explicit reference identified.

    Note: No evidence found.

  10. E6.10

    Youth participation

    Score 1 / 4

    Youth involved through innovation and entrepreneurship programmes.

    Note: Informal participation.

P7 · Weight 10% of composite

Regional Integration

1.11 / 4Emerging

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

    Awareness of AU digital transformation agenda.

    Note: No formal AI alignment process found.

  2. R7.2

    Kigali Declaration endorsement

    Score 3 / 4

    Participation in AU digital initiatives.

    Note: Verify current status.

    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

    Participation in regional digital policy discussions.

    Note: Active regional engagement.

  4. R7.4

    Cross-border AI agreements

    Score 0 / 4

    No AI-specific bilateral agreements identified.

    Note: No evidence found.

  5. R7.5

    Election integrity AI provisions

    Score 0 / 4

    No AI election framework identified.

    Note: No evidence found.

  6. R7.6

    Disinformation response framework

    Score 1 / 4

    Government addresses misinformation generally.

    Note: Not AI-specific.

  7. R7.7

    AI election incidents documented

    N/A: Does not apply to this country

    No documented AI election interference identified.

    Note: None found.

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

  8. R7.8

    Platform content moderation

    Score 1 / 4

    Informal engagement through ICT regulatory structures.

    Note: Limited evidence.

  9. R7.9

    Geneva Dialogue participation

    Score 1 / 4

    Possible participation through AU delegations.

    Note: Verify before submission.

  10. R7.10

    G20/multilateral AI engagement

    Score 1 / 4

    Engagement through AU and UN digital initiatives.

    Note: Early-stage participation.

P8 · Weight 10% of composite

Implementation & Impact

0.10 / 4Nascent

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 AI budget identified.

    Note: N/A

    Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 0 (USD). Raw value read from the evidence: "No AI budget identified." Checked against the evidence on 7 October 2026: confirmed.

  2. M8.2

    Health AI regulation

    Score 0 / 4

    No AI health regulation identified.

    Note: None found.

  3. M8.3

    Health AI devices approved

    Score 0 / 4

    No public approvals identified.

    Note: None found.

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

  4. M8.4

    Government AI system registry

    Score 0 / 4

    No AI registry identified.

    Note: None found.

  5. M8.5

    AI governance M&E reports

    Score 0 / 4

    No AI governance reports identified.

    Note: None found.

    Scoring basis Threshold applied. Raw value: 0 (reports). Raw value read from the evidence: "No AI governance reports identified." Checked against the evidence on 7 October 2026: confirmed.

  6. M8.6

    Agriculture AI governance

    Score 0 / 4

    No agriculture AI governance framework identified.

    Note: None found.

  7. M8.7

    Financial services AI governance

    Score 1 / 4

    General fintech regulation exists.

    Note: Not AI-specific.

  8. M8.8

    Education AI governance

    Score 0 / 4

    No education AI governance policy identified.

    Note: None found.

  9. M8.9

    Measurable governance outcomes

    Score 0 / 4

    No documented outcomes identified.

    Note: None found.

  10. M8.10

    WHO AI health guidance adoption

    Score 0 / 4

    No evidence of formal adoption found.

    Note: None found.

Method

What is the Africa AI Governance Index?

The Africa AI Governance Index 2026 assesses 8 pillars of national AI governance. Each pillar is examined through 10 indicators. The Index is diagnostic. It measures formal governance instruments, not capability. Composite differences under about 0.1 are not meaningful.

Indicator score key

Indicator score key, 0 to 4
ScoreDefinition
0 No evidenceNo policy, institution, or activity. Confirmed absence.
1 NascentInitial discussion, concept note, informal working group.
2 DevelopingDraft policy, institution forming, pilot, or formal consultation.
3 EstablishedAdopted policy or operational institution; limited enforcement.
4 AdvancedFully operational with enforcement and measurable outcomes.

Maturity tiers

Applied to pillar and composite means.

Maturity tiers by score range
TierMean score
NascentBelow 1.00
Emerging1.00 to 1.99
Developing2.00 to 2.99
Established3.00 and above

How scores are built

A pillar score is the mean of the scored indicators in that pillar. Confirmed absence scores 0. An indicator where nothing could be determined is excluded from the pillar mean and reported as not scored. A score with no supporting evidence is excluded.

The composite is 15% of each of pillars P1 to P4 plus 10% of each of pillars P5 to P8, on a scale of 0 to 4. In other words, P1, P2, P3, P4 carry 15% each and P5, P6, P7, P8 carry 10% each.

Source: Africa AI Governance Index 2026 Final Dataset, 54 countries, built 6 October 2026. Lawyers Hub, Africa AI Policy Lab. Version 1.2, 7 October 2026.

Suggested citation

Lawyers Hub, Africa AI Policy Lab (2026). Country Profile on AI Governance: Niger. Africa AI Governance Index 2026, version 1.2, 7 October 2026. https://www.aipolicy.africa/country-profiles/niger