Category: Africa

Posted on

Artificial intelligence (AI) is Advancing Faster Than Governments Can Protect People, New Global Index Finds

Source: APO


.

  • AI investment is accelerating faster than governments can govern it in the public interest.
  • Governments are investing in AI skills while leaving workers’ rights behind.
  • Governments are still failing to prevent misuse and unacceptable uses of AI, like surveillance.

Second edition of the Global Index on Responsible AI compares 135 countries and finds that laws, strategies and global commitments are spreading faster than the institutions, enforcement tools and transparency mechanisms needed to protect human rights.

A new study from the Global Center on AI Governance (www.GlobalCenter.AI/) warns that the global AI governance race is leaving many regions behind, even as artificial intelligence becomes embedded in public services, workplaces, education, healthcare, policing, finance and everyday life.

By “leaving many regions behind,” the report refers to a widening gap between countries that are turning responsible AI commitments into enforceable rules and those still relying mainly on non-binding principles, strategies and voluntary frameworks. That divide matters because, without institutions, oversight bodies, transparency requirements and redress mechanisms, many governments remain poorly equipped to protect people as AI systems shape access to public services, jobs, education, healthcare, policing, finance and other areas of everyday life.

In this scenario, the second edition of the Global Index on Responsible AI (GIRAI) (http://www.Global-index.AI/) finds that responsible AI governance is expanding, but unevenly and too slowly for the pace of AI development and diffusion. While more countries are adopting AI strategies, laws and policy commitments, many still lack the institutional capacity, enforcement tools, public accountability and transparency mechanisms required to protect human rights as AI systems spread.

Built by the Global Center on AI Governance with a network of 135 regional experts, GIRAI compares national approaches across 135 countries and five human-rights-linked dimensions: AI Use in Public Service Delivery, Ethics and Sustainability, Inclusion and Diversity, Labour and Skills, and Trust and Safety. The data used for the report covers the period 1 Nov 2023 – 30 Sept 2025.

The Index exposes a widening AI governance divide between countries with enforceable rules and countries relying mainly on non-binding principles, voluntary frameworks and early-stage capacity-building efforts.

The findings are especially relevant as governments move to regulate private AI while often failing to disclose, monitor or oversee their own use of algorithmic systems. The Index finds that the weakest-performing area is AI use in public service delivery, where automated systems can affect access to welfare, healthcare, education, housing, policing, migration and other essential services.

“Responsible AI cannot be secured through principles alone. The second edition of GIRAI shows a persistent gap between responsible AI as a commitment and responsible AI as a capability,” said Rachel Adams, founder and CEO at the Global Center on AI Governance. “As AI becomes a structural force in public life, governments need enforceable obligations, independent oversight, public disclosure, monitoring systems and accessible routes for redress.”

Key findings

The report identifies a global responsible AI landscape that is more active than before, but still fragmented, under-enforced and insufficiently grounded in public accountability. Among the main findings:

1. AI is accelerating faster than governments can govern it in the public interest

Diffusion of AI is expanding, with 53% of the global population having used generative AI tools. Yet average GIRAI scores remain low, at roughly 35 out of 100, and evidence of implementation exists in only 55% of cases where frameworks are active, falling to 45% in Global South countries.

2. Responsible AI governance is expanding in Global South countries, but binding protections remain scarce

Since the 1st Edition, Global South countries substantially broadened the responsible AI content of their national frameworks. On average, the number of GIRAI topics covered rose from 2.5 to 4.7, an 88% increase. In Global North countries, the number rose from 8.2 to 11.1, a 35% increase. Global South countries account for 203 of the 306 new country cases of indicators covered by frameworks identified since the 1st Edition. Despite this progress, most of the growth is in soft law: 78% of responsible AI framework cases in these countries are non-binding, compared with 42% in Global North countries.

3. AI safety is being governed as a technical problem, while human harms remain under-addressed

AI safety and security is one of the fastest-growing areas of governance, but much of it focuses on technical safeguards. Meanwhile, the Index found credible evidence of government misuse of AI in 35 of 135 countries, and only 49 countries (36%) have frameworks addressing AI-facilitated misinformation and violence.

4. Governments are regulating AI transparency but not disclosing their own use of AI

Transparency and Explainability is the strongest-performing indicator, with 58% of countries having some form of framework. Yet implementation lags behind the existence of frameworks. For government use of AI, Public Disclosure of Government Algorithmic Systems is the weakest-performing indicator, with only 18% of countries requiring disclosure of government AI systems.

5. Gender is increasingly recognised in AI governance, but protection from gendered harms remains weak

Gender equality is gaining visibility, with 29 new countries addressing gender and AI since the 1st Edition, but only 24 of 55 countries with gender-related frameworks show evidence of implementation. Protection from gendered AI harms remains limited.

6. Future generations are being prepared for the AI economy but not protected from AI-related harms

AI Literacy is one of the strongest-performing indicators, with 71 countries (53%) having some framework in place and 106 countries showing evidence of some activity in this area. By contrast, only 55 countries (41%) have frameworks addressing Children’s Rights in AI, and only 27 of them show evidence of implementation.

7. AI’s environmental footprint remains a blind spot in responsible AI governance

Only 27% of countries have frameworks addressing AI’s environmental effects, and 83% of those frameworks are non-binding. Very few governments require disclosure of AI’s energy use, water use, or environmental impact, contributing to making the environmental impact of AI a global blind spot.

8. Governments recognise the need for local-language AI but do not require developers to deliver it

Governments are investing in local-language technologies and cultural inclusion, with 52 countries (39%) showing government-led initiatives. Only 47 countries (35%) have frameworks addressing Cultural and Linguistic Diversity, and few require developers to use diverse datasets or adapt systems to local contexts.

9. Governments are investing in AI skills but neglecting workers’ rights

Labour protection frameworks exist in only 39 countries (29%), compared with 72 countries (53%) with frameworks on reskilling and upskilling. Few countries address workers’ rights to organise and collectively bargain in response to AI-driven workplace change.

10. Global AI governance is fragmenting before a shared floor of protection has been established

Average GIRAI scores range from 55 in Global North countries to 27 in Global South countries. Available evidence shows that 164 of 215 recent AI-related frameworks are non-binding, and multi-stakeholder consultations appear only 31 times in the global implementation record. Only 73 of 135 countries (54%) have adopted a national AI policy or equivalent framework, and just 36 countries (27%) have operational mechanisms for participation of civil society organisations (CSOs) in AI governance. Without a shared rights-based floor, interoperability risks serving markets before it protects people.

What GIRAI measures

The Global Index on Responsible AI is a research and advocacy initiative designed to measure countries’ commitments, capacities and progress toward rights-respecting responsible AI. It is developed by the Global Center on AI Governance, a South Africa-based think tank that works as a global hub for research and evidence-led action on inclusive and equitable AI governance.

This work was carried out with the aid of a grant from the International Development Research Centre, Ottawa, Canada and the Foreign and Commonwealth Development Office under the AI4Development funding programme. Some further funds were used for the project from the Government of Canada, and from the International Development Bank of Latin America.

The Global Center’s mission is to reduce global inequalities exacerbated by AI and to help build a world where AI technologies and governance reflect all of humanity. A central part of its work is bringing voices that are often marginalised into global AI governance debates, especially from regions and communities underrepresented in policy conversations.

GIRAI is intended to move the global AI governance debate from aspiration to evidence. It ranks countries but it also helps policymakers identify where stronger laws, institutions, resources and implementation mechanisms are needed; helps civil society actors see where governments have made commitments and where they can be held to account; and helps international organisations, funders and researchers understand where capacity gaps are most urgent.

Africa: Growing momentum, but implementation remains the greatest challenge

Africa continues to expand its responsible AI governance landscape, but the Global Index on Responsible AI finds that implementation and enforceability remain significant barriers. The region records the world’s lowest average GIRAI score (22 out of 100), 13 points below the global average, reflecting persistent gaps between policy ambition and practical action.

Out of the 39 African countries surveyed, only 6 score above the global average: Nigeria, Egypt, Kenya, Ghana, Benin and Morocco, with North Africa emerging as the continent’s strongest-performing subregion overall.

The continent’s biggest gap lies between commitments and action. Key topics related to the Ethics and Sustainability of AI have the widest policy coverage, yet only 20.45% of the existing policy frameworks are implemented. In contrast, Policy frameworks addressing Labour and Skills challenges in the context of AI record the strongest implementation rate at 65.52%, making it the only dimension in Africa to exceed the global implementation average.

Most of Africa’s governance frameworks also remain non-binding, Just 21% of the continents’ 170 documented cases of policy areas covered by frameworks throughout the 39 countries are legally enforceable, with the majority taking the form of strategies, guidance or draft policies.

The Index also finds that civil society efforts are largely focused on building awareness, strengthening capacity and fostering collaboration, while fewer initiatives concentrate on accountability and oversight. At the same time, documented cases of unacceptable-risk AI in Kenya, Ghana and Uganda highlight the urgent need to strengthen governance as AI adoption accelerates across the continent.

Ranking

World Top 10

  1. Norway
  2. Italy
  3. Ireland
  4. France
  5. Netherlands
  6. Germany
  7. United Kingdom
  8. Slovenia
  9. Latvia
  10. Estonia
  11. Brazil
  12. Spain
  13. Greece
  14. Chile
  15. Bulgaria

Regional Top 5

Region

Rank

Country

GIRAI score

Europe

1

Norway

74.66

2

Italy

72.71

3

Ireland

71.39

4

France

70.32

5

Netherlands

69.58

Latin America and the Caribbean

1

Brazil

63.3

2

Chile

61.91

3

Uruguay

56.99

4

Colombia

54.74

5

Costa Rica

52.3

Northern America

1

Canada

55.17

2

United States of America

53.34

Asia

1

Japan

55.66

2

Kyrgyz Republic

51.64

3

South Korea

47.69

4

Singapore

45.21

5

China

43.58

Africa

1

Nigeria

45.93

2

Egypt

41.26

3

Kenya

39.53

4

Ghana

38.43

5

Benin

37.01

Oceania

1

Australia

56.4

2

New Zealand

45.81

How the Index was built

The index was built by translating major global AI governance commitments, including the UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of AI and the OECD AI Principles, into measurable, comparable indicators that can be tracked over time.

These indicators assess the three core pillars of the GIRAI: AI Policy, covering laws, regulations, policies and their implementation; Civil Society Engagement; and Enabling Conditions. The indicators are grouped across five dimensions: AI Use in Public Service Delivery, Ethics and Sustainability, Inclusion and Diversity, Labour and Skills, and Trust and Safety.

The measurement framework was validated with civil society organisations working on human rights in digital environments. Once the framework was finalised, the research team hired 135 local experts, one in each country covered by the Index, to collect evidence for all primary indicators. That process produced more than 68,000 data points, which were then analysed to identify global and regional trends grounded in local evidence.

The second edition introduces a stronger distinction between the existence of AI governance frameworks and their implementation in practice. It assesses not only whether countries have adopted laws, policies, strategies or guidelines, but whether those commitments are being operationalised through institutions, oversight mechanisms, programmes, standards, monitoring systems, budgets, consultations and other concrete actions.

Distributed by APO Group on behalf of Global Center on AI Governance.

Additional resources:

• Download the second edition of the Global Index on Responsible AI.

• Access country-level data and methodology at global-index.ai.

• Learn more about the Global Center on AI Governance and its work on inclusive and equitable AI governance.

• Contact us to get in touch with your local researcher.

About the Global Center on AI Governance:
The Global Center on AI Governance is a South Africa-based think tank that works as a global hub for research and evidence-led action on inclusive and equitable AI governance. Its mission is to reduce global inequalities exacerbated by AI and to help build a world where AI technologies and governance reflect all of humanity.

Through research, advocacy and global collaboration, the Center works to ensure that communities historically marginalised in global technology governance are included in the decisions shaping AI futures.

www.Globalcenter.AI

Posted on

L’essor rapide de l’Intelligence Artificielle (IA) dépasse la capacité des gouvernements à mettre en place des protections efficaces, selon le nouvel Indice mondial sur l’IA responsable (GIRAI)

Source: Africa Press Organisation – French


  • Les investissements dans l’IA progressent plus vite que la capacité des gouvernements à réguler cette technologie dans l’intérêt général.
  • Alors que les gouvernements mettent l’accent sur les compétences en IA, les droits des travailleurs restent insuffisamment protégés.
  • Les gouvernements ne sont toujours pas en mesure de prévenir les abus et les utilisations inacceptables de l’IA, comme la surveillance.

La deuxième édition de l’Indice mondial sur l’IA responsable compare 135 pays et révèle que les lois, les stratégies et les engagements mondiaux se multiplient plus rapidement que les institutions, les outils de mise en œuvre et les mécanismes de transparence nécessaires à la protection des droits humains.

Une nouvelle étude du Global Center on AI Governance (www.GlobalCenter.AI/) met en garde contre l’écart qui se creuse entre les différentes régions du monde dans la course à la gouvernance de l’intelligence artificielle, alors même que cette technologie s’impose progressivement dans les services publics, le monde du travail, l’éducation, les systèmes de santé, les forces de l’ordre, le secteur financier et la vie quotidienne.

Selon le rapport, ces écarts se traduisent principalement par un fossé grandissant entre les pays qui transforment leurs engagements en faveur d’une IA responsable en règles juridiquement contraignantes et ceux qui continuent de s’appuyer principalement sur des principes, des stratégies et des cadres volontaires non contraignants. Ces disparités sont préoccupantes, car les gouvernements sont mal armés pour protéger les citoyens lorsqu’ils ne disposent pas d’institutions, d’organismes de contrôle, d’exigences de transparence et de mécanismes de recours, alors même que les systèmes d’IA redéfinissent l’accès aux services publics, à l’emploi, à l’éducation, aux soins de santé, aux services de police, à la finance et à d’autres domaines de la vie quotidienne.

Dans ce contexte, la deuxième édition du Global Index on Responsible AI (GIRAI) (www.Global-index.AI/) révèle que la gouvernance responsable de l’intelligence artificielle se développe, mais de façon inégale et à un rythme qui demeure insuffisant face à la rapidité du développement et de la diffusion des technologies d’IA. Si de plus en plus de pays adoptent des stratégies, des lois et des engagements politiques en matière d’IA, un grande nombre ne disposent toujours pas des capacités institutionnelles, des outils de mise en œuvre, ni des mécanismes de responsabilité publique et de transparence nécessaires pour protéger les droits humains à mesure que les systèmes d’IA se développent.

Élaboré par le Global Center on AI Governance en collaboration avec un réseau de plus de 135 experts régionaux, le GIRAI compare les approches nationales de 135 pays selon cinq dimensions relatives aux droits humains : Utilisation de l’IA dans la prestation des services publics, Éthique et développement durable, Inclusion et diversité, Travail et compétences, et Confiance et sécurité. Les données sur lesquelles s’appuie le rapport couvrent la période allant du 1er novembre 2023 au 30 septembre 2025.

L’indice révèle un fossé grandissant en matière de gouvernance de l’IA entre, d’une part, les pays dotés de règles contraignantes et, d’autre part, ceux qui s’appuient principalement sur des principes non contraignants, des cadres volontaires et des efforts de renforcement des capacités encore embryonnaires.

Ces résultats prennent une importance particulière dans un contexte où les gouvernements tendent à réglementer l’IA dans le secteur privé, tout en échouant souvent à assurer la transparence, le suivi et la supervision de leurs propres usages des systèmes algorithmiques. En effet, l’indice révèle que le domaine où les performances sont les plus faibles est celui de l’utilisation de l’IA dans la prestation des services publics, où les systèmes automatisés peuvent avoir une incidence sur l’accès à l’aide sociale, aux soins de santé, à l’éducation, au logement, aux services de police, à la gestion des migrations et autres services essentiels.

« Une IA responsable ne peut être garantie par de simples principes. La deuxième édition du GIRAI met en évidence un écart persistant entre l’IA responsable en tant qu’engagement et l’IA responsable en tant que capacité », selon Rachel Adams, fondatrice et directrice générale du Global Center on AI Governance. « À mesure que l’IA s’impose comme une force structurelle dans la vie publique, les gouvernements doivent mettre en place des obligations exécutoires, des mécanismes de contrôle indépendants, des obligations de transparence, des systèmes de suivi et des voies de recours accessibles. »

Principales conclusions

Le rapport décrit un paysage mondial de la gouvernance responsable de l’IA plus actif qu’auparavant, mais qui reste fragmenté, faiblement appliqué et insuffisamment ancré dans des mécanismes de redevabilité publique. Parmi les principales conclusions :

1. L’IA progresse plus vite que la capacité des gouvernements à la réguler dans l’intérêt général

Le recours à l’IA se généralise de plus en plus : 53 % de la population mondiale a déjà utilisé des outils d’IA générative. Toutefois, les scores moyens sur l’indice GIRAI restent faibles, à environ 35 sur 100, et on constate que seuls 55 % disposent de cadres d’IA responsable effectivement mis en œuvre, ce chiffre tombant à 45 % dans les pays du Sud

2. La gouvernance responsable de l’IA se développe dans les pays du Sud, mais les mesures de protection contraignantes restent rares

Depuis la 1re édition, les pays du Sud Global ont considérablement élargi la portée de leurs cadres nationaux en matière d’IA responsable. En moyenne, le nombre de thèmes GIRAI abordés est passé de 2,5 à 4,7, représentant une augmentation de 88 %. Dans les pays du Nord, ce chiffre est passé de 8,2 à 11,1, soit une hausse de 35 %. Depuis la première édition, 203 des 306 nouveaux cas d’indicateurs recensés dans les cadres identifiés concernent des pays du Sud global. Malgré ces progrès, la majeure partie de ces avancées relève du droit non contraignant : Dans ces pays, 78 % des cadres réglementaires relatifs à l’IA responsable sont non contraignants, contre 42 % dans les pays du Nord.

3. La sécurité de l’IA est abordée comme un problème technique, tandis que les préjudices causés aux personnes restent insuffisamment pris en compte

La sûreté et la sécurité de l’IA constituent l’un des domaines de la gouvernance qui connaît la croissance la plus rapide, mais une grande partie de ces efforts se concentre sur les mesures de protection techniques. Par ailleurs, l’indice a mis en évidence des preuves crédibles d’une utilisation abusive de l’IA par les pouvoirs publics dans 35 des 135 pays étudiés, et seuls 49 pays (36 %) disposent de cadres réglementaires visant à lutter contre la désinformation et la violence facilitées par l’IA.

4. Les gouvernements réglementent la transparence en matière d’IA, sans toutefois divulguer leur propre utilisation de cette technologie.

La transparence et l’explicabilité constituent l’indicateur le plus performant, 58 % des pays disposant d’un cadre réglementaire à cet égard. La mise en œuvre demeure toutefois en retard par rapport à l’adoption de ces cadres. En ce qui concerne l’utilisation de l’IA par les pouvoirs publics, l’indicateur relatif à la divulgation publique des systèmes algorithmiques gouvernementaux est celui qui affiche les plus mauvais résultats : seuls 18 % des pays ont rendu obligatoire la divulgation de leurs systèmes d’IA.

5. Le genre est de plus en plus pris en compte dans la gouvernance de l’IA, mais la protection contre les préjudices liés au genre reste insuffisante

Les enjeux d’égalité de genre gagnent en visibilité : depuis la première édition, 29 nouveaux pays ont intégré cette question dans leurs cadres relatifs à l’IA. Toutefois, parmi les 55 pays disposant de tels cadres, seuls 24 présentent des preuves de leur mise en œuvre. La protection contre les préjudices causés par l’IA liés au genre reste limitée.

6. Les jeunes générations sont préparées à l’économie de l’IA, mais ne sont pas suffisamment protégées contre les préjudices qu’elle peut engendrer.

La culture de l’IA est l’un des indicateurs affichant les meilleurs résultats : 71 pays (53 %) ont mis en place un cadre politique et 106 pays sont engagés dans des initiatives dans ce domaine. En revanche, seuls 55 pays (41 %) disposent de cadres réglementaires consacrés aux droits de l’enfant face à l’IA, et seuls 27 d’entre eux présentent des éléments attestant de leur mise en œuvre.

7. L’empreinte environnementale de l’IA demeure un angle mort de la gouvernance responsable de l’IA.

Seuls 27 % des pays disposent de cadres abordant les effets de l’IA sur l’environnement, dont 83 % sont non contraignants. Très peu de gouvernements exigent la divulgation de la consommation d’énergie et d’eau ou de l’impact environnemental de l’IA, faisant de cette dimension un angle mort de la gouvernance mondiale.

8. Les gouvernements reconnaissent la nécessité de développer des systèmes d’IA en langues locales, mais n’imposent pas aux développeurs de les proposer dans leurs technologies.

Les gouvernements investissent dans les technologies en langues locales et dans l’inclusion culturelle, comme en témoignent les initiatives menées par les pouvoirs publics dans 52 pays (39 %). Seuls 47 pays (35 %) disposent de cadres abordant la diversité culturelle et linguistique, et très peu d’entre eux exigent des développeurs qu’ils utilisent des ensembles de données diversifiés ou qu’ils adaptent les systèmes aux contextes locaux.

9. Alors que les gouvernements mettent l’accent sur les compétences en IA, les droits des travailleurs restent insuffisamment protégés.

Seuls 39 pays (29 %) disposent de cadres de protection du travail, tandis que 72 pays (53 %) ont mis en place des cadres en matière de reconversion et de renforcement des compétences. Peu de pays abordent les droits des travailleurs à s’organiser et à négocier collectivement dans le contexte des mutations du travail liées à l’IA.

10. La gouvernance mondiale de l’IA se fragmente avant même qu’un niveau minimal commun de protection ait été mis en place

La gouvernance mondiale de l’IA se fragmente alors même qu’aucun socle commun de protection n’a encore été établi. Les données disponibles montrent que 164 des 215 cadres récents liés à l’IA ne sont pas contraignants, et que les consultations multipartites n’apparaissent que 31 fois dans le registre de mise en œuvre à l’échelle mondiale. Seuls 73 pays sur 135 (54 %) ont adopté une politique nationale en matière d’IA ou un cadre équivalent, et seuls 36 pays (27 %) disposent de mécanismes opérationnels permettant la participation des organisations de la société civile (OSC) à la gouvernance de l’IA. En l’absence d’un socle commun fondé sur les droits, l’interopérabilité risque de servir les marchés avant de protéger les personnes.

Ce que mesure l’indice (GIRAI)

L’Indice mondial sur l’IA responsable est une initiative de recherche et de plaidoyer qui évalue les engagements, les capacités et les progrès des pays en matière d’IA responsable et respectueuse des droits. Il a été élaboré par le Global Center on AI Governance, un think tank basé en Afrique du Sud qui agit comme un pôle mondial de recherche et d’action fondée sur des données probantes pour une gouvernance inclusive et équitable de l’IA.

Ce travail a été réalisé grâce à une subvention du Centre de recherches pour le développement international (CRDI), situé à Ottawa, au Canada, et du Bureau des affaires étrangères, du Commonwealth et du développement, dans le cadre du programme AI4Development. Des fonds supplémentaires ont été alloués à ce projet par le gouvernement du Canada et par la Banque internationale de développement de l’Amérique latine.

La mission du Global Center on AI Governance est de réduire les inégalités mondiales exacerbées par l’IA et de contribuer à bâtir un monde où les technologies d’IA et leur gouvernance reflètent l’ensemble de l’humanité. L’un des axes principaux de son action consiste à faire entendre, dans les débats mondiaux sur la gouvernance de l’IA, les voix souvent marginalisées, en particulier celles des régions et des communautés sous-représentées dans les discussions politiques.

L’indice entend faire évoluer le débat mondial sur la gouvernance de l’IA en l’ancrant dans des données probantes plutôt que dans de simples intentions. Au-delà du classement des pays, l’indice aide les décideurs publics à identifier les domaines dans lesquels il est nécessaire de renforcer les cadres juridiques, les institutions, les ressources et les mécanismes de mise en œuvre. Il permet également aux acteurs de la société civile de repérer les engagements pris par les gouvernements et de leur demander de rendre des comptes. Enfin, il aide les organisations internationales, les bailleurs de fonds et les chercheurs à identifier les lacunes les plus urgentes en matière de capacités.

Afrique :  La dynamique s’accélère, mais la mise en œuvre reste un défi majeur

L’Afrique continue de développer son cadre de gouvernance en matière d’IA responsable, mais l’Indice mondial sur l’IA responsable révèle que la mise en œuvre et l’applicabilité de ces mesures restent des obstacles majeurs. La région affiche le score GIRAI moyen le plus bas au monde (22 sur 100), soit 13 points de moins que la moyenne mondiale, ce qui reflète des écarts persistants entre l’ambition politique et les mesures concrètes mises en œuvre.

Sur les 39 pays africains étudiés, seuls 6 obtiennent un score supérieur à la moyenne mondiale : Le Nigeria, l’Égypte, le Kenya, le Ghana, le Bénin et le Maroc, alors que l’Afrique du Nord s’impose comme la sous-région la plus performante du continent dans l’ensemble.

Le principal défi du continent réside dans le décalage entre les engagements et leur mise en œuvre. Les thèmes clés liés à l’éthique et à la durabilité de l’IA sont ceux qui font l’objet de la plus large couverture politique, mais seuls 20,45 % des cadres politiques existants sont effectivement mis en œuvre. En revanche, les cadres politiques visant à relever les défis liés à l’emploi et aux compétences dans le contexte de l’IA affichent le taux de mise en œuvre le plus élevé, à 65,52 %, ce qui en fait le seul domaine en Afrique dépassant la moyenne mondiale de mise en œuvre.

La plupart des cadres de gouvernance africains restent également non contraignants. Seuls 21 % des 170 cas documentés de domaines d’action publique couverts par des cadres de gouvernance dans les 39 pays étudiés sont juridiquement contraignants, la majorité prenant la forme de stratégies, de lignes directrices ou de projets de politiques publiques.

L’indice révèle également que les efforts de la société civile sont principalement axés sur la sensibilisation, le renforcement des capacités et la promotion de la collaboration, tandis que peu d’initiatives se concentrent sur la responsabilité et le contrôle. Parallèlement, des cas avérés d’IA présentant des risques inacceptables au Kenya, au Ghana et en Ouganda soulignent la nécessité urgente de renforcer la gouvernance, alors que l’adoption de l’IA s’accélère sur l’ensemble du continent.

Classement

Top 10 mondial

  1. Norvège
  2. Italie
  3. Irlande
  4. France
  5. Pays-Bas
  6. Allemagne
  7. Royaume-Uni
  8. Slovénie
  9. Lettonie
  10. Estonie
  11. Brésil
  12. Espagne
  13. Grèce
  14. Chili
  15. Bulgarie

Top 5 régional

Région

Classement

Pays

Score sur l’index

Europe

1

Norvège

74,66

2

Italie

72,71

3

Irlande

71,39

4

France

70,32

5

Pays-Bas

69,58

Amérique du Sud et Caraïbes

1

Brésil

63,3

2

Chili

61,91

3

Uruguay

56,99

4

Colombie

54,74

5

Costa Rica

52,3

Amérique du Nord

1

Canada

55,17

2

États-Unis d’Amérique

53,34

Asie

1

Japon

55,66

2

Kirghizistan

51,64

3

Corée du Sud

47,69

4

Singapour

45,21

5

Chine

43,58

Afrique

1

Nigéria

45,93

2

Égypte

41,26

3

Kenya

39,53

4

Ghana

38,43

5

Bénin

37,01

Océanie

1

Australie

56,4

2

Nouvelle-Zélande

45,81

Comment l’indice a été élaboré

Cet indice a été élaboré en traduisant les principaux engagements mondiaux en matière de gouvernance de l’IA, notamment la Recommandation de l’UNESCO sur l’éthique de l’IA et les Principes de l’OCDE relatifs à l’IA, en indicateurs mesurables et comparables pouvant faire l’objet d’un suivi dans le temps.

Ces indicateurs évaluent les trois piliers fondamentaux de l’indice : les politiques publiques en matière d’IA, couvrant les lois, les réglementations, les politiques publiques et leur mise en œuvre ; la participation de la société civile ; et les conditions favorables. Les indicateurs sont regroupés en cinq dimensions : Utilisation de l’IA dans la prestation des services publics, Éthique et développement durable, Inclusion et diversité, Travail et compétences, et Confiance et sécurité.

Le cadre d’évaluation a été validé par des organisations de la société civile œuvrant dans le domaine des droits de l’homme dans les environnements numériques. Une fois le cadre défini, l’équipe de recherche a recruté 135 experts locaux, à raison d’un par pays couvert par l’indice, afin de recueillir des données pour l’ensemble des indicateurs primaires. Ce processus a généré plus de 68 000 points de données, qui ont ensuite été analysés afin d’identifier des tendances mondiales et régionales étayées par ces données locales.

La deuxième édition établit une distinction plus nette entre l’existence des cadres de gouvernance de l’IA et leur mise en œuvre concrète. Elle évalue non seulement si les pays ont adopté des lois, des politiques, des stratégies ou des lignes directrices, mais aussi si ces engagements sont mis en œuvre par le biais d’institutions, de mécanismes de contrôle, de programmes, de normes, de systèmes de suivi, de l’allocation de budgets, de consultations et autres mesures concrètes.

Distribué par APO Group pour Global Center on AI Governance.

Ressources complémentaires :

• Téléchargez la deuxième édition de l’Indice mondial sur l’IA responsable.

• Consultez les données par pays et la méthodologie sur global-index.ai.

En savoir plus sur le Global Center on AI Governance et ses travaux en faveur d’une gouvernance de l’IA inclusive et équitable.

• Contactez-nous pour entrer en contact avec votre chercheur local.

À propos du Global Center on AI Governance :
Le Global Center on AI Governance est un think tank basé en Afrique du Sud qui agit comme une plateforme mondiale dédiée à la recherche et à la mise en œuvre de mesures fondées sur des données factuelles en matière de gouvernance inclusive et équitable de l’IA. Sa mission est de réduire les inégalités mondiales exacerbées par l’IA et de contribuer à bâtir un monde où les technologies d’IA et leur gouvernance reflètent l’ensemble de l’humanité.

À travers la recherche, le plaidoyer et la collaboration internationale, le centre œuvre pour que les communautés historiquement marginalisées dans la gouvernance technologique mondiale soient associées aux décisions qui façonneront l’avenir de l’IA.

www.Globalcenter.AI

Posted on

Financing Africa’s Future: Global Leaders to Convene for Africa Social Impact Summit 2026

Source: APO

As Africa faces one of the defining moments in its development journey, global leaders, policymakers, investors, philanthropists, development institutions, corporate executives and innovators will gather in Lagos for the 2026 Africa Social Impact Summit (ASIS), a landmark convening focused on unlocking the partnerships and financing needed to accelerate sustainable development across the continent.

Scheduled to take place from 22–24 July 2026 at the Eko Convention Centre, Lagos, this year’s summit is themed “Financing for Development: Building Resilience and Transforming Emerging Economies.” The convening will provide a high-level platform for shaping practical solutions to Africa’s most pressing development priorities through investment, collaboration and innovation.

Co-convened by the Sterling One Foundation alongside the United Nations in Nigeria and the Federal Ministry of Budget and Economic Planning, the Africa Social Impact Summit has, since its inception, grown into one of Africa’s leading platforms for advancing market-led solutions to sustainable development challenges. The summit brings together decision-makers from government, business, development finance institutions, philanthropy, civil society and the innovation ecosystem to move beyond dialogue towards measurable action.

Africa’s development trajectory presents both immense opportunities and urgent challenges. By 2050, the continent is projected to be home to more than 2.5 billion people, including the world’s largest youth population. At the same time, shifting global capital flows, climate pressures, food insecurity and infrastructure gaps continue to demand innovative approaches to financing development and strengthening economic resilience.

Against this backdrop, ASIS 2026 will focus on mobilising catalytic capital, fostering strategic partnerships and creating scalable solutions capable of driving inclusive growth across emerging economies.

Speaking ahead of the summit, Mohamed Malick Fall, United Nations Resident Coordinator in Nigeria, underscored the importance of collective action in advancing Africa’s development priorities.

“Africa’s greatest opportunity lies in the strength of its partnerships. The Africa Social Impact Summit continues to provide a unique platform where governments, the private sector, development partners and civil society come together to mobilise the investments, innovation and collaboration needed to accelerate progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals. Together, we can build resilient economies that leave no one behind.”

Highlighting the importance of sustained collaboration across sectors, Abubakar Suleiman, Board Member, Sterling One Foundation, said the summit has evolved into more than an annual convening.

“What we are building through ASIS is not just a convening, but a long-term platform for action. The conversations we are having today must translate into real commitments, measurable outcomes and partnerships that outlive the summit itself. That is how we move from intention to impact across the continent.”

Nigeria’s Honourable Minister of Budget and Economic Planning, Abubakar Atiku Bagudu, also emphasised the importance of platforms that strengthen collaboration between governments, investors and development partners.

“Nigeria welcomes platforms like the Africa Social Impact Summit that bring together global capital, innovation and policy dialogue. Strengthening collaboration between government, investors and development partners is critical to accelerating economic growth, improving livelihoods and advancing sustainable development across the continent.”

For the organisers, the summit represents a deliberate effort to create a platform where ideas, investment and leadership converge to deliver lasting impact.

Speaking on the significance of this year’s edition, Olapeju Ibekwe, Chief Executive Officer of Sterling One Foundation, noted that the summit has already demonstrated the power of partnerships to unlock transformative outcomes across Africa.

“The Africa Social Impact Summit platform has already unlocked over $1 billion across sectors, and this needs to be scaled significantly. The future of Africa will be defined by the quality of the sustainable partnerships we build today. The Africa Social Impact Summit is a platform that brings together African leaders, local and international investors, innovative ideas and catalytic capital to address some of the continent’s most pressing challenges while unlocking opportunities for inclusive and sustainable growth. We are excited to unveil an edition that is bigger, more collaborative and more action-oriented than ever before. We expect deals of over $500 million to be signed this year.”

The 2026 edition will prioritise investment and partnerships across sectors that are central to Africa’s long-term prosperity, including education, healthcare, climate resilience, food systems, gender equality and women’s empowerment, youth development, the creative economy and sustainable finance.

Through keynote addresses, ministerial dialogues, investor roundtables, policy discussions, innovation showcases and strategic partnership announcements, participants will explore practical pathways for financing development while accelerating implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals and the African Union’s Agenda 2063.

The summit is expected to attract more than 2,000 delegates from over 50 countries, including heads of government, multilateral organisations, development finance institutions, global investors, corporate leaders, entrepreneurs, philanthropists, innovators and civil society organisations. The gathering will provide opportunities to forge new partnerships, unlock investment opportunities and scale solutions capable of delivering measurable social and economic impact across Africa.

As momentum builds towards July, the Africa Social Impact Summit 2026 continues to position itself as a catalyst for transformative action, bringing together the leadership, capital and partnerships required to build resilient economies and shape Africa’s sustainable future.

Registration for the summit is now open. Leaders, investors, innovators, development partners and organisations interested in participating can register by visiting www.TheImpactSummit.org.

Distributed by APO Group on behalf of Sterling One Foundation.

About Africa Social Impact Summit (ASIS):
The Africa Social Impact Summit (ASIS), co-convened by the Sterling One Foundation and the United Nations in Nigeria, is a premier platform dedicated to accelerating sustainable development across Africa through innovation, financing and cross-sector partnerships. Since its launch in 2022, ASIS has convened leaders from government, business, philanthropy, development institutions and civil society to co-create actionable solutions that advance the Sustainable Development Goals and Africa’s long-term development agenda.

Media files

.

Posted on

AFC Financing Supports Largest Power Plant in Burkina Faso to Tackle One of World’s Biggest Electricity Access Gaps

Source: APO

Burkina Faso is set to take a major step towards overcoming one of the world’s largest electricity access gaps after Africa Finance Corporation (AFC) reached financial close on funding for what will become the country’s biggest power plant.

In a country of 24 million, where only one in five people currently has access to electricity, AFC has successfully disbursed the first US$60 million tranche of a US$300 million corporate loan facility supporting development of the 119MW thermal power plant by Aksa Enerji Üretim A.Ş., Türkiye’s largest publicly listed power generation company.

The project is expected to transform Burkina Faso’s electricity system. The West African country currently imports approximately 60% of its power supply, leaving homes, businesses and industry vulnerable to supply disruptions and elevated energy costs, constraining industrialisation and economic growth. Once operational in 2027, the facility will reduce dependence on imported electricity by more than 50% while significantly strengthening domestic generation capacity. By delivering more reliable, lower-cost baseload power, the project is expected to improve energy security, attract private investment and create a stronger foundation for long-term economic growth.

The transaction marks AFC’s first investment in Burkina Faso, reinforcing the Corporation’s commitment to finance transformational infrastructure across every region of Africa. Expanding reliable electricity access remains central to AFC’s mission of accelerating industrialisation, strengthening economic resilience and unlocking sustainable growth.

The financing builds on AFC’s US$150 million corporate loan facility to Aksa Enerji in 2025, which supported the company’s utility-scale gas-to-power projects in Senegal and Ghana, including a 255MW brand new combined-cycle gas power plant in Senegal designed to use domestic natural gas and deliver more reliable and lower-emission baseload power. The successful execution of these projects established Aksa as a trusted partner in delivering large-scale energy infrastructure across Africa, providing the foundation for this expanded collaboration.

The financing underscores AFC’s strategy of partnering with experienced private-sector developers capable of delivering critical energy infrastructure at scale in markets where electricity shortages remain a major constraint on growth.

Samaila Zubairu, President & CEO of AFC, said: “Africa’s path to industrialisation and global competitiveness by 2050 depends on the infrastructure decisions we make today. Reliable electricity is fundamental to economic transformation. Without dependable power, countries cannot industrialise, businesses cannot grow and communities cannot realise their full economic potential. Aksa shares our commitment to delivering the reliable energy infrastructure needed to power Africa’s industrial growth and long-term transformation.”

Cemil Kazanci, Chairman of Aksa Energy commented, “Burkina Faso represents an important milestone in our long-term commitment to Africa. Together with AFC, we are delivering critical energy infrastructure that will strengthen energy security, support economic development and improve the reliability of electricity supply for millions.”

The investment further advances AFC’s broader strategy of strengthening national energy systems and enabling industrialisation through partnerships with experienced private-sector developers delivering transformational infrastructure across Africa.

Distributed by APO Group on behalf of Africa Finance Corporation (AFC).

Media files

.

Posted on

UTM Offshore, Seplat Energy and Nigerian National Petroleum Company (NNPC) Sign Gas Supply Agreement for Nigeria’s First Indigenous Floating Liquefied Natural Gas (FLNG) Project

Source: APO – Report:

.

UTM Offshore has signed a Gas Sales Agreement (GSA) with oil and gas company Seplat Energy and the Nigerian National Petroleum Company (NNPC), marking a vital step forward in the development of Nigeria’s first indigenous-led FLNG project. The agreement represents one of the final commercial building blocks ahead of a final investment decision, reinforcing confidence in a project that is expected to support Nigeria’s gas monetization strategy while expanding LNG exports and domestic gas utilization.

The African Energy Chamber (AEC) – representing the voice of the African energy sector –commends UTM Offshore, the NNPC and Seplat Energy for reaching this landmark agreement. The Chamber views the GSA as a significant step toward unlocking Nigeria’s vast offshore gas resources through indigenous leadership and strategic collaboration. As Africa seeks to maximize the value of its natural gas resources while strengthening energy security and industrial development, projects such as UTM FLNG demonstrate how African companies can lead world-scale infrastructure developments that generate investment, create jobs and position the continent as a more competitive LNG supplier.

Situated in the deepwater Yoho field offshore Nigeria, the FLNG project is expected to produce 176 million cubic feet per day once operational. Engineering and pre-construction activities have been completed, with the operator now pursuing the signing of the Sale and Purchase Agreement and FID following the GSA milestone. On a financing side, the project has secured debt capital from Afreximbank as well as equity commitments from the NNPC and Delta State Government. Global technology firms JGC Holdings and Technip Energies are currently reviewing the EPCIC contract, supporting the project as it advances toward a 2030 shipping target.   

“The signing of this GSA demonstrates what is possible when indigenous companies, national institutions and private investors work together toward a shared vision. UTM FLNG is more than an LNG project; it is a blueprint for how Africa can commercialize its gas resources through African leadership, create long-term economic value and strengthen energy security while supplying cleaner energy to both domestic and international markets,” states NJ Ayuk, Executive Chairman of the AEC.

Advancements at the UTM FLNG project comes at a pivotal time for Nigeria’s natural gas sector as the country pursues new investments that align with its Decade of Gas Initiative. Focused on transforming the country into a gas-powered economy by 2030, the initiative aims to reduce gas flaring, improve energy access while monetizing the country’s 200 trillion cubic feet of proven gas reserves. Projects such as UTM FLNG represent a cornerstone of this strategy, raising Nigeria’s export capacity and strengthening its position in global energy markets.

Beyond exports, the project has also been structured to support Nigeria’s domestic energy ambitions. Approximately 300,000 tons per annum of LPG will be supplied to the local market, supporting cleaner household cooking fuels and reducing reliance on imports.

“It’s great to see companies like Seplat Energy come on board for this strategic project. We believe that the FLNG facility will strengthen Nigeria’s position as one of Africa’s leading LNG producers while providing a model for monetizing offshore gas resources across the continent. By combining indigenous ownership, strategic partnerships and world-class engineering, the project demonstrates how African-led developments can accelerate industrialization, reduce gas flaring and unlock greater value from the continent’s abundant natural gas resources,” Ayuk added. 

– on behalf of African Energy Chamber.

Posted on

A UTM Offshore, a Seplat Energy e a NNPC assinam um acordo de fornecimento de gás para o primeiro projeto FLNG de liderança nigeriana

Source: Africa Press Organisation – Portuguese –

Baixar .tipo

A UTM Offshore assinou um Acordo de Venda de Gás (GSA) com a empresa de petróleo e gás Seplat Energy e com a Nigerian National Petroleum Company (NNPC), marcando um passo vital no desenvolvimento do primeiro projeto FLNG liderado por entidades nacionais na Nigéria. O acordo representa um dos últimos alicerces comerciais antes da decisão final de investimento, reforçando a confiança num projeto que se espera que apoie a estratégia de monetização do gás da Nigéria, ao mesmo tempo que expande as exportações de GNL e a utilização doméstica de gás.

A Câmara Africana de Energia (AEC) — que representa a voz do setor energético africano — felicita a UTM Offshore, a NNPC e a Seplat Energy por terem alcançado este acordo histórico. A Câmara considera o GSA um passo significativo no sentido de explorar os vastos recursos de gás offshore da Nigéria através da liderança local e da colaboração estratégica. À medida que África procura maximizar o valor dos seus recursos de gás natural, reforçando simultaneamente a segurança energética e o desenvolvimento industrial, projetos como o UTM FLNG demonstram como as empresas africanas podem liderar desenvolvimentos de infraestruturas à escala mundial que geram investimento, criam postos de trabalho e posicionam o continente como um fornecedor de GNL mais competitivo.

Situado no campo de águas profundas de Yoho, ao largo da costa da Nigéria, o projeto FLNG deverá produzir 176 milhões de pés cúbicos por dia assim que estiver operacional. As atividades de engenharia e pré-construção foram concluídas, estando a operadora agora a procurar a assinatura do Acordo de Compra e Venda (GSA) e a Decisão Final de Investimento (FID), na sequência do marco do GSA. No que diz respeito ao financiamento, o projeto garantiu capital de dívida do Afreximbank, bem como compromissos de capital próprio da NNPC e do Governo do Estado do Delta. As empresas globais de tecnologia JGC Holdings e Technip Energies estão atualmente a rever o contrato EPCIC, apoiando o projeto à medida que este avança rumo à meta de embarque prevista para 2030.  

«A assinatura deste GSA demonstra o que é possível quando empresas locais, instituições nacionais e investidores privados trabalham em conjunto em prol de uma visão partilhada. O UTM FLNG é mais do que um projeto de GNL; é um modelo de como África pode comercializar os seus recursos de gás através da liderança africana, criar valor económico a longo prazo e reforçar a segurança energética, ao mesmo tempo que fornece energia mais limpa aos mercados nacionais e internacionais», afirma NJ Ayuk, Presidente Executivo da AEC.

Os avanços no projeto UTM FLNG surgem num momento crucial para o setor do gás natural da Nigéria, à medida que o país procura novos investimentos que se alinhem com a sua «Iniciativa da Década do Gás». Centrada na transformação do país numa economia movida a gás até 2030, a iniciativa visa reduzir a queima de gás, melhorar o acesso à energia e, ao mesmo tempo, rentabilizar as 200 triliões de pés cúbicos de reservas comprovadas de gás do país. Projetos como o UTM FLNG representam uma pedra angular desta estratégia, aumentando a capacidade de exportação da Nigéria e reforçando a sua posição nos mercados energéticos globais.

Para além das exportações, o projeto foi também estruturado para apoiar as ambições energéticas internas da Nigéria. Serão fornecidas aproximadamente 300 000 toneladas por ano de GPL ao mercado local, promovendo combustíveis mais limpos para a cozinha doméstica e reduzindo a dependência das importações.

«É excelente ver empresas como a Seplat Energy a juntarem-se a este projeto estratégico. Acreditamos que a instalação FLNG irá reforçar a posição da Nigéria como um dos principais produtores de GNL de África, ao mesmo tempo que servirá de modelo para a rentabilização dos recursos de gás offshore em todo o continente. Ao combinar a propriedade local, parcerias estratégicas e engenharia de classe mundial, o projeto demonstra como os desenvolvimentos liderados por africanos podem acelerar a industrialização, reduzir a queima de gás e libertar maior valor dos abundantes recursos de gás natural do continente», acrescentou Ayuk.

Distribuído pelo Grupo APO para African Energy Chamber.

Posted on

UTM Offshore, Seplat Energy et la NNPC signent un accord d’approvisionnement en gaz pour le premier projet FLNG mené par des acteurs locaux au Nigeria

Source: Africa Press Organisation – French


UTM Offshore a signé un accord de vente de gaz (GSA) avec la société pétrolière et gazière Seplat Energy et la Nigerian National Petroleum Company (NNPC), marquant ainsi une avancée décisive dans le développement du premier projet FLNG mené par des acteurs locaux au Nigeria. Cet accord constitue l’un des derniers éléments commerciaux indispensables avant la décision finale d’investissement, renforçant ainsi la confiance dans un projet qui devrait soutenir la stratégie de monétisation du gaz du Nigeria tout en développant les exportations de GNL et l’utilisation du gaz sur le marché intérieur.

La Chambre africaine de l’énergie (AEC) – qui se fait le porte-parole du secteur énergétique africain – félicite UTM Offshore, la NNPC et Seplat Energy d’avoir conclu cet accord historique. La Chambre considère le GSA comme une avancée significative vers l’exploitation des vastes ressources gazières offshore du Nigeria grâce à un leadership local et à une collaboration stratégique. Alors que l’Afrique cherche à maximiser la valeur de ses ressources en gaz naturel tout en renforçant la sécurité énergétique et le développement industriel, des projets tels que l’UTM FLNG démontrent comment les entreprises africaines peuvent mener des développements d’infrastructures d’envergure mondiale qui génèrent des investissements, créent des emplois et positionnent le continent comme un fournisseur de GNL plus compétitif.

Situé dans le champ en eaux profondes de Yoho, au large du Nigeria, le projet FLNG devrait produire 176 millions de pieds cubes par jour une fois opérationnel. Les activités d’ingénierie et de pré-construction sont achevées ; l’opérateur s’attache désormais à la signature du contrat d’achat-vente (SPA) et à la décision finale d’investissement (FID), après le franchissement de l’étape clé que constitue l’accord de vente et d’achat (GSA). Sur le plan financier, le projet a obtenu un financement par emprunt auprès d’Afreximbank ainsi que des engagements en fonds propres de la part de la NNPC et du gouvernement de l’État du Delta. Les entreprises technologiques mondiales JGC Holdings et Technip Energies examinent actuellement le contrat EPCIC, soutenant ainsi le projet alors qu’il progresse vers son objectif de mise en service en 2030.  

« La signature de ce GSA démontre ce qu’il est possible de réaliser lorsque des entreprises locales, des institutions nationales et des investisseurs privés travaillent ensemble vers une vision commune. UTM FLNG est plus qu’un simple projet de GNL ; c’est un modèle montrant comment l’Afrique peut commercialiser ses ressources gazières sous la houlette africaine, créer de la valeur économique à long terme et renforcer la sécurité énergétique tout en fournissant une énergie plus propre aux marchés nationaux et internationaux », déclare NJ Ayuk, président exécutif de l’AEC.

Les avancées du projet UTM FLNG interviennent à un moment charnière pour le secteur du gaz naturel au Nigeria, alors que le pays recherche de nouveaux investissements s’inscrivant dans le cadre de son initiative « Décennie du gaz ». Axée sur la transformation du pays en une économie fondée sur le gaz d’ici 2030, cette initiative vise à réduire le torchage du gaz, à améliorer l’accès à l’énergie tout en monétisant les 200 billions de pieds cubes de réserves prouvées de gaz du pays. Des projets tels que l’UTM FLNG constituent une pierre angulaire de cette stratégie, en augmentant la capacité d’exportation du Nigeria et en renforçant sa position sur les marchés énergétiques mondiaux.

Au-delà des exportations, le projet a également été conçu pour soutenir les ambitions énergétiques nationales du Nigeria. Environ 300 000 tonnes de GPL par an seront fournies au marché local, favorisant ainsi l’utilisation de combustibles de cuisson plus propres dans les foyers et réduisant la dépendance vis-à-vis des importations.

« C’est formidable de voir des entreprises comme Seplat Energy se joindre à ce projet stratégique. Nous sommes convaincus que l’installation FLNG renforcera la position du Nigeria en tant que l’un des principaux producteurs de GNL en Afrique, tout en servant de modèle pour la valorisation des ressources gazières offshore à l’échelle du continent. En combinant une participation locale, des partenariats stratégiques et une ingénierie de classe mondiale, ce projet démontre comment des initiatives menées par l’Afrique peuvent accélérer l’industrialisation, réduire le torchage du gaz et tirer davantage de valeur des abondantes ressources en gaz naturel du continent », a ajouté M. Ayuk.

Distribué par APO Group pour African Energy Chamber.

Posted on

Flawed credit ratings in Africa: are top 3 western agencies driven by data or bias?

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Misheck Mutize, Post Doctoral Researcher, Graduate School of Business (GSB), University of Cape Town

The three major credit rating agencies – Moody’s, S&P Global and Fitch – have often differed among themselves when rating African institutions and countries. Their opinions don’t have to be aligned, but a huge gap in the ratings suggests inaccuracies in the analyses.

Wrong ratings have consequences. They drive up the cost of capital. Lower ratings indicate higher risk, and lead investors to demand higher interest rates to compensate for that risk. When a sovereign (country) is downgraded, its borrowing costs increase. It has to pay more interest on the same amount of debt, and has less chance of getting funding for development.

In the last three years there have been notable examples of rating agencies differing significantly in their decisions.

The first example is African Export-Import Bank. Between June 2025 and June 2026, the three major agencies reached materially different conclusions about the creditworthiness of the bank. The African Union has highlighted the flawed ratings.

Read more: Africa’s development banks are being undermined: the continent will pay the price

The second example is Fitch Ratings’ downgrade of the Nigerian industrial group Dangote Industries Limited on 6 August 2024. It cited risk linked to the construction of a refinery. A year later, the Dangote Oil Refinery proved to be a transformative project that rebalanced Nigeria’s trade position. It reduced the country’s imports and increased its domestic production. Fitch was wrong and its rating downgrades put the completion of the project at risk.

The African Finance Corporation shows a similar divide. S&P New York and its Chinese subsidiary gave widely differing assessments.

And finally, Moody’s downgraded Kenya in July 2024 while S&P maintained its B-rating.

These examples highlight the same problem: the differences between rating agencies ostensibly looking at the same set of risk factors.

In my view these discrepancies present African countries with two opportunities:

  • challenge the ratings

  • diversify their ratings and funding relationships away from the western markets.

Lastly, the differences highlight the need for rating agencies to be more objective and base their ratings on factual data and fundamentals.

The differences

Fitch downgraded the African Export-Import Bank twice, from BBB to BBB- in June 2025 and subsequently to BB+ in January 2026 before withdrawing its rating. This means Fitch stopped assigning ratings to the bank after its contract was cancelled.

Both Moody’s and S&P maintained investment-grade ratings, assigning Baa2 and BBB+, respectively. This is a three notch difference between Fitch and S&P on the same institution.

This rarely happens in other continents because the three international rating agencies assess largely similar risk factors in an entity’s ability to repay its loans.

The question is whether Fitch’s three-notch downgrades of Afreximbank were driven by facts about the bank or by analysts’ own subjective misjudgements.

Asian agencies tend to recognise the policy importance of Afreximbank, which plays a strategic role in financing Africa’s trade and development. As a result they recognise its preferred creditor status, that its member countries continue to repay the bank’s loans even during periods of crises.

Fitch, however, argued that Afreximbank’s role in Africa was diminishing and it was not a preferred creditor because the International Monetary Fund said so.

S&P Global Ratings aligned with China’s Chengxin International Credit and Japan Credit Rating Agency.

When Fitch Ratings downgraded Dangote Industries it said the risk was refinancing linked to a new oil refinery. Fitch speculated that delays in meeting funding requirements would make financial restructuring or default more likely, and that could trigger further downgrades.

Faced with such a conservative and speculative outlook, Dangote Industries Limited decided to end its contract with Fitch Ratings. It said the rating no longer made commercial sense and the group would instead focus on securing ratings from African-based rating agencies.

A year later, the Dangote Oil Refinery has turned Nigeria into a regional exporter and bolstered its energy security.

Moody’s downgraded Kenya on 8 July 2024 after the government withdrew planned tax hikes in response to protesters. S&P decided to wait for Kenya’s August 2024 budget.

The Moody’s downgrade resulted in a two-notch rating split on Kenya between Moody’s and S&P. Within six months Moody’s had reversed the downgrade with an outlook upgrade. Skipping from negative, past “stable”, to positive. It is highly unusual for a rating agency to revise its outlook within six months and to skip one notch.

It can be argued that the revision was an implicit admission by Moody’s that its earlier ratings were incorrect.

Kenya incurred approximately US$150 million in additional interest costs on existing Eurobond debt as investors rushed to sell off their bonds.

Alternatives

The high cost of capital, driven by weak ratings from the international rating agencies, is pushing Africa to shift towards Asia for foreign funding sources.

Five African countries have already issued a combined US$5 billion in bonds from Japan, China, Hong Kong, Korea and the United Arab Emirates over the past two years. This shift has made Asian rating agencies more relevant as no country or institution would raise capital in Asia without a rating from local rating agencies. These are giving some African institutions stronger assessments than their western peers. Asian agencies are equally independent and credible.

When Fitch Ratings downgraded Afreximbank to speculative grade, Asian rating agencies saw it differently. Chengxin International Credit Ratings Co. kept a stable AAA rating on Afreximbank. Japan Credit Rating Agency rates the bank A- stable for its Samurai bond programme. They differ widely from Fitch on the same institution, with the same balance sheet and the same mandate.

What needs to change

The widening rating splits among the three international rating agencies present an opportunity for African sovereigns and their institutions.

First, rather than accepting rating assessments that prove to be analytically flawed, African sovereigns and their institutions must challenge these ratings. In my view this will help the rating agencies be more thorough. It will also bring flawed ratings to the attention of international investors.

Second, African entities need to diversify their ratings and funding relationships away from the western markets. Domestic rating agencies have demonstrated a more nuanced understanding of local realities.

Lastly, the rating agencies need to be more objective. Analysts’ sentiments and frustrations should not find their way into the rating process.

– Flawed credit ratings in Africa: are top 3 western agencies driven by data or bias?
– https://theconversation.com/flawed-credit-ratings-in-africa-are-top-3-western-agencies-driven-by-data-or-bias-286364

Posted on

President Dr Patrick Herminie Chairs Third Presidential Economic Advisory Council Meeting on Agriculture, Food Security and National Resilience

Source: APO


.

The President of the Republic, Dr Patrick Herminie, today chaired the third meeting of the Presidential Economic Advisory Council at State House, continuing the Council’s strategic deliberations on the future of agriculture and its role in strengthening Seychelles’ food security, economic resilience and national well-being.

The meeting built on the Council’s previous discussions, with particular focus on the policies and investments required to support a modern, productive and sustainable agriculture sector capable of meeting the country’s long-term development aspirations. Members also considered the important interrelationship between agriculture, nutrition and public health, recognising that resilient food systems are fundamental to the health and quality of life of the Seychellois people.

Also in attendance were Ms Jeniffer Vel, Chief of Staff and Economic Advisor to the President, and Secretary to the Council; Mr Wallace Cosgrow, Principal Minister and Minister for Fisheries, Agriculture and the Blue Economy; Mr Kevin Nancy, Principal Secretary for Agriculture; and members of the Presidential Economic Advisory Council.

The Council was briefed on current developments within the agriculture sector, including ongoing initiatives to strengthen domestic production, enhance biosecurity, improve institutional coordination and reinforce technical support for farmers.

Deliberations centred on the structural priorities necessary to unlock the sector’s full potential. These included improving access to finance, strengthening water security and energy efficiency, investing in agricultural technology and innovation, developing local skills, enhancing market linkages, promoting value addition, and encouraging production models that are commercially viable, environmentally responsible and responsive to the evolving needs of the country.

Members also highlighted the importance of ensuring that research, innovation and technical expertise are translated into practical solutions that improve productivity, strengthen farmer resilience and support evidence-based policy development.

Addressing the Council, President Herminie reaffirmed that agriculture remains a strategic national priority and an essential pillar of Seychelles’ long-term development. He emphasised that building a resilient agriculture sector requires coordinated action across Government, the private sector, financial institutions, research organisations and farming communities. The President underscored the importance of expanding access to finance, embracing technological innovation, improving resource efficiency, and creating an enabling environment that encourages investment, productivity and sustainable growth.

The President further noted that strengthening domestic agricultural production extends beyond food security. It is equally an investment in public health, economic resilience and national self-reliance, ensuring that future generations benefit from a food system that is secure, sustainable and capable of withstanding external shocks.

The meeting concluded with a shared commitment to advancing a coherent national approach to agricultural transformation, recognizing that sustained progress will depend on strong partnerships, innovation, strategic investment and policies that empower producers while safeguarding the country’s long-term food security and sustainable development objectives.

Distributed by APO Group on behalf of State House Seychelles.

Posted on

Treasury launches probe into Madlanga Commission allegations

Source: Government of South Africa

Treasury launches probe into Madlanga Commission allegations

National Treasury has announced the launch of an investigation into allegations of improper conduct involving a former National Treasury employee.

The investigation comes after testimony given at the Madlanga Commission and will be conducted by external forensic investigators.

“It has been alleged at the Madlanga Commission that a former employee improperly influenced the awarding of various transversal contracts during his time at the National Treasury. In light of the seriousness of the allegations presented, the National Treasury has initiated an investigation into the awarding of transversal contracts concluded during this period.

“The investigation will test the veracity of the allegations made and, importantly, determine any measures needed to further strengthen the procurement and award processes within the transversal contracting system. Findings of this investigation will be made public in the interest of public trust and good governance,” the department said in a statement on Wednesday.

Furthermore, the department said it has already started processing the Commission’s documentation requests.

“National Treasury… will continue to ensure that the Commission’s work is fully supported by the department.

“The National Treasury remains committed to transparency, accountability and integrity in public procurement and will take all necessary steps to ensure that any allegations of misconduct are thoroughly investigated and consequence management is applied,” the department assured.

Transversal contracts

Explaining the nature of transversal contracts, National Treasury explained that these are procurement arrangements that the department facilitates for “goods and services required by multiple public sector entities.

At the department itself, these contracts are managed by the Office of the Chief Procurement Officer, who is responsible for “sourcing strategy, bid process, and contract award”.

“All transversal contracts managed by the National Treasury involve line departments who participate in the procurement process.

“For example, if a transversal contract is for the South African Police Service [SAPS], officials from SAPS would participate in the Bid Specification, Bid Evaluation and Bid Adjudication Committees, where they provide sector-specific expertise, confirm demand requirements, and contribute to evaluation and recommendation processes,” the department explained.

Additionally, public sector entities may choose to utilise transversal contracts.

“However, procurement transactions are conducted directly between the participating institution and the appointed suppliers. This model therefore combines centralised contracting with decentralised purchasing.

“The National Treasury recognises public interest in this matter; however, to protect the integrity of the investigation, the department will not provide media interviews while the process is underway,” National Treasury said. – SAnews.gov.za

NeoB

0