The Sentience Readiness Index: A Preliminary Framework for Measuring National Preparedness for the Possibility of Artificial Sentience

TL;DR

This paper proposes the Sentience Readiness Index (SRI), a new preliminary framework to assess how prepared nations are for the potential moral and institutional challenges posed by artificial sentience, highlighting current gaps.

Contribution

It introduces the first composite index measuring national preparedness for AI sentience, using expert scoring and a novel methodology based on OECD/JRC guidelines.

Findings

No jurisdiction is fully prepared for AI sentience.

Research Environment scores are the strongest category.

Professional Readiness is the weakest category.

Abstract

The scientific study of consciousness has begun to generate testable predictions about artificial systems. A landmark collaborative assessment evaluated current AI architectures against six leading theories of consciousness and found that none currently qualifies as a strong candidate, but that future systems might. A precautionary approach to AI sentience, which holds that credible possibility of sentience warrants governance action even without proof, has gained philosophical and institutional traction. Yet existing AI readiness indices, including the Oxford Insights Government AI Readiness Index, the IMF AI Preparedness Index, and the Stanford AI Index, measure economic, technological, and governance preparedness without assessing whether societies are prepared for the possibility that AI systems might warrant moral consideration. This paper introduces the Sentience Readiness Index (SRI), a preliminary composite index measuring national-level preparedness across six weighted categories for 31 jurisdictions. The SRI was constructed following the OECD/JRC framework for composite indicators and employs LLM-assisted expert scoring with iterative expert review to generate an initial dataset. No jurisdiction exceeds ``Partially Prepared'' (the United Kingdom leads at 49/100). Research Environment scores are universally the strongest category; Professional Readiness is universally the weakest. These exploratory findings suggest that if AI sentience becomes scientifically plausible, no society currently possesses adequate institutional, professional, or cultural infrastructure to respond. As a preliminary framework, the SRI provides an initial diagnostic baseline and highlights areas for future methodological refinement, including expanded expert validation, improved measurement instruments, and longitudinal data collection.