World sees opportunities and risks of AI
An international Ipsos survey shows that enthusiasm and nervousness about artificial intelligence are closely matched.
People worldwide are using artificial intelligence more often, but do not uniformly feel more confident about it. In 32 countries, enthusiasm and concern are almost evenly balanced, according to Ipsos.
For the AI Monitor 2026, Ipsos surveyed 23,532 adults under the age of 75. The interviews were conducted between 20 March and 3 April 2026 in 32 countries. The study measures public views on products and services that use artificial intelligence.
According to Ipsos, the central finding is that people can be enthusiastic and nervous at the same time. The research agency sees no simple divide between supporters and opponents: the same person may expect benefits while worrying about, for example, jobs, reliability or control.
In several countries, the proportion of people who are enthusiastic about AI fell compared with a year earlier. Ipsos writes that this decline is particularly visible in countries where people had previously been relatively cautious about the technology. Differences between countries remain large, meaning that there is no single global public opinion.
The survey also asks whether AI products and services have more advantages than disadvantages. The answers vary by country and by application. The results say something about expectations and feelings, but not directly about the actual performance or safety of individual systems.
The timing is relevant because AI is meanwhile reaching further into work, education, customer service and consumer products. A positive attitude may speed up adoption, while nervousness may increase pressure for transparency, oversight and accountability.
Ipsos implicitly warns against an overly simple reading of the figures: greater use does not automatically mean greater trust. The study is a snapshot of attitudes in the spring and not an experiment measuring AI's societal effects. Nor does it prove that a particular regulatory approach works better.
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- The study took place in 32 countries and included more than 23,000 respondents.
- Enthusiasm and nervousness about AI often occur among the same people.
- The survey measures perceptions, not objective safety or effectiveness.
Left
Arguments The combination of enthusiasm and fear shows that AI needs robust public oversight, with protection for workers, privacy and groups unable to bear the risks themselves.
Values Equality, human control and protection against concentrations of power.
Consequences Stricter rules may limit abuse, but may also delay the introduction of useful applications.
Centre
Arguments Policy should be determined per application: allow room for proven benefits, with transparency, independent evaluation and clear accountability where risks are greater.
Values Proportionality, evidence and institutional reliability.
Consequences A gradual approach may increase public support, but requires continual oversight while the technology changes rapidly.
Right
Arguments The positive attitude in many countries is a signal not to stifle innovation. Competition and voluntary standards may lead to useful solutions more quickly than heavy-handed regulation imposed in advance.
Values Freedom to innovate, economic growth and individual choice.
Consequences Fewer rules may accelerate development, but leave more responsibility with consumers and companies.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The study's sample size, fieldwork period and main conclusions were checked against the Ipsos publication. The text makes no claims about safety or performance that the survey cannot support.
- confirmed Ipsos surveyed 23,532 adults under the age of 75 in 32 countries. — This is stated in the methodological explanation of the AI Monitor 2026. source
- confirmed The fieldwork took place between 20 March and 3 April 2026. — The report gives this period alongside the international comparisons. source
- confirmed Enthusiasm and nervousness about AI are closely matched worldwide. — Ipsos calls this the central finding of the 2026 edition. source
- confirmed In several countries, enthusiasm for AI fell compared with 2025. — The Ipsos report shows a negative change for several countries. source
- confirmed The survey measures views and is not a technical safety assessment. — This follows from Ipsos's research questions and methodology. source
Editor's note
The survey was conducted in the spring of 2026 and describes attitudes, not technical safety. The original headline referred to a subscription newspaper; this article uses only the publicly available Ipsos source.Sources
- Global Attitudes on AI 2026: The Wonder vs. Worry Divide Deepens — Ipsos
- Ipsos AI Monitor 2026 — Ipsos
- Landenrapport van Nederland over het digitale decennium 2026 — Europese Commissie
More on this in Dutch media
- Het Parool — „kunstmatige intelligentie”
- NRC — „kunstmatige intelligentie”
- Tweakers — „kunstmatige intelligentie”