TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024)vsISO/IEC 42001:2023

See exactly how Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024) controls map to ISO/IEC 42001:2023. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

20
Controls Mapped
12
Gaps Found
41%
Coverage

Need this as a report you can hand to an assessor? A coverage crosswalk for this pair can be built to order.

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024) maps to ISO/IEC 42001:2023 with 41% coverage across 20 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 32 Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024) controls identifies 25 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in The framework, its status and scope – Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024).

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 32 controls analysed | 849 frameworks | 314K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 20 mapped controls across 8 domains. Sign up to explore all 314K+ mappings across 849 frameworks.

Principle 1: Human, societal and environmental wellbeing – Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024)(2 mappings)

australia-national-framework-for-the-assurance-of-ai-in-government-2024::1.21.2 Consult with stakeholders
→iso-iec-42001-2023::4.2Understanding the needs and expectations of interested parties
australia-national-framework-for-the-assurance-of-ai-in-government-2024::1.31.3 Assess impact
→iso-iec-42001-2023::A.5.2AI system impact assessment process

Principle 2: Human-centred values – Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024)(1 mappings)

australia-national-framework-for-the-assurance-of-ai-in-government-2024::2.12.1 Comply with rights protections
→iso-iec-42001-2023::A.5.4Assessing AI system impact on individuals or groups of individuals

Principle 3: Fairness – Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024)(2 mappings)

australia-national-framework-for-the-assurance-of-ai-in-government-2024::3.13.1 Define fairness in context
→iso-iec-42001-2023::A.5.4Assessing AI system impact on individuals or groups of individuals
australia-national-framework-for-the-assurance-of-ai-in-government-2024::3.33.3 Ensure quality of data and design
→iso-iec-42001-2023::A.7.4Quality of data for AI systems

Principle 5: Reliability and safety – Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024)(4 mappings)

australia-national-framework-for-the-assurance-of-ai-in-government-2024::5.15.1 Use appropriate datasets
→iso-iec-42001-2023::A.7.4Quality of data for AI systems
australia-national-framework-for-the-assurance-of-ai-in-government-2024::5.25.2 Conduct pilot studies
→iso-iec-42001-2023::A.6.2.4AI system verification and validation
australia-national-framework-for-the-assurance-of-ai-in-government-2024::5.35.3 Test and verify
→iso-iec-42001-2023::A.6.2.4AI system verification and validation
australia-national-framework-for-the-assurance-of-ai-in-government-2024::5.45.4 Monitor and evaluate
→iso-iec-42001-2023::A.6.2.6AI system operation and monitoring

Principle 6: Transparency and explainability – Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024)(2 mappings)

australia-national-framework-for-the-assurance-of-ai-in-government-2024::6.26.2 Maintain reliable data and information assets
→iso-iec-42001-2023::7.5.3Control of documented information
australia-national-framework-for-the-assurance-of-ai-in-government-2024::6.46.4 Support and enable frontline staff
→iso-iec-42001-2023::7.2Competence

Principle 7: Contestability – Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024)(1 mappings)

australia-national-framework-for-the-assurance-of-ai-in-government-2024::7.27.2 Communicate rights and protections clearly
→iso-iec-42001-2023::A.8.3External reporting

Principle 8: Accountability – Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024)(3 mappings)

australia-national-framework-for-the-assurance-of-ai-in-government-2024::8.18.1 Establish clear roles and responsibilities
→iso-iec-42001-2023::A.3.2AI roles and responsibilities
australia-national-framework-for-the-assurance-of-ai-in-government-2024::8.28.2 Train staff and embed capability
→iso-iec-42001-2023::7.3Awareness
australia-national-framework-for-the-assurance-of-ai-in-government-2024::8.38.3 Embed a positive risk culture
→iso-iec-42001-2023::A.3.3Reporting of concerns

Cornerstones of assurance – Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024)(5 mappings)

australia-national-framework-for-the-assurance-of-ai-in-government-2024::C.1C.1 Governance cornerstone: adapt accountability structures and equip staff
→iso-iec-42001-2023::5.1Leadership and commitment
australia-national-framework-for-the-assurance-of-ai-in-government-2024::C.2C.2 Data governance cornerstone: datasets and governance fit for AI
→iso-iec-42001-2023::A.7.2Data for development and enhancement of AI system
australia-national-framework-for-the-assurance-of-ai-in-government-2024::C.3C.3 Risk-based approach cornerstone: assess case by case across the lifecycle
→iso-iec-42001-2023::6.1.2AI risk assessment
australia-national-framework-for-the-assurance-of-ai-in-government-2024::C.4C.4 Standards cornerstone: align with relevant AI standards
→iso-iec-42001-2023::4.4AI management system
australia-national-framework-for-the-assurance-of-ai-in-government-2024::C.5C.5 Procurement cornerstone: AI-aware procurement and contracts
→iso-iec-42001-2023::A.10.3Suppliers
Coverage crosswalk

A Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024) to ISO/IEC 42001:2023 crosswalk, built to order

The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which ISO/IEC 42001:2023 controls your existing Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024) work already satisfies, which are real gaps, and the reasoning behind every claim so you can check it. One pair, $299, one time.

Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024) into ISO/IEC 42001:2023
Not published yet

This direction has not been through crosswalk review and sign off, so no coverage figure is published for it. Reporting an unreviewed number would be worse than reporting none. It can be built to order at the same price as a pair that is already on the shelf.

If the two frameworks turn out to have too little in common for a crosswalk to help you, we say so and refund it rather than send a number worth nothing.

ISO/IEC 42001:2023 into Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024)
Not published yet

This direction has not been through crosswalk review and sign off, so no coverage figure is published for it. Reporting an unreviewed number would be worse than reporting none. It can be built to order at the same price as a pair that is already on the shelf.

If the two frameworks turn out to have too little in common for a crosswalk to help you, we say so and refund it rather than send a number worth nothing.

Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024) to ISO/IEC 42001:2023 (built to order)
$299
per framework pair, one time
  • Every evidenced control, with the reasoning behind it
  • Every gap, with what it requires
  • Its level of review stated plainly, not a bare number

Why this page shows two different percentages. The 41% in the header counts how many Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024) controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many ISO/IEC 42001:2023 controls are actually evidenced, after a pass that argued against each mapping and kept only what survived. They answer different questions and they are not meant to agree.

A crosswalk narrows the work. It does not replace an audit, and your assessor may take a different view on individual controls. Mappings between frameworks are judgements, not text printed in either standard, which is why every claim in the report shows its reasoning. Questions go to support@theartofservice.com.

Related Comparisons

Other Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024) comparisons

Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024) vs Australia Guidance for AI Adoption (2025)28 mappingsAustralia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024) vs NSW AI Operational Policy (2026)19 mappingsAustralia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024) vs Australian Government Data Governance Framework (2025)1 mappings

Other ISO/IEC 42001:2023 comparisons

NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0) vs ISO/IEC 42001:202338 mappingsEU AI Act vs ISO/IEC 42001:202338 mappingsISO 27001:2022 vs ISO/IEC 42001:202333 mappingsISO 27002:2022 vs ISO/IEC 42001:202332 mappingsNIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 vs ISO/IEC 42001:202331 mappingsSOC 2 vs ISO/IEC 42001:202330 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs ISO/IEC 42001:202322 mappingsASEAN Guide on AI Governance and Ethics vs ISO/IEC 42001:202316 mappings

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

Cross-framework mappings across 849 frameworks, at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • ✓ 849 framework browser
  • ✓ Cross-framework mappings (314K+)
  • ✓ 824 compliance assessments
  • ✓ 3 AI queries & searches per day
Get Started Free
Recommended
$149/month

Professional

  • ✓ Unlimited AI Compliance Advisory
  • ✓ Unlimited full-text search
  • ✓ Framework self-assessment
  • ✓ PDF, Excel & CSV exports
Start 7-Day Free Trial →

Popular framework comparisons

NIST CSF vs NIST 800-53ISO 27001 vs NIST CSFCMMC vs NIST 800-53FedRAMP vs NIST 800-53NIST CSF vs SOC 2HIPAA vs NIST 800-53ISO 27001 vs SOC 2ISO 27001 vs ISO 27701

What are the key differences between Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024) and ISO/IEC 42001:2023?

Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024) has 32 controls across its framework, while ISO/IEC 42001:2023 covers 38 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 20 overlapping controls (41% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in The framework, its status and scope – Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024), where 5 Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024) controls have no direct ISO/IEC 42001:2023 equivalent.

How many controls map between Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024) and ISO/IEC 42001:2023?

Of 32 total Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024) controls, 20 map directly to ISO/IEC 42001:2023 controls, representing 41% coverage. The remaining 25 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024) to ISO/IEC 42001:2023?

25 Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024) controls have no direct equivalent in ISO/IEC 42001:2023. The highest concentration of gaps is in The framework, its status and scope – Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024) with 5 unmapped controls. These gaps represent areas where additional controls, policies, or documentation must be created to achieve compliance with both frameworks.

Which control domains have the most gaps between Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024) and ISO/IEC 42001:2023?

The domain with the highest gap count is The framework, its status and scope – Australia National Framework for the Assurance of AI in Government (2024) (5 gaps). Export the full domain-by-domain gap breakdown via the Professional tier to generate a prioritised remediation roadmap.

Related Resources

How to Map Controls Across Frameworks|Multi-Framework Compliance Guide|Compliance Glossary

This platform provides educational compliance tools, not legal, regulatory, or professional compliance advice. Cross-framework mappings are AI-assisted interpretations and do not reproduce or replace official standards. Framework names and trademarks belong to their respective owners. Consult qualified professionals for your specific compliance requirements. See our Terms of Service.