> **来源：[研报客](https://pc.yanbaoke.cn)** # The Global Risks Report 2026 # 21st Edition INSIGHT REPORT # Contents Preface 4 Overview of methodology 5 Key findings 6 Chapter 1: Global Risks 2026-2036: The Age of Competition 14 1.1 The world in 2026: on a precipice 14 1.2 The path to 2028: compounding risks 15 1.3 The path to 2036: over the edge? 18 1.4 A darkening outlook 21 Chapter 2: Global Risks In-Depth: Anticipating Tomorrow's Challenges Today 23 2.1 An underlying context of structural change 23 2.2 Multipolarity without multilateralism 24 2.3 Values at war 32 2.4 An economic reckoning 40 2.5 Infrastructure endangered 46 2.6 Quantum leaps 53 2.7 AI at large 60 68 Appendix A: Definitions and Global Risks List 75 Appendix B: Global Risks Perception Survey 2025-2026 78 Appendix C: Executive Opinion Survey: National Risk Perceptions 81 Appendix D: Risk Governance 91 Partner Institutes 94 Acknowledgements 100 # Acknowledgement The Global Risks Report is produced exclusively by the World Economic Forum. We are grateful to our longstanding partners on previous editions, Marsh and Zurich Insurance Group. Their generous inputs and in-depth guidance have been invaluable. # Terms of use and disclaimer This document is published by the World Economic Forum as a contribution to a project, insight area or interaction. The findings, interpretations and conclusions expressed herein are a result of a collaborative process facilitated and endorsed by the World Economic Forum but whose results do not necessarily represent the views of the World Economic Forum, nor the entirety of its Members, Partners or other stakeholders. # World Economic Forum 91-93 route de la Capite CH-1223 Cologne/Geneva Switzerland Tel.: +41 (0)22 869 1212 Fax: +41 (0)22 786 2744 E-mail: contact@weforum.org www.weforum.org Copyright © 2026 by the World Economic Forum All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, or otherwise without the prior permission of the World Economic Forum. ISBN: 978-2-940631-60-5 The report and an interactive data platform are available at https://www.weforum.org/publications/global-risks-report-2026/. # Preface Saadia Zahidi Managing Director The annual Global Risks Report offers a view of global risks at the start of each year, focusing global leaders on addressing emerging challenges and their potential knock-on effects. It does not offer predictions, nor does it suggest that the future is predetermined. Instead, it provides a range of potential futures with a view to prevention and management. Three years ago, the 18th edition of the Global Risks Report considered the possibility of a "polycrisis", as risks from multiple domains unfold at the same time. This $21^{\text{st}}$ edition of the Global Risks Report explores how a new competitive order is taking shape and its impact across multiple concurrent risk domains. We are witnessing the turmoil caused by kinetic wars, the deployment of economic weapons for strategic advantage, and growing fragmentation across societies. And as these "here and now" risks unfold, longer-term challenges, from technological acceleration to environmental decline, continue to create knock-on effects across systems. In parallel, rules and institutions that have long underpinned stability are increasingly deadlocked or ineffective in managing this turbulence. While this report examines the worst-case scenarios across domains, it is also clear that new forms of global cooperation are already unfolding even amid competition, and the global economy is demonstrating resilience in the face of uncertainty. This shifting landscape, where cooperation looks markedly different than it did yesterday, reflects a pragmatic reality: collaborative approaches remain essential to sustain economic growth, accelerate innovation responsibly, and build adaptive capacity for an increasingly complex era. This report examines a future where today's relative resilience breaks down in the face of unprecedented turbulence, defined by the accelerating scale, interconnectedness and speed of global risks. Among contributors to the report's survey and narrative, negative perceptions of the future are mounting. We find that $50\%$ of leaders and experts surveyed anticipate either a turbulent or stormy outlook over the next two years, growing to $57\%$ over the next 10 years with only $1\%$ anticipating a calm outlook across each time horizon. GEOEconomic confrontation has emerged as the most severe risk over the next two years while economic risks have experienced the sharpest rises among all risk categories over the two-year timeframe, with concerns growing over an economic downturn, rising inflation and potential asset bubbles as countries face high debt burdens and volatile markets. Meanwhile, inequality is once again identified as the most interconnected global risk over the next decade, fuelling other global risks as the social contract between citizens and government falters under pressure. And as shorter-term concerns overtake shared long-term global objectives, environmental risks are being reprioritized downward in the two-year time horizon, with the majority declining in rank and exhibiting reduced severity scores, even as they remain key concerns in the ten-year time horizon. Finally, technological acceleration, while driving unprecedented opportunities, is also generating significant risks in the form of misinformation and disinformation, a top short-term concern, and creating anxiety about the potentially adverse long-term outcomes of AI, a risk that sees the sharpest increase in rank between the short term and the long term across all 33 risks covered. The first section of this report shares these and other results from the latest annual Global Risks Perception Survey, which this year brought together the views of over 1,300 global leaders and experts across academia, business, government, international organizations and civil society. The second section of this report examines six key global themes in depth and considers how the risks associated with them may unfold in the coming years. These include relatively short- to medium-term risks associated with "multipolarity without multilateralism", "values at war", and an "economic reckoning" as well as medium- to long-term concerns associated with "infrastructure endangered", "quantum leaps" and "AI at large". As nations turn inward and strategic competition intensifies, we need a clear-eyed focus on understanding the dangers that lie ahead as well as maintaining or rebuilding capacity for collective action on these shared challenges. We would like to thank over 160 experts, including from the Global Risks Report Advisory Board, the Chief Risk Officers Community, as well as Forum C-suite communities and staff from across its eleven thematic Centres, whose insights have shaped this report. We would also like to express our gratitude to the core team that developed the report - Mark Elsner and Grace Atkinson - and to Mitali Chatterjee, Ricky Li and Eoin Ó Cathasaigh for their support. As the Global Risks Report enters its 21st year, one lesson endures: cooperation is indispensable for global risk management. In a world with greater competition, this may be harder to achieve, but only by rebuilding trust and new forms of collaborative mechanisms can leaders steer us towards greater resilience and help shape a more stable future. The future is not a single, fixed path but a range of possible trajectories, each dependent on the decisions we make today as a global community. The challenges highlighted in this report – spanning geopolitical shocks, rapid technological change, climate instability, societal strife, and economic risks – underscore both the scale of the potential perils we face and our shared responsibility to shape what comes next. # Overview of methodology The Global Risks Perception Survey (GRPS) has underpinned the Global Risks Report for two decades and is the World Economic Forum's premier source of original global risks data. This year's GRPS has brought together insights on the evolving global risks landscape from over 1,300 experts across academia, business, government, international organizations and civil society. Responses for the GRPS 2025-2026 were collected between 12 August and 22 September 2025. "Global risk" is defined as the possibility of the occurrence of an event or condition that, if it occurs, would negatively impact a significant proportion of global GDP, population or natural resources. Relevant definitions for each of the 33 global risks are included in Appendix A: Definitions and Global Risks List. The GRPS 2025-2026 included the following components: - Risk landscape invited respondents to assess the likely impact (severity) of global risks over a one-, two- and 10-year horizon to illustrate the potential development of individual global risks over time and identify areas of key concern. Consequences asked respondents to consider the range of potential impacts of a risk arising, to highlight relationships between global risks and the potential for compounding crises. - Risk governance invited respondents to reflect on which approaches have the most potential for driving action on global risk reduction and preparedness. - Outlook asked respondents to predict the evolution of key aspects underpinning the global risks landscape. Refer to Appendix B: Global Risks Perception Survey 2025-2026 for more detail on the methodology. To complement GRPS data on global risks, the report also draws on the World Economic Forum's Executive Opinion Survey (EOS) to identify risks that pose the most severe threat to each country over the next two years, as identified by over 11,000 business leaders in 116 economies. When considered in context with the GRPS, this data provides insight into local concerns and priorities and points to potential "hot spots" and regional manifestations of global risks. Refer to Appendix C: Executive Opinion Survey: National Risk Perceptions for more details. Finally, the report integrates the views of leading experts to generate foresight and to support analysis of the survey data. Contributions were collected from 161 colleagues across the World Economic Forum's Centres of expertise and community meetings, drawing on private interviews and thematic workshops with experts from across academia, business, government, international organizations and civil society. These discussions were conducted from May to November 2025. Experts included the Global Risks Report Advisory Board and the Chief Risk Officers Community. Refer to Acknowledgements for more detail. # Key findings The Global Risks Report 2026, the 21st edition of this annual report, marks the second half of a turbulent decade. The report analyses global risks through three timeframes to support decision-makers in balancing current crises and longer-term priorities. Chapter 1 presents the findings of this year's Global Risks Perception Survey (GRPS), which captures insights from over 1,300 experts worldwide. It explores risks in the current or immediate term (in 2026), the short-to-medium term (to 2028) and in the long term (to 2036). Chapter 2 explores the range of implications of these risks and their interconnections, through six in-depth analyses of selected themes. Below are the key findings of the report, in which we compare the risk outlooks across the three-time horizons. Uncertainty is the defining theme of the global risks outlook in 2026. GRPS respondents viewed both the short- and long-term global outlook negatively, with $50\%$ of respondents anticipating either a turbulent or stormy outlook over the next two years, deteriorating to $57\%$ of respondents over the next 10 years (Figure 1). A further $40\%$ and $32\%$ , respectively, view the global outlook as unsettled over the two- and 10-year time frames, with only $1\%$ anticipating a calm outlook across each time horizon. As global risks continue to spiral in scale, interconnectivity and velocity, 2026 marks an age of competition. As cooperative mechanisms crumble, with governments retreating from multilateral frameworks, stability is under siege. A contested multipolar landscape is emerging where confrontation is replacing collaboration, and trust – the currency of cooperation – is losing its value. This year's GRPS findings show heightened short-term concerns compared to last year, with a 14 percentage-point increase in respondents selecting a turbulent or stormy outlook over the next two years. By contrast, compared with last year, there is a five percentage-point improvement over the next 10 years in those two categories (from $62\%$ last year to $57\%$ this year), with a slight uptick in respondents selecting either a calm or stable outlook (up three percentage points) or an unsettled outlook (up two percentage points). # Multilateralism is in retreat The multilateral system is under pressure. Declining trust, diminishing transparency and respect for the rule of law, along with heightened protectionism, are threatening longstanding international relations, trade and investment and increasing the propensity for conflict. Geoeconomic confrontation is top of mind for respondents and was selected as the top risk most likely to trigger a material global crisis in 2026 by $18\%$ of respondents, increasing two positions from last year (Figure 2). This is followed by State-based armed conflict, selected by a further $14\%$ of respondents. # Short-term (2 years) and long-term (10 years) global outlook "Which of the following best characterizes your outlook for the world over the following time periods?" FIGURE 1 # Source World Economic Forum Global Risks Perception Survey 2025-2026 # Note The percentages in the graph may not add up to $100\%$ because values have been rounded up/down. In a world already weakened by rising rivalries, unstable supply chains and prolonged conflicts at risk of regional spillover, such confrontation carries systemic, deliberate and far-reaching global consequences, increasing state fragility. The centrality of Geoeconomic confrontation in the global risks landscape is not restricted to 2026, with respondents selecting it as the top risk over the two-year time horizon (to 2028, Figure 3), as well, up eight positions from last year (Figure D). Geoeconomic confrontation threatens the core of the interconnected global economy, as explored further in Section 2.2: Multipolarity without multilateralism. # Economic risks are intensifying Economic risks, taken collectively, show the largest increases in ranking over the next two years, albeit from relatively low rankings last year. Economic downturn and Inflation are both up eight positions, to #11 and #21 respectively, with a similar uptick for Asset bubble burst, up seven positions to #18 (Figure 4). Economic downturn has witnessed one of the largest increases in severity score compared with last year's findings, behind only Geoeconomic confrontation. Section 2.4: An economic reckoning explores how, over the next two years, mounting debt sustainability concerns coupled with potential economic bubbles – in a context of rising Geoeconomic confrontation – could herald a new phase of volatility, potentially further destabilizing societies and businesses. # FIGURE 2 # Current Global Risk Landscape "Please select one risk that you believe is most likely to present a material crisis on a global scale in 2026." Source World Economic Forum Global Risks Perception Survey 2025-2026 Risk categories Economic Environmental Geopolitical Societal Technological # Short term (2 years) 1. Geoeconomic confrontation 2. Misinformation and disinformation 3. Societal polarization 4. Extreme weather events 5. State-based armed conflict 6. Cyber insecurity 7. Inequality 8. Erosion of human rights and/or of civic freedoms 9. Pollution 10. Involuntary migration or displacement # Long term (10 years) 1. Extreme weather events 2. Biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse 3. Critical change to Earth systems 4. Misinformation and disinformation 5. Adverse outcomes of AI technologies 6. Natural resource shortages 7. Inequality 8. Cyber insecurity 9. Societal polarization 0. Pollution Source World Economic Forum Global Risks Perception Survey 2025-2026 Risk categories Economic Environmental Geopolitical Societal Technological # FIGURE 4 # Change in short-term (2 years) global risks perception from last year Stable level of concern Biggest increase in ranking Biggest fall in ranking Source World Economic Forum Global Risks Perception Survey 2025-2026 Risk categories Economic Environmental Geopolitical Societal Technological # Technological risks are growing, largely unchecked Technological developments and new innovations are driving opportunities, with vast potential benefits from health and education to agriculture and infrastructure, but also leading to new risks across domains, from labour markets to information integrity to autonomous weapons systems. Misinformation and disinformation and Cyber insecurity ranked #2 and #6, respectively, on the two-year outlook. Adverse outcomes of AI is the risk with the largest rise in ranking over time, moving from #30 on the two-year outlook to #5 on the 10-year outlook. Section 2.7: AI at large explores how, over the next decade, AI could impact labour markets, societies and global security. Conversely, Adverse outcomes of frontier technologies, which moves from #33 in the two-year ranking to #25 in the 10-year ranking (Figure 5), remains relatively low overall. Section # Short term (2 years) 24. Critical change to Earth systems 25. Intrastate violence 26. Biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse 27. Infectious diseases 28. Biological, chemical or nuclear weapons or hazards 29. Talent and/or labour shortages 30. Adverse outcomes of AI technologies 31. Decline in health and well-being 32. Non-weather related natural disasters 33. Adverse outcomes of frontier technologies # Long term (10 years) 24. Economic downturn 25. Adverse outcomes of frontier technologies 26. Disruptions to a systemically important supply chain 27. Asset bubble bursts 28. Decline in health and well-being 29. Crime and illicit economic activity 30. Intrastate violence 31. Inflation 32. Talent and/or labour shortages 33. Non-weather related natural disasters Source World Economic Forum Global Risks Perception Survey 2025-2026 Risk categories Economic Environmental Geopolitical Societal Technological 2.6: Quantum leaps explores how an acceleration in quantum technologies can offer significant opportunities to societies and economies, from improving the accuracy and speed of climate and weather modelling to the discovery of new drugs. Yet, advancements in the quantum field also risk becoming another facet of strategic rivalry, economic bifurcation and political polarization. # Societies are on the edge Rising societal and political polarization is intensifying pressures on democratic systems, as extremist social, cultural and political movements challenge institutional resilience and public trust. The growing prevalence of "streets versus elites" narratives reflect deepening disillusionment with traditional governance structures, leaving many citizens feeling excluded from political decision-making processes and increasingly skeptical that policy-making can deliver tangible improvements to livelihoods. Inequality was selected by respondents as the most interconnected global risk for a second year running, followed closely by Economic downturn (Figure 6). In parallel, Misinformation and disinformation in second position in the two-year timeframe, below Geoeconomic confrontation, remains an acute global concern. As wealth continues to concentrate in the hands of a few, while cost of living pressures remain high, permanently K-shaped economies are becoming a risk, calling the social contract and its financing into question. Section 2.3: Values at war explores how societal and political polarization may deepen over the next two years as technology becomes more embedded in daily life and geoeconomic tensions persist, heightening the risks of increased digital distrust and dilution of socio-environmental progress. # Environmental concerns are being deprioritized The GRPS findings suggest heightened prioritization of non-environmental risks relative to environmental ones compared to previous years. In the outlook for the next two years, a majority of environmental risks experienced declines in ranking, with Extreme weather events moving from #2 to #4 and Pollution from #6 to #9. Critical change to Earth systems and Biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse also declined, by seven and five positions, respectively, and are in the lower half of the risk list this year in the two-year outlook. All environmental risks also declined in severity score for the two-year time horizon compared with last year's findings. In other words, not only do their rankings decline relative to other risk categories, but there has also been an absolute shift away from concerns about the environment. In the next 10 years, environmental risks have retained their ranking as the most severe risks, with Extreme weather events identified as the top risk and half of the top 10 risks being environmental in nature (Figures 7 and 10). In this year's GRPS, we also asked respondents about their perceptions of the global outlook by risk Nodes Risk influence Edges Relative influence Medium Low Risk categories Economic Environmental Geopolitical Societal Technological Source World Economic Forum Global Risks Perception Survey 2025-2026 category: societal, technological, environmental, economic and geopolitical. Over the next decade, environmental risks were perceived with the most pessimism out of all risk categories surveyed, with close to three-quarters of respondents selecting either a turbulent or stormy outlook (Figure 8). Chapter 2.5: Infrastructure endangered explores, in part, the effects of continued extreme weather and climate change on ageing infrastructure. From supply-chain chokepoints to strains on electrical grids, critical infrastructure requires renewed attention, with the current risks already playing out and affecting societies globally. # A new competitive order is emerging In this period of geoeconomic transformation, alliances are being reshaped and the resilience of markets and of the institutions that emerged from the Bretton Woods Conference of 1944 is being tested. Protectionism, strategic industrial policy and active influence by governments over critical supply chains all signal a world growing more intensely competitive. In this year's GRPS, $68\%$ of respondents describe the global political FIGURE 7 Relative severity of global risks, short term (2 years) and long term (10 years) # Source World Economic Forum Global Risks Perception Survey 2025-2026 # Note Severity was assessed on a 1-7 Likert scale $[1 = \text{Low severity}, 7 = \text{High severity}]$ . environment over the next 10 years as a "multipolar or fragmented order in which middle and great powers contest, set and enforce regional rules and norms", an increase of four percentage points compared to last year (Figure 9). Only $6\%$ of respondents expect a reinvigoration of the previous unipolar, rules-based international order. The growing shift toward more inward-looking and adversarial policies has cast further uncertainty over the future of multilateralism. As nations increasingly prioritize national interests over collective action, pressing questions emerge about the capacity of the international community to confront shared challenges such as climate change, global health and economic stability – as well as generate the local growth needed for domestic prosperity and stability. In this evolving landscape, global leadership and the values that will underpin the next phase of international cooperation are issues that remain critically unresolved. Yet, history reminds us that order can be rebuilt if nations choose strategic collaboration even amid competition. The future is not a single, fixed path but a range of possible trajectories, each dependent on the decisions we make today as a global community. The challenges highlighted in the GRPS – spanning geopolitical shocks, rapid technological change, climate instability, economic uncertainty and their collective impact on societies – underscore both the scale of the risks we face and our shared responsibility to shape what comes next. FIGURE 8 Long-term (10 years) outlook by risk category Calm: Negligible risk of global catastrophes Stable: Isolated disruptions, low risk of global catastrophes Unsettled: Some instability, moderate risk of global catastrophes Turbulent: Upheavals and elevated risk of global catastrophes Stormy: Global catastrophic risks looming # Source World Economic Forum Global Risks Perception Survey 2025-2026 # Note The percentages in the graph may not add up to $100\%$ because values have been rounded up/down. "Which of the following best characterizes the global political environment for cooperation on global risks in 10 years?" FIGURE 9 Global political outlook # 68% Multipolar or fragmented order in which middle and great powers contest, set, and enforce regional rules and norms # 14% Bipolar or bifurcated order shaped by strategic competition between two superpowers # 12% Realignment towards a new international order led by an alternative superpower # 6% Reinvigoration of the US-led, rules-based international order # Source World Economic Forum Global Risks Perception Survey 2025-2026 # Short term (2 years) 1. Geoeconomic confrontation 2. Misinformation and disinformation 3. Societal polarization 4. Extreme weather events 5. State-based armed conflict 6. Cyber insecurity 7. Inequality 8. Erosion of human rights and/or of civic freedoms 9. Pollution 10. Involuntary migration or displacement 11. Economic downturn 12. Online harms 13. Lack of economic opportunity or unemployment 14. Censorship and surveillance 15. Concentration of strategic resources and technologies 16. Debt Natural resource shortages 18. Asset bubble bursts 19. Disruptions to a systemically important supply chain 20. Insufficient public infrastructure and social protections 21. Inflation 22. Disruptions to critical infrastructure 23. Crime and illicit economic activity 24. Critical change to Earth systems 25. Intrastate violence 26. Biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse 27. Infectious diseases 28. Biological, chemical or nuclear weapons or hazards 29. Talent and/or labour shortages 30. Adverse outcomes of AI technologies 31. Decline in health and well-being 32. Non-weather related natural disasters 33. Adverse outcomes of frontier technologies # Long term (10 years) 1. Extreme weather events 2. Biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse 3. Critical change to Earth systems 4. Misinformation and disinformation 5. Adverse outcomes of AI technologies 6. Natural resource shortages 7. Inequality 8. Cyber insecurity 9. Societal polarization 0. Pollution 1. Concentration of strategic resources and technologies 2. State-based armed conflict 3. Involuntary migration or displacement 4. Lack of economic opportunity or unemployment 5. Censorship and surveillance 6. Erosion of human rights and/or of civic freedoms 7. Debt 8. Online harms 9. Geoeconomic confrontation 0. Biological, chemical or nuclear weapons or hazards 1. Insufficient public infrastructure and social protections 2. Infectious diseases 3. Disruptions to critical infrastructure 4. Economic downturn 5. Adverse outcomes of frontier technologies 6. Disruptions to a systemically important supply chain 7. Asset bubble bursts 8. Decline in health and well-being 9. Crime and illicit economic activity 0. Intrastate violence 1. Inflation 2. Talent and/or labour shortages 3. Non-weather related natural disasters 1 # Global Risks 2026-2036: The Age of Competition # 1.1 The world in 2026: on a precipice As we enter 2026, the world is balancing on a precipice. The turmoil caused by kinetic wars alongside deployment of economic weapons for strategic advantage is continuing to fragment societies. Rules and institutions that have long underpinned stability are under siege in a new era in which trade, finance and technology are wielded as weapons of influence. This report analyses global risks through three time frames: 2026, 2028 and 2036. In 2026, geopolitical and geoeconomic risks dominate the risk outlook, with close to one-third of GRPS respondents selecting either Geoeconomic confrontation (18% of respondents) or State-based armed conflict (14% of respondents) as the top risk for 2026 (Figure 11). Geoeconomic confrontation has increased two positions compared to last year and is now the number one risk, with State-based armed conflict falling from #1 to #2. There has also been an uptick in respondent concern for technological risks as we enter 2026, with Misinformation and disinformation at #5 (7% of respondents), and two new entrants into the top 10: Adverse outcomes of AI technologies at #8 (4% of respondents) and Cyber insecurity at #9 (3% of respondents). # Current Global Risk Landscape "Please select one risk that you believe is most likely to present a material crisis on a global scale in 2026." (top 10 risks selected by respondents) FIGURE 11 Source World Economic Forum Global Risks Perception Survey 2025-2026 Risk categories Economic Environmental Geopolitical Societal Technological While societal risks have remained stable as a concern compared to last year, in particular Societal polarization at #4 (selected by $7 \%$ of respondents) and Inequality at #10 (3% of respondents), there has been an uptick in respondents selecting Erosion of human rights and/or civic freedoms, at #7, up two positions from last year. Economic downturn remains in the top 10 at the start of 2026, at #6, selected by $5 \%$ of respondents. By contrast, environmental risks have experienced a decline in share of respondents' nominations compared with last year's findings. Extreme weather events has moved from #2 to #3, falling by six percentage points (down to $8\%$ of respondents) and Critical change to Earth systems has declined from #7 to #13. # 1.2 The path to 2028: compounding risks Geoeconomic confrontation is also the top risk for 2028 according to the GRPS, up eight positions from last year and moving Misinformation and disinformation to #2 for the first time since 2023 (Figure 12). In highlighting Geoeconomic confrontation, respondents are indicating a deepening and broadening of their concerns: after a year of heightened uncertainty over trade policy, there is now a growing recognition of the escalating use of other economic and political instruments, from sanctions and regulations to capital restrictions and weaponization of supply chains, as tools of geoeconomic strategy. State-based armed conflict stands in fifth position, as competition among countries hardens. "Please estimate the likely impact (severity) of the following risks over a 2-year period." FIGURE 12 Global risks ranked by severity over the short term (2 years) Source World Economic Forum Global Risks Perception Survey 2025-2026 Risk categories Economic Environmental Geopolitical Societal Technological Rising geoeconomic tensions between countries are also coinciding with elevated levels of inequality and uneven economic impacts of the transformations underway. While there have been upward movements in societal risks since last year's survey, with Societal polarization (#3) up one position and Erosion of human rights and/or civic freedoms up two positions to #8, this risk category has overall remained relatively stable in its ranking. Inequality (#7), Lack of economic opportunity or unemployment (#13), Insufficient public infrastructure and societal protections (#20) and Infectious diseases (#27) all retain the same rankings as last year. Deepening divides along political, cultural or identity lines within societies are being amplified by technological risks, such as Misinformation and disinformation (#2). This corrodes public discourse, weakens crisis responses and is propagated by technological advancements, such as in AI. These developments in turn heighten the risks of increased digital distrust and dilution of ambitious socio-environmental decision-making amid shifting short-term priorities and increasingly nationalistic narratives. Technological risks overall remain an ongoing and significant concern for respondents, with Cyber insecurity at #6 reflecting the increasing frequency and sophistication of cyberattacks targeting critical infrastructure, businesses and government. However, the low ranking of Adverse outcomes of AI at #30 in the two-year time frame indicates that respondents view these risks as still relatively distant or as a segment of other more current risks (such as State-based armed conflict or Misinformation and disinformation). While environmental risks are present in the top 10 over the next two years, with Extreme weather events at #4 and Pollution at #9, there has been a reprioritization of global risks by respondents in the short term towards geoeconomic and societal shocks. Environmental risks have some of the largest declines in ranking, with Critical change to Earth systems down seven positions to #24, Biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse down five positions to #26, and Pollution down three positions to #9 (Figure 13). FIGURE 13 Change in short-term (2 years) global risks perception from last year Source World Economic Forum Global Risks Perception Survey 2025-2026 FIGURE 14 Global risks, short term (2 years), by stakeholder group # Source World Economic Forum Global Risks Perception Survey 2025-2026 # Note Sample size by stakeholder group varied, and all respondents were weighted equally for the purposes of global rankings. The results are based on the following: academia, n=312 (24% of total); business, n=495 (38%); civil society, n=169 (13%); government, n=124 (10%); international organization, n=129 (10%); and other, n=61 (5%). Across stakeholder groups surveyed, there is general alignment on the most severe global risks identified by respondents, with all stakeholders viewing Geoeconomic confrontation and Misinformation and disinformation as key risks over the next two years (Figure 14). Economic risks are of significant concern for some stakeholders; in particular, Economic downturn for both the government and the private sector. Compared with last year's GRPS, environmental risks, in particular Extreme weather events, have seen relative declines in ranking across stakeholder groups, with no stakeholder group in aggregate perceiving Biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse or Natural resource shortages to be a top 10 risk anymore, unlike last year. When assessing risk perception by age groups surveyed, the findings indicate overall alignment across cohorts. However, younger groups are more concerned with Misinformation and disinformation than with Geoeconomic confrontation (Figure 15). Environmental risks are also a prominent concern for the under-30 age group, in particular. FIGURE 15 Global risks, short term (2 years), by age group # Source World Economic Forum Global Risks Perception Survey 2025-2026 # Note Sample size by age group varied, and all respondents were weighted equally for the purposes of global rankings. The results are based on the following: <30 years, n=139 (11% of total); 30-39, n=161 (12%); 40-49, n=324 (25%); 50-59, n=388 (30%); 60-69, n=203 (16%); and 70+, n=77 (6%). # 1.3 The path to 2036: over the edge? Extreme weather events retains its position as the top risk for 2036, with half of the top 10 risks environmental in nature, similar to last year (Figure 16). Biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse retains its position at #2, followed by Critical change to Earth systems at #3. Natural resource shortages at #6 has declined by two positions since last year, with Pollution at #10, like last year. Unlike in the two-year outlook, where these have declined in rankings, the existential nature of environmental risks means they remain as the top priorities over the next decade across stakeholders and age groups. The only broadly environmental risk that is not present as a top concern is Non-weather related natural disasters, ranking #33 on the 10-year outlook. Among the specific risks surveyed, Biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse is the risk with the sharpest worsening in its severity score from the two-year outlook to the 10-year outlook. # Global risks ranked by severity, long term (10 years) "Please estimate the likely impact (severity) of the following risks over a 10-year period." FIGURE 16 Source World Economic Forum Global Risks Perception Survey 2025-2026 Technological risks are also anticipated to worsen in severity over the next decade, with Adverse outcomes of AI technologies and Adverse outcomes of frontier technologies among the risks anticipated to experience some of the largest increases in severity score from the two-year outlook to the 10-year outlook (Figure 17). Misinformation and disinformation and Adverse outcomes of AI technologies have both increased one position in this year's ranking compared to last year, to #4 and #5, respectively. Progress in both AI and quantum technologies are likely to accelerate over the next decade as each fuels further breakthroughs in the other, with potentially cascading risk impacts, including in the context of rising geoeconomic confrontation. Societal risks are a dominant feature across time horizons, with Inequality at #7 and Societal polarization at #9 in the 10-year risk ranking. While the vast majority of global risks are anticipated to worsen over the next decade, one risk was expected by respondents to improve in severity score: Geoeconomic confrontation (#19) declines 18 positions from the two-year to the 10-year outlook. When asked about their geopolitical outlook for the world, responses are slightly more negatively skewed over the next two years than over the 10-year horizon. This finding suggests that while the outlook is still pessimistic, geopolitical risks are not anticipated to worsen over the next decade. Economic risks are absent from the top 10 rankings when it comes to the outlook for the next decade, featuring primarily at the lower end of the risk ranking. However, there is a general upward movement in severity across economic risks, with Concentration of strategic resources and technologies (#11) and Disruptions to critical infrastructure (#23) both rising two positions compared to last year, and Debt (#17), Asset bubble burst (#27) and Economic downturn (#24) each rising three positions. Crime and illicit economic activity (#29) has the largest decline since last year's survey, by 14 positions. While geopolitical and economic risks do not feature as top long-term risks among the entire set of respondents, when looking at age cohorts, those Risk categories Economic Environmental Geopolitical Societal $\bullet$ Technological Source World Economic Forum Global Risks Perception Survey 2025-2026 Note Severity was assessed on a 1-7 Likert scale $[1 = \text{Low severity}, 7 = \text{High severity}]$ . under 30 are concerned by Biological, chemical or nuclear weapons or hazards (#10), while the 60-69-year age group is worried about State-based armed conflict (#10) (Figure 18). Across stakeholder groups, there is diminishing concern for geopolitical risks looking ahead 10 years, although respondents from academia include State-based armed conflict in their top 10 (at #10). Concentration of strategic resources and technologies was also selected as a concern by both the 50-59-year age group (Figure 18, at #10) and by governments (also at #10) over the next decade (Figure 19). FIGURE 18 Global risks, long term (10 years), by age group <table><tr><td></td><td><30</td><td>30-39</td><td>40-49</td><td>50-59</td><td>60-69</td><td>70+</td></tr><tr><td>1st</td><td>Biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse</td><td>Extreme weather events</td><td>Extreme weather events</td><td>Extreme weather events</td><td>Extreme weather events</td><td>Extreme weather events</td></tr><tr><td>2nd</td><td>Extreme weather events</td><td>Biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse</td><td>Biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse</td><td>Critical change to Earth systems</td><td>Misinformation and disinformation</td><td>Critical change to Earth systems</td></tr><tr><td>3rd</td><td>Natural resource shortages</td><td>Misinformation and disinformation</td><td>Critical change to Earth systems</td><td>Biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse</td><td>Biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse</td><td>Misinformation and disinformation</td></tr><tr><td>4th</td><td>Inequality</td><td>Adverse outcomes of AI technologies</td><td>Adverse outcomes of AI technologies</td><td>Misinformation and disinformation</td><td>Critical change to Earth systems</td><td>Biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse</td></tr><tr><td>5th</td><td>Critical change to Earth systems</td><td>Natural resource shortages</td><td>Misinformation and disinformation</td><td>Adverse outcomes of AI technologies</td><td>Cyber insecurity</td><td>Societal polarization</td></tr><tr><td>6th</td><td>Pollution</td><td>Societal polarization</td><td>Cyber insecurity</td><td>Natural resource shortages</td><td>Inequality</td><td>Cyber insecurity</td></tr><tr><td>7th</td><td>Misinformation and disinformation</td><td>Inequality</td><td>Inequality</td><td>Societal polarization</td><td>Adverse outcomes of AI technologies</td><td>Involuntary migration or displacement</td></tr><tr><td>8th</td><td>Societal polarization</td><td>Critical change to Earth systems</td><td>Pollution</td><td>Inequality</td><td>Natural resource shortages</td><td>Natural resource shortages</td></tr><tr><td>9th</td><td>Adverse outcomes of AI technologies</td><td>Cyber insecurity</td><td>Natural resource shortages</td><td>Cyber insecurity</td><td>Societal polarization</td><td>Inequality</td></tr><tr><td>10th</td><td>Biological, chemical or nuclear weapons or hazards</td><td>Pollution</td><td>Societal polarization</td><td>Concentration of strategic resources and technologies</td><td>State-based armed conflict</td><td>Adverse outcomes of AI technologies</td></tr></table> # Source World Economic Forum Global Risks Perception Survey 2025-2026 # Note Sample size by age group varied, and all respondents were weighted equally for the purposes of global rankings. The results are based on the following: <30 years, n=139 (11% of total); 30-39, n=161 (12%); 40-49, n=324 (25%); 50-59, n=388 (30%); 60-69, n=203 (16%); and 70+, n=77 (6%). FIGURE 19 Global risks, long term (10 years), by stakeholder group <table><tr><td colspan="2">Civil society</td><td>International organizations</td><td>Academia</td><td>Government</td><td>Private sector</td></tr><tr><td>1st</td><td>Extreme weather events</td><td>Extreme weather events</td><td>Extreme weather events</td><td>Extreme weather events</td><td>Extreme weather events</td></tr><tr><td>2nd</td><td>Biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse</td><td>Biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse</td><td>Critical change to Earth systems</td><td>Biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse</td><td>Biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse</td></tr><tr><td>3rd</td><td>Critical change to Earth systems</td><td>Critical change to Earth systems</td><td>Biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse</td><td>Critical change to Earth systems</td><td>Misinformation and disinformation</td></tr><tr><td>4th</td><td>Misinformation and disinformation</td><td>Misinformation and disinformation</td><td>Misinformation and disinformation</td><td>Adverse outcomes of AI technologies</td><td>Critical change to Earth systems</td></tr><tr><td>5th</td><td>Inequality</td><td>Adverse outcomes of AI technologies</td><td>Adverse outcomes of AI technologies</td><td>Misinformation and disinformation</td><td>Cyber insecurity</td></tr><tr><td>6th</td><td>Adverse outcomes of AI technologies</td><td>Natural resource shortages</td><td>Inequality</td><td>Natural resource shortages</td><td>Adverse outcomes of AI technologies</td></tr><tr><td>7th</td><td>Societal polarization</td><td>Societal polarization</td><td>Natural resource shortages</td><td>Inequality</td><td>Natural resource shortages</td></tr><tr><td>8th</td><td>Natural resource shortages</td><td>Inequality</td><td>Cyber insecurity</td><td>Cyber insecurity</td><td>Inequality</td></tr><tr><td>9th</td><td>Pollution</td><td>Pollution</td><td>Societal polarization</td><td>Societal polarization</td><td>Societal polarization</td></tr><tr><td>10th</td><td>Involuntary migration or displacement</td><td>Involuntary migration or displacement</td><td>State-based armed conflict</td><td>Concentration of strategic resources and technologies</td><td>Pollution</td></tr></table> # Source World Economic Forum Global Risks Perception Survey 2025-2026 # Note Sample size by stakeholder group varied, and all respondents were weighted equally for the purposes of global rankings. The results are based on the following: academia, n=312 (24% of total); business, n=495 (38%); civil society, n=169 (13%); government, n=124 (10%); international organization, n=129 (10%); and other, n=61 (5%). # 1.4 A darkening outlook The GRPS asks respondents to categorize the overall outlook on a qualitative scale: “calm”, “stable”, “unsettled”, “turbulent” or “stormy”. While respondents indicate short-term concern about the global outlook, with $50\%$ of respondents selecting either a turbulent or stormy outlook over the next two years, this worsens further towards 2036, with the figure rising to $57\%$ for 2036 (Figure 20). # FIGURE 20 "Which of the following best characterizes your outlook for the world over the following time periods?" Short-term (2 years) and long-term (10 years) global outlook Calm: Negligible risk of global catastrophes Stable: Isolated disruptions, low risk of global catastrophes Unsettled: Some instability, moderate risk of global catastrophes Turbulent: Upheavals and elevated risk of global catastrophes Stormy: Global catastrophic risks looming Source World Economic Forum Global Risks Perception Survey 2025-2026 Note The percentages in the graph may not add up to $100\%$ because values have been rounded up/down. Pessimism overall is on the rise in the shorter term. Respondents' perception of the global outlook over the next two years has worsened compared with last year's findings. The GRPS shows a 14 percentage-point increase in respondents selecting a turbulent or stormy outlook over the next two years compared with last year's findings, reflecting heightened short-term concern. However, the long-term figure is five percentage points lower than it was last year, with a slight uptick in respondents selecting either a calm, stable or unsettled outlook compared with last year. This year, the survey also asked respondents about their outlook for the world by risk category: "societal", "technological", "economic", "environmental" and "geopolitical". Over the next two years, respondents are most concerned by geopolitical risks. When asked about the outlook for the world by risk category, close to two-thirds of respondents viewed the geopolitical outlook as turbulent or stormy (Figure 21). Conversely, technological risks have a relatively positive two-year outlook, with $32\%$ of respondents selecting a calm or stable outlook. Over the next 10 years, most respondents are concerned with environmental risks, with close to three-quarters of those surveyed selecting either a turbulent or stormy outlook for this risk category (Figure 22). While nearly all risk categories decline in the 10-year time frame when it comes to those who select a relatively positive outlook, technological risks remain the relative outlier, with $18 \%$ of respondents expecting a calm or stable outlook. In four of the five risk categories for the two-year timeframe, a majority of respondents expect an unsettled outlook, with some instability and a moderate risk of global catastrophes. The exception is the geopolitical outlook, where a larger proportion (48%) select a turbulent outlook, with expected upheavals and an elevated risk of global catastrophes. For the 10-year period, the majority select a turbulent outlook for societal and geopolitical risks and a stormy one, with globally catastrophic risks looming, for environmental risks. The future is not a single, fixed path but a range of possible trajectories, each dependent on the decisions we make today as a global community. The challenges highlighted in the GRPS – spanning geopolitical shocks, rapid technological change, climate instability, economic uncertainty, and their collective impact on societies – underscore both the scale of the risks we face and our shared responsibility to shape the path ahead. By anticipating today what may come next, we can better prepare for tomorrow's challenges. The next chapter explores in depth these themes