World Economic Forum warns geoeconomic confrontation tops 2026 risks

Geoeconomic confrontation has surged to the top of the World Economic Forum’s Global Risks Report 2026, displacing other priorities and underscoring a new era in which trade and investment policy are being wielded as instruments of rivalry. The finding, drawn from the Forum’s Global Risks Perception Survey of more than 1,300 leaders and experts, marks a sharp rise for the category from ninth place last year to first for the 2026 horizon.

Eighteen percent of survey respondents selected geoeconomic confrontation as the single most significant risk for 2026, ahead of state-based armed conflict at 14 percent. The report shows that the same concern remains dominant across the two-year horizon to 2028, and that it has climbed eight positions compared with last year’s rankings. The Forum’s Executive Opinion Survey, which captures business executives’ national risk perceptions, found that executives in 16 countries rank geoeconomic confrontation among their top five risks, particularly in export-oriented economies.

The report defines geoeconomic confrontation to include rising tariffs, tighter controls on foreign investment, strategic industrial policies, active government management of critical supply chains and restrictions on resources such as critical minerals. Saadia Zahidi, managing director of the World Economic Forum, framed those measures at an online news conference as economic policy tools becoming "essentially weaponry rather than a basis of cooperation." The Forum warns that this dynamic is corroding multilateral constraints on unilateral action and contributing to market fragmentation.

The consequences are immediate and systemic. The Global Risks Report cautions that intensified geoeconomic rivalry increases uncertainty for investment and trade, heightens volatility in supply chains and energy markets, and risks significant contractions in global trade. It links these economic tensions to elevated chances of geopolitical spillovers: rivalries that begin with tariffs or investment curbs can escalate into proxy conflicts, regional instability and military confrontations, with cascading effects on capital flows and corporate planning.

Environmental and technological threats remain central in the longer view. Over a 10-year horizon, the Forum projects that environmental and technological risks will dominate, with extreme weather and climate-driven infrastructure damage, food insecurity and insurance losses featuring prominently. Rapid technological change, notably adverse outcomes from artificial intelligence and rising cyber insecurity, also appear in the short-term top 10, reflecting concerns about labour displacement, governance gaps and systemic misuse.

The report presents a sobering outlook for the coming decade: 57 percent of respondents expect a turbulent or stormy period ahead, and half of business executives surveyed anticipate turbulence over the next two years, with only 1 percent forecasting calm. The Forum’s text, in a section titled "Multipolarity without multilateralism," warns that weakened global cooperation will complicate collective responses to cross-border challenges from climate to cyber threats.

Published as leaders prepare for the Forum’s annual meeting in Davos, the Global Risks Report is intended to push policy makers and corporate boards to reckon with a shifting strategic environment. For businesses, the advice is clear: plan for greater regulatory fragmentation, reassess supply chain resilience and factor geopolitical policy risks into long-term investments. For governments, the report signals the urgent need to restore multilateral frameworks that can make economic policy a tool of coordination rather than confrontation.