As always, January marked the release of the annual Global Risks Report from the World Economic Forum (WEF), a critical publication that draws on survey insights related to the global risk landscape from more than 1,300 individuals across multiple sectors (academia, business, government, international organizations and civil society). 

The WEF defines global risk 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.”

Not surprisingly, the 2026 report illuminates perhaps the most concerning and rapidly evolving theme currently roiling the world order (and one which was much discussed at COP30) – the decline of multilateralism. 

The authors correctly note that multilateralism is in retreat, adding that “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.”  

They add that “as global risks continue to spiral in scale, interconnectivity, and velocity, 2026 marks an age of competition.”  Further, they note that stability is “under siege,” and that “a contested multipolar landscape is emerging where confrontation is replacing collaboration, and trust – the currency of cooperation – is losing its value.” 

Confrontation replacing collaboration – that is the essence of where the world stands today, to the great detriment of humanity.

As a result, Geoeconomic confrontation is ranked as the top short term (two year time frame) risk factor most likely to create a material crisis on a global scale in 2026.  This was followed immediately by State-based armed conflict (risk #2), Extreme weather events (risk #3), and, closely related on the confrontation theme, Societal polarization (risk #4) and Misinformation and disinformation (risk #5).  

Beyond the erosion of democracy and the rise of autocracy around the world (notably amplified by the actions of the current U.S. administration), this conflict-laden landscape – exacerbated by aggressive misinformation and disinformation efforts particularly with respect to migration and climate issues – further drives reduced global collaboration on the key challenges that underpin the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) framework.

Indeed, the decline of multilateralism intensifies these sustainability challenges since they affect all nations, yet no single nation can solve them independently.  Global collaboration at unprecedented levels – with urgency – is essential if the world is to get on a course of meaningful progress toward mitigating humanity’s most critical social and environmental challenges.

There is a negative circular element that reinforces today’s risk landscape as well.  Climate change and many SDG challenges (including drought, flooding, food insecurity, water insecurity, poverty, and accompanying elements of civil disorder) fuel mass migration, which in turn fuels populism, autocracy, and distrust – all of which threaten global security and erode the basic norms that support collaboration on the planetary and humanitarian challenges that affect all nations. 

And with the absence of meaningful concerted collaborative action to address those challenges, the cycle continues.

Three years ago I discussed the findings of the 2023 Global Risks Report in this post (The Risk of Multiple Global Risks).  At the time, as the world was emerging from the devastation of the global pandemic, I noted that it was not surprising that respondents ranked Cost of living crisis as the top short term risk, followed by Natural disasters and extreme weather events, Geoeconomic confrontation, Failure to mitigate climate change, and Erosion of social cohesion.

Significantly, despite the economic disruption caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, five of the top ten risks in the short term category emanated from the environmental category: Natural disasters and extreme weather events, Failure to mitigate climate change, Large-scale environmental damage incidents, Failure of climate change adaptation, and Natural resource crises.

I added that it was perhaps even more significant that five of the top six global risks in the long term (ten year horizon) were environmental – with Failure to mitigate climate change as the number one risk, followed by Failure of climate change adaptation (#2), Natural disasters and extreme weather events (#3), Biodiversity and ecosystem collapse (#4), and Natural resource crises (#6).  In addition, I found it notable that the fifth-ranked risk was Large-scale involuntary migration, which has long been a direct result of climate change impacts that increasingly make living conditions across broad regions inhospitable.

So at that time it was quite clear that there was solid understanding among respondents regarding the gravity of the impact of environmental risks facing the world in both the short and long term horizons.  The risks conveyed in the 2023 report reflected the troubling indicators presented in many key reports from that period (such as the IPCC and WMO). 

And with each passing year of insufficient action to address them, the threat from these risks has continued to grow.

At that time I wrote:

The big, and persistent question, of course, is how to transform that understanding into action – especially global collaborative action focused on accelerating sustainable development in order to achieve a shared sustainable future. 

Fast forward to 2026, where the “how” of engineering the needed global collaboration for sustainable development remains, only now the linkage to economic development – and indeed global security – is even more pronounced. 

As noted above, the top five short term risks cited by respondents in 2026 were Geoeconomic confrontation, Misinformation and disinformation, Societal polarization, Extreme weather events, and State-based armed conflict. 

Rounding out the top ten short term risks were Cyber insecurity, Inequality, Erosion of human rights and/or civic freedoms, Pollution, and Involuntary migration or displacement.

So in today’s conflict-laden world, the perceived threat of environmental and social risks in the short term declined from three years ago, taking a back seat to elements related to direct confrontation. 

Indeed, the authors cite five categories in the 2026 report with the biggest fall in ranking from last year.  In the short term segment these include Critical changes to Earth systems (which fell seven slots to #24), Biodiversity loss and ecosystems collapse (which fell five slots to #26), and Pollution (which fell three slots to #9).  These declines are not only disturbing, but also ironic given our increased knowledge of the state of planetary health – including the recent reporting from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research that we have now breached the seventh (ocean acidification) of nine critical planetary boundaries regulating life on Earth (see the 2025 Planetary Health Check report here). 

On the other hand, in the long term time frame, environmental and social risks were clearly recognized in 2026.  The top three long term risks were environmental – Extreme weather events, Biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse, and Critical change to Earth systems. 

Further, four environmental and social risks round out the top ten long term risks – Natural resource shortages (#6), Inequality (#7), Societal polarization (#9), and Pollution (#10).

Thus, seven of the top ten global risks cited in the long term horizon this year are environmental or social in nature.  Moreover, Inequality was selected as the most interconnected global risk for the second consecutive year.

This demonstrates that respondents truly do understand the criticality of major environmental and social risks, which is positive, but these risks are perceived as bearing a lesser degree of threat than those related to a world of heightened competition and conflict.   

As always, this indicates that the urgency of action that the world brings to critical sustainability challenges like climate change, food security, poverty and biodiversity loss fails to match the gravity of their scale and impact. 

And despite the clear linkage between these environmental and social risks and the risks of geoeconomic confrontation and armed conflict, global leaders can’t seem to elevate them to the “here and now” in today’s environment – instead they remain as issues to be dealt with “later.” 

But we must avoid deprioritizing environmental and social risks, because we don’t have the luxury of later.

Warming continues with grave consequences.  The World Meteorological Organization noted in January that 2025 was one of the three warmest years on record, and that the past eleven years have been the eleven warmest on record.  In a recent paper, Pan and co-authors reported that ocean heat is at near-record levels, with 2025 expected to tie 2023 as the second warmest year recorded. 

The 2025 Global Climate Highlights report from the Copernicus Climate Change Service stated that the 3-year average temperature from 2023 to 2025 was the first such average to exceed the 1.5°C mark, and that sea ice remained at near record lows in the Arctic and Antarctic.  Further, and significantly, “half of the globe experienced more days than average with at least strong heat stress in 2025.” 

We are all seeing, and feeling, the effects of warming in terms of devastating fires, floods, and storms.

As Ed Hawkins of the University of Reading stated in January “Warmer temperatures have real impacts. Hotter heatwaves cause more health issues, heavier downpours cause greater flooding risks and rising sea levels causing more coastal flooding hazards.”  And the impact of these climate-related extreme weather events is borne to a greater degree by many less developed countries.  In a December paper, Dang and co-authors analyze subnational data and find “strong and statistically significant global effects of higher temperature on poverty and inequality.”

Disturbingly, the 2025 Global Climate Highlights report notes that if warming continues at the current rate, we could reach the critical 1.5°C figure by the end of this decade – aggravating all of the above-mentioned negatives. 

That alone is a compelling motivator given that we just marked the ten year anniversary of the Paris Agreement, which united 195 countries around the goal of limiting temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.

While the tight interconnection between the 17 Sustainable Development Goals is clear, the connection between the SDGs and the drivers of confrontation and conflict is seemingly less apparent to many.

Global leaders must see the causal linkage, and the opportunity, in addressing the upfront causes of climate change and core SDG challenges (such as food and water security) that in turn are fueling the growth of populism, conflict, and its anti-collaborative corollary.

Effective collaboration on the former reduces risk of the latter.

At COP30, a group of scientists issued a statement warning that “We are at a planetary crossroad.  We are already facing danger.  Suffering for billions of people and rapidly approaching tipping points in the Amazon and the Tropical Coral Reef systems and many others.”

Specific to emissions, they warned that “The global curve of GHG emissions needs to bend next year, 2026, not sometime in the future.  We need to start, now, to reduce CO2 emissions from fossil-fuels, by at least 5% per year.  This must happen in order to have a chance to avoid unmanageable and extremely costly climate impacts affecting all people in the world.”

In addition, the System Change Lab’s State of Climate Action 2025 report noted that “Global emissions today are higher than when the Paris Agreement was signed, and warming to date has already brought devastation to communities and ecosystems around the world.  While the Paris vision is alive, the pace and scale of delivery will determine whether we fulfill its promise.”

The needed pace and scale of delivery require global leaders to recognize the connection between both climate change and SDG challenges and the confrontation and conflict that they create – issues that are currently dominating the short term global risk outlook.

It requires collaboration through multilateralism with commitment to accelerating sustainable development to achieve a shared sustainable future.

While the immediate outlook looks bleak, the authors of the 2026 Global Risks Report provide a key go-forward message for all of us – “history reminds us that order can be rebuilt if nations choose strategic collaboration over armed competition.”