The Global Risks Report 2026

Insight Report: Key Findings (5)

​Global Risks In-Depth: Values at War
Across the world, there are deep divisions between those who are trying to preserve one value system and the institutions built around it, and others who hold opposing views. Groups that have not benefited from the prevailing political, societal and economic orders are now playing a more pivotal political role. At the heart of this division is Societal polarization, which, according to the Global Risks Perception Survey 2025-2026 (GRPS) is the third-most severe risk over the next two years, an increase of one position in ranking since last year. Further, Societal polarization is identified by respondents as contributing to Misinformation and disinformation, Inequality and Intrastate violence. This set of risks is deeply intertwined, with impacts in all directions
. 
The risks of Societal polarization are spreading across geographies according to the business executives surveyed in the Executive Opinion Survey 2025 (EOS). Societal polarization was identified as a top five concern for 16 of the 116 countries surveyed. The risk is particularly pronounced in Latin America, where it is the fifth-highest concern, and in Eastern Asia, where it ranks #10. 
 
This section examines three sets of interconnected risks. First, trust in institutions that have long governed and shaped societies is being eroded, and it is becoming more difficult for citizens to know where to turn for truthful, accurate information, especially online. Second, the social contract between citizens and governments, particularly in advanced economies, is lagging economic and technological transformations, further eroding trust and exacerbating societal polarization. Third, long-term needs such as climate action are caught in societal, political and economic crosswinds, opening new avenues of risk impact. 
 
Distrust, divergence and desensitization 
In an increasingly fragmented world permeated by new technological capabilities, information is vulnerable to manipulation for influencing political outcomes or for economic gain. This can contribute to deepening societal and political fractures, worsening grievances, hardening beliefs, reducing critical thinking and amplifying extremist views. 
 
It can also lead to desensitization. One of the strongest interconnections in the GRPS is between Societal polarization and Misinformation and disinformation. 
 
Misinformation and disinformation are of particular concern in the online world. The integrity of online news and broader information is increasingly under threat, as distinguishing between authentic and synthetic content, whether video, audio, or written, is becoming progressively more difficult. According to a survey by the Reuters Institute, 58% of respondents globally are concerned about how to distinguish truth from falsehood in online news. This figure rises to 73% in both Africa and the United States. In parallel to rising concerns about misinformation and disinformation, trust in news is falling and news avoidance is rising. 
 
Similarly, at the country level, Misinformation and disinformation ranks second among EOS respondents in Northern America and among the top three risks in Europe and Eastern Asia, while placing within the top 10 risks in most other regions. It is the highest ranked risk in four economies, and features in the top 10 in 67 countries. 
 
While citizens have traditionally relied on government institutions, academia and the media to obtain and process information, widespread use of social media is reshaping the ways in which information is accessed and interpreted. The sharpest rises in the use of social media for news consumption have been in the United States, Latin America, Africa and some South-Eastern Asian countries. In the United States, the share of people who cite social media as their primary source of news has grown sharply, from 4% in 2015 to 34% in 2025. For the first time, more people in the United States now access news through social media and video platforms than through television or traditional news websites. In addition, the use of AI tools for finding information is also rising, from 11% in 2024 to 24% today.The Reuters Institute survey also reveals concerns among the general public that AI will make the news less transparent, less accurate and significantly less trustworthy.
 
A particular problem area is the proliferation of deepfakes (digitally altered videos, images, and audio recordings). Over the past five years, deepfake creation has become easier, cheaper, and more convincing. While the use of deepfakes during the 2024 “super election year” was still a relatively new phenomenon, they have started to proliferate and have a greater influence on politics and electoral processes. The weaponization of deepfakes can undermine trust in democratic institutions, contributing to more political polarization, and can lead to the incitement of political violence or social upheaval. 
 
Recent elections in the United States, Ireland, the Netherlands, Pakistan, Japan, India and Argentina have all had to contend with such fabricated content on social media, depicting fictional events or discrediting political candidates, blurring the line between fact and fiction. As AI is used to make such content more personalized and persuasive, there is a risk of greater impact on elections. For example, research has found that 87% of people in the United Kingdom are concerned about deepfakes affecting election results. But while awareness is high, many lack confidence in their abilities to identify when content is manipulated.
 
Increasing reliance on both social media and AI tools enhances the impact of algorithmic bias, which shapes what information users see online and reinforces exposure of individuals to information aligned with their views. This can create widely divergent perspectives on real-world events and developments. The impacts are starting to run even deeper. How real-world events are interpreted online combined with the growing circulation of violent content on social media may be leading citizens to become more emotionally and cognitively detached and numbed to human tragedies. 
 
There were 61 conflicts across 36 countries in 2024, making it the fourth-most deadly year since the Cold War ended in 1989. With content about these conflicts increasingly distributed through algorithms, different perspectives are shared with selected audiences, contributing to a hardening of views. Additionally, repetition of violent content being shared can over time lead to viewers perceiving it as “normal”, generating apathy and disinterest. Studies have shown that exposure to high levels of violent content is linked to emotional desensitization. In other words, the way people increasingly consume news and analysis, coupled with the nature of that content, is leading to a disconnect from empathy for other human lives. 
 
Faltering social mobility 
Technological change, geoeconomic shifts and tighter fiscal space are together weakening the pathways to social mobility and eroding trust. Even as nationalist and polarizing rhetoric has sought to tap into the rising economic concerns of some segments of societies, in most parts of the world growth is not just subdued relative to the past, but also increasingly K-shaped, in which some sectors of the economy do well while others struggle. As a result, expectations of lack of economic opportunity or unemployment exacerbate declining trust. 
 
The aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic, compounded by technological and structural economic shifts, have strained traditional pathways to social mobility. Real wages have recently ticked up in most advanced economies, reaching an average of 2.5% annual growth across the OECD as of Q1 2025. However, in 18 of the 37 countries, real wages remained below their level in Q1 2021, just prior to the global inflation spike of 2021-2022.Moreover, this followed over a decade of mediocre real wage growth in advanced economies, in particular. 
 
Real wage growth was highest from 2008-2019 in South Korea (22% over the whole period) and Germany (15%), while real wages declined over that timeframe in Italy, Japan and the United Kingdom. Meanwhile, real residential property prices in advanced economies have risen 20% between 2008 and today, and 37% since their trough in 2012. Asset holders, including property owners and those who have invested in financial assets, have experienced rising wealth, while wage earners who do not own assets struggle amid rising living costs. This has contributed to Societal polarization and a loss of trust among lower- and middle-income groups. 
 
These tensions are reflected in the EOS. Lack of economic opportunity or unemployment is perceived as the top risk in 27 countries and within the top five in 72 countries. Weak and uneven job creation and a sense of stalling social mobility and rising inequality is central to the erosion of the social contract. 
 
A rise in “streets versus elites” narratives reflects deepening disillusionment with traditional governance structures, leaving many citizens feeling excluded from political decision making processes and increasingly skeptical that their economic environments can deliver tangible improvements to their livelihoods. Inequality was selected by respondents as the most interconnected global risk for a second year running, followed closely by Economic downturn. 
 
Corporations are treading a fine line in how they navigate this environment. In a more multipolar world, they are facing far-reaching strategic decisions about which countries to continue operating in, which governments and political views to align with (if any), and how to talk and act on topics that have become politically sensitive, including issues related to social and economic inclusion. Reputational risk is set to become more central to corporate risk management as policies and actions are realigned in the face of powerful pressures at times pulling in divergent directions between societies and governments. 
 
With fiscal pressures rising, the social contract faltering and corporations feeling more pressure to focus on business considerations, there is a rising risk that the level of ambition for addressing a range of social challenges will be muted over the coming years. As pressure builds, it is likely that a correction will need to take place. Until then, the fraying social contract will be a source of heightened risk. 
 
Climate in the crosswinds 
The GRPS finds that environmental concerns, especially in the short term, are slipping down the ranking of leading risks for the first time in many years. The majority of environmental risks have fallen in ranking over the two-year time horizon, with Extreme weather events moving from #2 to #4, Pollution from #6 to #9, and declines also in ranking for Critical change to Earth systems and Biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse by seven and five positions, respectively, with both of these risks in the lower half of the risk list. All environmental risks surveyed also decline in severity score over the next two years compared with last year’s findings. 
 
This shift in both relative and absolute terms away from concerns about the environment is unfolding despite the scientific outlook for the adverse future impacts of climate change. The UN Environment Programme’s Emissions Gap Report 2025 estimates that global temperatures are likely to exceed 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels within the coming decade. Extreme heat, drought, wildfires and other extreme weather events are likely to become more intense and frequent. While the consequences could heighten societal polarization and inequality, the pushback to climate mitigation efforts is increasingly evident. However, this pushback may turn out to be only temporary if, for example, political incentives change again or if significant technological and business breakthroughs in combating climate change impacts materialize. 
 
For now, the downward reprioritization of environmental risks is unfolding in a geopolitical landscape shaped by growing multipolarity and protectionism. The Global Tipping Points Report 2025 warns that the potential for multilateral cooperation on environmental concerns is being weakened, as major powers prioritize sovereignty and national gain over collective action. Competition for resources is intensifying, and national security, including energy security, is deemed by many governments to be the newly leading driver of policy-making.Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 underscored the vulnerabilities of energy interdependence and spurred new ambitions for self-sufficiency in Europe and elsewhere. While 2024 marked a record $2.1 trillion in low-carbon transition investments, growth in clean energy funding slowed compared to previous years.Momentum is now building towards an “all-of-the-above” global effort to increase energy supply, including an extended reliance on fossil-fuel extraction, in addition to renewable energy sources.
 
This momentum could intensify into the medium term because of potentially soaring energy needs in the coming years. The rise of the middle classes in emerging markets will continue to be a key driver, as will the rapid buildout of AI infrastructure. By 2030–2035, data centres alone could consume up to 20% of global electricity, placing strain on already overburdened power grids. Local resistance is likely to mount, with sharply-rising energy prices already affecting some communities living in the vicinity of recently built data centres. The growing divergence between rising demand for energy on one hand, and climate change and associated social realities on the other, could come to a head in the coming years. Difficult, values- based choices will continue to emerge in the race between economic, political, climate and societal considerations. 
 
Actions for today 
Representative multi-stakeholder dialogue was identified as critical by GRPS respondents to reducing the risk of Societal polarization in the long term. The combined resources of funding, technology, knowledge and data provided by multiple partners can amplify the impact of initiatives. Furthermore, involving a broad range of stakeholders enhances legitimacy, trust and accountability, which can encourage wider participation and support, ultimately increasing the scalability and sustainability of efforts over time. 
 
One of the keys to rebuilding trust in institutions and reducing societal polarization is to tackle misinformation and disinformation. As technology continues to advance in sophistication, upskilling efforts in areas such as digital literacy should be accelerated. This is reflected in the GRPS findings. 
 
When asked “which approaches do you expect to have the most potential for driving action on risk reduction and preparedness over the next 10 years?” the top approach identified by respondents for Societal polarization was Public awareness and education (29% of respondents). Digital literacy initiatives should empower individuals to understand how algorithms and data influence their online experiences, while fostering critical thinking skills to recognize and address biased or harmful content. Governments, civil society and private- sector organizations all play a role in advancing these efforts, ensuring that such campaigns are accessible to diverse communities. 
 
Policy-making should also consider supporting the identification of authentic content to improve digital trust. Standards and technical solutions to ensure content authenticity – such as digital watermarking, content origin and history, and blockchain-based rights management – are currently under development to support a trustworthy information ecosystem. However, successful adoption at scale requires policy frameworks that are aligned with shared principles, rules and technological standards. 
 
World Economic Forum, Geneva, Switzerland.