By Stephen DeAngelis
Earlier this year, 3,595 risk management experts in 57 countries were asked by AXA pollsters to identify the top risks they were facing. The Visual Capitalist took those survey results and created a very interesting infographic. The infographic shows that since the end of the pandemic, climate change has remained the world’s number one risk. For the past two years, however, geopolitical instability has maintained its spot as the second most concerning risk for risk management experts. Journalist Dorothy Neufeld observes, “From rising conflicts to geopolitical fragmentation, the global risk landscape looks very different than it did five years ago.”[1] She adds, “Global conflict deaths reached their highest level in 25 years in 2024. In Europe, [global instability] ranked as the top risk overall, given the proximity to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Even more grim is that more than eight in 10 experts say there is a significant risk of a global war.”
Geopolitics and the Supply Chain
Supply chain disruptions have traditionally been the greatest concern for supply chain professionals when considering geopolitical risks. Some experts believe, however, that risk managers need a broader perspective. Ralf W. Seifert, a professor of operations management at IMD, and Richard Markoff, a supply chain researcher, consultant, coach, and lecturer, argue that supply chains have been politicized.[2] This politicization can be traced back to supply chain concerns that were front and center during the pandemic. As a result, they note, the Biden administration sought to return some manufacturing to the United States. That effort accelerated under the second Trump administration. They also note that tariffs levied during the first Trump administration “had a clear impact.” They report, “In 2023, Mexico surpassed China and became the largest trading partner of the US. These tariffs were a precursor to the situation today, with a complex, ever-changing landscape of tariffs that are confounding and bewildering supply chains today.”
Benjamin Selwyn, a professor of international relations and international development at the University of Sussex, understands why some experts are concerned about the politicization of global supply chains. He explains, “Global supply chains (GSCs) — which account for around 70 percent of international trade — are often referred to as the backbone of the world economy. As tensions rise between major powers — especially the United States and China — many commentators fear for the future of GSC’s and hence the world economy.”[3] Surprisingly, Selwyn believes geopolitical rivalry could be a good thing. He explains, “Geopolitical rivalries have stimulated the development of advanced technologies, which in turn enabled the rise and ongoing transformation of global supply chains. A close look at the US-led development of technology during the Cold War shows that it enabled the formation and expansion of many contemporary global supply chains. China in turn has made efforts to catch-up to US technological development, and in response, the US has been deploying strategies to curb China’s tech rise amid a new geopolitical rivalry.” Selwyn believes that “technology drives supply chains” and, therefore, anything that drives technological development has more upsides than downsides.
Selwyn concludes, “Yes, geopolitical tensions are rising. But framing this as a clash between geopolitics and the existence of global supply chains misses the key elements of this moment. In truth, geopolitical competition has fueled the development of the very technologies that power global supply chains — from information and communication technologies and the internet to AI and advanced chip manufacturing. The continued and further development of such, and perhaps novel, technologies will in all probability contribute to the evolution and change of geopolitical and economic dynamics.”
Coping with Geopolitical Supply Chain Challenges
Selwyn may be right about rivalries stimulating technological advances. Nevertheless, supply chain professionals must still cope with the complexities and uncertainties that those rivalries create. The staff at DP World explains, “From shifting trade policies and tariffs to rising political tensions and regulatory unpredictability, these forces are upending global operations and driving up costs. This volatility is sending supply chain managers back to the drawing board as they discover traditional risk mitigation strategies on their own may not be enough to counter the unique challenges of geopolitical disruption.”[4] They go on to note, “Supply chain disruptions come with real, measurable financial consequences. … To increase resilience in the face of strong geopolitical headwinds, it’s critical to better understand the sources of disruption and prioritize mitigation strategies that protect revenue and reputation.”
Achieving resilience in a geopolitically unstable world is not easy. The answer lies in embracing solutions purpose-built to decode this unstable environment and, by extension, provide control systems that generate and sustain what Enterra Solutions® calls “enterprise resilience.” Artificial intelligence (AI) powered solutions can help deal with complex geopolitical instability. Solutions like the Enterra Dynamic Enterprise Resiliency System™ (EDERS™) leverages advanced autonomous reasoning and decision science to help organizations not just survive but thrive in an unstable world. By blending elegant AI with explanatory mathematics, EDERS is a technology platform that processes complexity, anticipates non-linear risks, and adapts in real time. By design, EDERS transforms chaos into clarity and brittleness into resilience.
Angana Jacob and Zane Van Dusen, analysts with Bloomberg, agree that companies need a solution that provides real-time updates. They explain, “For decades, supply chain leaders have leaned on country risk reports from international organizations. These resources are detailed but outdated by the time they arrive, leaving decision-makers struggling to keep pace with today’s volatile geopolitical environment.”[5] They add, “With attention to the right signals, like quantifiable trade policy shifts, sanctions and regulatory changes, leaders can move from reactive crisis management to proactive optimization, like rerouting logistics in the face of emerging threats, reassessing vendor exposure to political instability, and aligning operations with broader risk tolerance. … The most effective risk intelligence strategies are ones that rely on a trifecta of human oversight, interoperable data, and AI/ML-powered detection.”
Concluding Thoughts
The DP World staff asserts, “It’s clear that geopolitical disruption is no longer a periodic shock — it’s a persistent and escalating threat.” That’s why William Dixon, an Associate Fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, believes that every company needs a Chief Geopolitical Officer.[6] For large companies, he may be right. Dennis Groseclose, Chief Executive Officer of TransVoyant, insists, “If you lead a global supply chain and aren’t treating geopolitics like a core risk, you're planning for a world that no longer exists.”[7] And Richard Waterer, the Global Risk Consulting Leader at Aon, asserts, “The past year has demonstrated that executives need to adopt a decision-making framework for risk that can match the velocity of geopolitical events. This dynamic approach needs to be informed by analytics and contemplate the role of risk capital in offsetting the impact from these events.”[8] His Aon colleagues conclude, “Volatility is the new normal. To navigate this landscape effectively, organizations must adopt a proactive and comprehensive approach to risk management by leveraging available insights and tools. They must also be prepared to act with agility and respond quickly to new developments.”
Footnotes
[1] Dorothy Neufeld, “Visualizing the Top 10 Global Risks (2020-2025),” Visual Capitalist, 29 October 2025.
[2] Ralf W. Seifert and Richard Markoff, “The geopoliticization of supply chains: How it started and where it’s going,” I by IMD, 3 November 2025.
[3] Benjamin Selwyn, “Geopolitics isn’t killing global supply chains—it’s powering them,” London School of Economics, 19 September 2025.
[4] DP World, “Smart moves to prepare supply chains for geopolitical disruption,” Supply Chain Dive, 3 November 2025.
[5] Angana Jacob and Zane Van Dusen, “Geopolitical Risk in Supply Chain Management is Entering a New Era of Human and AI Intelligence,” Supply & Demand Chain Executive, 19 October 2025.
[6] William Dixon, “Why every company now needs a Chief Geopolitical Officer,” World Economic Forum, 16 July 2025.
[7] Dennis Groseclose, “The Next War Will Be Fought in Supply Chains,” SupplyChainBrain, 11 July 2025.
[8] Staff, “Geopolitical Volatility: Preparing for the Unpredictable,” AON, 1 October 2025.
