From Davos: A global forecast
Just completed a panel on "weak signals" … essentially, factors generally underappreciated (or, in market parlance, not priced in) with significant global implications for the future. A very wide ranging discussion. And notably, almost all the signals offered for discussion by the group were negative. There was geopolitics — China’s peaceful rise becomes prickly. There ...
Just completed a panel on "weak signals" ... essentially, factors generally underappreciated (or, in market parlance, not priced in) with significant global implications for the future. A very wide ranging discussion. And notably, almost all the signals offered for discussion by the group were negative.
Just completed a panel on "weak signals" … essentially, factors generally underappreciated (or, in market parlance, not priced in) with significant global implications for the future. A very wide ranging discussion. And notably, almost all the signals offered for discussion by the group were negative.
There was geopolitics — China’s peaceful rise becomes prickly. There was finance — interconnectedness creates ever more rapid cycles of ever more severe crises. There was society — fragmentation of personal and community relationships strengthens broader, more authoritarian types of affiliation. There was business — information overload means impressionistic psychological values of business increasingly trumps fiscal realities. And many, many more.
To be fair, there were two notable exceptions — social impact of the dramatic change in global role of women. And backlash against personal overstretch in work-life balance (though maybe that last one is wishful thinking).
But still, why so glum? A few plausible answers. All 4 probably contributed.
1) My buddy Nouriel Roubini (Dr. Doom) was a fellow panelist.
2) Can’t make an omelette without breaking eggs, and since the eggs get broken first, that’s what we’re focusing on.
3) Davos tends to represent the establishment and its members don’t tend to benefit from change. Or … we’ve seen the problem, and it is us.
4) Rapid geoeconomic and geopolitical change leads to a world increasingly lacking leadership. weak signals are becoming more problematic accordingly. Or, to be more bleak, we’re actually in a pre-war, not a post-war environment, and we’re assessing coming changes accordingly.
Ian Bremmer will be blogging from Davos this week sending reports and commentary from inside the World Economic Forum.
Ian Bremmer is the president of Eurasia Group and GZERO Media. He is also the host of the television show GZERO World With Ian Bremmer. Twitter: @ianbremmer
More from Foreign Policy
What Putin Got Right
The Russian president got many things wrong about invading Ukraine—but not everything.
Russia Has Already Lost in the Long Run
Even if Moscow holds onto territory, the war has wrecked its future.
China’s Belt and Road to Nowhere
Xi Jinping’s signature foreign policy is a “shadow of its former self.”
The U.S. Overreacted to the Chinese Spy Balloon. That Scares Me.
So unused to being challenged, the United States has become so filled with anxiety over China that sober responses are becoming nearly impossible.
Sign up for Morning Brief
Foreign Policy’s flagship daily newsletter with what’s coming up around the world today. Delivered weekdays.
By submitting your email, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use and to receive email correspondence from us. You may opt out at any time.
