The Shifting Sands of Geopolitical Risk Management
Geopolitical risk is no longer a peripheral concern for financial institutions; it’s rapidly becoming central to their risk frameworks. Traditionally handled by specialized teams focused on political analysis and often staffed with individuals from government or military backgrounds, the responsibility for navigating these complex threats is increasingly falling to enterprise risk management (ERM) departments. This evolution reflects a growing understanding that geopolitical instability isn’t isolated, but deeply intertwined with operational, financial, and strategic vulnerabilities.
From Reactive to Proactive: A Paradigm Shift
The move towards integrating geopolitical risk into ERM isn’t simply about adding expertise; it’s about a fundamental shift in approach. Companies are moving away from reactive responses to proactive planning. Recent data indicates that 60% of companies have already enhanced their corporate processes to better manage political risks, according to WTW’s Political Risk Survey 2024. This suggests a broader recognition that events like economic sanctions and policy shifts can significantly impact a company’s bottom line.
The Financial Sector Leads the Charge
The financial sector is at the forefront of this change. The appointment of retired General Mark Milley by JP Morgan as a senior advisor underscores this trend – a clear signal of the elevation of geopolitical considerations within the industry. This isn’t an isolated incident; it’s indicative of a broader pattern of financial institutions recognizing the need for deeper geopolitical insight.
The Impact of Recent Events
The recent experience with tariffs provides a stark example of the vulnerabilities exposed by geopolitical instability. Credit Benchmark data from June 2025 highlighted how the sudden imposition of tariffs caused a rapid deterioration in the creditworthiness of companies involved in US-exporting businesses. This demonstrates the tangible financial consequences of failing to adequately assess and prepare for geopolitical risks.
BlackRock’s Geopolitical Risk Indicator
Tools like the BlackRock Geopolitical Risk Indicator (BGRI) are gaining prominence as organizations seek to quantify and monitor overall market attention to geopolitical risks. The BGRI, a simple average of the top 10 risks, provides a snapshot of the current risk landscape.
The Rise of Geoeconomic Confrontation
Geoeconomic confrontation is emerging as a particularly significant risk. It’s currently ranked as the risk most likely to trigger a global crisis in 2026, with 18% of respondents identifying it as such. It’s ranked first for severity over the next two years, representing an eight-position increase from the previous year.
Integrating Risk into a Holistic Framework
The transition to ERM isn’t without its challenges. It requires a holistic, enterprise-wide framework that integrates geopolitical risks with operational, financial, and strategic considerations. This demands a collaborative approach, breaking down silos between different departments and fostering a shared understanding of the interconnectedness of risks.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What is the role of ERM in geopolitical risk management? ERM departments are taking on increased responsibility for integrating geopolitical risks into a company’s overall risk framework, moving beyond reactive responses to proactive planning.
- Why is the financial sector leading this shift? The financial sector is particularly vulnerable to geopolitical risks and is recognizing the need for deeper insight and more robust risk management practices.
- What is the BlackRock Geopolitical Risk Indicator? The BGRI is a tool used to capture overall market attention to geopolitical risks, based on an average of the top 10 risks.
- What is geoeconomic confrontation? This proves currently considered the most likely risk to trigger a global crisis, and is ranked highly for severity over the next two years.
Explore more articles on Risk Management and Geopolitical Risk on Risk.net.
