Global economy November 2025-

From 1776 to 2026: Adam Smith’s lessons for the global economy
‘Wealth of Nations’ marks 250th anniversary on March 9
Debate over legacy of Smith’s ideas continues
But his ideas on trade, wealth, labour still resonate
(Reuters) – Tax the rich. Trash the tariffs. End monopolies.
Such are the rallying calls of many of today’s most heated economic debates. They could also come straight from the pen of revered economist Adam Smith, hailed by some as the “father of capitalism” and others as an early progressive.

World Economic Outlook Update
Global Economy in Crosscurrents of War and Technology July 2026
(IMF) Global growth is projected at 3.0 percent for 2026 and 3.4 percent for 2027, broadly unchanged cumulatively from the April 2026 World Economic Outlook. The outlook is uneven: The war shock is weighing on energy importers and vulnerable economies, while AI-driven demand is lifting countries integrated into the global technology value chain.
Global disinflation has stalled. Risks are more balanced than in April, but downside risks from renewed conflict and financial market repricing persist. Policymakers should preserve price stability, rebuild fiscal space, and strengthen adaptability.

11 June
Iran war is the worst hit to the global economy since Covid, World Bank says
The World Bank says that the war is slashing global growth prospects and that a prolonged conflict could tip dozens of developing nations into years of stagnation.
(WaPo) The global economy — tested by years of war, pandemic and trade tension — is beginning to fray, as fallout from the U.S.-led war on Iran dents prospects for growth, the World Bank said in a new forecast.

1 June
Gabriel Zucman makes the case for a billionaire tax
(The Economist) The super-rich should pay more tax. So says Gabriel Zucman. The French economist has spent his career uncovering the hidden workings of tax havens, who uses them and how. He has emerged as the main intellectual force behind the global push to “tax the rich” and has supported many of the left’s leading lights—from Zohran Mamdani, the mayor of New York, to Brazil’s President Lula—in their wealth-tax efforts. In France, he is now so closely tied to the cause that he even has a tax named after him.
Henry Curr, The Economist’s economics editor, sits down with Mr Zucman to interrogate his thesis. Does he think that there are good billionaires as well as bad ones? Wouldn’t his proposals punish entrepreneurship? And how would a global wealth tax actually work?

30 April
A New Economics for the 21st Century
Mariana Mazzucato and Lara Merling
By coming out in favor of industrial policy after many decades of advising against government intervention in the economy, the World Bank has taken an important step. But it still has much further to go to translate real-world evidence into better policy advice.
(Project Syndicate) The Bank has merely affirmed what many of us have long argued: the framework it has promoted since 1993—when its East Asian Miracle report cautioned against industrial-policy tools—has not served developing countries well. Such advice, World Bank Chief Economist Indermit Gill recently observed, “has the practical value of a floppy disk today.” Yet in his defense of the report, he also made clear how limited the shift remains. Industrial policy, he argued, should be “targeted and temporary,” an exception to a market-led model, rather than a tool for driving broader economic transformations.
The Bank’s latest work confirms that industrial policy is more replicable across income levels and institutional contexts than the old consensus admitted, with a toolkit that extends beyond tariffs and subsidies.

20 April
The Forces of Scarcity Hitting Asia May Soon Spread Across the World
The Asia-Pacific was hit hard and quick by the war in Iran and its energy bottlenecks. Scenes of crisis there indicate that problems are multiplying and spreading.
(NYT) Many countries across the Asia-Pacific are experiencing sudden jolts of disruption that they are struggling to manage, with some comparing the crisis’s breakdowns and scope to the Covid pandemic.
Even if there is a peace deal soon, the future of this industrious region that has driven global economic growth for decades will likely include months of canceled flights, surging food prices, factory pauses, delayed shipments and empty shelves for products long considered quick and easy to buy worldwide: plastic bags, instant noodles, vaccines, syringes, lipstick, microchips and sportswear.
Collectively, according to many officials and experts, if the war’s strangling of commercial traffic through the Middle East lasts for even a few more weeks, and uncertainty lingers, shortages could push several countries into convulsions of unrest, followed by recession.

16 April
A Pillar of the Economics Establishment Admits That It Was Wrong
In a new report, the World Bank thinks better of its old free-market absolutism.
(The Atlantic) How does a country get rich? For decades, the economics establishment generally agreed on a simple answer: Embrace free markets and avoid “industrial policy”—state-led efforts to shape what an economy produces—at all costs. No institution embodied this viewpoint, widely known as the “Washington Consensus,” quite like the World Bank. Established in 1944 to provide low-interest loans to developing countries, the bank soon became the intellectual center of development economics. In the 1990s, it took a hard stance against industrial policy, turning the concept almost into a taboo.
But… A report issued last month argues that the bank’s previous stance had things backward: Government intervention, when done right, can actually be an essential ingredient of economic success. Industrial policy “should be considered in the national policy toolkit of all countries,” the report concludes.
Industrial policy for development – Approaches in the 21st century
… The World Bank’s turnabout centers on a famous story in development economics. During the 1960s, ’70s, and ’80s, a group of Asian economies known as the “Four Asian Tigers”—Hong Kong, South Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan—experienced some of the fastest growth ever recorded, transforming them from poor farming backwaters into rich industrial powerhouses even as the rest of the developing world lagged far behind.
… The details of how countries use industrial policy matter a great deal. On surveying a litany of international case studies, the report finds that tariffs rarely achieve their stated goals, or they do so at the unacceptable costs of hurting industries that rely on imported goods and of inviting retaliation from other countries. Instead, the report argues for policies that offer specific industries direct support, such as subsidies, tax credits, or workforce-training programs.
Perhaps the biggest problem with industrial policy is that it can easily become susceptible to corruption and self-dealing as various special-interest groups lobby the government for favors or carve-outs. The report dedicates a chapter to “How to Get the Institutions Right,” which includes a recommendation to hand over policy implementation to a technocratic agency that is relatively insulated from politics, and that thus won’t be susceptible to pressure by politically connected interest groups. It also emphasizes the importance of making clear, credible commitments, ideally across political parties, that reduce uncertainty and allow current and would-be businesses to make long-term decisions in response to new policies. And it warns against “picking winners”—investing in particular companies or national champions as opposed to offering broad incentives for an entire sector. ..

13-17 April
Press Briefing Transcript: International Monetary and Financial Committee, Spring Meetings 2026
(IMF) Minister Mohammed Aljadaan, Chair of the IMFC and Minister of Finance of Saudi Arabia: As the global economy is once again tested by geopolitical developments in the Middle East with serious macroeconomic and financial implications, we are now experiencing a new normal. It is a persistent uncertainty in the global economy. That said, persistence does not mean paralysis. It is our hope that peace will soon be restored around the world. This week the IMFC has discussed the immediate human and economic fallout from wars and conflicts. The IMFC members came together to affirm their commitment to reinforcing macroeconomic and financial stability.
Looking ahead, in this shock‑prone world, countries need to strengthen their resilience by being agile and proactive in implementing necessary reforms. With the increasing fiscal pressures in many countries, any new debt should be directed towards improving potential output without undermining debt sustainability.
(NYT) The I.M.F. said that even if the war is short-lived, the damage to the global economy has been done. In that best-case scenario, the fund expects global growth to fall to 3.1 percent this year from 3.4 percent in 2025. That is down from the 3.3 percent that the fund projected in January. It is also lower than the 3.4 percent growth that it was prepared to project before the war broke out and oil shipments through the Strait of Hormuz were halted.
Middle East War Will Slow Global Economic Growth, I.M.F. Warns
The conflict could also fuel another bout of inflation, according to the International Monetary Fund.
War in the Middle East has upended the world economy, the International Monetary Fund said on Tuesday, warning in a report that disruptions to oil markets could slow growth, fuel inflation and raise the possibility of a global recession.
The sober message came after the global economy had largely weathered a pandemic, Russia’s war in Ukraine and soaring inflation without tipping into a recession. But President Trump’s decision to initiate a war in Iran has stopped the world economy in its tracks.
In its latest World Economic Outlook, the I.M.F. sharply downgraded its growth forecasts, exposing the economic fallout from a geopolitical crisis that has roiled energy prices and injected a new bout of uncertainty into the global economy.

14 April
IMF World Economic Outlook
Global Economy in the Shadow of War
The global economy faces renewed tests as the war in the Middle East threatens to disrupt growth and disinflation.
After withstanding higher trade barriers and elevated uncertainty last year, global activity now faces a major test from the outbreak of war in the Middle East. Assuming that the conflict remains limited in duration and scope, global growth is projected to slow to 3.1 percent in 2026 and 3.2 percent in 2027. Global headline inflation is projected to rise modestly in 2026 before resuming its decline in 2027. Slowdown in growth and increase in inflation are expected to be particularly pronounced in emerging market and developing economies.
Downside risks dominate the outlook. A longer or broader conflict, worsening geopolitical fragmentation, a reassessment of expectations surrounding artificial‑intelligence‑driven productivity, or renewed trade tensions could significantly weaken growth and destabilize financial markets. Elevated public debt and eroding institutional credibility further heighten vulnerabilities. At the same time, activity could be lifted if productivity gains from AI materialize more rapidly or trade tensions ease on a sustained basis.
Fostering adaptability, maintaining credible policy frameworks, and reinforcing international cooperation are essential to navigating the current shock while preparing for future disruptions in an increasingly uncertain global environment.
The compiled full report (PDF) of the April 2026 World Economic Outlook will be available online by April 30, 2026.

Five Things to Watch at the IMF-World Bank Meetings This Week
(Bloomberg) For the fourth time in six years, the spring meetings take place at a moment fraught with global uncertainty.
• The Middle East fallout: The World Economic Outlook published Tuesday will include three scenarios, from a relatively swift recovery to a prolonged period of high oil prices affecting the broader economy, Georgieva said. With the situation changing daily, finance chiefs will no doubt be repeatedly questioned again and again about the impact.
• Central bank policy leaning: The conflict has introduced significant uncertainty for the European Central Bank and the Bank of Japan, both of which were seen raising interest rates as soon as this month. Their policymakers will face intense scrutiny, perhaps even more so than Fed officials.
• Scale of IMF support: The fund anticipates requests for balance of payment needs ranging from $20 billion (if a ceasefire holds) to $50 billion. This substantial funding would be on top to the approximately $140 billion already outstanding.
• Fragmentation and deglobalization: Themes of a fragmented world and “strained multilateralism” will feature prominently on panels. Despite Georgieva’s plea against go-it-alone actions, the prospect of international cooperation in the face of a crisis appears dim. Even if countries were willing to work on unified action, they may not be able to afford to.
• Private market risks: “Cockroach” became a buzzword the last time financial chiefs convened in DC, as Jamie Dimon came up with his oft-quoted analogy just as the fall meetings were getting under way. Seven months later, perhaps not coincidentally, the IMF has dedicated a chapter of its Global Financial Stability Report to the growth of non-bank lending in emerging markets.
9 April
Spring Meetings 2026 Preamble: ‘Rupture in world order’ further challenges IMF and World Bank’s legitimacy
Rising global instability, discord among key shareholders, escalating violations of international law and inadequate responses to Iran war deepen BWIs’ legitimacy crisis.
World Bank discusses industrial policy, although focus on private capital mobilisation at BWIs [Bretton Woods Institutions] remain.
Persistent governance imbalances and stalled reforms of the global financial architecture raise concerns as the peace-development-humanitarian nexus erodes.
(Bretton Woods Project) The IMF and World Bank Spring Meetings, taking place in Washington DC from 13 to 18 April, will unfold against a “rupture in the world order,” as described by Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney in his speech at the World Economic Forum in January, warning of “a harsh reality…where geopolitics…is subject to no limits, no constraints.” Violations of international law, from Israel’s genocide in Palestine, to the illegal abduction of Venezuela’s president, the economic strangulation of Cuba, and the war launched on Iran and Lebanon, reflect significant changes in approach by the United States – the largest and veto-holding shareholder of the BWIs, i.e. IMF and World Bank – to maintain its hegemony over a shifting global economic order.

8 April
The Real Question About the AI Future
Ricardo Hausmann and Andrés Velasco
Whereas US power in the 20th century rested heavily on manufacturing scale, military reach, and dollar strength, in the 21st century it may rest increasingly on ownership of indispensable AI infrastructure. The challenge for the world will be how to pay for access to it.
(Project Syndicate) … For years, discussion of global imbalances has revolved around a familiar concern: how long can the US continue to run large external deficits? But if markets are even approximately right about AI, the more urgent question is how the rest of the world will pay for the growing claims of US-owned AI capital on global income.
The world will not merely be asked to recognize America’s technological lead. It will be asked to pay for it—year after year, and on a vast scale. Forget the broad-based industrial export surge President Donald Trump keeps promising; the world’s payments will be to a relatively small group of firms that control the large language models, chips, cloud infrastructure, software ecosystems, and complementary platforms on which the AI age depends.
How exactly is the rest of the world supposed to pay?

20 March
Gulf nation ports deliver water, energy and food. What happens when they close?
(WEF) Expert voices provide analysis on the impacts of the Middle East conflict, with outlooks on energy, industries and the global economy:
Key shipping routes and energy infrastructure have been affected, suspending around a fifth of the world’s crude and natural gas supply – and creating global price volatility.
The need for geopolitically resilient ports: This is an energy crisis, a water crisis and a food crisis – and all three converge at ports, which need to continue to operate during calm or stormy geopolitical weather. Here’s how responsible governance can make that a reality.
More ports are needed that can operate during calm or stormy geopolitcal weather.
Responsible governance makes a port resilient across geopolitical cycles. Neutrality can be actively maintained through regulatory predictability, compliance standards and diversified international investment. This ensures no single geopolitical rupture can unwind a port’s commercial foundations. And a port that’s trusted by competing powers is more likely to stay open throughout geopolitical shifts.
The same logic extends to worker welfare and community resilience. Minimum welfare standards must be embedded into licensing and contractor systems that can be applied uniformly across anchor operators, subcontractors and service providers. Issues such as heat stress incidents, housing shortfalls and inaccessible grievance channels shouldn’t be seen as welfare problems, but operational failures. Ports that put workers, communities and nature at the heart of their operations earn the social license to operate.
Nature-positive port operations should also be a strategic priority. Duqm’s master plan integrates fisheries and coastal communities alongside industrial sub-zones, for example. And strategic bets on innovations such as green hydrogen and renewable energy could help ports thrive in the post-oil economy.
Fair employment, community investment and clean energy integration will determine whether a port remains trusted and legitimate across geopolitical cycles, not just in calm weather. …

23 March
International Energy Agency head says global economy faces ‘major, major threat’ from Iran war
(AP) — The head of the International Energy Agency said Monday that the global economy faces a “major, major threat” because of the Iran war.
“No country will be immune to the effects of this crisis if it continues to go in this direction,” Fatih Birol said at Australia’s National Press Club in Canberra on Monday.
The crisis in the Middle ⁠East, he said, has had a worse impact on oil than the two oil shocks of the 1970s combined, and a worse effect on gas than the Russia-Ukraine war.
… Trump is facing increasing pressure at home to secure the strait as oil prices soar.
One major fear is that the war could knock out oil and gas production in the Middle East for a long time, which would mean high prices could last a while and cause inflation to rip higher around the world.

8 March
Why an Iran war inflation shock could wreck global economic recovery
Central bankers and economists warn prolonged conflict could raise retail prices and rip up growth forecasts

19–23 January 2026
World Economic Forum Annual Meeting
‘A Spirit of Dialogue’

Global Risks Report 2026: Geoeconomics Takes Centre Stage
Geoeconomic confrontation has emerged as the top global risk for 2026, signalling a more contested global economy as geopolitical rivalry reshapes growth, investment and stability.
Half of the surveyed leaders and experts expect a turbulent global outlook over the next two years, with disruption likely to persist into the next decade, pointing to sustained uncertainty rather than a short-term shock.
What’s driving the risk outlook:
• Geoeconomic confrontation leads. Ranked first for severity in the short term, it threatens supply chains, capital flows and the ability of countries to coordinate responses to economic shocks.
• Economic risks accelerate. Concerns over downturn, inflation, rising debt and potential asset bubbles surged, signalling mounting strain on growth and financial stability.
• Fragmentation deepens. Nearly 70% of respondents expect a multipolar or fragmented global order, reshaping trade, investment and industrial policy.
• Technology raises the stakes. Misinformation, cyber insecurity and adverse AI outcomes are climbing the risk rankings, amplifying economic and societal vulnerabilities.
• Environmental risks persist. While ranked lower in the short term, they dominate the long-term outlook, led by extreme weather, biodiversity loss and critical changes to Earth systems.
Bottom line: In a new age of competition, economic resilience will depend on how effectively leaders manage geoeconomic risk, mobilize capital and adapt to technological disruption.

27 January
The world economy is resilient, despite tariffs
(GZERO) Despite ongoing trade wars, geopolitical shocks, and global uncertainty, the International Monetary Fund recently upgraded its global growth outlook for 2026. On the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Ian Bremmer presses IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva on the decision to upgrade the forecast, especially for the eurozone–a move that caught even seasoned observers off guard.
Georgieva says the global economy has been surprisingly resilient for four reasons: a more agile private sector, the limited impact of tariffs, early productivity gains from AI, and the hard-earned discipline of central banks and finance ministries since the global financial crisis. Together, she argues, these forces are quietly buffering the world economy from turbulence. But just because the economy has been resilient, doesn’t mean it will stay that way.
“Mark my words, we should not take this for granted,” Georgieva says, “We have to always remind countries of the benefits and costs of how they choose to participate in trade.”

21 January
Larry Fink Ponders Moving WEF Meetings From Davos to Dublin or Detroit
Takeaways by Bloomberg AI
Larry Fink is musing about a venue change for the World Economic Forum’s flagship event, taking it outside of Switzerland to places like Detroit and Jakarta.
Fink has privately discussed options to move the gathering to other locations on a rotational basis, according to people familiar with the matter.
A possible relocation would be a blow to Switzerland, which has benefited from the forum being held in the Swiss Alps for decades, cementing its position as a place for global diplomacy and business talks.
Fink is rethinking the forum’s design and wants access to be extended beyond political and business leaders. Co-chair Andre Hoffmann, who is vice chairman of pharma giant Roche Holding AG’s board of directors, agrees.

20 January
‘The old order is not coming back,’ Carney says in provocative speech at Davos
Prime Minister Mark Carney says great powers are using ‘economic integration as weapons’
As it grapples with this new dynamic, Carney said Canada must be “principled and pragmatic” and turn inward to build up the country and diversify trading relationships to become less reliant on countries like the U.S., now that it’s clear “integration” can lead to “subordination.”
Mark Carney’s full speech on middle powers navigating a rapidly changing world
‘We actively take on the world as it is,’ says PM at World Economic Forum meeting
Europe’s leaders stand firm in Davos as CEOs warn on emotions
Trump threatens tariffs in bid to take over Greenland
European leaders seeking to present united front
CEOs urge more pragmatism
(Reuters) Without referring directly to Trump, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen highlighted a need to respond to seismic shifts in the world and said the speed and scale of change had driven a consensus in Europe on independence.
“It is time to seize this opportunity and build a new independent Europe,” she said in a speech.
19 January
Global cooperation is under pressure and evolving.
The Global Cooperation Barometer 2026 shows overall cooperation holding steady even as traditional multilateral frameworks weaken, with smaller, agile partnerships emerging across trade, technology and climate action.
However, cooperation still falls short of what is needed to tackle major economic, security and environmental challenges.
8 January
World Economic Forum survey shows doing business got tougher in 2025
(Reuters) – Companies found it harder to do business in 2025 due to a deterioration in global cooperation on issues including trade, climate, technology and security, a survey published by the World Economic Forum showed on Thursday.

18 January
Davos 2026: the last-chance saloon to save the old world order?
Heather Stewart and Dan Sabbagh
Donald Trump will lead the largest US delegation ever at the World Economic Forum, as others plan a fightback against his policies including his latest tariff threats
(The Guardian) … A year on, what was left of the fraying rules-based global order, already jeopardised by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the rising power of the autocratic regime in Beijing, is rapidly unravelling, and the “spirit of dialogue” has been distinctly hard to find.
This year’s meeting is taking place at a time of extraordinary geopolitical tumult. War continues to rage in Ukraine, whose president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, is making the trip to Davos as he continues to rally support.
Just days before heading to the WEF, Trump stunned European leaders by threatening to slap punitive tariffs on allies, including the UK, if they fail to back his plan to annex Greenland. EU ambassadors were holding emergency talks on Sunday, as their leaders prepare to join Trump in the Alps.
When WEF asked more than 1,300 politicians, business leaders and academics about their fears for the future, they identified “geo-economic confrontation” as the most pressing risk for the next two years – the clash for economic dominance between the big powers. The second most popular choice was outright war between nations.

16 January
Davos 2026: The ultimate networking event is feeling the strain
(The Economist) The WEF’s once-deft fence-sitting is now untenable, writes Thierry Malleret, a former devotee
The WEF has long excelled at peddling the myth that it helps shape the agenda of world leaders. When I worked there in the 2000s, its mission statement proclaimed it to be “committed to improving the state of the world by engaging leaders in partnerships to shape global, regional and industry agendas”. No modest ambition. However, after the global financial crisis of 2007-09, the WEF came under intense criticism for having promoted a neoliberal agenda that many saw as contributing to the crash. In response, it discreetly dialled down its rhetoric. Today, its mission is “to improve the state of the world through public-private co-operation”. Still lofty but notably vaguer.
The WEF neither shapes the global agenda nor improves the state of the world. The reality is more prosaic. It does one thing very well: providing a networking platform. This explains why its agenda consistently mirrors, rather than leads, that of its constituents: first and foremost, the member companies that pay handsomely to attend and understandably expect a return on their investment.
At a moment when the very notion of the West lies shattered, the WEF remains a Western-centric organisation with an overwhelmingly Western agenda. Be it as a political bloc, a cultural identity or a set of rules-based liberal values, the West’s coherence and claim to global leadership is being steadily eroded by Donald Trump’s Hobbesian worldview, the rise of “the rest” and the shift towards multipolarity. Yet despite efforts at diversification, the WEF remains quintessentially Western: a Swiss not-for-profit foundation led by a Norwegian CEO and American and Swiss co-chairs. In today’s fragmenting geopolitical landscape, this is not a good look for an organisation that claims to be global.
Globally, the high-end conference business is flourishing. Paradoxically, the more digital the world becomes, the stronger the appetite for in-person gatherings. But certain events already outperform the WEF in specific domains, for instance the Munich Security Conference on defence and international relations. At the same time, country- and region-specific forums are proliferating, often backed by policymakers with as much pull as Davos, if not more. Saudi Arabia’s Future Investment Initiative (branded “Davos in the Desert”) and the Boao Forum for Asia (“the Asian Davos”) are emblematic. As the world becomes more multipolar, such high-powered regional events are sure to multiply in both number and significance.
…the WEF faces a hostile takeover of its agenda and platform. To secure the participation of Mr Trump in this year’s Davos, the organisers assured him that “woke topics” would be watered down, in effect handing him control of the programme. Mr Trump—whose promised presence has delivered a sugar-high to overall attendance this year—will occupy centre stage while members of his administration, business allies, family members and other supporters advance his agenda across the official programme and the hundreds of side events orbiting the meeting.
Is this year’s Davos a preview of what is to come? Probably. The WEF will continue to exist, but as a disembodied shell that has abandoned any pretence of credible agenda-setting, let alone improving anything. It will keep doing what it does best: staging a high-end commercial fair for global chief executives and their constituents. But beware: many countries are on the prowl, looking to carve up this lucrative cake and keep the best pieces for themselves.

2025

19 December
A Singularly Turbulent Time’: Deeper Uncertainty in Store for Global Economy
A reordering of the rules of trade, set on top of transformational change in technology, demographics and climate, is remaking jobs, politics and lives.
(NYT) Despite being swatted about like a tetherball by ever-shifting trade wars, shortages of critical minerals and tense standoffs between the United States and China, the global economy has turned out to be more resilient than predicted.
But don’t think that it’s time to take a breath. The whirligig shows no sign of stopping.
“We are living through a singularly turbulent time,” said Daron Acemoglu, an economist at M.I.T. who won the Nobel in economic science last year.
Transformational changes continue to rattle the global economy, including the revolution in artificial intelligence, rapidly aging populations, climate change, and a worldwide turn against liberal democracy and a rules-based international order.
All of which are poised to remake jobs, politics and lives.
The transition has been complicated by chaotic economic policymaking around the world this year.

2 December
Economic growth in 2025 has defied the gloomy expectations
(World Bank Blog) 2025 has been a year of steep ups and downs for the global economy—at least where growth forecasts have been concerned. The consensus forecasts of economists have swung from optimism to pessimism and back again. Yet actual economic activity has remained remarkably resilient. Forecasters now expect global growth of about 2.7 percent—broadly in line with expectations at the start of the year.
Until late March, the global economy was performing roughly as had been expected at the start of the year—forecasts were stable. Then the picture changed: in April, sweeping tariff hikes triggered a sharp rise in trade tensions between major economies. Policy uncertainty surged to unprecedented highs, markets braced for a significant global slowdown, and forecasters lowered their expectations. By May, consensus forecasts were pointing to one of the weakest outcomes in recent years, with the global growth forecast for 2025 cut by 0.4 percentage point.
Since then, momentum has shifted sharply. The tariff shock has not—at least so far—produced the rapid downturn many feared. Activity has held up across many economies, and while uncertainty is still elevated, it has eased from the record levels reached in the spring. As a result, consensus forecasts for 2025 have fully recovered the ground lost earlier in the year.

25 November
Market Volatility Underscores Epic Buildup of Global Risk
Some experts see a dangerous combination of factors reminiscent of practices that led to previous financial crises.
(NYT) The stock market bounces in recent weeks are just one indicator of the profound uncertainty and heightened risks running through the global economy and financial system.
It’s not simply that the hundreds of billions of dollars flooding into artificial intelligence investments might turn out to be a bubble. Or that the use of cryptocurrencies in mainstream banking is spreading even as their values have plunged after soaring to record highs. Or the billion dollar bankruptcies related to a mad rush of lending by shadow banks (and regular banks, too).
It is also the titanic levels of debt that the United States and other governments have built up. President Trump’s erratic policy zigzags. And the possibility that the cornerstone of the administration’s economic agenda — tariffs — could be ruled unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court.
It’s everything, everywhere, all at once.
“I have just been flabbergasted that market measures of volatility have been so low up until recently,” said Kenneth Rogoff, a professor of economics at Harvard University. Market valuations are not accurately reflecting risks, he said.

18 November
The AI Bubble’s Shaky Math
Carl Benedikt Frey
(Project Syndicate) Today’s massive and still-growing investments in AI and its accompanying infrastructure could well pay off like the internet did, following the investment boom of the late 1990s. But, for now, the gains from AI look more muted, and the macro downsides larger, than in the case of the dot-com bubble.
When OpenAI recently committed $1.4 trillion to securing future computing capacity, it was merely the latest indication of irrational exuberance in 2025. By some estimates, US GDP growth in the first half of this year came almost entirely from data centers, prompting a flood of commentary about when the bubble will burst and what it may leave behind.
It is tempting to think that large language models (LLMs) will speed up innovation and discovery itself, such as by surfacing hidden links in the academic literature, writing code, and drafting protocols. New tools – from Robert Hooke’s microscope to Galileo’s telescope – have sparked such leaps before. This time, however, we have already had the ultimate research tool in the form of the internet-connected PC. Yet even with instant access to the world’s accumulated knowledge and top talent, measures of research productivity and breakthrough innovation have declined. Keeping alive Moore’s Law – the observation that computer processing power doubles every two years – now takes orders of magnitude more researchers than it did in the early 1970s.

Sorkin: A financial crisis is coming and CEOs are scared to speak out
New York Times financial columnist Andrew Ross Sorkin warns that many of today’s top business leaders see economic trouble ahead for global markets—but aren’t willing to talk about it publicly.
… “They’ll talk to you privately, absolutely. But publicly, unless they’re going to be in praise of what’s ever happening in Washington… they are not willing to raise their hand and say, ‘this is a problem.”
Sorkin points to fear—both political and reputational—as a key reason why tech and financial leaders stay silent. “If I raise my hand now, I may not have a hand,” he says. “Should I raise it now? Should I raise it later? And will there be a later?”
As economic uncertainty grows, he questions whether the public can count on the private sector to lead. “If we ever get to a moment where there is a crisis… are there going to be leaders willing to stand up and explain what needs to happen?”
Andrew Ross Sorkin on What 1929 Teaches Us About 2025
The financial journalist discusses his new book about the Wall Street crash of 1929, and the mounting concerns about an A.I. bubble.
He tells David Remnick that the concern lies in the immense borrowing to build the infrastructure for a future A.I. economy, without the sufficient revenue, currently, to pay off the loans. “If I learned anything from covering 1929, [and] covering 2008, it is leverage,” Sorkin says, “people borrowing to make all of this happen. And right now we are beginning to see a remarkable period of borrowing to make the economics of A.I. work.”

17 November
Trump’s tariffs hit the global economy
Courtenay Brown
(Axios) There is new evidence of global pain stemming from President Trump’s trade policy, which single-handedly scrambled the world economy.
From China to Switzerland, the economic readjustment to double-digit tariffs has been bumpy. Even with trade deals, the levies imposed on their goods are still well above pre-Trump norms.
Unlike the U.S., most countries do not have an AI investment boom picking up the slack.
Driving the news: Japan’s economy shrank by almost 2% on an annualized basis in the third quarter, the first time activity contracted in more than a year. Switzerland’s GDP in the same period fell by 0.5%, the first quarterly drop since 2023.
A slowdown in exports to the critical U.S. market was a key drag on the respective economies, as tariffs weighed on demand for their goods.
In Japan, shipments of autos plunged after a pickup earlier in the year as many sought to get ahead of tariffs — even as a U.S.-Japan trade deal in July slashed tariffs from 25% to 15%.
Switzerland’s U.S. exports of watches, chocolate and more plummeted as the near-40% tariff rate imposed by Trump in August took effect.
The big picture: That data, released overnight, follows a string of bleak economic readings in China that show the economy is on weaker footing than previously known — even as it ramped up trade tensions with the U.S.

14 November
Something Feels Different About the Economy
Human brains were not meant to think about trillions of dollars.
By Gilad Edelman
(The Atlantic) Numbers are too big now. Just before Halloween, Nvidia made headlines for becoming the first $5 trillion company in history. A week later, Tesla’s shareholders approved a pay package for Elon Musk that could be worth about $1 trillion in a decade. At a certain point, figures this large become uncomfortably meaningless.
…the stock market…has been on an outrageous tear, with the gains concentrated among a tiny number of unfathomably valuable companies. The S&P 500 has doubled since October 2022, which is impressive on its own, but the combined market cap of the Magnificent Seven—Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Meta, Microsoft, Nvidia, and Tesla—has more than quadrupled. These firms are all heavily invested in generative AI, a technology based on training computers to make connections among quantities of data that are completely beyond human understanding. Large numbers are generating large numbers.

5 November
World Economic Forum chief warns of three possible ‘bubbles’ in global economy
(Reuters) – The world should watch out for three possible bubbles in financial markets, including artificial intelligence, the head of the World Economic Forum said on Wednesday, in comments that came amid sharp falls in global technology stocks.
Brokers and analysts say the falls are a cause for caution but not panic as markets have been touching record highs and some valuations are looking overblown.
“We could possibly see bubbles moving forward. One is a crypto bubble, second an AI bubble, and the third would be a debt bubble,” WEF president Borge Brende told reporters during a visit to Brazil’s financial hub, Sao Paolo.
Markets have for months shrugged off concerns over elevated interest rates, stubborn inflation and trade turmoil, pushing higher partly on expectations that AI could transform the prospects for the global economy and businesses.
AI offers the possibility of big productivity gains but could also threaten many white collar jobs, said Brende, whose organisation is best known for its annual meetings at Davos, Switzerland, where business and political leaders discuss pressing global challenges.
“What you could – worst case – see is that… there is a ‘Rust Belt’ in those big cities that have a lot of back offices with white-collar workers that can more easily be replaced by this AI and increased productivity,” Brende said, citing recent job cut announcements from companies such as Amazon and Nestle.

4-5 November
Live Updates: Justices Cast a Skeptical Eye on Trump’s Tariffs
The Supreme Court’s questioning of the use of a 1977 emergency law to impose tariffs on scores of countries raised doubt about the centerpiece of the president’s economic agenda.
Supreme Court Confronts Trump’s Power to Disrupt World Trade
Takeaways by Bloomberg AI
The Supreme Court will consider arguments that President Donald Trump exceeded his constitutional authority with many of the sweeping tariffs he has imposed on goods from around the world.
The case hinges on whether the International Emergency Economic Powers Act gives presidents the power to impose tariffs, with lower courts finding that it does not.
A ruling against Trump could undermine his ability to reshape global flows of goods and capital, and potentially lead to refunds of tens of billions of dollars in duties paid by American importers.
President Donald Trump has worked fast in his second term, wielding unilateral power to reassert American dominance in the global economy. For a few hours Wednesday, the world will get clues as to whether any US institution is willing to rein him in.