Skip to content

GRF

Insights and resources

What The Global Risks Forum (GRF) publishes under its own authority: governance papers, institutional analyses, explainers, approved speeches and lessons from dialogues, councils and annual cycles. Institutions face pressure to act on fast analysis. The UN Global Principles for Information Integrity (2024) ask publishers to show sources and corrections. Every GRF item carries its author, review state, sources and correction history. Nothing appears before release.

02Genres

Five genres and the standard each meets.

GenrePurposeReview
Governance paperAnalysis of a governance question with optionsExternal review by at least one independent reader
ExplainerPlain-language account of an instrument or processAccuracy check against the instrument’s text
Case studyReconstruction of how institutions governed an eventFactual check by the institutions described
Learning noteLessons from dialogues and exercisesReview by the lesson owners
Speech or statementGRF’s own position on its own workAdopted by the responsible GRF organ
03Positions

GRF does not take positions on other institutions’ decisions.

Insights explain and analyse; they do not lobby for an outcome in any negotiation or rate any government. Where a paper presents options, it says what evidence supports each and who would decide. Evidence comes from GCRI’s Reports with its labels.

04Publication standard

What every item is designed to state.

Attribution

Who wrote it and for whom

Authors, the publishing institution and any funder are named. Sponsors cannot approve publications or change evidence.

Evidence

What it rests on

Sources are cited, and data carries its evidence class: observed, modelled, scenario or expert judgement.

Corrections

What changed and why

A correction creates a recorded new version, never a silent edit.

05How insights are made

From convening to a publication someone can check.

  1. 01

    Records first

    Most GRF analysis starts from records: dialogue outcomes, council minutes, exercise after-action notes. An insight cites the record it interprets.

  2. 02

    Method stated

    Comparative institutional analysis, case study, process tracing or scenario review, with the method named and its limits given.

  3. 03

    Review route

    Each item states who reviewed it and how conflicts were managed; speeches are labelled as the speaker’s views unless released as an institutional statement.

  4. 04

    Onward use

    Findings may be offered to the Reports programme or, where a common method is missing, filed as a change proposal to the Nexus Standards. Neither body is bound by GRF’s analysis.

06Boundaries

What a GRF publication is not.

  • It is not a regulatory interpretation, a rating, a ranking or a certification of any institution or country.
  • It is not investment, legal or financial advice; finance-readiness questions are led by The Global Risks Alliance (GRA).
  • A dialogue record states what participants agreed. An analysis states GRF’s view. The two are never presented as each other.
  • A scenario or exercise finding is never a forecast or a warning.

No GRF publication is listed in these collections yet. Questions go to the contact form and corrections to the integrity concern form. GCRI’s research library is at GCRI publications.

07In review

Where the first items will come from.

No GRF publication is listed in these collections yet. The Reports editions that GRF is scheduled to review for public meaning are drafts in stewardship review; each edition page states its evidence close, version and review passes. See the editions in review.

08Sources

Where this page’s references lead.

The bodies and documents this page is read against. Status and editions change; each link goes to the issuing body.

10Questions

Questions and answers.

Why are there no papers listed yet?
Because an item is listed only once it has been released with its review state. A paper in preparation is not presented as published.
Can I cite a GRF speech as a GRF position?
Only where the speech is labelled as an institutional statement released by GRF. Otherwise a speech reflects the speaker’s views, and the label says so.
How do I report an error?
Write to the integrity concern form with the item and the claim. The acknowledgement gives a reference and names the next step, and any correction is recorded on Publication corrections.
Where is the scientific evidence behind GRF analyses?
Evidence and methods are led by The Global Centre for Risk and Innovation (GCRI). GRF analyses cite their sources and link to the publisher that holds the evidence.
ReportsContribute

Contribute evidence from this page.

Reports is the Consortium’s quarterly publication. What you know about this subject can become evidence, a case or a correction in the next edition, credited to you and published under CC BY 4.0 where it is your own work.

Global Risks Forum
The Global Risks Forum

Bring a governance question to the Forum.

Information and enquiries are open today. An enquiry receives a reference and names the next step; applications, payments, compute allocations and registrations open only when their team, terms and review capacity exist.