GRF · Research Nexus

Research Nexus

Institutional research dialogue, comparative learning and evidence interpretation without taking over the Global Centre for Risk and Innovation (GCRI) scientific publication authority. Research Nexus is an established platform of The Global Risks Forum.

Open Mandate, publisher and status About GRF
STEM methods
3
Canonical methods this field applies
Topics
8
Subject pages in the field
Counterparts
7
Platforms in shared fields across the network
Report series
2
Reports series it contributes to
01Contents

Research Nexus in seven parts.

Reading order6 steps
  1. 01What the platform doesDialogue, comparison and peer learning, on the record
  2. 02FrameworksWhat the work is read against
  3. 03OverviewWhat Research Nexus does
  4. 04The problemEvidence about risk often fails on the way to the people who decide
  5. 05Foundation and counterpartsLinked to science at GCRI and to finance at GRA
  6. 06CoverageThe areas of research and evidence this platform takes on
02What the platform does

Dialogue, comparison and peer learning, on the record.

Research Nexus works through research synthesis, comparative inquiry and institutional learning. Its signature outputs are designed to make dialogue reusable: anyone who did not attend should be able to see what was asked, what evidence was discussed, where participants agreed and disagreed, and which questions were passed back to researchers. Dialogue is planned so that no discipline, institution or region dominates, and records state who took part in what capacity.

Records

Research dialogue records

Structured summaries of what was discussed, where participants agreed, where they did not and what remains open.

Seminars

Methods seminars

Sessions where researchers compare methods, assumptions and limits across disciplines and institutions.

Learning

Peer learning briefs

Short accounts of how institutions in different countries use evidence, including what did not work.

Research Nexus does not take over GCRI's authority for scientific publication. Reviewed scientific findings are published by GCRI through Reports.

03Monitor

Evidence synthesis workspace.

The screen a team would use to follow this field: its measures, states and decisions. Names are examples and values are illustrative.

Evidence synthesis workspace

Science-policy panel · Synthesis SY-99

  • Records found
    3537
  • Screened
    1204Active
  • Included
    69Normal
  • Reviewer agreement
    0.78kappaNormal
ScreeningGRF · Research Nexus

Systematic review

  1. QuestionPICO
  2. Protocolregistered
  3. Search3 databases
  4. Screentwo reviewers
  5. Extractform v2
  6. Appraisecertainty
  7. Briefpolicy owner

Certainty of evidence

Reduced losses6ModerateBenefit
Faster recovery8LowUnclear
Equity of access5Very lowUnclear
Evidence synthesis workspace: the screen's structure, terms and states for Science-policy panel.Example names and illustrative values; a design, not a record or a live system.
04Topics

The questions this field works on.

Topic

Risk research dialogue

Cross-disciplinary research themes.

Topic

Risk knowledge translation

Making evidence useful to institutions.

Topic

Research integrity

Review, conflict and correction practices.

Topic

Collaborative research

Institutional research communities.

Topic

The science-policy interface

Evidence and public decision responsibilities.

Topic

Research methods dialogue

Comparative methods and limitations.

Topic

Global research networks

Authorised international collaborations.

Topic

Institutional knowledge gaps

Research agenda and unresolved questions.

05Policy scenarios

Compare instruments: rules, incentives and information.

Three families of instruments side by side against the baseline, each with its own lag and adoption speed, under the coverage and compliance you set; effect sizes are teaching values to replace with evidence. Scenario: named assumptions about the future, not a forecast.

Controls

Baseline trend of the outcome
2.0% a year
Coverage of the instrument
70%
Compliance
75%
Effect size, against the teaching value
100%
Years ahead
20 years

Readouts

Largest reduction at the horizon
Regulation
Its reduction against the baseline
21%
Numbers, methods and sources
YearBaselineRegulationEconomic incentiveInformation and capacity
0100.099.598.899.1
1102.0101.2100.199.8
2104.0102.5101.199.9
3106.1103.5101.6100.0
4108.2103.7101.8100.7
5110.4103.2101.7102.1
6112.6102.0101.6103.9
7114.9100.4101.6105.9
8117.299.2102.1108.0
9119.598.6102.9110.1
10121.998.9104.2112.3
11124.399.7105.7114.5
12126.8101.1107.4116.8
13129.4102.7109.4119.2
14131.9104.5111.4121.6
15134.6106.5113.5124.0
16137.3108.5115.7126.5
17140.0110.7118.0129.0
18142.8112.9120.4131.6
19145.7115.1122.8134.2
20148.6117.4125.2136.9

Methods

  1. Tools of government Hood (1983), The Tools of Government, Macmillan
  2. Carrots, sticks and sermons Bemelmans-Videc, Rist and Vedung (1998), Transaction
  3. Diffusion of innovations Rogers (2003), Diffusion of Innovations, Free Press
  4. Uncertainty fan (parameter Monte Carlo) Spiegelhalter, Pearson and Short (2011), Visualising uncertainty about the future, Science 333
  5. One-at-a-time sensitivity (tornado) Saltelli and others (2008), Global Sensitivity Analysis: The Primer, Wiley

Data

The model runs on the teaching values set by the controls. To calibrate it for a place, read it against these admitted layers and series, which this page's map can draw:

  • Borders Natural Earth
  • Cities Natural Earth
Compare instruments: rules, incentives and information. Illustrative teaching model: it runs on the values set by the controls, not on measured data. Methods: Tools of government (Hood (1983), The Tools of Government, Macmillan); Carrots, sticks and sermons (Bemelmans-Videc, Rist and Vedung (1998), Transaction); Diffusion of innovations (Rogers (2003), Diffusion of Innovations, Free Press).

Across the six pillars, led by Nexus Consortium

06Frameworks

What the work is read against.

The platform does not set standards. It reads its evidence against the frameworks that competent bodies have adopted, so a finding can be placed where a decision-maker already works.

Framework or standardBodyWhat it sets
UNESCO Recommendation on Open ScienceUNESCOA shared definition, values and principles of open science, with actions for member states on open access, open data, infrastructure and engagement
UNESCO Recommendation on Science and Scientific ResearchersUNESCORights and responsibilities of researchers, academic freedom, and the obligations of states toward the research system
Frascati ManualOECDDefinitions and survey guidance for measuring research and experimental development expenditure and personnel
Singapore Statement on Research IntegrityWorld Conference on Research IntegrityPrinciples and responsibilities for honesty, accountability, professional courtesy and good stewardship in research
European Code of Conduct for Research IntegrityALLEAGood research practices and the handling of violations, used by funders and institutions across Europe
San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA)DORA and its signatoriesRecommendations to assess research on its own merits rather than on journal-based metrics
Bonn Declaration on Freedom of Scientific ResearchMinisters of the European Research AreaCommitments by governments to protect freedom of scientific research and its core values
Science advice principles and practice guidanceInternational Network for Governmental Science Advice (INGSA)Practice guidance for advisers and advisory bodies on independence, transparency, uncertainty and engagement
FAIR Guiding PrinciplesFORCE11 and the GO FAIR communityFindability, accessibility, interoperability and reusability of research data and metadata
OECD Global Science Forum reportsOECDPolicy analysis on science advice, research integrity, research security, infrastructures and international cooperation
07Implementation

From mandate to evaluation, by pillar.

The steps an instrument takes from mandate to evaluation, each with the pillar that runs it, and the decisions that stay with the authority. Teaching model with stated illustrative values, not a prediction.

  1. Mandate and problem framing Competent authority (outside the programme)
    A competent authority frames the problem and the mandate under its own rules. Howlett, Ramesh and Perl (2009)
  2. Evidence and system model Foundry
    The system is modelled with its feedbacks, data and stated limits. OECD (2014), principle 2
  3. Options appraised with scenarios Foundry
    Instruments are compared under scenarios, with uncertainty shown. Hood (1983)
  4. Exercise with stakeholders Universe
    The options are tested in an exercise with those who would implement and bear them. OECD (2014), principle 3
  5. Standard or guidance drafted Nexus Standards
    What works is codified as a standard or guidance, open to comment. Nexus Standards process
  6. Decision by the authority Competent authority (outside the programme)
    The authority decides, outside the programme, with the evidence on record. Howlett, Ramesh and Perl (2009)
  7. Capacity and training Risk Academy
    Those who implement are trained on the decided instrument and its data. Sendai Framework (2015), priority 2
  8. Monitoring and public report Reports
    Indicators are published with sources, limits and corrections. OECD (2014), principle 5
  9. Evaluation and revision Nexus Standards
    Results return to the standard and the model: the cycle closes. Howlett, Ramesh and Perl (2009)

Methods

  1. Policy cycle Howlett, Ramesh and Perl (2009), Studying Public Policy, Oxford University Press
  2. Governance of critical risks OECD (2014), Recommendation of the Council on the Governance of Critical Risks
  3. Layered drawing of directed graphs Sugiyama, Tagawa and Toda (1981), IEEE SMC 11
From mandate to evaluation, by pillar: the steps as recorded, each with its pillar; sources as cited on each step.

Across the six pillars, led by Nexus Consortium

08Overview

What Research Nexus does.

Research governance is the set of rules, institutions and practices that decide how research is commissioned, reviewed, shared, corrected and used. Research Nexus, Global Risks Forum's platform for it, covers research integrity, science advice, knowledge translation, collaboration agreements and research agendas for risk. Its pages describe governance practice; scientific findings remain with authors, journals and GCRI.

Who it serves

Its community

Policy scholars; social scientists; international researchers; evidence reviewers.

How it works

Its methods

Research synthesis; comparative inquiry; institutional learning.

What it produces

Its outputs

Research dialogue records; methods seminars; peer learning briefs.

09Instruments and commitments

How Research Nexus is governed: instruments, mandates and commitments.

The instruments, mandates, actors and accountability arrangements a policymaker, diplomat or development agency works with, citing the agreements that set them. Structures follow the frameworks named. Any state or progress drawn is illustrative, not a record.

Who holds which role

The actors around Research Nexus: who decides, who implements, who finances and who brings knowledge and voice.

Illustrative: roles, not named institutions; no position is attributed to anyone. A dialogue fills it with the participants on record.

Accountability cycle

How commitments on Research Nexus are held to account, from commitment to correction.

  1. CommitGovernmentA commitment with a mandate and a legal basis.
  2. PlanLead agencyA national plan with owners and milestones.
  3. ResourceMinistry of financeA budget line or financing on record.
  4. ImplementAgencies and local governmentDelivery against the plan.
  5. ReportStatistics officeIndicators reported in agreed definitions.
  6. ReviewLegislature, audit, civil societyIndependent review of results and gaps.
  7. CorrectGovernmentChanges to the plan, published with reasons.
A generic accountability cycle; the owner of each step follows the country's own constitution and law.
Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction · UNDRRParis Agreement · UNFCCC2030 Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals · United NationsInternational Health Regulations · WHO
10The problem

Evidence about risk often fails on the way to the people who decide.

Research on systemic risk is abundant and growing, but it reaches decision-makers unevenly. Studies use different definitions and methods, answer questions that institutions did not ask and arrive after decisions are made. Institutions, in turn, struggle to say what they need to know and to judge competing claims.

The difficulty is partly structural. Academic incentives reward novelty and publication; institutional incentives reward timely, actionable answers. Disciplines describe the same phenomenon in incompatible terms, so an economist, an engineer and an epidemiologist can study one cascade without being able to combine their findings. Evidence produced in a few well-funded countries is applied in very different contexts, and local knowledge rarely flows back.

There is also a question of interpretation. The same evidence can support different conclusions depending on values, risk tolerance and the decision at hand. When interpretation happens behind closed doors, or when advocates present uncertain findings as settled, trust in evidence erodes. Research on the science-policy interface consistently finds that structured, transparent dialogue between researchers and institutions improves both the relevance of research and the quality of its use.

Comparative learning adds a further layer. Countries and institutions facing similar risks have built very different arrangements for commissioning research, using scientific advice and correcting course. Some of those arrangements have been tested by crises and some have not. Seeing how others work, including what failed, is often the fastest way for an institution to improve its own practice.

Research Nexus exists to host that dialogue. It does not produce or certify science. It brings researchers and institutions together, compares how different systems learn, records what was discussed and agreed, and feeds unresolved questions back to those who can research them.

Why now: new science-policy bodies are starting work, including the UN scientific panels on artificial intelligence and on chemicals, waste and pollution established in 2025, while public institutions face contested evidence on heat, health and technology. Research Nexus convenes researchers and decision holders in recorded dialogues; with participants' consent, its records can inform the Evidence Brief series of Reports, and recurring gaps in how evidence is described can be filed as change proposals to the Nexus Standards.

11Foundation and counterparts

Linked to science at GCRI and to finance at GRA.

The platform's STEM foundation is policy, institutional and decision science, probability and statistics and causal inference and impact evaluation: the methods needed to judge what evidence shows and what it does not.

At GCRI, Reports publishes reviewed science, Labs runs research, Registry keeps records and Systems Science and Modelling develops models. At Global Risks Alliance (GRA), Financial Regulations Nexus builds shared industry understanding of regulatory evidence. Research Nexus contributes to the Evidence Brief and Universe Annual Synthesis series. See all counterparts.

12Coverage

The areas of research and evidence this platform takes on.

Research Nexus is Global Risks Forum's platform for institutional dialogue about research on risk: how evidence is commissioned, reviewed, corrected, shared across borders and taken up by public institutions. Its pages set out the governance of research rather than its results: the mandates, agreements, integrity practices and science-policy arrangements that decide whether evidence can be trusted and used. Scientific publication remains with GCRI and with authors, journals and institutions under their own review.

Area

Cross-disciplinary research dialogue

Structured exchange between disciplines and institutions on shared risk questions, with records of what was agreed and what remains contested.

Area

Knowledge translation

How evidence is synthesised, briefed and made usable for institutions, and where translation distorts or loses uncertainty.

Area

Research integrity

Peer review, conflicts of interest, misconduct procedures, correction and retraction as the system that keeps the record reliable.

Area

Collaborative research

Consortia, institutional partnerships and research communities: their agreements, authorship rules, data sharing and governance.

Area

Science-policy interface

Science advice, assessment bodies and the division of responsibility between those who supply evidence and those who decide.

Area

Methods and comparability

Comparative research designs, their assumptions and limits, and how evidence from different designs is weighed together.

Area

International research networks

Authorised cross-border collaboration, research security, science diplomacy and equitable partnership terms.

Area

Knowledge gaps and research agendas

Unresolved questions, research priority setting and the institutional reasons some risks remain under-studied.

13Grounding

Built on named science, technology, engineering and mathematics.

Every claim on Research Nexus rests on methods with a canonical page in the STEM Commons, so readers can see what a finding depends on and where its limits lie.

Policy, institutional and decision scienceProbability and statisticsCausal inference and impact evaluation

See the STEM foundation of Research Nexus

14Cycle

How work moves in this field.

A question becomes evidence, a governed build, an organised community, a controlled test, a reviewed publication and, finally, a decision taken by the competent authority under its own rules.

  1. Question Universe National, regional or institutional priority. Question in Research Nexus
  2. Evidence Foundry STEM foundation of the platform. Evidence in Research Nexus
  3. Build Foundry Foundry. Build in Research Nexus
  4. Organise Universe Nexus ecosystem. Organise in Research Nexus
  5. Test Universe Universe (independent site). Test in Research Nexus
  6. Publish Reports Reports. Publish in Research Nexus
  7. Decide Competent authority Competent authorities and institutions, through NXS-RLS (participants, agreements and handoffs). Decide in Research Nexus
  8. Renew Universe Corrections and the next annual agenda. Renew in Research Nexus

Each step of the cycle in the pillar it runs in; the decision stays with the competent authority, outside the programme.

15Six pillars

How this works across the six pillars.

Research Nexus works through six pillars of one annual programme, led by the Nexus Consortium, with GCRI, GRF and GRA each contributing in its role: explore, experiment and prototype in Labs, build, simulate and prepare in Foundry, convene and test in Universe, codify, correct and apply in Nexus Standards, publish in every format in Reports, teach in the open in Risk Academy.

Select pillars · hover lines18 / 18 handoffs

Route

The whole programme

Every pillar hands its work to another; together they close the year's feedback loops.

L · F · U · S · R · A

Pillars
6 of 6
Handoffs
18 of 18
Loops
17 closed

Handoffs in play

  • F01Universe → Foundry · Admitted mission becomes a cycle project with a decision caseReadiness preparation
  • F02Foundry → Universe · Core Build Report and go or no-go evidenceControlled build
  • F03Foundry → Reports · Sealed observations and indicator series behind a profileCloseout
  • F04Universe → Reports · After-action and scenario findings for chapters 10 and 13After-action review

and 14 more

F01 to F14 are the recorded handoffs of the programme year, each with the artefact that moves and its phase; R1, R2, R3 and R4 carry work around the ring. A loop counts when every pillar on it is selected. Every pillar is led by the Nexus Consortium.
  1. LabsWhere questions become experiments and prototypes: new methods, data and tools are tried in the open, with their limits on record, before the Foundry builds them, under the Nexus Consortium.Labs
  2. FoundryWhere the evidence behind a mandate or commitment is built, with its owner and limits on record.Research Nexus in FoundryFoundry
  3. UniverseWhere mandates become missions: GRF records each gate, convenes the parties and keeps implementation accountable.Research Nexus in Universeuniverse.nexus
  4. Nexus StandardsWhere shared rules are agreed in the open; each jurisdiction decides adoption, and no global body holds a veto.Data and Evidence in Standardsnexustandards.com
  5. ReportsWhere governance analysis and the year's results are published, so commitments can be followed and checked.Research Nexus in ReportsReports
  6. Risk AcademyWhere policymakers, diplomats and agency staff learn the programme roles and decision-making on the record, on Risk Academy.Faculty of Risk Science and Methods in Academyrisksacademy.com
16Consortium

The same field, seen three ways.

GCRI studies a field as science, GRF governs it and GRA builds shared financial understanding of it. Research Nexus links to its counterparts so that work on one side is visible on the others.

17Pages

Pages in Research Nexus.

Page

Mandate, publisher and status

Page

Discipline and institutional issues

Page

Research and institutional knowledge

Page

Professional practice

Page

Dialogues and cooperation

Page

Programmes and projects

Page

Annual programme contribution

Page

Specialist and institutional community

Page

Leadership and skills

Page

Convenings and dialogues

Page

Published findings

Page

Participate

Page

Institutional contact

Page

Transparency, rights and safeguards

Page

STEM foundation of Research Nexus

Page

How work moves in this field

Page

Build in Foundry

Page

Test in Universe

Page

Publish in Reports

Page

The same field across the Consortium

Page

Topics

18Connected

Where this page leads across the Consortium.

19Questions

Questions and answers.

Who publishes Research Nexus?
The Global Risks Forum (GRF) publishes Research Nexus and is responsible for what it publishes. GRF convenes and governs programmes. It does not regulate, finance, procure or certify, and hosting or sponsorship confers no authority over findings.
Is Research Nexus active?
Research Nexus is an established platform of The Global Risks 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.
How can I contribute?
Start with the participation paths or write to Contact. An enquiry receives a reference; it does not create membership, a role or an assignment.
Where are findings published?
Reviewed outputs appear on the publications page, and contributions to the Reports series are listed on Publish in Reports.
Which values on this platform are real?
Indicator names, units, sources, methods and frameworks are real. Levels in figures and canvases are examples in a design. A programme replaces them with labelled evidence it owns.
How do I report an error?
Use corrections and concerns, or write to Contact. A correction is recorded as a new version, never a silent edit.
Does Research Nexus publish scientific findings?
No. Scientific publication is the responsibility of GCRI. Research Nexus publishes records of dialogue and peer learning, clearly labelled as such.
Who can take part in a research dialogue?
Researchers, evidence reviewers and institutional practitioners with relevant expertise. Participation is by invitation or enquiry; see participation paths. Taking part confers no endorsement of anyone's work.
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 ForumResearch NexusEvidence BriefUniverse Annual Synthesis

Never send personal data, sensitive infrastructure detail or anything you have no right to share. A contribution is reviewed before use; sending it confers no authorship or editorial rights, and sponsorship never buys a finding.

How it works

How Research Nexus works.

Choose a view and press Play to follow the platform's process, its programme year, the standards it applies and how its findings are published. The outline shows how the work is designed to run, not the status of any decision.

Research Nexus

How Research Nexus works

Platforms · Programme year · Standards · Reports

A platform joins a field to named methods, labelled evidence and the outputs it publishes, without becoming the authority it serves.

  1. 01 Scope

    1. 01Field and familiesStart · The platform leadThe home states the field, its families and who it serves.
    2. 02Topic dossiersRecord · Platform authorsTopics explain the subject with labelled evidence.

  2. 02 Evidence

    1. 03Evidence labelsRecord · GCRIEach value is labelled: observed, published statistics, estimated, modelled, scenario or unknown.
    2. 04MethodsStep · Method ownersMethods come from the STEM Commons, each with one canonical page.

  3. 03 Work

    1. 05Scenarios on the systemsModel · Foundry pillarScenarios run on the Nexus systems, labelled as scenario.
    2. 06Standards that applyRecord · Nexus StandardsThe platform names the standards that apply. A validator report is evidence for review.

  4. 04 Publish

    1. 07EditionsRecord · ReportsFindings are published through Reports with their limits.
    2. 08Authority decidesOutcome · The competent authorityDecisions and execution stay with the government, operator or licensed institution.

Research Nexus home · Platforms · Shared methodsAn outline of how the work is designed to run; it does not report the status of any decision or record.

Take part

Take part in Research Nexus.

Start from who you are. Answer an open call. Or form and lead a competence cell on the Research Nexus platform.

Route

National institutions

Ministries, statistics offices and agencies: a national desk and chapter, and a seat in the working groups. National chapters

Route

Sectors and professions

Operators, regulators, banks, insurers and professional bodies whose work touches Research Nexus. Participate

Route

Learning

Courses and practice, with a record of every course completed. Free to study. Open learning

Route

Standards

Draft, review and adopt the methods and data standards with the working groups. Working groups

Route

Communities and research

Universities, civil society and individual experts: projects, data and review. Write to the team

The Global Risks Index

Every figure on this page is indexed: hazards, climate, conflict, the world.

The Index is the Consortium's indexing system for risk data. Every indicator, hazard, series and country profile carries its Nexus Standards identifier, its source and its licence, so what this page shows can be traced, corrected and reused.

  1. 01 · Sources205 registered sourcesEvery value keeps its source and licence; withheld values are counted.Data and licences
  2. 02 · Nexus StandardsNIS-1 and NHS-1451 indicators, 905 hazards; every record carries a UNI.Nexus Standards
  3. 03 · The Index54 series, 195 country profilesComputed on the standards; no value is published until an edition is released.The Global Risks Index
  4. 04 · This pageResearch NexusMaps, figures and feeds read the Index in the context of hazards, climate, conflict.Public API
Sources205registered, each with its licence
Indicators451NIS-1, 106 composites, 20 domain indices
Hazards905NHS-1, crosswalked to UNDRR-ISC HIPs
Series54global, sector, strategic, technology, thematic
Country profiles195one site per country

Series in this context hazards, climate, conflict

  1. GLBGlobal SystemsThe state of interdependent global risk: the twenty domain indices aggregated to the world, the five core systems (water, energy, food, health, biodiversity) and their couplings, the global tail register and the gap…NXS-GRX-AR-000002Hazards · Climate · Conflict
  2. THDisaster Risk Intelligence (DRI)Signals, observations, event streams, geospatial layers and scenario packs turned into structured risk intelligence for preparedness and planning.NXS-GRX-AR-000111Hazards · Climate · Conflict
  3. GSGlobal CitiesUrban exposure, heat, flooding, informal settlement, service dependency and the economic weight of cities at risk.NXS-GRX-AR-000068Hazards · Infrastructure · Climate
  4. GSGlobal ClimateChronic and acute physical climate hazard, transition exposure, adaptation gaps and scenario pathways to 2030, 2050 and 2100.NXS-GRX-AR-000065Climate · Hazards · Finance

All 54 series · The 20 domain indices

Country profiles the world

All 195 country profiles

Every country profile carries the source and licence of each value. Correct a value or reply

Hazard domains NHS-1

Geodata and API open

Open layers on an equal-area hexagon grid, shown as densities per km² or as symbols: People · GHSL 2025People · WorldPop 2025Built-up areaPortsAirportsRoadsRailwaysRivers and lake centrelines

/api/v1/public/grix · https://nexustandards.com/uni/{uni}
Developers · Data · Made with Natural Earth, Public domain; GHSL and WorldPop, CC BY 4.0

Snapshot of the Index registries pinned 2026-10-23 · 22c6eed. Research and risk-analytics information: not a rating, an official classification, a warning, a benchmark or advice.

Research Nexus

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.

Propose a dialogue See all contact routes
Legal
Show all 18 legal documents

Maps, data and figures on this site are shown for context and general information. They are not advice, forecasts or warnings; the limits of the information are set out in the Disclaimers and Data Notices.

Latest

All posts
The Global Risks Forum

Convening · leadership · urgency

Not for profit

Our articles, maps and twins are free to read and free to republish. Readers and partners keep it that way.

Partner with us

Who funds us

GRF is a not-for-profit institution. To ask who funds a piece of work, use the funding questions form.

Independence

Editors and the expert reviewers named on each article decide what we publish. Funders and partners do not review or approve articles before publication.

Corrections policy

Licence

Articles: CC BY 4.0. Figures, maps, twins and data: CC BY 4.0. Other uses: ask through the permissions form.

Privacy choices