that sufficient international norms or verification mechanisms will be established in time. Each country's pursuit of security may, collectively, produce a more dangerous world. Beyond state actors, the democratization of AI capabilities raises the spectre of asymmetric security threats. Advanced AI tools could accelerate the development of novel weapons faster than governance frameworks can adapt. Even small groups may eventually wield destructive capacities once reserved for superpowers, leveraging AI to design bioweapons, conduct infrastructure attacks or manufacture disinformation at scale. These risks will be heightened in countries in which the dividing line is blurred between well-resourced national militaries and criminal groups with intentions to cause extreme harms. Corrupt practices and a declining rule of law (see Section 2.2: Multipolarity without multilateralism) could contribute to more frequent illicit sharing of sensitive information, technologies or weaponry. Militaries may then both use AI-powered autonomous technology to deflect human responsibility in warfare174 and in parallel shift that responsibility towards loosely associated non-state actors. These dangerous trajectories could lead to a world in which the very sides in warfare become difficult to identify, with plausible deniability becoming the norm. Actions for today To build a resilient workforce, governments and businesses should be proactive in planning ahead, and treat skills development and job transition planning as core elements of AI deployment. This includes funding scalable reskilling infrastructure, incentivizing job creation in emerging sectors, and targeting support for high-risk groups such as youth, people in routine service and administration roles, and older workers. If the negative impacts of AI on labour markets accelerate, each year of policy inaction increases the adaptation gap between technology and the workforce, raising the costs of correction. To stay ahead of the curve, governments should also strengthen their monitoring of labour- market, social, and geopolitical risks, similar to monitoring financial markets for systemic exposure. This includes tracking job churn, trust indicators and political volatility, including using tools such as scenario planning. Beyond workforce considerations, the social contract between citizens and governments will itself also require renewal to be fit for the era of AI. Investing in public digital infrastructure and ensuring linguistic, geographic and socioeconomic inclusivity in AI design and access is essential to avoid the emergence of a globally marginalized AI underclass. Public awareness and education will be central to rebuilding the social contract and trust in an AI-transformed economy over the next decade. It will also help to mitigate the risks most closely associated with Adverse impacts of AI technologies, which include Misinformation and disinformation and Cyber insecurity (Figures 54 and 55). In parallel, societies must prepare for extended support to those most impacted by technological unemployment, exploring adaptive models of social protection and investing in the civic, psychological and cultural infrastructure needed to maintain purpose, meaning and participation in an AI-transformed economy. The long-term risks stemming from AI depend on choices made or avoided within the short to medium term. However, fragmentation of regulatory regimes is increasing the risk of a race to the bottom. Coordination on minimum safety, transparency and ethical deployment standards, particularly for military, biometric and large- scale decision-making systems, is needed - yet requires cooperation similar to that for nuclear or bioweapons safeguards. Leon Andov, Unsplash Global Risks Report 2026 66