This paper assesses differences in countries’ macroeconomic exposure to trade fragmentation along geopolitical lines. Estimating structural gravity regressions for sector-level bilateral trade flows between 185 countries, we find that differences in individual countries’ geopolitical ties act as a barrier to trade, with the largest effects concentrated in a few sectors (notably, food and high-end manufacturing). Consequently, countries’ exposure via trade to geopolitical shifts varies with their market size, comparative advantage, and foreign policy alignments. Introducing our estimates into a dynamic many-country, many-sector quantitative trade model, we show that geoeconomic fragmentation—modelled as an increased sensitivity of trade costs to geopolitics and greater geopolitical polarization—generally leads to lower trade and incomes. However, emerging markets and developing economies (EMDEs) tend to see the largest impacts: real per-capita income losses for the median EMDE in Asia are 80 percent larger, and for the median EMDE in Africa 120 percent larger, than for the median advanced economy. This suggests that the costs of trade fragmentation could fall disproportionally on countries that can afford it the least.

Recent developments and outlook. Weak household income growth, falling house prices, higher interest rates, and stagnation in Europe has caused activity to stall in Finland, with a contraction of 0.5 percent estimated in 2023. Labor markets have shown resilience, but unemployment is expected to increase somewhat in coming months, especially from the construction sector. However, inflation has fallen to more normal levels and financial conditions appear to be easing, paving the way for a modest recovery this year, strengthening further in 2025.

Denmark has demonstrated remarkable resilience in the face of the energy crisis, high inflation, and tighter financial conditions. In recent years, growth has been increasingly driven by an exceptional surge in the pharmaceutical sector, while the rest of the economy has largely stagnated. Staff expect robust growth to continue in the near term, driven by pharmaceutical exports, the reopening of the Tyra natural gas field, and a gradual recovery in the non-pharmaceutical sectors. With the sharp decrease in global energy prices and lackluster domestic demand, inflation has fallen sharply. The positive outlook is, however, clouded by considerable external risks, most notably geopolitical tensions. The financial system has remained stable, although risks remain due to still-high interest rates and vulnerabilities in the commercial real estate markets.

In this paper we seek to answer the question of how the patterns of bilateral trade are altered by rising trade policy uncertainty (TPU). Specifically, we investigate whether geopolitical alignments between country pairs determine how bilateral trade flows react during periods of greater uncertainty. Using a structural gravity framework augmented with a text-based TPU index and a geopolitical distance measure based on UN General Assembly voting records, we find a significant negative effect of the latter when TPU is elevated, indicating a shift to trading among “friends” in uncertain times.

Global linkages are changing amidst elevated geopolitical tensions and a surge in policies directed at increasing supply chain resilience and national security. Using granular bilateral data, this paper provides new evidence of trade and investment fragmentation along geopolitical lines since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and compares it to the historical experience of the early years of the Cold War. Gravity model estimates point to significant declines in trade and FDI flows between countries in geopolitically distant blocs since the onset of the war in Ukraine, relative to flows between countries in the same bloc (roughly 12% and 20%, respectively). While the extent of fragmentation is still relatively small and we do not know how longlasting it will be, the decoupling between the rival geopolitical blocs during the Cold War suggests it could worsen considerably should geopolitical tensions persist and trade restrictive policies intensify. Different from the early years of the Cold War, a set of nonaligned ‘connector’ countries are rapidly gaining importance and serving as a bridge between blocs. The emergence of connectors has likely brought resilience to global trade and activity, but does not necessarily increase diversification, strengthen supply chains, or lessen strategic dependence.

Global value chains (GVCs) powered the surge of international trade after 1990 and now account for almost half of all trade. This shift enabled an unprecedented economic convergence: poor countries grew rapidly and began to catch up with richer countries. Since the 2008 global financial crisis, however, the growth of trade has been sluggish and the expansion of GVCs has stalled. Meanwhile, serious threats have emerged to the model of trade-led growth. New technologies could draw production closer to the consumer and reduce the demand for labor. And trade conflicts among large countries could lead to a retrenchment or a segmentation of GVCs. World Development Report 2020: Trading for Development in the Age of Global Value Chains examines whether there is still a path to development through GVCs and trade. It concludes that technological change is, at this stage, more a boon than a curse. GVCs can continue to boost growth, create better jobs, and reduce poverty provided that developing countries implement deeper reforms to promote GVC participation; industrial countries pursue open, predictable policies; and all countries revive multilateral cooperation.

A collection of papers by some of the world's leading specialists on global value chains (GVCs). It examines how GVCs have evolved and the challenges they face in a rapidly changing world. The approach is multi-disciplinary, with contributions from economists, political scientists, supply chain management specialists, practitioners and policy-makers. Co-published with the Fung Global Institute and the Temasek