Businesses that manage geopolitical risk through static, periodic assessments are structurally exposed, new research from Lockton warns.

The report, Mapping Organisational Exposure to Geopolitical Risk, finds that geopolitical threats no longer arrive as discrete events. They now operate as a continuous force across multiple fronts. Physical assets, workforces, and cyber infrastructure can be hit at the same time.

The scale of property damage alone signals how much the threat has grown. Conflict-related property losses over the past five years now exceed those of the entire previous decade.

The recent Middle East conflict drove losses of approximately $2.1 billion. State actors are increasingly targeting energy facilities, critical infrastructure, and data centres during active conflicts.

The report examines five threat categories: physical damage, supply chain disruption, cybersecurity, workforce displacement, and financial and reputational exposure. Lockton developed it with insurance specialists across its international business.

Clarissa Franks, head of retail at Lockton, said geopolitical risk now shapes core organisational decision-making.

“Geopolitical risk is no longer episodic; it must now be viewed as a force that frequently defines core aspects of organisational risk and shapes strategic decision-making,” Franks said. “Organisations that continue to treat its effects in isolation will find themselves structurally unprepared.”

That concern extends well beyond Lockton’s findings. Aon’s 2025 Global Risk Management Survey covered nearly 3,000 executives across 63 countries. It found geopolitical volatility entered the top 10 global risks for the first time in 19 years. The risk now ranks alongside business interruption, regulatory change, and economic slowdown.

Workforce and cyber exposure

The report identifies workforce displacement as one of the most immediate operational risks for globally dispersed organisations. Companies face rising exposure to violence and kidnapping in unstable regions, as well as psychological strain and the cost of employee evacuation.

Joe Barnes, head of global mobility at Lockton, said connecting HR, global mobility, and risk management into a single strategy gives companies better workforce visibility.

“This preparedness not only helps protect employees but also strengthens organisational resilience when unforeseen events occur,” Barnes said.

On cyber, the report found that state-linked or ideologically motivated actors have shifted their focus from financial gain to causing maximum disruption. Unlike ransomware operators, they have no incentive to restore systems after an attack.

Organisations tied to state munitions or technology supply chains face the greatest exposure, but the report notes that any company can be a target.

Willis reached a similar conclusion in a separate May 2026 report. Attacks on physical infrastructure were the top concern for 65% of respondents. Willis warned that political risk now cuts across trade, technology, and information systems rather than being confined to conflict zones.

The case for continuous risk management

Traditional models built around isolated, event-based assessments are not designed for this environment. That gap is already reshaping how brokers work with clients.

Hub International’s Will Mulè said the pace of political and regulatory change is forcing companies away from annual renewal cycles toward continuous consultation. The Allianz Risk Barometer 2026 separately found that geopolitical risk and political violence reached their highest recorded levels.

At RISKWORLD 2026 in Philadelphia, industry executives described the current environment as structurally more volatile rather than cyclically elevated. Lockton’s report draws the same conclusion: organisations that wait for stability before acting are already behind.