<p>AMRAE BAROMETERS COLLECTION ©AMRAE 2025 • 1 st edition Corporate Geopolitical Risk BAROMETER 02 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer Navigating troubled waters: the key role of the Risk Manager in confronting geopolitical risk Grégoire DUTERTRE Corporate Geopolitical Barometer, Lead Head of the Geopolitics Commission, AMRAE 1 Federation of European Risk management Associations, Global risk manager Survey Report 2024 - Link 2 Global risks report 2025 3 Future risks report 2025 Armed conflicts, competition over critical resources, growing political instability, the resurgence of authoritarian regimes, and the erosion of long- standing alliances…corporations are now navigating in a world where traditional landmarks are fading, and uncertainty is becoming the new norm. Geopolitical risk is no longer background noise; it has become a disruptive force, impacting supply chain and investment decisions, prompting companies to reassess their business model. International studies converge on this point. The 2024 FERMA survey indicates that European Risk Managers now consider geopolitics as a critical challenge for their organizations. Reports from the World Economic Forum 2 and AXA 3 , among others, confirm this finding, ranking the geopolitical context among the top risks identified by executives for 2025. In this context, AMRAE is releasing the first edition of its new geopolitical risk barometer aiming at providing a snapshot of the governance measures and resources implemented to address the topic. This barometer goes beyond documenting current practices, it calls for a holistic understanding of geopolitical risk. It also prompts a broader reflection on the evolving role of the Risk Manager: sentinel lookout, orchestrator, or strategic advisor? Ultimately, each company must define its own approach, based on its organization, priorities, and maturity. Such a challenge requires substantial resources: clear governance structure, dedicated funding, appropriate tools, and ongoing training are indispensable. Professionalizing geopolitical risk management demands strong sustained commitment from senior leadership. It is no longer about identifying risk but about building a resilient, integrated approach; shifting from a reactive to a proactive mindset; turning geopolitics into a source of opportunity. This barometer invites us to shift perspective. It offers a space for dialogue across functions, sectors, and disciplines, challenging the collective responsibility for a risk transcending borders and organizational silos. And it points out that, in an unstable world, thanks to their cross-functional vision, their ability to structure information and federate stakeholders, risk managers are more than ever at the forefront of corporate sustainable resilience and performance. Editorial If a man does not know to what port he is sailing, no wind is favorable to him.» Seneca, Letters from a Stoic 03 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer Global risks, competitive advantages: the art of integrating geopolitics Experts’ insight (TAC Economics) As the barometer reveals, the major turbulence facing businesses today centers around geopolitical transformations in a multipolar and unstable world transformations that companies can no longer ignore. International tensions are no longer confined to diplomatic circles; they now directly affect supply chain, markets, financing, and growth models. Faced with this reality, risk managers must move beyond a purely defensive approach and build a genuine "culture of anticipation". This means implementing specific quantitative tools aimed at (1) identifying ex-ante risks and vulnerabilities linked to geopolitical transformations, (2) preparing for them by developing scenarios and financial stress tests, and (3) receiving alerts through early warning systems based on real-time analysis of massive data. The goal is not to predict the unpredictable, but to strengthen organizational resilience by preparing appropriate responses. However, it would be a strategic mistake to view geopolitics solely through the lens of threat. Every disruption also creates opportunities. Trade tensions can open up new avenues for redirecting exports; energy or technology sovereignty policies generate massive public support; and the restructuring of alliances creates more accessible emerging markets. Companies that can anticipate these shifts will turn risk into competitive advantage, for example, by diversifying their supply chains early or adjusting their portfolio of country locations. This approach requires strong commitment from corporate governance. Boards of directors and senior management must integrate the geopolitical dimension into the validation of strategic orientations, just as they do with financial or climate considerations. Cross-functionality is key: linking corporate diplomacy, strategy, finance, and operations. Preparing scenarios, setting up crisis units, and regularly updating the geopolitical risk map are becoming recognized best practices. Rather than merely enduring global instability, organizations must learn to take advantage of it. Mexico is benefiting from the US–China decoupling, India is positioning itself as an industrial and technological alternative, Vietnam and Indonesia are attracting new manufacturing flows, East Africa is developing its energy hubs, and Central Europe is strengthening its industrial and security positions. These are all regions which, although exposed to turbulence, offer growth drivers and competitive advantages. This turbulence is here to stay. Instead of enduring instability, companies need to make geopolitical change a structural component of their business strategy. Those that can read this complexity with clarity and agility will turn uncertainty into a lasting competitive advantage. Sandrine LUNVEN CEO of TAC ECONOMICS Thierry APOTEKER Chairman of TAC ECONOMICS The greatest danger in turbulent times is not the turbulence itself, but acting with yesterday’s logic. » Peter Drucker Acknowledgements AMRAE would like to thank all respondents for the time and attention they devoted to this survey, as well as all the Risk Managers who enriched it with their insights. This edition of the Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer was made possible thanks to the commitment of the participants who contributed to the production of this study: Barometer leaders Thomas DEREUX Project Manager, Scientific Division, AMRAE Grégoire DUTERTRE Group Risk Manager, SONEPAR Iris FORCADE Project Manager, Scientific Division AMRAE Mariana STRAVATO Intern, Scientific Division, AMRAE François BEAUME Senior Vice-President Risks and Insurance, SONEPAR Chairman, AMRAE Estelle JOSSO Director of Insurance and Prevention, HERMÈS int. Board member, AMRAE Oliver WILD Group Chief Risk and Insurance Officer, VEOLIA Vice President Scientific Division, AMRAE Agathe DUJARDIN Intern, Risk and Compliance, SONEPAR Gilles FRANCOIS Risk Manager, ENGIE Guillaume BOUNY Head of Risk &amp; Compliance, ASENDIA Santiago BOSIO Head of Risk Management and Foresight, ADP Group Théophile FRESNAIS Risk Manager, VEOLIA Thomas OSMONT Supplier Business Continuity Manager, THALES Carolina MORLION Intern, Risk and Compliance, SONEPAR Quentin POZZOBON Group Risk Manager, RATP Group The team would also like to express its gratitude to the following individuals for their significant contributions to the design and review of the survey: Contributors 04 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer 05 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer Geopolitical risk is a complex concept to grasp. This barometer is the opportunity for AMRAE to share its perspective on the subject, not to impose a definition, but to foster dialogue. This perspective is not intended to be exhaustive; rather, it reflects the collective discussions and exchanges among the association’s members. Geopolitical risk can be understood as the impact of power rivalries within a given territory, whether physical (land or sea), spatial, or digital (cyberspace), on corporate activities. It is not confined to inter-state conflicts but also encompasses the influence of local contexts, covering a broad spectrum of situations ranging from social movements to regime changes, as well as migration, health, and environmental crises. Moreover, geopolitical risk often acts as an "influencer", triggering, altering, or amplifying other types of risk, such as compliance, procurement, logistics, security, or climate, which further contributes to its complexity and the difficulty of assessing it. Traditionally handled by states, whose stabilizing role is eroding, the management of geopolitical risk increasingly falls within the scope of companies. They must implement mechanisms to anticipate potential triggers of such risks, thereby strengthening their resilience, improving decision-making, and reinforcing their capacity for action. The term "geopolitical risk" as used in this document should be understood in this broad, cross-cutting, and interconnected dimension. Geopolitical risk: the major influencer? Geopolitical risk is now clearly recognized by risk professionals in their risk mapping exercises and is regularly discussed within governance bodies. Companies acknowledge the significant impact of geopolitics on their business models. However, the resources allocated to this topic still appear modest compared with the scale of the challenges identified. Awareness is rising and companies must now strengthen their teams, deploy appropriate tools, and commit dedicated financial resources to establish a structured and enduring approach to goal, to structure their approach and ensure the long-term professionalization of geopolitical risk management. Objective? To structure their strategy and implement a robust management of geopolitical risk in their organization. Geopolitical risk is hard to grasp, it’s usually when companies face its consequences that they realize its full extent. This was particularly evident with the war in Ukraine, which brought to light numerous indirect consequences, from soaring energy costs and shortages of key raw materials to disinformation campaigns and renewed investment in the defense sector. The challenge for companies is to implement effective monitoring capabilities to detect weak signals in an overwhelming flow of information, and to adjust their strategies in time to respond.» Quentin POZZOBON Group Risk Manager, RATP Group 82% of respondents have identified geopolitical risk in their risk map, and 57% rank it among their top risks. 92% of respondents include geopolitical risk on the agenda of their governance bodies. 5% of respondents have received training on geopolitical topics over the past 12 months. 26% of respondents allocate a dedicated budget to monitoring geopolitical risk (excluding employee compensation). Executive Summary Expert insight SUMMARY Respondents’ profiles P.080 1 Geopolitical risk management systems P.1603 Resources P.2805 Geopolitical risk governance P.1202 Insurance P.2304 One-year outlook P.3106 06 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer Barometer methodology This first edition of the Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer is based on an online survey conducted among 1,106 AMRAE Risk Manager members between June 20 and September 5, 2025, and a total of 158 responses were collected. The objective of this barometer is to provide an initial assessment of how risk management professionals perceive geopolitical risk, and to identify existing practices in terms of governance, integration, and monitoring within organizations. The survey, structured around 26 questions, follows a methodology combining participant profiling, data collection, and rigorous statistical analysis. The absence of mandatory questions explains the variation in the number of responses per question. Moreover, some multiple-choice questions may result in cumulative percentages exceeding 100%, this is specified where applicable. As with any survey based on perception, this study has inherent limitations linked to the composition of its sample. The findings reflect the perspectives, analytical framworks, and concerns of Risk Managers primarily from French organizations. This English version is a translation of the original French edition of the AMRAE Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer. This translated version aims to provide non-French-speaking readers with accessible insight while preserving the substance and analytical rigor of the AMRAE Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer. In case of discrepancy, the French version prevails. 1,106 members consulted 158 respondents 26 questions 07 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer 0 1 Respondents’ profiles 08 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer 9 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer 01 Respondents’ profiles 03 Risk management systems04 Insurance05 Resources02 Risk Governance 06 One-year outlook 70% of respondents work for large companies, reflecting the standard profile of AMRAE members. Nearly one-third of respondents come from the industrial and energy sectors, which are among the most exposed to geopolitical risks. Their vulnerability lies within a strong dependence on critical resources and globalized markets, making them particularly sensitive to supply chain disruptions and price volatility. Beyond these sectors, the diversity of respondents shows that such vulnerabilities cut across the entire economy. The growing interdependence of global supply chain means that few activities escape the repercussions: some are directly affected by geopolitical tensions (increased transport costs, logistical disruptions, etc.), while others suffer indirect consequences through spillover effects (industrial disruptions affecting distribution, services, consumption, etc.). This diversity underlines that geopolitical risk is not confined to specific sectors. It has become a systemic factor, capable of destabilizing supply chains and, ultimately, threatening business continuity. 70 % Large company +1,5 billion in consolidated turnover +5,000 associates 5 % SMEs and Small business -50 M€ -250 associates 18 % Mid-cap companies -1.5 billion in revenue -5,000 associates 1 % Association / NGO 6 % Public sector Insurance / Reinsurance / Mutual / Provident Institution / Brokerage Banking / Finance Consumer Goods / Luxury Construction / Real estate Audit / Consulting Retail High Tech Industry / Energy Healthcare / Biomedical Defense / Security Media / Leisure / Entertainment Services Transport / Logistics Public Sector / Local Authority / Association / NGO Other 8 % 3 % 6 % 3 % 3 % 2 % 4 % 5 % 4 % 4 % 11 % 7 % 7 % 1 % 33 % N U M B E R O F RESP O N D E N T S 158 Question n°1 What is the type of your organisation? N U M B E R O F RESP O N D E N T S 158 Question n°2 In which sector does your organisation operate? 10 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer 01 Respondents’ profiles 03 Risk management systems04 Insurance05 Resources02 Risk Governance 06 One-year outlook A cross-analysis of company locations and revenue sources reveals a high level of internationalization among member firms that responded to the survey: only 17% operate exclusively in France, while the majority are spread across several continents. However, their revenue distribution is far more concentrated, with most income generated in France, Europe, and North America. This discrepancy underscores the complexity of global supply chain: some locations play a critical role in production or logistics, yet do not constitute key commercial markets. It also highlights specific vulnerabilities, as companies may be exposed to high risks in regions that are not strategically important from a commercial standpoint, but are essential to their operational functioning. Question n°4 In which geographic area(s) does your Group generate the majority of its revenue? Top 2 only Multiple answers possible – total exceeds 100%. N U M B E R O F RESP O N D E N T S 158 Question n°3 In which geographic area(s) are you established (offices, sites, plants, etc.)? Multiple answers possible – total exceeds 100%. N U M B E R O F RESP O N D E N T S158 46 % 42 % 56 %80 %17 %46 % Africa Middle East Asia- Pacific EuropeFrance only Central and South America North America Africa Middle East Asia- Pacific EuropeFrance only Central and South America North America 54 % 28 % 56 % 5 %1 % 3 % 54 % 11 % 11 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer 01 Respondents’ profiles 03 Risk management systems04 Insurance05 Resources02 Risk Governance 06 One-year outlook The Risk Managers surveyed place ERM 4 at the core of their responsibilities (64%), reflecting a holistic and strategic approach to risk management. More than half also report being involved in insurance management, while around 40% indicate activities related to crisis management and business continuity planning (BCP). 4 ERM : Enterprise risk management Question n°5 What is the scope of your Risk Management function? Multiple answers possible – total exceeds 100%. N U M B E R O F RESP O N D E N T S158 ERM 64 % Insurance (including prevention) 52 % Security&nbsp;/ Safety / HSE 13 % Crisis Management / Business Continuity 39 % Internal Control 25 % Internal Audit 9 % Compliance 16 % Other(s) 3 % 02 Geopolitical risk governance 012 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer 13 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer 03 Risk management systems04 Insurance05 Resources02 Risk Governance 06 One-year outlook01 Respondents’ profiles Question n°6 Which entity or function initiated the monitoring of geopolitical risk within your organisation? N U M B E R O F RESP O N D E N T S 119 In nearly half of cases (44%), the risk management function initiated geopolitical risk monitoring, followed by executive management (36%). This shows that the initiative to monitor geopolitical risk may come either from Risk Managers or from executive management. Board members and top management expect regular reporting from the Risk Manager or, in some companies, from dedicated committees responsible for monitoring geopolitical risk. It should be noted that 8% of respondents report that their organization does not currently have a specific process in place to monitor geopolitical risk. 7 % Other organisational function 5 % The shareholders / the Board of Directors 8 % Geopolitical risk not monitored / managed within the organization 36 % Headquarters, General Management 44 % The Risk Management function 14 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer 03 Risk management systems04 Insurance05 Resources02 Risk Governance 06 One-year outlook01 Respondents’ profiles Question n°7 What role does risk management play in managing geopolitical risk within your organization? 29 % The Risk Management function leads (or co-leads) geopolitical risk management within my organization 25 % The Risk Management function is not involved in the management of geopolitical risk within my organization 46 % The Risk Management function is involved&nbsp;/ consulted in the management of geopolitical risk within my organization but does not lead it N U M B E R O F RESP O N D E N T S 119 Question n°8 Which entity or function drives geopolitical risk monitoring within your organization? N U M B E R O F RESP O N D E N T S 119 In 75% of cases, Risk Managers play an active role, either by directly co-leading (29%) or by being consulted and/or involved in the process (46%). However, they hold primary responsibility for geopolitical risk in only 22% of cases, even though they are often instrumental in driving its monitoring. When it comes to governance, no single model prevails: responsibility may also fall under the Strategy or CEO Office (29%) or be shared among different teams (18%). This fragmentation can be explained by differences in organizational structures and corporate cultures, and it underscores the inherently multidimensional nature of geopolitical risk. General Counsel / Legal / Compliance (if the risk management function is not attached to it) Finance Department / Mergers and Acquisitions Strategy / CEO Office Communication / Public Affairs International Affairs Department / Economic Intelligence HSE / Safety / Security Procurement Management distributed across different functions without a clearly defined leadership structure Outsourced geopolitical risk monitoring Geopolitical risk not monitored/ managed within the organization Other Risk management 22 % 10 % 1 % 29 % 1 % 2% 6 % 1 % 18 % 0 % 8% 3 % 15 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer 03 Risk management systems04 Insurance05 Resources02 Risk Governance 06 One-year outlook01 Respondents’ profiles The results indicate that geopolitical risk is now firmly embedded in boardroom discussions, with 92% of respondents reporting that it is regularly addressed within their governance structures. 92% of respondents state that geopolitical risk is discussed in their governance bodies. Question n°9 Is geopolitical risk discussed within governance bodies (Executive Committee, Audit/ Risk Committee, etc.)? N U M B E R O F RESP O N D E N T S 119 Yes, at least once a year Yes, at least twice a year Yes, at least once per quarter 8 % 8 % 26 % 27 % 32 % Yes, occasionally / upon request No 03 Geopolitical risk management systems 016 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer 17 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer 01 Respondents’ profiles 03 Risk management systems04 Insurance05 Resources02 Risk Governance 06 One-year outlook Geopolitical risk monitoring is primarily triggered by the global geopolitical environment, cited by nearly 79% of respondents, underscoring the predominance of external factors. Risk-mapping exercises, mentioned by 53% of respondents, also rank among the main practices contributing to their integration into risk-management processes. These are followed by geopolitical events that Geopolitical risk monitoring is predominantly structured around a centralized approach, cited by more than half of respondents. A significant proportion of organizations (34%) report adopting a hybrid model that combines central oversight with input from local teams, suggesting 9 % Primarily decentralized approach (countries / BUs / operations take the lead, limited involvement from headquarters) 34 % Combination of both approaches Identification of the topic during risk mapping exercises Global geopolitical context Geopolitical mentioned in flagship reports (WEF, AXA Risk Report, etc.) A geopolitical event affecting your organization A geopolitical event affecting your supply chain 19 % 37 % 79 % 53 % 36 % Question n°10 What were the triggers for monitoring geopolitical risk? Multiple answers possible – total exceeds 100%. N U M B E R O F RESP O N D E N T S119 Question n°11 Which organizational approach have you adopted for monitoring geopolitical risk? N U M B E R O F RESP O N D E N T S 119 have directly affected the organization (36%) or its supply chain (37%). Ultimately, the establishment of geopolitical risk-monitoring mechanisms reflects the interplay between exogenous and endogenous factors, combining the international context, internal risk-identification systems, and operational experience. the presence of mechanisms designed to capture “weak signals” that may be difficult for headquarters to detect. By contrast, a fully decentralized approach remains uncommon, mentioned by fewer than 10% of respondents. 57 % Primarily centralized approach (guidelines, alerts and deliverables issued by headquarters) 18 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer 01 Respondents’ profiles 03 Risk management systems04 Insurance05 Resources02 Risk Governance 06 One-year outlook Question n°12 Is geopolitical risk included in your organization’s risk universe? 84 % YES 16 % NO 57 % Yes, it is considered a top risk and/or a triggering or aggravating factor that drives or exacerbates other risks 25 % Yes, but it is not considered a top risk 10 % No, it is not considered a significant risk for my organization 8 % No, my organization is not sufficiently mature to properly address geopolitical risk N U M B E R O F RESP O N D E N T S 106 Question n°13 Is geopolitical risk included in your organization’s risk map? N U M B E R O F RESP O N D E N T S 106 The results show that geopolitical risk is now fully embedded in corporate risk management framworks: 82% of respondents state that it is included in their organization’s risk universe. More than half (57%) view it as a triggering or aggravating factor that can amplify other risks. Organizations that do not include it in their risk mapping cite two main reasons: it is not considered a top risk by their company (10%), or it remains difficult to assess accurately (8%). These are mainly medium-sized enterprises and large corporations operating across a range of sectors and geographical areas beyond France. Thus, even some sizeable, internationally exposed organizations do not yet identify geopolitical risk as a major threat. 19 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer 01 Respondents’ profiles 03 Risk management systems04 Insurance05 Resources02 Risk Governance 06 One-year outlook 70% of respondents report assessing geopolitical risk through a holistic, multi- factor approach. These findings confirm that companies have recognized the cross-cutting nature of geopolitical risk. This comprehensive approach reflects a desire to simultaneously integrate several factors to better understand all the interdependencies and their potential impact on business. Question n°14 From which perspective does your organization assess geopolitical risk? 0 % Approach focused on ESG aspects 70 % Holistic, multidimensional approach 3 % Approach focused on security / safety 13 % Approach focused on supply chain 5 % Approach focused on cybersecurity 10 % Approach focused on finance N U M B E R O F RESP O N D E N T S 104 Santiago BOSIO Head of Risk Management and Foresight, ADP Group Expert Insight Geopolitical risk is a multifaceted issue, monitored by various departments within organizations, yet often lacking a comprehensive vision. To strengthen this global perspective and support strategic decision-making, a scenario-based approach, covering the short, medium, and long term and led by the Risk Manager, enables organizations to anticipate the ripple effects of geopolitical events (local tensions, political upheavals, supply chain disruptions, etc.) and to assess their associated financial impacts (heightened security measures, loss of revenue, adjustments to operations, and so forth).» 20 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer 01 Respondents’ profiles 03 Risk management systems04 Insurance05 Resources02 Risk Governance 06 One-year outlook Question n°15 What types of deliverables or mechanisms exist within your organization regarding geopolitical risk (excluding risk mapping)? Multiple answers possible – total exceeds 100%. N U M B E R O F RESP O N D E N T S106 Question n°16 Has your organization implemented monitoring mechanisms on geopolitical topics? If yes, on which themes? Multiple answers possible – total exceeds 100%. N U M B E R O F RESP O N D E N T S106 Studies, reports, briefings (including media and/or security monitoring) 69 % Organization of brainstorming sessions, foresight workshops or case studies (including with external experts) 29 % Internal training 10 % Other(s) 4 % None of the above 23 % 2 % Other(s) Economy / Finance (including international trade, exchange rates, commodities) 51 % Business intelligence 30 % Security / Safety / Conflicts 53 % Supplier / Stakeholder monitoring 45 % To measure and analyze the geopolitical risks affecting their organization, nearly 70% of respondents report relying on studies, reports, and intelligence briefings. Around 40% have implemented additional measures, such as participatory workshops or internal training sessions. Notably, a significant share of respondents (24 individuals, representing 23% of the sample, including ten large corporations) have not introduced any specific measures. Where monitoring systems exist, the topics addressed tend to be diverse, focusing primarily on security and safety issues (53%) as well as economic and financial aspects (51%). No geopolitical monitoring mechanism in place 19 % 21 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer 01 Respondents’ profiles 03 Risk management systems04 Insurance05 Resources02 Risk Governance 06 One-year outlook 43% of respondents say they do not analyze the impact of geopolitical risk on their company’s supply chain or are unaware that such analysis is being conducted. Among companies that do perform this analysis, it is mainly focused on tier 1 third parties (i.e., partners or suppliers with whom the organization has a direct relationship). Very few respondents extend their assessment beyond tier 1, reflecting the challenges companies face in obtaining visibility into their broader supply chain. It should be noted that, of the 20 respondents adopting a dual approach (geographic area and third-party level), 15 focus their analysis on tier 1 third parties, while 5 extend it to tier 2 and above. Question n°17 Does your organization analyze the impact of geopolitical risks on its supply chain? Multiple answers possible – total exceeds 100%. N U M B E R O F RESP O N D E N T S106 I don’t know 12 % Yes, at Tier 1 third-party level 25 % Yes, beyond Tier 1 third parties 7 % Yes, by geographic area or high- risk country 40 % No, this type of analysis has not yet been implemented 31 % Thomas OSMONT Supplier Business Continuity Manager, THALES With rising global uncertainty, supply chain risk management is now a strategic priority for ensuring operational continuity. To navigate multiple crises and strengthen their resilience, organizations need a comprehensive understanding of their extended supply chains, enabling them to fully grasp the complexity of their ecosystems.» Expert Insight 22 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer 01 Respondents’ profiles 03 Risk management systems04 Insurance05 Resources02 Risk Governance 06 One-year outlook Among organizations that have implemented strategies to mitigate geopolitical risk within their supply chain, the responses reveal a wide range of approaches. Diversifying suppliers or sourcing countries remains the most common practice (52%), followed by the development of business continuity plans (40%) and the inclusion of specific contractual clauses (39%). It should be noted that 25 respondents (24%) have not implemented any specific measures, 16 of which have international operations on all continents. Question n°18 What strategies has your company implemented to mitigate geopolitical risks related to its supply chain? Multiple answers possible – total exceeds 100%. N U M B E R O F RESP O N D E N T S106 No specific strategy implemented to date Other(s) Diversification of suppliers or sourcing countries 52 % Building up strategic inventories 29 % Partial or full relocation of certain activities 20 % Inclusion of specific contractual clauses (force majeure, resilience etc.) 39 % Review of the business model (new product categories, new geographic areas, new distribution channels, etc.) 22 % Strengthening of geopolitical monitoring 38 % Implementation of business continuity or emergency plans 40 % 24 % 1 % 04 Insurance 23 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer 24 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer 03 Risk management systems04 Insurance05 Resources02 Risk Governance 06 One-year outlook01 Respondents’ profiles To mitigate the consequences of geopolitical risks, respondents most frequently reported purchasing Kidnap &amp; Ransom (43%) and Political Violence &amp; Terrorism (34%) insurance policies. However, 32% of respondents have not taken out insurance policies covering the consequences of geopolitical risks. This may reflect a preference for strengthening preventive mechanisms, such as business continuity plans, crisis management systems, or incident escalation processes, or a perception that the insurance products currently available do not fully meet their operational needs. In other cases, it may simply indicate that the organization’s residual risk level is deemed acceptable. Question n°19 Which insurance policies have you purchased to cover the consequences of geopolitical risks? Multiple answers possible – total exceeds 100%. 5 N U M B E R O F RESP O N D E N T S102 Uninsured risk Political violence and terrorism Kidnap &amp; Ransom Confiscation / Expropriation / Nationalization Armed attack Single risk PDBI 5 (with buy-back of political violence exclusion) Other(s) 32 % 34 % 43 % 10 % 6 % 4 % 16 % 14 % 5 PDBI: Property Damage and Business Interruption 25 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer 03 Risk management systems04 Insurance05 Resources02 Risk Governance 06 One-year outlook01 Respondents’ profiles Question n°20 According to you, what are the current barriers to purchasing insurance policies covering the consequences of geopolitical risks? Half of the respondents (50%) are either unaware of, or have not identified, any barriers to purchasing insurance policies that cover the impacts of geopolitical risks. For the other half, the main obstacle cited is the misalignment between insurers’ offerings and companies’ actual needs, particularly due to exclusions or limited capacity (31% of responses). The cost of premiums (24% of responses), a financial constraint, also reflects the tight budgetary environment in which many companies operate. In an increasingly complex geopolitical landscape, a persistent gap therefore remains between the political risk insurance products available and the expectations of businesses. Multiple answers possible – total exceeds 100%. This question was asked to all respondents, not just those who answered "uninsured" to the previous question. N U M B E R O F RESP O N D E N T S 102 33 % I don’t know / Not applicable 24 % Premiums are too expensive 17 % No particular obstacles 31 % Mismatch between available coverage and your needs (exclusions, terms &amp; conditions, capacity, deductibles, etc.) 23 % Insurers’ refusal to cover certain geographic areas 7 % Other 25 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer 26 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer 03 Risk management systems04 Insurance05 Resources02 Risk Governance 06 One-year outlook01 Respondents’ profiles Estelle JOSSO Director of Insurance and Prevention, HERMÈS international Expert Insight The multitude of geopolitical risks facing companies today makes it challenging to adapt insurance coverage. Many policies can be affected by geopolitical factors, yet their exposure to such risks is sometimes poorly understood. While there is no dedicated ‘geopolitical risk’ insurance as such, coverage typically relies on a combination of specific policies (political violence, terrorism, K&amp;R, investments, transportation, etc.). This layered approach adds complexity and requires a strong understanding of existing products to identify the most suitable insurance levers. Current coverage meets certain needs but still leaves a significant share of actual exposures unprotected: supply chain disruptions, economic sanctions, or regulatory restrictions. In practice, many offerings remain standardized and contain numerous exclusions, which can hinder their uptake. Moreover, in a constrained budgetary environment, it can be difficult to justify purchasing policies whose relevance is not immediately evident. Nevertheless, companies are paying increasing attention to these issues, and insurers are showing a real willingness to adapt their products. There is now genuine scope for dialogue to evolve the insurance offering so that it is better aligned with operational realities and corporate risk prevention needs.» 26 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer 03 Risk management systems04 Insurance05 Resources02 Risk Governance 06 One-year outlook01 Respondents’ profiles 42% of respondents reported no recent changes to their insurance programs over the past 12 months to account for the impacts of geopolitical risks, while approximately 24% indicated that they had extended their coverage or are currently negotiating to do so. Question n°21 Have you reviewed or adjusted your insurance programs covering the consequences of geopolitical risks over the past 12 months? 36 % I don’t know / Not applicable 9 % Ye s , subscription to new coverages or buy-back of exclusions 15 % No, but subscription processes are underway 42 % No, no recent adjustments N U M B E R O F RESP O N D E N T S 102 27 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer 05 Resources 28 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer 29 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer 03 Risk management systems04 Insurance05 Resources02 Risk Governance 06 One-year outlook01 Respondents’ profiles Question n°23 Are you currently attending, or have you attended in the past 12 months, any training related to geopolitics (economic environment, international relations, country risk, etc.)? Question n°22 What is the estimated annual budget allocated to monitoring geopolitical risk (excluding the compensation of involved staff)? A combined review of these responses highlights the limited resources dedicated to monitoring geopolitical risk within companies, which still relies mainly on open-source and freely available information. Investment in tools, training, and human resources specifically focused on this topic remains limited. The budgetary aspect reveals that nearly half of respondents have no specific budget, while a quarter say they do not know what amount is allocated, suggesting that resources may exist but are dispersed or managed within other teams. Only 25% of respondents have a dedicated budget, and just 6% of them report a more substantial allocation (over €50,000 per year). Added to this is a shortfall in continuous training: only 5% of respondents reported having completed a short, specialized course over the past twelve months. Furthermore, 39% indicated that they have no specific training needs, while more than half did not identify any relevant programs on the subject. 51 % No, no relevant training identified on the topic 39 % No, no specific need 5 % Yes, short training course (1–2 weeks maximum) 5 % Other 0 % Yes, long training program 6 % &gt; 50 KEUR 48 % No dedicated budget 26 % I don’t know 11 % 20-50 KEUR 9 % &lt; 20 KEUR N U M B E R O F RESP O N D E N T S 100 N U M B E R O F RESP O N D E N T S 100 30 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer 03 Risk management systems04 Insurance05 Resources02 Risk Governance 06 One-year outlook01 Respondents’ profiles Question n°24 Do you have dedicated resources for monitoring geopolitical risk? The human resources allocated show a similar trend: more than one in two organizations have no dedicated resources. When they do exist, they are more often integrated into departments with broader responsibilities. The use of external service providers remains limited, and the existence of teams or managers exclusively dedicated to geopolitical issues is the exception rather than the rule. Question n°25 What types of sources or tools are used within your organization to monitor geopolitical risk? When it comes to tools, most companies continue to rely on free sources, whether available online or provided by third parties (brokers, insurers, etc.). Furthermore, solutions based on artificial intelligence (AI) applied to geopolitical analysis are mentioned by approximately 29% of respondents, reflecting both the contribution of recent technological advances and a search for cost-effective tools. Over time, AI could represent real added value in the management and analysis of geopolitical risk, by facilitating the collection, analysis, and synthesis of increasingly extensive and fragmented information. 25 % Internal resources dedicated to geopolitics within a department or team covering multiple topics 7 % Internal department or team dedicated to geopolitical monitoring 2 % Head of Geopolitical Risk / Chief Geopolitical Officer 18 % Use of external service providers 4 % Other(s) 57 % No 29 % AI tools (general public or specific) 55 % Reports or materials provided by insurers, brokers, consultants, etc. 5 % Other(s) 79 % Open source (freely accessible information) 47 % Subscription to databases (macroeconomic, political risk, etc.) N U M B E R O F RESP O N D E N T S 100 Multiple answers possible – total exceeds 100%. N U M B E R O F RESP O N D E N T S100 Multiple answers possible – total exceeds 100%. 06 One-year Outlook 31 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer 32 Amrae Corporate Geopolitical Risk Barometer 01 Respondents’ profiles 03 Risk management systems04 Insurance05 Resources02 Risk Governance 06 One-year outlook Question n°26 What upcoming geopolitical event do you fear most in the next 12 months? China–Taiwan conflict Uncertainty related to the U.S. / Trump and its impact on trade tensions Other Disruptions to IT infrastructure (crash, cyberattack, etc.) Escalation of the Russia– Ukraine conflict Disruptions to global supply chains Impact and/or escalation of the conflict in the Middle East No opinion Global conflict China–U.S. confrontation Riots / violence / extreme social unrest 21 % 13 % 12 % 8 % 8 % 8 % 7 % 7 % 6 % 6 % 4 % Responses point to mounting global tension: heightened fears of a China– Taiwan conflict, the impact of U.S. policy on international trade, and a possible extension of the Russia–Ukraine war into Europe. Concerns about major cyberattacks and supply chain disruptions signal increased vigilance over the technological and economic dimensions of geopolitical rivalry. Persistent conflict in the Middle East is viewed as an aggravating factor, contributing to broader strategic uncertainty. Many of these risks are interdependent: the materialization of one could amplify others. Some respondents provided separate items. Analysis based on participants’ open-ended responses. N U M B E R O F RESP O N D E N T S 112 ABOUT AMRAE Anchoring risk management at the heart of organizational performance and resilience The Amrae (Association for Risk Management and Insurance in Business) brings together the main players in risk management (risk management, internal control and audit, insurance, and legal). Through its scientific committees, publications, position papers, and congress, it works to promote excellence in risk management, which helps secure business strategy and build resilience. AMRAE has approximately 2,000 members from 850 private and public organizations. Informed and long-term risk management is the foundation of business resilience. It aims to absorb shocks, assume responsibility, and seize opportunities, while fostering sustainable and responsible growth. Its benefits extend to businesses, their ecosystems, and the entire economic fabric. Amrae’s fundamental missions are: RISK CULTURE • To promote a risk management culture within companies and their ecosystem; • To contribute to the evolution of the corporate insurance market through constructive influence. EXPERTISE • To develop and maintain the expertise of risk managers at the highest level; • To offer a privileged forum for sharing best practices among risk management professionals; • To provide benchmark training programs dedicated to risk management professions. TRAINING &amp; CONFERENCES With Amrae Training, the Association meets professional development needs by offering high- level certification programs. The Amrae Risk Management Conference is the leading conference for risk and insurance professionals (more than 3,800 participants in 2025). These three days are the essential event for all stakeholders in risk management and financing. To find out more www.amrae.fr Copyright Amrae 2025 - Any reproduction, in whole or in part, is strictly prohibited Design : La nageuse agency - Photo credits: Shutterstock/Istock/AdobeStock/Unsplash/Freepik</p>