리스크 유형
Global, catastrophic, existential, emerging, planetary, exponential and frontier-technology risk, each with published criteria and the hazards that meet them, on the components and chain every indicator declares.
Seven risk types across every domain
classes carry published criteria. A hazard can hold several; a class says what kind of risk it is, never how large it is.
Global risk
A hazard is global when its occurrence, its consequences or its causal chain cross national borders and act at continental or planetary scale, so that no single country can fully assess, prevent or absorb it.
- Its characteristic footprint is continent or planet, or a single event routinely affects several countries at once.
- Or its harm propagates across borders through shared systems: trade, finance, migration, information, atmosphere, oceans, rivers or disease transmission.
- Or effective management depends on coordination among several states or on a shared global resource.
- Do not tag a hazard global only because it occurs in many countries independently; local events that are merely widespread are not global.
파국적 리스크
A hazard is catastrophic when at least one plausible scenario for it would cause global catastrophe: a very large loss of life, the crippling of global systems, or a civilisational setback that would take generations to recover from.
- A plausible, evidence-based scenario exists in which the hazard alone, or as the trigger of a cascade, causes mass mortality or harm on a scale well beyond the largest national disasters.
- Or such a scenario disables globally critical systems, such as food supply, energy, finance, communications or governance, across many countries at once.
- Or recovery from that scenario would take generations rather than years.
- Plausibility is judged from physical science, history or structured expert judgement, not from worst imaginable cases; the tag carries no probability claim.
Existential risk
A hazard is existential when a plausible scenario for it would cause human extinction or a permanent, unrecoverable collapse of humanity’s long-term potential.
- A credible mechanism exists by which the hazard could kill all or nearly all people, or leave survivors unable to rebuild a comparable civilisation.
- Or it could permanently lock humanity into a drastically worse trajectory, for example through irreversible loss of control or enduring global oppression.
- Every existential hazard is also tagged catastrophic and global.
- Apply sparingly: the tag requires a stated mechanism to the unrecoverable outcome, not only very large harm.
Emerging risk
A hazard is emerging when it is new, or is changing fast in nature, scale, likelihood or reach, and the evidence base for assessing it is still thin or immature.
- The hazard has appeared or been recognised recently, or its drivers are shifting quickly, such as new technologies, new pathogens or a changing climate.
- And historical records are short, unrepresentative or absent, so frequencies or impacts cannot yet be estimated with confidence.
- Or authoritative assessments disagree materially about its scale or mechanism.
- Review the tag regularly: a hazard stops being emerging once a stable, tested evidence base exists.
Planetary risk
A hazard is planetary when it concerns the stability of an Earth-system process: it pressures a planetary boundary, or it is, or directly drives, a tipping element whose change of state would alter the Earth system as a whole.
- The hazard is a human pressure on a regulating Earth-system process, such as climate, biosphere integrity, nutrient cycles, freshwater, land, novel entities, aerosols, ozone or ocean chemistry.
- Or it is a tipping element, or a process that can push one past its threshold.
- Its effects operate through the coupled Earth system rather than only through local damage.
- Do not tag ordinary local environmental hazards unless they aggregate into an Earth-system pressure.
Exponential risk
A hazard is exponential when its growth or diffusion is self-accelerating, through compounding technology capability, contagion, network effects or reinforcing feedback, so that its scale can outrun linear planning and response.
- A reinforcing mechanism is identified whereby the hazard’s current size increases its rate of growth or spread.
- Examples of mechanisms: person-to-person or machine-to-machine transmission, compounding capability or cost decline, self-replication, adoption cascades, amplifying physical feedback.
- The window between first signal and large-scale harm can be short relative to institutional response times.
- Growth that is merely fast but driven by an external constant force does not qualify.
Frontier technology risk
A hazard is frontier-tech when it arises from frontier or fast-advancing technology, through accident, misuse, unintended system behaviour or structural effects of its deployment.
- The hazard’s source is a technology at or near the leading edge of capability, such as advanced AI and autonomous systems, engineered biology, nanotechnology, geoengineering, quantum computing, neurotechnology or advanced space systems.
- And the hazard would not exist, or would be materially different in kind or scale, without that technology.
- Covers accidents, deliberate misuse, loss of control and broad societal or strategic effects of deployment.
- Mature technologies with well-characterised hazards, such as conventional industrial chemistry, are not tagged.
Risk components
Every indicator declares the risk component it measures.
재해
From hazard to recovery
Each indicator declares its place on the risk chain and its polarity, so aggregation never mixes directions silently.
재해
노출
Vulnerability
Impact
Likelihood
리스크
Capacity
대응
Financing
결과
11 facets of the systemic risk taxonomy
11 facets, each a Nexus-native vocabulary (Hazard Standard domains, contexts and risk classes, Indicator Standard, the systemic risk chain, the model registry, the functional system classes, the Universe platforms and domain packs, the programme pillars). every node is governed by at least one standard and every standard sits in at least one facet. Published as a SKOS concept scheme in machine/risk-taxonomy.ttl.
Read the hazards behind each type
Every class links to the hazards that meet its criteria.
상태
Global Risks Index의 방법론, 구조, 정의는 검토와 의견 수렴을 위해 배포된 예비 작업 초안(2026)이며 이행용이 아닙니다. 관리되는 근거 마감에 따라 판이 공개되기 전까지는 어떠한 값도 표시되지 않으며, 공개 후 값에는 구간, 등급, 출처, 정정 경로가 함께 표시됩니다. 시뮬레이터는 귀하가 선택한 숫자에 공개된 방법을 적용할 뿐이며 NXS-GRX 값을 표시하지 않습니다.
NXS-GRX가 아닌 것
NXS-GRX는 연구 및 리스크 분석 정보입니다. 신용등급이나 ESG 등급이 아니며 등급 척도를 사용하지 않고, 금융상품의 벤치마크도, 공식 통계도, 긴급 경보나 공식 분류도, 자문도 아닙니다. 자연인 평가에 사용해서는 안 됩니다. 리스크 등급은 공개된 척도 위의 구간이며, 국가나 사람의 순위가 결코 아닙니다.
기관과 출처
The Nexus Consortium is stewarded by three independent not-for-profit institutions: The Global Centre for Risk and Innovation (GCRI), through GCRI US in Washington, DC and GCRI Canada in Ontario, with GCRI Canada as Lead Institution, Consortium Secretariat and lead contracting organisation; The Global Risks Forum (GRF); and The Global Risks Alliance (GRA). Technology, infrastructure and service providers work with the Consortium at arm’s length under written agreements, like every other external party in the public-private-planet model, and hold no role in its stewardship.
모든 값에는 출처 표시가 함께 제공되며, 각 출처는 고유한 라이선스를 유지합니다. 외부 명칭은 상호운용성을 위해서만 인용됩니다. Nexus가 작성한 텍스트는 공개 시 CC BY 4.0 적용을 예정합니다.
Avis en français
La méthodologie et les définitions du NXS-GRX sont un projet de travail préparatoire (2026). Le NXS-GRX est une information de recherche et d’analyse des risques : ni notation, ni indice de référence financier, ni statistique officielle, ni alerte, ni conseil. Les classes de risque sont des bandes sur une échelle publiée, non des classements.