The Global Economic Outlook

Summary

This panel discussion at the World Economic Forum in Davos focused on the global economic outlook and key challenges facing different regions. Participants included leaders from international financial institutions, central banks, and government ministries.

The discussion began with differing views on economic optimism, with some seeing strength in the US economy while others noted pessimism in Europe. Participants debated the state of inflation, with some arguing it was largely contained while others warned of potential resurgence due to factors like AI-driven energy demand and persistent wage pressures.

Trade tensions and industrial policies were key topics, with most panelists advocating for open trade and cautioning against protectionist measures. There was broad agreement on the importance of developing domestic capabilities and innovation rather than constraining other nations. Climate change was highlighted as an area requiring coordinated industrial policy and public investment.

Panelists emphasized the need to rebuild optimism and trust among populations feeling economically insecure. They discussed challenges like aging demographics in developed countries and the importance of social policies to maximize human potential. The transformative potential of artificial intelligence was noted as both an opportunity and potential source of inequality if not managed properly.

The discussion concluded on a generally optimistic note about long-term progress and problem-solving capabilities, while acknowledging significant near-term challenges around issues like sovereign debt levels. An announcement was made about Saudi Arabia hosting a future World Economic Forum meeting, highlighting the country’s growing global role.

Keypoints

Major discussion points:

– The global economic outlook, including optimism about the US economy but concerns about Europe

– Inflation risks and central bank policies

– Trade tensions and industrial policies

– The role of technology like AI in driving economic growth

– The importance of addressing climate change and social issues for sustainable growth

Overall purpose:

The purpose of this panel discussion was to provide a high-level overview of the global economic outlook from the perspective of key policymakers and business leaders. It aimed to highlight both risks and opportunities facing the world economy in the near term.

Tone:

The overall tone was cautiously optimistic. While panelists acknowledged significant challenges like inflation, debt, and geopolitical tensions, they also emphasized reasons for hope, including technological progress and opportunities for reform. The tone became more explicitly positive towards the end, with several panelists making a point to end on an optimistic note about the future.

Speakers

– Sara Eisen: Host at CNBC

– Christine Lagarde: President of the European Central Bank (ECB)

– Tharman Shanmugaratnam: President of Singapore

– Laurence D. Fink: CEO and founder of BlackRock

– Kristalina Georgieva: Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF)

– Faisal Alibrahim: Minister for Economy and Planning in Saudi Arabia

Additional speakers:

– Professor Schwab: Founder of the World Economic Forum (mentioned but did not speak)

– Borge: World Economic Forum executive (mentioned but did not speak)

World Economic Forum Panel Discussion: Global Economic Outlook

This panel discussion at the World Economic Forum in Davos brought together leaders from international financial institutions, central banks, and government ministries to discuss the global economic outlook and key challenges facing different regions. The conversation covered a wide range of topics, including economic growth prospects, inflation risks, trade tensions, technological transformation, and climate change.

Economic Outlook and Regional Disparities

The discussion began with differing views on the global economic outlook. Laurence D. Fink, CEO of BlackRock, expressed optimism about the US economy and suggested that pessimism about Europe may be overblown, stating, “I believe it’s probably time to be investing back into Europe, focusing on it.” This contrarian view challenged prevailing negative sentiment and sparked further debate on Europe’s potential.

Kristalina Georgieva, Managing Director of the IMF, provided a more nuanced perspective, projecting global growth of 3.3% but noting stark regional differences. She highlighted strong US performance contrasted with underwhelming European growth, emphasising the importance of understanding these disparities: “The most important message I have for the audience is to ask the question, why? Why growth in the United States is so strong? Why growth in Europe is somewhat underwhelming?” Georgieva attributed these differences primarily to variations in productivity growth.

Tharman Shanmugaratnam, President of Singapore, struck a more cautious note, emphasising the need to “rebuild the bases for optimism in today’s world.” He contextualised current challenges within a broader historical perspective, noting that we are “not going back to the era when the Bretton Woods institutions were formed.”

Faisal Alibrahim, Minister for Economy and Planning in Saudi Arabia, highlighted his country’s efforts to transition from a resource-dependent to a productivity-based economy. He advocated for a balanced approach to economic analysis, combining data-driven explanations with future-focused potential assessment.

China’s Economic Impact

The panel devoted significant attention to China’s economic situation and its global implications. Georgieva noted that China’s growth, while still substantial, has moderated compared to historical levels. She highlighted the country’s shift towards a more consumption-driven economy and its impact on global inflation dynamics. Fink added that China’s economic transition is creating both challenges and opportunities for the global economy, particularly in terms of supply chain reconfiguration and investment flows.

Inflation and Monetary Policy

The panel expressed varying levels of concern about inflation risks. Georgieva suggested that inflation was largely under control but acknowledged remaining risks. In contrast, Fink warned that bond markets were indicating potentially higher inflation than expected, introducing a note of caution.

Christine Lagarde, President of the European Central Bank, emphasised the ECB’s focus on bringing down inflation while maintaining growth. She highlighted the complexity of economic indicators, cautioning against oversimplified assessments: “There is no way I can say yes or no, okay? What I believe is that he is looking very carefully at surplus versus deficit in the current account and in the trade balance in particular, focusing on that. And I think that you have to look very carefully under the hood.”

Trade Tensions and Industrial Policy

Panelists expressed concern about rising tariffs and protectionist measures globally. Shanmugaratnam advocated for a global industrial policy to benefit from productivity gains, emphasising that such policies should focus on developing domestic capabilities rather than constraining other nations. This view was generally supported by other panelists, who cautioned against excessive protectionism.

The discussion highlighted the need for industrial policies that address climate change and technological transformation. Shanmugaratnam argued for coordinated efforts to scale up climate action, while Alibrahim emphasised Saudi Arabia’s commitment to energy transition and sustainability.

Technological Transformation and AI

The transformative potential of artificial intelligence (AI) emerged as a key theme. Fink highlighted AI’s role in driving increased energy demand and potential labour shortages. Georgieva and Lagarde both emphasised the importance of ensuring AI benefits are widely accessible and harnessed for societal good. The discussion acknowledged AI as both an opportunity and a potential source of inequality if not managed properly.

Future of Europe

Despite differing levels of optimism, panelists agreed on the need for structural reforms in Europe. Fink emphasised addressing issues like banking and capital markets union, while Lagarde highlighted Europe’s potential for transformation if it acts on needed reforms. The panel agreed that Europe’s challenges, including productivity gaps and demographic shifts, require concerted action but also present opportunities for renewal and growth.

Global Economic Governance

The panel stressed the importance of strong institutions and frameworks in global economic governance. Shanmugaratnam highlighted the need to adapt these institutions to current realities while preserving their core principles. Georgieva emphasized the IMF’s role in promoting global economic stability and cooperation.

Conclusion and Future Outlook

The discussion concluded on a cautiously optimistic note about long-term progress and problem-solving capabilities, while acknowledging significant near-term challenges around issues like sovereign debt levels. An announcement was made about Saudi Arabia hosting a future World Economic Forum meeting, highlighting the country’s growing global role and commitment to international economic dialogue.

Key takeaways included the mixed global economic outlook, the need for industrial policies focused on domestic capabilities and climate change, the opportunities and challenges presented by AI, and the importance of optimism and hope as drivers for economic growth and problem-solving.

Unresolved issues and areas for further discussion included effectively implementing industrial policies without stifling innovation, balancing AI benefits with potential labour market disruptions, addressing high sovereign debt levels, resolving trade tensions, and implementing necessary structural reforms in Europe.

This wide-ranging discussion provided valuable insights into the complex challenges facing the global economy and highlighted the diverse perspectives of key economic leaders. It underscored the need for nuanced, forward-looking approaches to address these challenges and unlock future economic potential.

Sara Eisen: Thank you so much for being here, and I look forward to working with you in the future. Good morning, everybody. Welcome to the grand finale. We end Davos on a high note here, and I’m so excited and honored to be here. My name is Sarah Eisen, I’m a host at CNBC, and we are going to have the conversation everybody’s been waiting for, the global debate and the global outlook on the economy. Obviously, we have a tremendous lineup here. We have Faisal Al-Abraham, he’s the Minister for Economy and Planning in Saudi Arabia. That’s excellent, thank you. Larry Fink is the CEO and founder of BlackRock. Christine Lagarde is the president of the ECB. We have Kristalina Gorgieva, who is the head of the IMF, and we have the president of Singapore, President Charmin, Shanmugaratman. Thank you all for joining us. You know, this Davos has been very interesting. Larry, there’s so much optimism around President Trump and pro-growth policies and the US outlook. I sort of wonder, as an asset manager and a risk manager, should we take the other side? Are you worried that everyone’s too excited right now? Larry, you got me? It’s hard to hear. Oh, it’s hard to hear. This is why we are putting those things. Oh, okay. I was just asking you if there’s too much optimism around the US outlook right now and whether that was worrisome. Well, welcome everybody. Thank you, Sarah. Now I can hear you.

Laurence D. Fink: Is there too much optimism in the US? No. But that being said, there’s risk in every economy. I can say much more forcibly, there’s too much pessimism in Europe. For somebody who’s been pessimistic in Europe for like 10 years, if I had my number one observation this week in Davos, the pessimism, I’ve never felt the pessimism to be larger and more profound. I believe it’s probably time to be investing back into Europe, focusing on it. I see all the problems in Europe, but I do believe the pessimism is too large. There’s many things it needs to do. It needs a banking union and a capital markets union, which I could talk about later on. Back to the United States, I think all the ingredients for the United States is it will be the continuation of its strength, the foundation of its capital markets. Any entrepreneur, any small company, any large company can find capital. That foundation of capital raising allows much more entrepreneurialism, much more creativity. I believe the US has ability, because of its strength of its capital markets, which is solely really underappreciated, allows it to rebuild itself, change directions, modify faster than any economy in the world. I do believe the economy obviously changes depending on the political party and the president, but the reality is the economy is larger than any one political party or any one president. Obviously they could be additive to any economy. President Trump’s policies, if we’re able to unlock private capital and put private capital to work faster, easier, with less regulation, less time for permitting, it’ll allow the US to become less dependent on its own fiscal problems. Those are some of the issues that could be worked out.

Sara Eisen: There’s not too much optimism in the US, and there’s probably more to be optimistic here in Europe. President Lagarde, I bet you didn’t expect to kick off the panel with a vote of confidence for Europe, because what we’ve been hearing here a lot is Europe’s economy is underperforming, the Trump factor is going to be bad for Europe. How have you digested all of this?

Christine Lagarde: Good morning to everyone. I was going to say to Larry that if ever you look for a pro bono job, come and join us in Europe, because you advocate Europe in a beautiful way. Given where I am, the fact that I’m in my quiet period before a monetary policy week decision coming up soon, I would just like to underscore what Europe is good at. If I look at the scorecard at the moment, whether you look at debt to GDP, about 80%, overall deficit for the euro area, about 3%, inflation, latest reading 2.4, and strong confidence that it’s going down rather than up, interest rates, 3%, huge amount of talent, huge amount of savings, and a big wake-up call that is really calling the Europeans to action. So if the European leaders can actually get their act together, respond to this wake-up call and existential threat that can be identified, then I think that there is a huge potential for Europe to respond to the call. I’m also pretty optimistic. I’m realist about the points that Larry made. We need banking union, we need capital market union, we need to keep the talent at home, we need to keep the savings at home, and maybe it’s also time to import a few of the talents that would be disenchanted for one reason or the other from another side of the sea. Just quickly, why do you call it an existential threat? Why is it existential right now? Why is it? Because as Larry was suggesting, if you talk to the CEOs, if you talk to the corporate world at the moment, those that are making major investment decisions, they are not very upbeat right now. And when you ask them why they’re not, they’re making reference to the price of energy. Fair enough, but energy costs are going down as the recycle, the non-fossil energy is going up in Europe in a significant way when you consider that electricity production in the Euro area at least is now 70% non-fossil originated. They complain about the excessive red tape and the excessive bureaucracy. That’s the wake-up call that we Europeans, those in policy-making places, have to really take to heart and respond fast to. You know, there was this great incentive to go and invest in the United States because of the Inflation Reduction Act and the significant subsidies that were going to be given to those who invested in the U.S. I think the IRA has essentially been removed and that any subsidies under the IRA will not be paid out. So people are going to have to rethink with the prism of confidence, with the prism of cost as is often the case, and the prism of opportunities. And there is no question that what is happening outside is a challenge, but it’s also a big opportunity for revisiting and deciding whether or not Europe wants to be a key player.

Sara Eisen: But I’m contending that it has the talent, and it has the means, and it has the ambition. Well, we’re going to talk about the IRA, and I know President Harman has a lot to say about industrial policy, but first, MD Gorgieva, if you could just give us a global overview right now, because you guys just put out your big world economic outlook.

Kristalina Georgieva: And yes, while there’s a lot of optimism and solid growth in the U.S., it’s a little lopsided around the world. Well, great to be on this panel. We published our projections for 2025 and 2026 just before the forum. And what they paint is a nice picture with some undertones. Nice picture because we project growth at 3.3% this year, and next, this is a slight upgrade for 2025. But under the hood of this average number, we have very strong performance for the U.S. We actually upgraded growth projections for the U.S. by half a percentage point from 2.2 to 2.7, and we have sort of not great European performance, and then we have the rest of the world more or less a little bit up, a little bit down. The most important message I have for the audience is to ask the question, why? Why growth in the United States is so strong? Why growth in Europe is somewhat underwhelming? Why the emerging markets are not doing fantastically well? And the answer is primarily in the differences in productivity growth. The U.S. is marching ahead with high productivity because capital markets allocate money to dynamic firms, because technology turns into business investment and then it grows into company fast, and because the U.S. has, relatively speaking, abundant, relatively cheap energy. When we look at productivity in the United States, year after year after year is close to a percentage point. You look at the rest of the world, advanced economies dropped in productivity vis-à-vis pre-pandemic times from over 1% productivity growth, and it pushes growth up, to meager 0.2% now. Even more worrisome, in emerging markets, productivity dropped from 2.5% to 0.7%, and in low-income countries from 2% to 0%. So my first message is the world is changing very rapidly. We are experiencing a tremendous technological transformation. Capital has to have long legs and go where it would make the biggest difference. And you look at capital, where did capital go with its long legs? It went to the United States. And if countries want to move forward, they have to be very aggressive in opening up opportunities for entrepreneurship, and yes, Europe has to have deep capital markets, it has to have a unified market that makes it possible to compete. And I want to say I’m a European, I’m a proud European. As a European, I want to make an observation in terms of culture. The United States has a culture of confidence. Europe has a culture of modesty. When I first went to the United States, I went there, if something is done really fantastically well, my parents would say, not too bad. That was the highest praise. And in the U.S., you just move your legs, and you’re fantastic. You blink, and you’re great. So my advice to my fellow Europeans is more confidence. Believe in yourself, and most importantly, tell others that you do.

Sara Eisen: Good message. President Harman, everybody’s wondering how the Trump presidency, which is so focused on economics and has so many changes from the prior regime, is going to change the outlook for their respective regions and economies. How are you thinking about it for Southeast Asia, emerging markets, the regions that you follow?

Tharman Shanmugaratnam: Well, first let me say, and I don’t want to be a spoiler here, if you look at all the evidence on what ordinary people think and feel, they’re not feeling good in the U.S., in Europe, everywhere in the world. Confidence is down. Optimism is down. Trust is down. So our real task is, how do we rebuild the bases for optimism in today’s world? We’re not going back to the era when the Bretton Woods institutions were formed. We’re not going back to an era where Henry Morgenthau, the U.S. Treasury Secretary, said in Bretton Woods, prosperity is indivisible. Just think about that. Prosperity is indivisible, meaning I can’t prosper unless you are prospering. No nation, even the largest, will prosper unless the rest of the world is prospering. We’re not going back to that era. It’s past us. It may have rested on a moment in time when the U.S. had an unassailable lead and had that confidence to say prosperity is indivisible. But what we’ve got to avoid is going to the other extreme of a real zero-sum world. There are some tendencies in that direction, but I think we’re nowhere near it. We have to avoid moving in a gradual, grinding way towards fragmentation and towards some breaking up of the world into blocks. It’s a real risk. So what do we do using all the agency we have? The middle powers, India, ASEAN, Europe, Japan, the international institutions. What do we do in between those two extremes, between the unattainable ideal of prosperity being indivisible and avoiding at all costs a zero-sum world? There’s a lot we can do. There’s a lot that we can do. But start from the reality that there are strengths in each of our nations, very well described. The U.S. has a unique set of markets and institutions that drives innovation in a way that no other nation or region does. And as Christine says, Europe has human capital, and I mean it not just in terms of expertise but in terms of values. It’s a font of the values that we admire in today’s world. Asia has a desire to keep opening up, to keep breaking barriers. Asia is still striking FTA deals, and you now have the UK joining the CPTPP, and there are several others on the waiting list. So build on these strengths, the desire on the part of most of the world to stay open, to be interdependent, so that we can all grow. So let’s build a realistic basis for optimism, but starting from a position where people are despondent, and today’s generation of parents has very little faith in their children doing as well as them. Let’s build a new basis for optimism.

Sara Eisen: I don’t think you’d have any disagreement on this panel, though I wonder if you have spoken yet with President Trump or your Prime Minister has. Have you shared this view of openness? I’m saying something which comes naturally to a small country.

Tharman Shanmugaratnam: I know of other small countries that think alike, including small European countries. Being small helps because your basis for doing well in the world is to be relevant to the rest of the world. You never look inward, and you never get too complacent. You never get too complacent. You’re always trying to find a way in which you’re complementing someone else’s strength, and someone else is able to complement your strength. But I don’t think that should be the province of small countries alone. We have no choice but to have that caste of mind. I think it also has to be the way in which the major powers think. In particular, if there was one real positive coming out of President Trump’s speech yesterday evening here at the Forum, it was the way he spoke about China and the US. It suggested a desire for a new understanding and a desire to avoid a continuous unraveling of a relationship that is still profoundly important for the global world economy.

Sara Eisen: I agree. Your Excellency, two important questions. In that speech here at the Forum, President Trump called on Saudi Arabia, specifically in OPEC, to lower oil prices. Will you do that? Before I answer this question, I’m just going to comment on what was discussed. I was going to move on to that as well. But I’ll get to your question. I think the way we look at the world is in two lenses. One is data-driven, to explain to us why we’re here, how we got here, where exactly we are. But also another lens that is more future-focused.

Faisal Alibrahim: What is the potential we need to unlock seriously? If you look at the first lens, like Christine said, there’s tepid growth. But also at the same time, we, the same people talking about tepid growth, are talking about the potential positive promise of technological advancements, including generative AI. This economic stalemate needs to be addressed or disrupted. We can’t stay here. Keeping our eye on the second lens, the vacuum is, like we’ve discussed probably throughout the past few days, in the last few days is intrepid leadership. We need intrepid leadership that is bold but inclusive, disruptive but constructive, ingrained in the long view like President Thurman said, but also action-oriented today to kind of get us out of where we are. And you see signs of hope or signs of signals that there are directions or momentum in the direction of more leadership that is required for us to get out of where we’re from. Saudi Vision 2030 is an example of that. You talk about complacency, President Thurman, I think every day, day in, day out, complacency in Saudi is punched in the face by Saudi youth. We need to make this transformation count. And every region, every economy has its own issue to deal with, whether it’s Europe and deregulation, for example, or innovation, the U.S. and the fiscal outlook. China and this new economic model and whether a shift to consumption drive will happen. The Middle East and stability and the need for more Vision 2030s, I think there are some pressing questions that the globe needs to address too. And one of them is energy security or the energy transition. I don’t think we can get or can afford not getting the energy transition story right this time. We need to get it right. Energy supply, energy security is essential for global growth, for global prosperity. The Kingdom’s position, OPEC’s position is all about long-term market stability to make sure that there’s enough supply for the growing demand, and there is a growing demand. Whether it’s the growing demand we see in the U.S. alone, whether it’s a growing demand that’s coming from AI, demand will grow and we need to make sure we supply energy in the most efficient way without jeopardizing energy supply, without jeopardizing our ability to use technology and collaboration to address climate change, which is serious. Saudi Arabia is in the front line. We’re in one of the most heat-stressed, drought-stressed areas, so we’re serious about climate action. And without jeopardizing giving the opportunity for developing countries and emerging countries fair access to the value of energy. What about your transition since you are the Minister of Planning? How dependent at this point is the economy on oil? Because the IMF did downgrade the outlook for Saudi Arabia based on the extension of the production cuts. And how are you tracking toward your goal of 2030? So Vision 2030 is a long-term restructuring of the Saudi economy. It’s not a short-term campaign. It’s not a short-term program. And we look at our numbers, GDP numbers, as one of the indicators that tell us where we’re going. We care about the non-oil economy. Non-oil activities today represent 52% of total real GDP for the first time. It’s not everything. It’s just a good sign to keep in mind. And non-oil growth has been steady. We expect to close 2024 at 3.9%, 2025 at 4.8% non-oil growth, and 2026 at 6.2%. And that’s what we care about. The numbers that were revised down are total GDP. That includes oil GDP. That includes the function of oil production and our voluntary cuts. What we really care about is transitioning from one economic structure that’s reliant on resources to another economic structure that’s reliant on productivity, human capital. And we’re leveraging all our assets and capabilities to transition from one to another.

Sara Eisen: One more really quickly, because this was also brought up by the President yesterday. Big $600 billion commitment to investment in the United States from the Crown Prince. How about rounding it up to a trillion, as Trump suggested? Is that easy to do?

Faisal Alibrahim: I’ll tell you that there is a long-standing, strong partnership between the U.S. and the Kingdom that lasts so far eight decades. We’ve worked very well on important work, global work, with all administrations, no matter which administration is in office. This number represents investments, procurement, public and private sector. And it’s just a mirror reflection of the strong relationship. What we’ll spend in the economy from the start of Vision 2030 till 2030 is 12 times that number. Well, that might satisfy him. You know, you can’t have a global discussion these days without talking about inflation. Or that’s been the case in the last few years, certainly. Managing Director, have we put the inflation genie back in the bottle? President Lagarde just sounded pretty optimistic.

Sara Eisen: So, that is a very, very good question. Here is the bottle, here is the genie. The head of the genie is in the bottle. Most of the body of the genie is in the bottle.

Kristalina Georgieva: Kind of getting stuck there, though. But the legs are kind of hanging still out. We need to push it all the way down. And it is remarkable how much progress the world has made. And I want to say something that we, in our worries about today and tomorrow, we not always reflect on. When we look into the past, over the last decades, every inflation episode would require interest rates to go up. And the response would be inflation would go down, but at the price of recession. This is the first time so far when inflation is being brought down. Interest rates are still somewhat high. And yet, we have admittedly below historic average, but still quite a positive growth. We have 3.3% historical growth. 3.3%, historic average was around 3.8%. So, when we look at the next stage, if we succeed to bring inflation down and yet retain the economy functioning, so people have jobs and, as Thurman said, they get more confidence, that would be a very good outcome. And I want the audience to ask itself a question. How come this time it was different? What is different this time? What is different this time is twofold. First, after the global financial crisis, the world created mechanisms for economic policy coordination that didn’t exist before. We have the G20. We have very active role of the Bank for International Settlement. Every month, central bank governors get together. We have the IMF using our twice a year meetings for policy coordination. And what that translates into is more consistent coordination when necessary, but also divergence in policies when necessary. And the second thing that is different, we have Madame Lagarde in ECB. Larry, I feel like I keep reading headlines.

Sara Eisen: Larry Fink warns of inflation. We’re not done with inflation. Larry is very worried about inflation. Why? I’m not terribly worried. But do you think the market is being too complacent about the inflation story?

Laurence D. Fink: The bond market is the best reflection of what’s going on in the world. It is the barometer for every politician, for every central bank. It really informs us every day where the mood of the global economy. And I believe the bond market is indicating that inflation may be higher than we think. The genie may be coming out of the bottle. And I look at this in so many different ways that if you just think about AI for a minute, in the United States right now, data centers represent about 50 gigawatts of power. And in the United States, we’re estimating alone data centers will represent and need 300 gigawatts of power in the next five years to meet the needs. And we’re talking about, you know, if you expand that throughout the world, this is my optimism about growth. But at the same time, we actually are going to have labor shortages, which is going to be driving up wages. I think we’re going to see more persistent wages. And that may be a good outcome, but it’s going to be an inflationary outcome. We’re going to have material shortages with all this building out. And so I think we are somewhat complacent that inflation can hit us again. But I would also say, if you look at where the bond market was even a year and a half ago, and we were experiencing very elevated inflation, we had a very, you know, we had a very, you know, we had a very inverted yield curve. The short rates were higher than the long rates. What we are seeing now is the normalizing of the yield curve. But I also believe we’re going to have a much more steeper yield curve. And that’s a function of forward inflation expectations. And so one of my fears is, because of this complacency, and I have not even said the most ugly word that’s facing economies, that’s called the deficits and the debt of so many countries. When you think about the amount of capital that we’re going to need to be financing all these amazing transformations, we have growing deficits worldwide. The cost of financing those deficits are going to go up. I think the yield curve is showing you that. And so I’ve said repeatedly here in Davos, I can see a scenario. I’m not calling for it. But I can see a scenario where we have a 5.5% 10-year. And really quickly, do you think the Fed’s done cutting rates this year? No, they still have room to cut. That will create a more steepening of the yield curve. So I think the next few months of data and information will identify it. I would say to you the economy is very strong. It was very strong in the fourth quarter. And the evidence that we are hearing from different corporations, that business is strong already in the first quarter. And so we have, and you see that in the labor statistics now. So they may pause for another period of time. And they may ease a little bit. I’m not worried about the short-term moves. But over the next year, if all this materializes, could they revert and go back up? Possibly. Rate hikes. A rate hike. I’m not calling for that. But all I’m saying is I see probabilities of that. That’s not my core prognostication. I’m trying to get a headline here, Larry. Yeah, I’m trying to avoid one. Very good. Just on the inflation story, not everybody is feeling inflation right now globally. I think we should mention in the global context that China has been seeing deflation,

Sara Eisen: Mr. President. And I do wonder how you assess the Chinese economy right now and the outlook and the spillover effects globally. Well, I think the Chinese will avoid an extreme downturn. They know what to do. They’re measuring the pace of the measures they’re taking to strengthen consumer spending, to get past the property market overhang.

Tharman Shanmugaratnam: They have an extremely complex task of achieving all this in an economy that’s not a fully market-based economy. But I think they’ll get there. Growth might be somewhat slower than hoped. But I don’t see a situation that leads us to a deflationary spiral. But more broadly, central banks and fiscal authorities have made mistakes in the last 15 years that set us on a somewhat higher plane of inflation for the medium term than we otherwise would be. But the fundamental advantage we’ve had is that we’ve been able to reduce the inflation. But the fundamental advantage we’ve had for several years now has been two things. The entry of China and some other parts of the developing world into the global labour market and global trading system, and countries’ willingness to be able to absorb their products. It’s been a tremendous deflationary force, counter-inflationary force. But we’re now past that. And we also have now an unprecedented situation of ageing in the entire developed world, the West, Japan, increasingly China. The US is seeing stagnation in its population, even if it’s not coming down. But you’ve got Africa that’s coming up. You’ve got India that’s still growing rapidly, still a rapidly growing population. So if you just think about that fundamental advantage we had for consumers all over the world in having an international trading system that allowed for emerging countries with growing populations and growing workforces and lower wages to be part of a global economy, how do we now replicate it in the next phase, when we have the added disadvantage of ageing in the Western world and severe labour shortages that already exist? In Europe, for instance, there’s already a very severe labour shortage, south to north. What do we do about Africa? What do we do about South Asia and some other parts of the developing world? How do we have, if you like, a global industrial policy so that we can benefit globally from higher productivity but also a lower cost of goods for consumers around the world? I think that has to be an important challenge. I think when it comes to the inflationary outlook, a lot will depend on trade policy with the US

Sara Eisen: and tariffs, right? I mean, is anybody on this stage a fan of tariffs? No. No one thinks it’s a good idea. I wonder, Your Excellency, when it comes to the trade battle, the fact that President Trump has indicated he’s going to use tariffs to get fairer terms on trade or for national security reasons or for negotiations, how does a country like Saudi Arabia fit in when the US and China, for instance, have a deeper trade dispute or even a trade war? Do you find yourself in the middle?

Faisal Alibrahim: I think we want to be in the middle, right? I think the Kingdom’s position is to have a strong partnership with all of its partners and friends, and that’s something that is a value proposition of the Kingdom that we want to grow. But on tariffs, I think, depending on what objectives an economy has, it’s been used as a tool, so long as it is objective-driven and time-bound. You can – an economy has a right to build resilience or leverage or give space for the private sector to grow some competitive advantage or to invest in adding new competitive advantages so that a local industry can start. So, it’s really about the details of tariffs, what it would look like, assessing its impact, and then figuring out how to deal with it. The important thing is to keep dialogue on the table and keep the orderly, respectful discussion going and maintaining it, even if it’s been absent for a while or not where it should be, and continue working on it. The Kingdom values its partnership with all of its economies. Since Vision 2030, we’ve played an even larger role in more domains than oil and gas, diplomacy and foreign aid and assistance, because we understand better, through Vision 2030, what our economy needs and society needs for us to unlock its potential. Both with the U.S. and China? U.S. and China and others.

Sara Eisen: President Lagarde – President Trump yesterday said that the EU does not treat the U.S. fairly on trade and that he has some big complaints. Is that true? This is a true or false question. Is it true that the EU has not been fair with the U.S.?

Christine Lagarde: There is no way I can say yes or no, okay? What I believe is that he is looking very carefully at surplus versus deficit in the current account and in the trade balance in particular, focusing on that. And I think that you have to look very carefully under the hood, as Kristalina was saying, you have to look at the goods exchanges, you have to look at the services exchanges, you have to look at the capital account. It cannot just be black and white. What is true is that there has to be negotiations, there has to be trade relationships that are organized in a framework that is giving confidence to the partners. It cannot be about, you know, removing all the rules, ignoring the institutions. The world has, what, 190 plus countries that are members of the IMF, the World Bank, the WTO, 191. And it’s about all of us operating together, as Tharman said earlier on. So, yes, you sit at the table, yes, you negotiate, yes, some countries are in stronger positions than others, but we all need each other. If there is one thing that the Europeans have learned over the course of time, since the end of the Second World War, is that you cannot go alone. you have to work together, you have to respect each other and you have to understand each other. For that, you sit at the table and you work. And I would not say enough about the strength of institutions. Any literature that you have about stability, about economic equilibrium, always reminds us that institutions have a huge value and that frameworks are here for players to know the rules of the game. And whether you look at trade, whether you look at financial regulations, I know that Basel III is in play, but there are values in having frameworks. There are values in all banks around the world, learning and understanding and appreciating that having safeguards, having rules vis-a-vis each other actually matters. And the best can win, but within a set of rules. That’s how the world has to operate. A lot of agreement here in this room.

Sara Eisen: Managing Director Gorgieva, you don’t like tariffs. You’ve been warning against trade friction at the IMF. You are the institution that advocates multilateralism. So what do you do in this environment? What we do is we look at the evidence. And here is what we find.

Kristalina Georgieva: It actually confirms that Saudi Arabia has the right strategy. We have been seeing over the last years increase in protectionist measures, tariffs, as well as industrial policy measures. And we have seen countries gravitating towards politically aligned countries in their trade practices. And what the evidence shows is that trade among politically aligned countries is higher than trade across politically aligned countries. But guess which category of countries is performing the best? The countries that are friends with everybody. So there is, in my view, what we are going to see over time is a reflection in trade and economic relations of a geopolitically changing world. More regional cooperation, more cooperation based on supply chains, more engagement that allows countries to achieve their objectives. And in our institution, we look into how we can support regions. How can we work more closely with ASEAN? How can we work more closely with the Gulf Cooperation Council so we can provide the analytical and policy encouragement for that kind of practical cooperation? I mean, look, we were, many, many thousand years ago, just a handful of people on this planet. Today, we are eight billion. How did we get from there to here? Well, by collaborating and competing. And I think that there is no way we can wipe out collaboration from the future of humanity.

Sara Eisen: On that note, Mr. President, I thought there would be an applause for that. On that note, Mr. President, trade and industrial policy, as you just heard from the managing director, very linked. You have some strong opinions here on industrial policy, I know.

Tharman Shanmugaratnam: Well, I think whether it’s tariffs or subsidies or the other forms of the new industrial policies that are now in the vogue, the fact is they’re being driven largely by politics and geopolitics rather than by any powerful new understanding of economics, any new evidence, or any reappraisal of economics. And I think the jury is out as to whether this is going to succeed in lifting standards of living for ordinary people, for the middle class, and lifting economic performance for countries. It’s happening by way of drift and tit-for-tat action. And we’re in a very unstable situation now, quite frankly. So I think we have to take a step back. There is a case for industrial policy, and it starts from recognizing that innovation is the key driver for long-term growth. And innovation comes from capabilities. So the industrial policies that have succeeded in the past, and I think are still entirely relevant, are industrial policies that involve developing your own capabilities, R&D skills, developing cluster synergies amongst firms, developing your own capabilities rather than constraining someone else’s efforts to develop capabilities. It’s about developing your own capabilities rather than constraining another country or the rest of the world. Because the difference between the two is that the first spurs innovation, and it spurs innovation through competition. And the second stifles innovation, and it stifles long-term growth. The second point, which may seem old-fashioned, but it’s still entirely relevant, and all the evidence still supports the proposition that global interdependence and some specialization that each country engages in is good for everyone. You don’t have to be a purist. You don’t have to know what Ricardo said. But the fact is, we all do better when we specialize in what we are good at and develop skill in what we are good at. And it’s very hard to depart from that. The whole history of import-based, import-substituting industrialization, which we saw in Latin America, we saw in parts of the developing world, and which we are now seeing in parts of the advanced world, has not been a pretty history. In fact, in general, it has led to massive inefficiency, which means costs for ordinary taxpayers, and big losses, big losses. So develop our own capabilities. Do it in areas where we have some advantage, some accumulated skills, some potential to succeed, and develop scale, and complement each other in an interdependent world. There is a further very important case today for industrial policy, and that is, we need to find ways of scaling up action on climate, and the associated crises of biodiversity, and a global water cycle that’s out of sync, out of kilter. It requires the public sector. It requires state intervention to front-load investment, to be able to front-load even the demand for new innovations in green energy, and all the other technologies that are going to get us to net zero. If you leave it to the markets, it’s going to take too long, it’s going to be too incremental, and in the meantime, the turning points kick in in climate change, and we get into a much more dangerous world. From time to time, countries will feel they can put climate action on the back burner, but climate change is not on a back burner, for you or for anyone else. The more we put climate action on the back burner, the more we burn in future, the more the costs are going to be to address the situation, and the greater the inequality that we’re going to face. So we’ve got to press ahead with addressing climate change, and it does require industrial policies involving public investment, involving subsidies, involving taxation policies, so that we build scale early, and drive down the costs for ordinary consumers of new technologies. It’s a very important contemporary reason why we need industrial policy.

Sara Eisen: So Larry mentioned the D word, debt and deficits, and it’s a whole other subject for another panel that we don’t have time to get into, but I am curious, show of hands, since we’re talking about the global economy, in the near term, how many of you put sovereign debt levels, high sovereign debt levels, in your top five lists of risks for the global outlook? Everybody. What about geopolitical tensions? Top five? No, why not, Larry? I mean, obviously, it represents idiosyncratic risks,

Laurence D. Fink: so we always have to put that into your forecast. Look, if we’re gonna really grow the economy of the world, it’s not about focusing on really tariffs or all these issues, I agree with Tarmac related to this industrial policy. But all of this, whether it’s the deficits or transforming an economy, it’s going to have to be done by hope. The more the global population is hopeful about the future, there’s more consumption in that environment. I mean, we talk about China. One of the fundamental problems of China is it has the highest savings rates of any major economy in the world. 38% today, it was as high as 50%. This is why they have to be more dependent on exports. I mean, so for China, it needs to be developing more hope within its country, and I think they’re focusing on this right now. And if they can do that, they’re going to have more domestic consumption. You know, we talk about tariffs, and what do we do about it? You know, I could go back and look at Europe and say, if Europe can solve its own problems, not focusing on the problems that the U.S. may impose on it, but focusing on their own issues. And Christine talked about it. It is about opening up the capital markets union, the banking union, to make Europe really one single market. I mean, it’s a myth right now. Europe is a myth. Okay? It’s a beautiful myth, but it’s not working. It is not working to compete. President Lagarde is going to take back her invitation. It’s not working relative to the strength of the United States, the innovation of the United States, the entrepreneurialism of the United States, the ability to pivot. And then if you look at China, it’s entrepreneurialism, it’s development. Europe needs to be in the same footing. And here we are now in 2025. We’re now 16 years post a financial crisis, and I don’t see Europe moving forward enough. I see Europe still focusing on backward-looking too much. But I do believe all elements are there, and that’s why I started off. I’m more optimistic. To be optimistic, you have to admit your problems. Final minute. Yes, I know you must respond. I’m always being provocative.

Christine Lagarde: No, no, but fair enough. And that’s exactly the good point about now is that it’s provocative. Because I think Europe is not a myth. Europe is not a basket case. Europe is a fantastic case for transformation. And I’m going to quote a report that was issued by the IMF, Kristalina. And I agree with you on that, Larry. I agree. If Europe was a single market, as it claims to be, if it was, then it would remove the equivalent custom duties of 40% on its goods that are transacted within Europe, and 110% of custom tariffs on its services. So I agree with you that it is not operating and functioning as a single market. I’m not the author of the letter report. He pointed it out. And Mario Draghi is pointing out what needs to be done about it. The real question for the Europeans, as I have said, corporates and policymakers alike, is get on and do it. Yes. May I, Sarah? We have one minute left. So that means like a short answer, really short, like 10 seconds from everybody. We talked a lot about the risks, inflation, tariffs, industrial policy, deficits.

Sara Eisen: One opportunity for growth in 2025 that you’re thinking about, Mr. President.

Tharman Shanmugaratnam: I think the most neglected dimension of strategy nationally, in most parts of the world, is social policy. You need social policy on an industrial scale, much more than industrial policy in the narrow sense. And that means maximizing human potential in every segment of the population. It means finding ways of recreating social compacts so that people feel some sense of solidarity, even between different ethnic groups, different nationalities. And it means, very importantly, thereby building the basis for political consensus to keep economies open and interdependent. And those three things must go together. The economic strategy of openness, the social policy of not leaving things to a social market, but intervening to help everyone uplift themselves, and the politics that then allows you to carry on being open. If any one of those fails, each of them falls apart.

Sara Eisen: Managing Director. Remove the self-inflicted injuries.

Kristalina Georgieva: There is so much that is on the way of productivity and growth that comes from red tape, comes from misguided policies, comes from poor implementation of good policies, that has to be taken out. And I know you say one thing, but I have to say two. And make sure that artificial intelligence is not a privilege of few, but not accessible for the rest of the world.

Sara Eisen: President Lagarde.

Christine Lagarde: I would second what Kristalina just said. I think that we have not discussed very much artificial intelligence. It’s been much discussed at the World Economic Forum this week. And we are not exactly certain what the potential is. We think that it’s huge. We believe that it is going to have massive impact. And I think we should make sure that it’s used for good to improving the state of the world and the world for all of us. Yes, Larry. You know, we spend so much time focusing on all the problems.

Laurence D. Fink: And when we discuss problems, we solve problems. So I believe it is a great process discussing problems because we solve problems. But because we solve problems, there should be even greater hope. I mean, the world is better today than it has been 10 years ago and 20 years ago. We’ve lifted more people. There’s more opportunity. There’s more technology transformations. Some of it is very fearful. But I just look back and look back at the last 20 years, and I’m more hopeful today than I’ve ever been. And it is our responsibility to provide that hope to everybody and lift more people.

Faisal Alibrahim: Your Excellency. So the reason I didn’t raise my hand earlier is because I think today we have more clarity in what we need to discuss and resolve. And there is signs of more optimism relative to where we were last year. So I’d say optimism by choice. Optimism is not just a gut feeling or a reaction to an environment. It could be a strategic decision. And like any decision, you can invest and then put in the hard work to make that investment reap its returns. Number two is putting in the hard work. I think reform and transformation is not a nine-to-five job. It requires people working night and day. I was asked by your colleague, Steve, before one of the panels, I don’t know why he asked us, but he asked us what extreme sports we play. I blanked out, which is depressing. But then the first thing that came to mind was Saudi Vision 2030, not because of what we’re doing but because of the so many young Saudi men and women who are working 12-, 14-, 16-hour shifts every day to make this transformation count.

Sara Eisen: Thank you all. And we end where we started, with the optimism, and it’s why it’s been a really rich World Economic Forum Davos this year. Thank you all for participating. Thank you. And please stay seated. Please stay seated, everybody, because we have two more things before we close everything out. We have a very special, exciting, newsworthy announcement from His Excellency from the Kingdom. And then if you would stay seated, right after that we are going to hear from the World Economic Forum President. Please.

Faisal Alibrahim: I’d like to start by first thanking Professor Schwab, Borge, and the entire World Economic Forum community for putting on another hugely successful annual meeting. Last year in April, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the World Economic Forum hosted a very successful special meeting in Riyadh under the patronage of His Royal Highness Crown Prince and Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Prince Mohammed bin Salman. And now, building on the success of this meeting, Saudi Arabia and the World Economic Forum are happy to announce that we will host a regular World Economic Forum global meeting in the Kingdom. This is a testament to the global platform for dialogue, collaboration, and innovation that Saudi Arabia has become and that the World Economic Forum continues to be. This meeting represents a significant opportunity to further unite the world in capturing the immense potential that lies ahead. In this critical juncture for the global economy, we are not only inspired by the opportunities before us, but also deeply confident that our collective efforts will forge a brighter, more inclusive, and more prosperous future for all. We look forward to welcoming the global community again in Saudi Arabia in the spring of 2026. Thank you very much.

Sara Eisen: Thank you.

Agreement Points

Global economic outlook is generally positive

speakers

– Laurence D. Fink
– Kristalina Georgieva
– Faisal Alibrahim

arguments

Optimism about US economy, pessimism about Europe overblown

Projected global growth of 3.3%, with strong US performance but underwhelming European growth

Saudi Arabia transitioning from resource-dependent to productivity-based economy

summary

The speakers generally agree that the global economic outlook is positive, with strong performance in the US and potential for growth in other regions, including Saudi Arabia’s economic transition.

Importance of addressing climate change and energy transition

speakers

– Tharman Shanmugaratnam
– Faisal Alibrahim

arguments

Industrial policy needed to scale up climate action

Saudi Arabia serious about climate action and energy transition

summary

Both speakers emphasize the importance of addressing climate change and transitioning to sustainable energy sources, with Shanmugaratnam advocating for industrial policy to accelerate action and Alibrahim highlighting Saudi Arabia’s commitment to the issue.

Similar Viewpoints

Both Fink and Lagarde agree that Europe needs to implement significant reforms, particularly in banking and capital markets, to unlock its economic potential and improve competitiveness.

speakers

– Laurence D. Fink
– Christine Lagarde

arguments

Europe needs to address structural issues like banking and capital markets union

Europe has potential for transformation if it acts on needed reforms

Both Georgieva and Lagarde emphasize the importance of ensuring that the benefits of AI are widely accessible and used for the betterment of society as a whole.

speakers

– Kristalina Georgieva
– Christine Lagarde

arguments

Need to ensure AI benefits are widely accessible

AI has huge potential impact that needs to be harnessed for good

Unexpected Consensus

Optimism about Europe’s economic potential

speakers

– Laurence D. Fink
– Christine Lagarde

arguments

Optimism about US economy, pessimism about Europe overblown

Europe has potential for transformation if it acts on needed reforms

explanation

Despite Fink’s reputation for being pessimistic about Europe, both he and Lagarde express optimism about Europe’s economic potential, provided necessary reforms are implemented. This unexpected alignment suggests a shifting perspective on Europe’s economic future.

Overall Assessment

Summary

The speakers generally agree on a positive global economic outlook, the need for structural reforms in Europe, the importance of addressing climate change, and the potential impact of AI. There is also consensus on the need for industrial policies that focus on developing domestic capabilities rather than constraining others.

Consensus level

The level of consensus among the speakers is moderately high, particularly on broad economic issues and future challenges. This suggests a shared understanding of global economic trends and priorities among key economic leaders, which could potentially lead to more coordinated policy approaches in addressing global economic challenges.

Different Viewpoints

Economic outlook for Europe

speakers

– Laurence D. Fink
– Kristalina Georgieva

arguments

Optimism about US economy, pessimism about Europe overblown

Projected global growth of 3.3%, with strong US performance but underwhelming European growth

summary

Fink suggests there’s too much pessimism about Europe’s economy and it may be time to invest back into Europe, while Georgieva highlights underwhelming European growth compared to strong US performance.

Inflation outlook

speakers

– Laurence D. Fink
– Kristalina Georgieva

arguments

Bond market indicating inflation may be higher than expected

Inflation largely under control but risks remain

summary

Fink warns that the bond market is signaling potential higher inflation than anticipated, while Georgieva suggests that inflation is largely under control with some remaining risks.

Unexpected Differences

Optimism about global economic outlook

speakers

– Laurence D. Fink
– Tharman Shanmugaratnam

arguments

Optimism about US economy, pessimism about Europe overblown

Need to rebuild bases for optimism in today’s world

explanation

While Fink expresses optimism about the global economy, particularly the US, Shanmugaratnam unexpectedly emphasizes the need to rebuild optimism, suggesting a more cautious outlook. This difference is notable given their similar backgrounds in finance and economics.

Overall Assessment

summary

The main areas of disagreement revolve around the economic outlook for different regions, particularly Europe, the inflation outlook, and the approach to industrial policy and economic reforms.

difference_level

The level of disagreement among the speakers is moderate. While there are differing views on specific issues, there is a general consensus on the need for reforms and adaptation to global economic changes. These differences reflect the complexity of global economic challenges and the varying perspectives based on regional experiences and roles. The implications of these disagreements suggest that policymakers and business leaders may need to navigate a range of viewpoints when addressing global economic issues.

Partial Agreements

All speakers agree that Europe needs reforms, but they differ on the specific focus areas. Fink emphasizes banking and capital markets union, Lagarde highlights broader market integration, while Shanmugaratnam stresses developing domestic capabilities.

speakers

– Laurence D. Fink
– Christine Lagarde
– Tharman Shanmugaratnam

arguments

Europe needs to address structural issues like banking and capital markets union

Europe has potential for transformation if it acts on needed reforms

Industrial policy should focus on developing domestic capabilities, not constraining others

Similar Viewpoints

Both Fink and Lagarde agree that Europe needs to implement significant reforms, particularly in banking and capital markets, to unlock its economic potential and improve competitiveness.

speakers

– Laurence D. Fink
– Christine Lagarde

arguments

Europe needs to address structural issues like banking and capital markets union

Europe has potential for transformation if it acts on needed reforms

Both Georgieva and Lagarde emphasize the importance of ensuring that the benefits of AI are widely accessible and used for the betterment of society as a whole.

speakers

– Kristalina Georgieva
– Christine Lagarde

arguments

Need to ensure AI benefits are widely accessible

AI has huge potential impact that needs to be harnessed for good

Key Takeaways

The global economic outlook is mixed, with strong US performance but weaker growth in Europe and emerging markets

Inflation is largely under control but risks remain, particularly in the bond market

There is a need for industrial policies focused on developing domestic capabilities and addressing climate change

Technological transformation, especially AI, presents both opportunities and challenges for economic growth

Europe needs structural reforms to unlock its economic potential

Optimism and hope are important drivers for economic growth and problem-solving

Resolutions and Action Items

Saudi Arabia and the World Economic Forum will host a regular WEF global meeting in Saudi Arabia starting in spring 2026

Unresolved Issues

How to effectively implement industrial policies without stifling innovation or competition

Balancing the benefits of AI and technological advancement with potential labor market disruptions

Addressing high sovereign debt levels while maintaining economic growth

Resolving trade tensions and avoiding further fragmentation of the global economy

Implementing necessary structural reforms in Europe to improve competitiveness

Suggested Compromises

Balancing industrial policy to develop domestic capabilities while maintaining global interdependence and specialization

Implementing social policies alongside economic strategies to build political consensus for open economies

Finding a middle ground between the ideal of indivisible prosperity and avoiding a zero-sum world in international relations

I believe it’s probably time to be investing back into Europe, focusing on it. I see all the problems in Europe, but I do believe the pessimism is too large.

speaker

Laurence D. Fink

reason

This comment challenges the prevailing negative sentiment about Europe’s economic prospects and suggests a contrarian investment view.

impact

It shifted the conversation to focus on Europe’s potential and the need to look beyond current pessimism, leading to further discussion of Europe’s strengths and challenges.

The most important message I have for the audience is to ask the question, why? Why growth in the United States is so strong? Why growth in Europe is somewhat underwhelming? Why the emerging markets are not doing fantastically well? And the answer is primarily in the differences in productivity growth.

speaker

Kristalina Georgieva

reason

This comment introduces a critical analytical framework for understanding global economic disparities, focusing on productivity as a key driver.

impact

It deepened the level of analysis by prompting participants to consider underlying factors behind economic performance differences, leading to discussions on innovation, capital allocation, and policy approaches.

Our real task is, how do we rebuild the bases for optimism in today’s world? We’re not going back to the era when the Bretton Woods institutions were formed. We’re not going back to an era where Henry Morgenthau, the U.S. Treasury Secretary, said in Bretton Woods, prosperity is indivisible.

speaker

Tharman Shanmugaratnam

reason

This comment provides historical context and challenges participants to think about creating new foundations for global economic cooperation in a changed world.

impact

It shifted the discussion towards considering long-term, systemic approaches to global economic challenges, prompting reflection on the role of international institutions and cooperation.

I think the way we look at the world is in two lenses. One is data-driven, to explain to us why we’re here, how we got here, where exactly we are. But also another lens that is more future-focused. What is the potential we need to unlock seriously?

speaker

Faisal Alibrahim

reason

This comment introduces a balanced approach to economic analysis, combining retrospective data analysis with forward-looking potential assessment.

impact

It broadened the discussion to include both current realities and future possibilities, encouraging a more comprehensive view of economic challenges and opportunities.

There is no way I can say yes or no, okay? What I believe is that he is looking very carefully at surplus versus deficit in the current account and in the trade balance in particular, focusing on that. And I think that you have to look very carefully under the hood, as Kristalina was saying, you have to look at the goods exchanges, you have to look at the services exchanges, you have to look at the capital account. It cannot just be black and white.

speaker

Christine Lagarde

reason

This comment introduces nuance into the discussion of trade relationships, challenging simplistic views and emphasizing the complexity of international economic interactions.

impact

It deepened the level of analysis by encouraging a more detailed examination of trade relationships and their various components, moving beyond surface-level assessments.

Overall Assessment

These key comments shaped the discussion by introducing nuanced perspectives on global economic challenges, shifting focus from pessimism to potential opportunities, and emphasizing the importance of productivity, innovation, and international cooperation. They encouraged a more comprehensive and forward-looking approach to economic analysis, balancing data-driven insights with considerations of future potential. The comments also highlighted the complexity of international economic relationships and the need for adaptive strategies in a changing global landscape.

How can Europe develop deep capital markets and a unified market to improve its competitiveness?

speaker

Laurence D. Fink

explanation

This is crucial for Europe to overcome its economic challenges and compete globally

What measures can be taken to address the growing deficits worldwide and their impact on financing costs?

speaker

Laurence D. Fink

explanation

Understanding this is important for assessing future economic stability and growth

How can we replicate the deflationary benefits of emerging markets joining the global economy in the next phase of global development?

speaker

Tharman Shanmugaratnam

explanation

This is critical for managing global inflation and economic growth in the future

What strategies can be employed to address labor shortages in aging economies while integrating growing workforces from developing regions?

speaker

Tharman Shanmugaratnam

explanation

This is essential for balancing global labor markets and economic growth

How can we develop a global industrial policy that benefits productivity and lowers costs for consumers worldwide?

speaker

Tharman Shanmugaratnam

explanation

This is important for promoting global economic cooperation and growth

What are the most effective ways to implement social policies on an industrial scale to maximize human potential?

speaker

Tharman Shanmugaratnam

explanation

This is crucial for addressing inequality and promoting inclusive growth

How can we ensure artificial intelligence is accessible and beneficial for all countries, not just a privileged few?

speaker

Kristalina Georgieva

explanation

This is important for promoting equitable technological advancement and economic growth

What are the potential impacts and opportunities of artificial intelligence on the global economy?

speaker

Christine Lagarde

explanation

Understanding this is crucial for preparing for future economic transformations