2026 Supply Chain Threats: Trade Wars, Climate Chaos & Cyber Risk Boom

Everstream’s 2026 Risk Report sets out a hierarchy of four threats that are seen as most likely to severely disrupt global supply chains. They move from regulatory/trade policy risks at the top, through climate risks and infrastructure vulnerabilities, to cyber threats in logistics. Below we unpack each threat, contrast with earlier findings, and identify what those mean for strategic decision-making by corporations, governments, and investors.

1. Geopolitical Fragmentation & Trade Regulations (97%)

This threat is characterized by increasing tariff risk, export controls, and trade as a strategic tool. Everstream notes that export controls on critical minerals doubled between 2023 and 2025, with China controlling large shares of rare earth processing and semiconductor-grade silicon production. These regulatory tools are now being used to lock down strategic inputs.

2. Extreme Weather Intensification (93%)

Everstream reports sharp climate-driven disruptions in 2025: European losses of €43 billion due to summer weather, global average annual flood disaster losses around US$42 billion—a 27% increase since 2000. Agricultural output is volatile: 2025 wheat harvests were 18% below average, and cacao price increases of 300% signal major supply shocks for commodity-dependent products.

3. Critical Infrastructure Aging & Failure (81%)

Infrastructure is deeply underinvested. Estimates put required global investment at US$106 trillion through 2040, with US$36 trillion specifically for transport and logistics. Recent events—three cyclones in Sri Lanka in November, highway damage of US$615 million, major trade paralysis between Thailand and Malaysia—highlight existing fragility. Everstream forecasts at least one multibillion-dollar infrastructure failure in 2026.

4. Cyberattacks on Logistics (70%)

Attacks involving carriers, third-party logistics providers (3PLs), and maritime infrastructure rose 61% from 2024 to 2025 (213 vs. 132 incidents), and are up almost tenfold versus 2021. Threats from state actors include drone incursions and GPS jamming, particularly in strategic maritime corridors like the Baltic Sea (about 15% of global cargo passes through).

Comparisons with 2025 Risk Landscape

For context, Everstream’s 2025 report had top risks including climate/weather (90%), geopolitical/tariff risk (80%), and cybercrime (75%)—similar themes but with trade regulation weaponization appearing more acute in 2026. Risks emerging in 2025 around rare minerals and forced labor shift somewhat; forced labor risks appear less prominent in the 2026 top four, perhaps deprioritized given recent international legislative activity.

Broader External Corroboration: Critical Mineral Controls & Diversification

Multiple sources confirm the rise in export restrictions on strategic minerals. China has restricted exports of gallium, germanium, antimony, and other critical minerals in response to U.S. tech-related policies. Global bodies such as the IEA warn that these restrictions are expanding in both number and scope—including downstream processing and technology inputs—raising the specter of supply concentration risk.

Strategic Implications & Actionable Responses

• Supply chain resilience investments must go beyond forecasting extremes: build redundancy with non-China rare earth sources; advance domestic/refined processing capacity for critical minerals.
• Climate risk assessment must be embedded in procurement and sourcing strategies—especially for agricultural inputs—and infrastructure investments should prioritize climate-proofing.
• Cybersecurity protocols across logistics firms (3PLs, ports, carriers) must be upgraded—especially in satellite, GPS resilience, anti-drone, and hybrid warfare risk monitoring.
• Regulatory strategy becomes operational strategy: trade lawyers, policy teams, supply planners need to be proactive as trade regulations will likely be weaponized unexpectedly, not just passively felt.

Open Questions

• How homogenous are supply chain exposures across sectors? For example, electronics vs. automotive vs. food—each faces different critical mineral dependency and climate risk.
• What is the timeline for change? Some export restrictions have morphed fast—china’s pause on certain rules in late 2025 suggests regulatory volatility.
• How will infrastructure failure manifest geographically? Are certain transport routes or chokepoints likely to suffer most in 2026?
• What is the resource capacity of smaller firms (SMEs) to respond to these threats? Risk mitigation is easier for large MNCs; many smaller players may lag.