Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42638688›Full record

ReviewGlobal challenges (Hoboken, NJ)2026

No Place to Hide? Regional Resilience and Vulnerability to Global Catastrophic Risk.

Florian Ulrich Jehn, Maximilian Rössler, Luke Kemp, Michael Cassidy, Zachary Kallenborn, Juan Bartolomé García Martínez, Lara Mani, Matt Boyd

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Global challenges (Hoboken, NJ), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Florian Ulrich JehnCenter For Critical Computational Studies (C3S) Goethe University Frankfurt Frankfurt am Main Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7296-8008
Maximilian RösslerAlliance to Feed the Earth in Disasters (ALLFED) Lafayette Colorado USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6594-3462
Luke KempCentre For the Study of Existential Risk (CSER) University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7447-4335
Michael CassidySchool of Geography, Earth and Environmental Science University of Birmingham Birmingham UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0658-2641
Zachary KallenbornDepartment of Geography King's College London UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4642-1658
Juan Bartolomé García MartínezAlliance to Feed the Earth in Disasters (ALLFED) Lafayette Colorado USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8761-7470
Lara ManiCentre For the Study of Existential Risk (CSER) University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2967-7499
Matt BoydAdapt Research & Islands for the Future of Humanity (IFH) Reefton New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1387-5047

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

What places on Earth are most resilient to global catastrophic risk (GCR)? We provide the first study of what locations are more resilient against the impacts of nuclear war, near-Earth objects, large-magnitude volcanic eruptions, large-scale cyberattacks, high altitude electromagnetic pulse, geomagnetic storms and pandemics. This shows there is no place on Earth which is resilient against all kinds of GCR. Australia shows resilience across the widest range of GCR scenarios in the literature we reviewed, but even for it, continued international cooperation and trade are essential. Across the different risks, common resilience factors that show up most are geographic isolation (e.g. islands), self-sufficiency (especially in food production), high governance quality (more democratic and lower inequality) and decentralization to mitigate single point catastrophic failures (e.g. impacting trade or food supply). Many of these factors stand in tension with each other and trade-offs are required to balance between different GCR scenarios and between a higher resilience against the immediate impacts or against the longer-term consequences. The literature suggests that increased GCR resilience requires more investment in preparation (e.g., food security), planning (e.g., national risk assessments), and international agreements that facilitate cooperation on preparation and GCR response.

Indexed as

catastrophic failuredecentralizationdemocracyfood securitygeomagnetic stormnuclear warfarepandemicresilience factorssupervolcanovulnerability

Identifiers

PMID42638688
PMCPMC13500455

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.