Climate Policy Benefits Most Countries, But Its Biggest Winners Have Little Impact on the Global Economy

A team at the Potsdam Institute has evaluated, for 169 countries, what fighting climate warming gains or loses for each economy by 2100. Published on October 15, 2026, the study classifies states into five groups of interests. This segmentation sheds light on why the energy transition is advancing so unevenly in negotiations.

Four economic levers enable the PIK to compare the exposure of 169 countries to decarbonization

The article, titled « Quantifying assets for the geopolitics of climate change mitigation », appears in Nature Sustainability. It is co-authored by Guanna Pan, a researcher at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), together with several colleagues including director Ottmar Edenhofer. The aim is to measure how climate action alters the value of national assets depending on the level of ambition chosen.

To do this, the team combines four effects. First, the decline in demand for fossil fuels reduces revenues from oil, gas and coal. Next, avoided climate damages protect economies, while solar, wind and the capacity to store carbon, whether forest-based or managed, gain in value.

Nineteen oil-, gas- or coal-dependent states risk hindering the most ambitious measures

The first group brings together 19 countries whose revenues depend heavily on hydrocarbons and coal. According to the authors, these states would have an interest in opposing ambitious measures, since they would bear the bulk of the losses. However, their weight remains limited because they account for only about 6% of global economic output.

At the other end, three groups emerge as major winners. Thus, 51 countries in the Global South would suffer particularly heavy climate damages without a rapid transition. In addition, 13 countries with strong solar and wind potential, mainly African, as well as 17 countries with significant carbon sinks, would also benefit from accelerated action.

The 69 economies with moderate impacts, including China, the United States and the European Union, account for 81% of global GDP

These three favorable groups do not accumulate more than 13% of global output. Consequently, most of the economic weight is concentrated in a fifth group of 69 countries with moderate impacts. It includes notably China, the United States and EU members.

For these economies, the benefits of climate policy can reach substantial absolute amounts, especially thanks to avoided disasters. By contrast, when measured relative to the size of their economy, these gains are less dramatic than those for the major winners. Above all, the PIK notes that Washington, Brussels and Beijing are affected in a surprisingly similar manner.

The researchers advocate global agreements to rally the losing countries, with no political guarantee of success

In light of these divergent interests, the team recommends global agreements, called « package deals ». Concretely, the efforts demanded of reluctant countries would be paired with trade offsets, research collaborations or financial transfers compensating their losses. Such logic sits within the ongoing debates on climate finance.

However, these results rest on modeling scenarios projected to 2100, with the inherent uncertainties of such forecasts. Moreover, the map describes economic interests rather than the actual political choices of governments. According to Ottmar Edenhofer, climate action does not merely destroy assets; it creates new ones that support future prosperity.