The 2026 Global Safety Index: Navigating a Fractured World

What Are the Key Findings of the 2026 Global Safety Index?

Iceland is the safest country in the world in the Global Peace Index 2026, ranked most peaceful for the 19th consecutive year with a score of 1.161, followed by New Zealand, Switzerland, Slovenia and Ireland; Russia is the least peaceful of 163 countries (Institute for Economics & Peace, GPI 2026, checked 18 October 2026). Portugal ranks 7th, Spain 27th, Italy 35th, Greece 53rd and the United States 134th.

The Global Peace Index is an annual ranking of 163 independent states and territories by the Institute for Economics & Peace (IEP). It scores each country on 23 indicators across three domains, societal safety and security, ongoing domestic and international conflict, and militarisation; a lower score means a more peaceful country.

The 2026 Global Safety Index is Movingto's guide to country safety for people planning a move. Its rankings are taken unchanged from the Global Peace Index (GPI) 2026, and it adds context from the EIU Global Liveability Index, the World Economic Forum's Global Risks Report and UNDRR's Global Assessment Report.

This year's findings reveal a sobering reality: global peacefulness deteriorated for the 12th consecutive year in the GPI 2026, by 0.7%, with 99 countries deteriorating and 62 improving. The trend mirrors the stagnation seen in global liveability as instability and uncertainty reshape societies worldwide.

A growing divide has become evident. A small group of countries, mainly in Western and Central Europe, continue to hold top safety rankings. However, these nations are facing increasing pressures that test their long-standing stability.

Meanwhile, many other regions remain locked in cycles of conflict and insecurity. These challenges are driven by rising geopolitical tensions, increased militarization, ongoing internal conflicts, and escalating environmental risks.

For businesses, governments, and international organizations, the implications are serious. Safety is no longer just a social measure; it has become a vital strategic asset.

Countries and cities that succeed in protecting their people and infrastructure will be better equipped to attract talent, safeguard investments, and support long-term growth in an unpredictable global environment.

How Is the Global Safety Index Measured?

This report groups the evidence under four lenses. The country ranks and scores themselves are the GPI's; the lenses show which GPI domains and which other sources each part of the report draws on:

Crime Rate

This lens covers violent and property crime, drawing on the GPI's Societal Safety and Security domain (homicide rate, violent crime, perceptions of criminality and related indicators). Cybercrime and the robustness of digital infrastructure also matter for safety, although the GPI does not measure them directly.

The explicit inclusion of cybercrime within this pillar signifies a profound and necessary evolution in the conceptualization of "safety" for the 21st century. This goes beyond traditional physical security to acknowledge that digital vulnerabilities are now integral components of a nation's overall safety profile.

A major cyberattack, for instance, can cripple critical infrastructure, impacting public services, and potentially leading to social unrest, thereby affecting multiple safety dimensions.

Political Stability

This lens covers the likelihood of unconstitutional or violent changes of government, political violence and terrorism, and the rule of law, drawing on the GPI's political instability, political terror scale, terrorism impact and ongoing conflict indicators.

Health Safety

This lens covers the quality and accessibility of healthcare. The GPI does not score healthcare, so this report uses the healthcare category of the EIU Global Liveability Index.

Environmental Safety

This lens covers natural disasters, pollution and climate-related hazards. The GPI does not score environmental risk, so this report draws on UNDRR's Global Assessment Report and the WEF Global Risks Report. The inclusion of "climate-related hazards" broadens the scope of what constitutes a "safe" environment.

Climate-induced disasters can lead to displacement, resource scarcity, and conflict, directly undermining political and societal stability. Recognizing these interconnected, multi-domain threats is crucial for a truly comprehensive analysis of global safety.

The GPI is published once a year by the Institute for Economics & Peace; this page uses the 2026 edition, published in June 2026 (GPI methodology).

Methodological Approach: Synthesizing Data for a Comprehensive 2026 Outlook

Movingto does not compute a separate score. The country ranks and scores on this page are the GPI's, unchanged, as on our Safety Index by Country page, which lists all 163 countries.

The GPI is the primary data source. Its Societal Safety and Security and Ongoing Domestic and International Conflict domains map to the Crime Rate and Political Stability lenses of this report.

For environmental and technological risk, the report also draws on the World Economic Forum's Global Risks Report 2026 and UNDRR's Global Assessment Report (GAR) 2025, which provide context on systemic risks the GPI does not measure.

Which Countries Are Safest and Least Safe in 2026?

The Global Safety Index reveals a bifurcated world, with a clear distinction between nations that exemplify high standards of security and those grappling with profound instability. Countries are assigned specific ranks in the index, highlighting their relative positions in terms of safety and peace.

The extent of the disparity between the safest and least safe nations is significant, underscoring the wide gap in security and stability across the globe.

The World's Safest Countries: Characteristics and Trends

The top-ranked countries in the GPI represent the pinnacle of national security and societal well-being. Iceland is the most peaceful country in the world for the 19th consecutive year in the GPI 2026, and has ranked first in every edition since 2008.

IEP attributes its position to the absence of a standing military, very low crime rates and strong social cohesion; it leads the index by a significant margin (GPI 2026).

Western and Central European nations dominate this elite cohort, with seven of the ten most peaceful countries in the GPI 2026 (eight in 2025). Besides Iceland, the 2026 group includes:

• Switzerland (3rd)
• Slovenia (4th)
• Ireland (5th)
• Austria (6th)
• Portugal (7th)
• Finland (9th)

Asia-Pacific supplies the other three: New Zealand (2nd), Singapore (8th) and Japan (10th).

The safest countries are often recognized for:

• Low crime rates
• Effective justice systems
• Strong social welfare, contributing to their reputation for peace and security

Common characteristics among these top-tier nations include:

• Medium-sized populations
• Strong democratic institutions
• High levels of social cohesion
• Robust welfare systems

Each safe country is characterized by low crime and high stability. They are generally free from significant internal or external conflicts, and for some, geographic isolation (for example, Iceland and New Zealand) contributes to their security profile.

Safe countries tend to share strong governance, effective law enforcement, and comprehensive social welfare systems, which underpin their high levels of safety.

However, a deeper examination reveals that even the high standing of these nations is increasingly precarious and not immune to broader global pressures. The demotion of Vienna from the top liveability spot, as detailed in the Liveability Index, due to isolated security incidents despite its otherwise perfect public services, underscores a critical fragility.

This observation is reinforced by the GPI’s finding that Western and Central Europe, despite its dominance, experienced an overall deterioration in peacefulness due to increased defense spending and growing social tensions.

This suggests that maintaining high safety levels in the current global climate demands continuous vigilance and proactive adaptation to evolving internal and external threats.

It cannot rely solely on historical stability, as the perception of safety and actual security events can swiftly impact a nation’s standing, making resilience a defining characteristic of sustained security. In these nations, personal security is a fundamental aspect of societal well-being, supported by trust in law enforcement and low crime rates.

The tables further down list the ten most and least peaceful countries in the 2026 and 2025 editions.

The Least Safe Countries: Conflict, Instability, and Humanitarian Crises

At the bottom of the GPI 2026, Russia is the least peaceful country for the second year running (it first ranked last in the 2025 edition), followed by:

• Sudan (162nd)
• Democratic Republic of the Congo (161st)
• Ukraine (160th)
• Israel (159th)

Afghanistan ranked 158th in the 2025 edition and 157th in 2026.

In the 2026 edition the largest deterioration was in Nepal, after the Gen Z protests of September 2025, followed by Chad, the Republic of the Congo, Pakistan and Tanzania, while Poland improved most, rising 23 places to 22nd. Syria remains near the bottom (155th), reflecting the deep damage of years of civil war and its unresolved transition.

These nations are typically scarred by:

• Prolonged internal and international conflicts
• Weak governance
• Widespread violence

They are often epicentres of severe humanitarian crises: about 117 million people were forcibly displaced worldwide as of 2025 (GPI 2026), against over 122 million in the 2025 edition.

In many of these countries, millions have fled their homes as refugees or internally displaced persons; the 2025 edition counted 17 countries where more than 5% of the population were displaced.

The phenomenon of "forever wars" is particularly evident in these regions, with the GPI 2025 noting that in the 2010s:

• Only 9% of conflicts ended in a decisive military victory (49% in the 1970s)
• A mere 4% ended with a peace agreement (23% in the 1970s)

This implies protracted instability and immense human suffering.

The persistent nature of conflicts and the alarmingly low rates of resolution in these least peaceful nations signify that safety improvements are not short-term prospects but deeply entrenched, generational challenges, impacting the world's population on a scale that exacerbates global inequality.

This creates a rapidly widening “safety chasm” between the most and least secure parts of the world, profoundly exacerbating global inequality in quality of life, access to basic services, and fundamental human security.

The ongoing humanitarian crises, particularly the massive displacement figures, are a direct consequence of this protracted instability, creating ripple effects that impact global safety and resource allocation.

The data on conflict resolution is not merely a statistical observation; it describes a global reality where conflicts are not reaching decisive ends, leading to prolonged instability, persistent humanitarian crises, and a growing, almost insurmountable, gap in safety levels globally.

How Do the Top 10 and Bottom 10 Countries Compare?

To provide a clear overview of the global safety landscape, the following tables present the 10 most peaceful and 10 least peaceful countries in the 2026 and 2025 editions of the Global Peace Index.

The first table highlights the world's safest countries, which consistently rank among the top ten safest countries due to their high levels of wealth, strong social welfare, effective criminal justice systems, and good government-citizen relationships.

Top 10 Most Peaceful Countries in 2026

Top 10 Most Peaceful Countries in 2025

10 Least Peaceful Countries in 2026

10 Least Peaceful Countries in 2025

What Do the Four Safety Pillars Reveal?

A granular analysis of the individual pillars of the Global Safety Index reveals the complex dynamics shaping the world’s security landscape in 2026.

Understanding these pillars is essential to develop peaceful societies, as each factor contributes to reducing violence and conflict across all three domains: social, political, and environmental safety.

The ultimate goal of these measures is to build peaceful societies that are stable, productive, and resilient.

1⃣ Crime Rate: Trends in Societal Safety and Security

The Crime Rate pillar encompasses violent crimes, property crimes, and cybercrimes, alongside an assessment of the strength of a nation’s digital infrastructure.

In addition to these measures, the Numbeo Safety Index is often used as a comparative tool to gauge the perceived safety of cities and countries based on resident surveys, providing an additional layer of insight alongside traditional crime statistics.

While some indicators within the GPI's Societal Safety and Security domain, such as violent demonstrations, terrorism impact and the homicide rate, improved in the 2025 edition, a broader and more concerning trend persists:

• Violent demonstrations have alarmingly deteriorated for 12 of the past 17 years, indicating a persistent underlying issue of social unrest.

The challenge of high average homicide rates remains particularly acute in the Central and North America region, despite some recorded reductions in the number of homicides in several countries.

This connects to the EIU Liveability Index, where US cities post chronically low stability scores. EIU has attributed them to a "greater incidence of social unrest… often rooted in the country's racial inequalities, as well as weak gun-control laws that mean crime is often violent and fatal" (as quoted by Newsweek, June 2025). In the GPI 2026 the United States fell to 134th, with political violence at its highest level since the 1970s.

In contrast, some countries with high safety profiles have police forces that do not carry firearms, which is seen as contributing to their overall societal safety.

The evolving definition of “Crime Rate” to include digital security alongside traditional violent and property crimes, coupled with the complex interplay between social unrest and gun violence, indicates that “societal safety” is increasingly multifaceted and deeply intertwined with underlying socio-economic and political factors.

The inclusion of cybercrime acknowledges a new frontier of threat, where a major cyberattack can cripple critical infrastructure, impacting public services and leading to social unrest.

This suggests that effective strategies for improving crime rates must extend beyond conventional law enforcement to:

• Address systemic inequalities
• Implement robust digital defense mechanisms
• Tackle the root causes of social dissatisfaction and violence

The persistence of high homicide rates in some regions, despite overall improvements in other safety indicators, points to deep-seated structural issues that defy easy, superficial solutions. Crime, in this expanded view, is not merely a law enforcement issue but a symptom of deeper societal problems.

2⃣ Political Stability: Geopolitical Fragmentation and Conflict Dynamics

The Political Stability pillar focuses on the likelihood of governmental changes by unconstitutional means, the presence of political violence or terrorism, and the overall strength of the rule of law.

The GPI’s central and most concerning finding is that global peacefulness continues its multi-year decline, a trend overwhelmingly driven by deteriorating political stability and escalating conflict dynamics worldwide.

The legacy of the Cold War continues to influence current defense policies and levels of militarization, shaping the security landscape and contributing to ongoing tensions.

Several key drivers contribute to this decline:

• Geopolitical Fragmentation: This has substantially increased, particularly evidenced by the significant deterioration in “relations between neighboring states” since 2008, a trend observed in 59 countries (GPI 2025).
• Increased Militarization: A growing number of countries are increasing their defense spending and overall militarization, a direct response to rising geopolitical tensions, notably in Europe due to the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Military expenditure has become a key factor in this trend, with many nations allocating a higher percentage of their GDP to defense.
• Internationalization of Conflicts: Conflicts are becoming increasingly internationalized, with 103 countries involved in some form of external conflict over the past five years in the GPI 2026, up from 98 in the 2025 edition and 59 in 2008.
• Precursors to Major Conflicts: There are now more active state-based conflicts than at any point since the end of the Second World War; the 2025 edition counted 59.
• Conflict-related deaths: just over 181,000 people were killed in violent conflict in 2025, the second highest total since the index began, with 20 countries recording more than 1,000 internal conflict deaths (GPI 2026). The 2025 edition counted over 152,000 deaths, with Ukraine, Palestine and Russia accounting for over 63%.
• Military spending: world military expenditure rose for the 10th consecutive year, to US$2.9 trillion in 2025 (GPI 2026).

Trends in military spending, both in absolute terms and as a percentage of GDP, have a significant impact on peace indices, as increased defense budgets often correlate with lower levels of peacefulness and higher militarization scores.

This pervasive decline in political stability directly aligns with the Liveability Index's finding that Stability was the only category to decline globally in 2025, attributed to geopolitical tensions, terrorism threats and civil unrest; it fell again in 2026. Specific examples include the profound impact of:

• The Russia-Ukraine conflict on Eastern Europe
• The perilously high tensions in Kashmir between India and Pakistan
• The ripple effects of the Israeli-Gaza conflict contributing to lower stability scores for cities like Tehran

The escalating internationalization of conflicts and the pervasive trend towards “forever wars” with low resolution rates indicate a fundamental and concerning shift in the nature of global conflict. If conflicts are not resolved and spread across borders, their impacts become systemic.

This implies that political instability is no longer a contained national issue but generates widespread, cascading ripple effects that impact global supply chains, drive mass refugee flows, and even influence the stability of distant, historically peaceful nations through increased defense spending and heightened social tensions (e.g., anti-immigrant sentiment fueling unrest in the United Kingdom).

This profound interconnectedness transforms global safety into a shared, complex challenge that necessitates unprecedented levels of international cooperation and integrated policy responses, moving beyond traditional state-centric security paradigms. This complex causal chain underscores that national safety is inextricably linked to global peace.

3⃣ Health Safety: Global Health Infrastructure and Resilience

The Health Safety pillar evaluates the quality and accessibility of healthcare services, the prevalence of infectious diseases, and the overall health infrastructure of a country.

The EIU Liveability Index recorded a marginal global improvement in Healthcare in 2025 (and a 0.7-point average rise in 2026); however, the 2025 aggregate conceals two starkly different narratives.

One narrative highlights a clear trend of rapid improvement in the Middle East. Cities in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have driven the upswing in the global average, largely due to:

• Massive government investments in expanding public healthcare systems
• Attracting private investment into state-of-the-art hospitals

This is a core component of national economic diversification strategies, such as Saudi Arabia's Vision 2030, and is directly reflected in the significant rank improvement of cities like Al Khobar.

The contrasting narrative details the degradation of once-unimpeachable healthcare systems in some highly developed Western nations. All four Canadian cities surveyed, Calgary, Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal, saw their healthcare scores decline in 2025. This is attributed to:

• Sustained pressure on the country's decentralized national health service
• Unresolved funding debates

The stark divergence in health safety trends — rapid, strategic improvements in the Middle East versus a noticeable decline in some developed Western nations — suggests a potential global rebalancing of healthcare capacity and quality.

This implies that traditional assumptions about healthcare excellence being solely tied to historically developed economies are being challenged.

For global businesses and talent, this creates both:

• New opportunities in emerging centers of medical excellence
• Unforeseen risks in established regions where public health systems are showing signs of fraying

This shift necessitates a re-evaluation of health safety as a dynamic and regionally variable factor in global mobility and investment decisions.

The two opposing trends are not just factual observations; they suggest a fundamental shift in the global landscape of healthcare quality and accessibility, making "Health Safety" a highly dynamic and regionally differentiated pillar.

4⃣ Environmental Safety: Natural Hazards and Climate-Related Risks

The Environmental Safety pillar takes into account risks such as natural disasters, levels of air and water pollution, and the potential impact of climate-related hazards on safety and well-being. Insights from UNDRR's Global Assessment Report (GAR) 2025 underscore the escalating significance of this pillar.

The economic burden of disasters is growing substantially.

• Direct costs averaged $70–80 billion annually between 1970 and 2000.
• These rose to $180–200 billion per year between 2001 and 2020, with the real cost far higher once indirect impacts are counted (GAR 2025, as reported at its May 2025 launch).

The economic impact of disasters on national and global economies is immense, often amounting to several percentage points of GDP and affecting millions of livelihoods.

The report treats disaster risk as a systemic threat to financial stability rather than an isolated issue. Investing in resilience not only saves lives but also preserves economic growth and stability.

The concept of “fiscal gaps” is particularly concerning, where a disaster is so costly that a country may be unable to meet its debt obligations, putting it at higher risk of default.

• For 61 vulnerable countries, a disaster big enough to trigger a fiscal crisis may occur more than once every ten years, an annual probability above 10%, according to IIASA analysis prepared for the report (as reported).

The GAR calls for smarter investment in disaster risk reduction (DRR), with resilience:

• Integrated into project design and development rather than being an afterthought.
• Used to break the cycle of disasters, debt, uninsurability and humanitarian need.

Some countries and regions have demonstrated the largest improvements in disaster resilience by prioritizing proactive risk management and integrating climate adaptation strategies.

Environmental safety has transcended its traditional scope of localized natural events to become a critical systemic risk with profound economic, social, and political implications. The concept of “fiscal gaps” powerfully demonstrates how environmental hazards can directly undermine a nation’s financial stability, potentially leading to:

• Broader societal breakdown
• Increased internal displacement and migration
• Heightened political instability

If a country’s economy collapses due to disaster costs, it cannot provide public services (impacting health safety), maintain law and order (impacting crime rate), or prevent social unrest (impacting political stability). This creates a complex cascading effect on other safety pillars.

This elevates environmental safety to a core component of national and global security, demanding proactive, integrated policy responses that view climate resilience as an investment in overall safety and stability.

A World in Flux: Regional Analysis of Safety Trends

The 2026 Global Safety Index reveals a world undergoing significant shifts, with regional variations in safety trends reflecting diverse challenges and strategic responses.

Within each region, many countries experience different safety trends, highlighting the importance of examining multiple countries to understand the full scope of regional stability.

1. Western & Central Europe: Enduring Peacefulness Under Increasing Strain

Western and Central Europe continues to hold its status as the world's most peaceful region, with eight of the ten most peaceful countries in the 2025 edition and seven in 2026.

However, this dominant position is showing signs of stress. The region's peacefulness deteriorated by 0.57% in the 2025 edition, driven by the Militarisation domain.

Over the last decade, Western and Central Europe has seen shifts in peace and stability, with recent years marking a reversal of the positive trends observed earlier in the decade. This decline is primarily attributed to:

• Increased defense spending in response to the Russia-Ukraine conflict
• Growing internal social tensions

Austria ranked fourth in the 2025 edition and sixth in 2026.

The paradox of Western Europe maintaining its position as the most peaceful region while simultaneously experiencing a notable deterioration underscores that even highly developed and historically stable regions are not immune to the “Great Fragmentation” impacting global safety.

Their safety is increasingly affected by a complex interplay of external geopolitical events (e.g., the Ukraine war leading to increased militarization) and internal social fissures (e.g., anti-immigrant sentiment, terrorism scares).

This challenges the long-held assumption of inherent stability in these regions, implying that their safety is a dynamic equilibrium requiring constant vigilance and adaptation to evolving threats, rather than a static state.

2. North America: Diverging Safety Challenges

In the 2025 edition the Central and North America region recorded a 0.7% deterioration in peacefulness. In the 2026 edition the United States fell to 134th, as its political instability indicator deteriorated by 38.5%, while Canada ranks 14th.

This aggregate figure, however, masks a significant divergence in safety challenges between Canada and the United States.

Canada's Crisis of Services: in the EIU Liveability Index 2025, all four Canadian cities lost healthcare points, reflecting sustained pressure on the country's public healthcare system:

• An unresolved debate over funding for the decentralised national health service (EIU 2025 summary report), which bears directly on "Health Safety"

The United States' Stability Deficit: In contrast, US cities continue to be held back by chronically poor performance in "Stability."

• EIU has attributed this to a "greater incidence of social unrest", often rooted in racial inequalities, and weak gun-control laws leading to violent and fatal crime (as quoted by Newsweek, June 2025).
• Some US cities rose in the 2025 rankings without any change in their scores (Miami and Portland moved up three places to joint 44th), so the gains reflected bigger falls elsewhere rather than progress within the US (EIU 2025 summary report).

North America presents a stark and instructive contrast in its safety challenges: Canada’s primary struggle lies in the strain on its public services, directly impacting "Health Safety," while the United States' core problem is a deep-seated deficit of social and political "Stability" due to internal divisions and gun violence.

This regional divergence underscores that "safety" is not a monolithic concept but is profoundly shaped by distinct national contexts, historical legacies, and policy choices.

This necessitates highly tailored and context-specific solutions, as a "one-size-fits-all" approach to improving safety across the region would be ineffective.

3. Asia-Pacific: A Dynamic Region of Extremes

The Asia-Pacific region is characterized by its sheer diversity, simultaneously hosting some of the world's most peaceful and safest cities alongside areas on the front line of significant geopolitical risk.

In the EIU Liveability Index 2025, Australian cities (Melbourne, Sydney, Adelaide), New Zealand's Auckland and Japan's Osaka were all in the top ten.

However, the region's overall peacefulness deteriorated by 0.21% in the GPI 2025, and in the EIU Liveability Index stability scores for cities in India and Taiwan were downgraded because of the heightened threat of military conflict.

Conversely, some cities are showing marked improvement, such as Jakarta, Indonesia, which rose 10 places in the EIU Liveability Index 2025 thanks to an improved stability score.

The Asia-Pacific region powerfully exemplifies the "fractured world" theme, simultaneously showcasing pockets of exemplary safety and rapid deterioration driven by escalating geopolitical tensions.

This dynamic environment presents a complex risk-reward profile for businesses and policymakers: opportunities in stable, high-performing countries sit alongside considerable risks in places directly exposed to military threats and unresolved conflicts.

This necessitates highly granular and continuously updated risk assessment, moving beyond broad regional generalizations to precise, location-specific evaluations.

4. The Middle East & North Africa (MENA): Persistent Instability and Strategic Investments

The Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region continues to be the world's least peaceful region, consistently hosting four of the ten least peaceful countries globally.

Despite this pervasive instability, the region registered significant gains in the EIU Liveability Index 2025, driven almost entirely by healthcare and education in Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries.

Al Khobar, Saudi Arabia, was the biggest riser in that index, climbing 13 places. This rapid ascent is a direct result of the kingdom's Vision 2030 plan, which is pouring vast resources into:

• Diversifying the economy
• Fundamentally upgrading social infrastructure

However, despite these strategic investments and improvements in "soft" infrastructure, the region continues to grapple with persistent political instability and violence in many areas, exemplified by cities like Tripoli, Libya, and Syria.

The MENA region presents a compelling paradox: while it remains the least peaceful in terms of conflict and political stability, strategic state-led investments are rapidly improving healthcare and education.

This suggests that economic diversification and social development efforts, driven by national visions, can significantly improve specific aspects of safety and quality of life, even in a region marked by fundamental political and security challenges.

This creates a complex and nuanced risk-reward profile for international engagement, where opportunities in specific sectors or countries must be weighed against underlying, deeply entrenched political risks.

The apparent contradiction between low overall peacefulness and significant gains in social infrastructure highlights that safety is multi-dimensional.

5. South Asia: Deterioration Driven by Internal and Cross-Border Tensions

South Asia was the second least peaceful region in the 2025 edition and recorded the largest regional deterioration in both 2025 and 2026.

This significant decline is attributed primarily to:

• Repressive measures implemented in Bangladesh under the Hasina government
• Heightened civil unrest and escalating internal and cross-border tensions in Pakistan (2025); in 2026 the falls were driven by Nepal and Pakistan

Kashmir is specifically highlighted as an "escalation hotspot," where tensions between India and Pakistan remain perilously high.

The region's trajectory underscores the profound impact of internal governance issues and persistent geopolitical flashpoints on overall safety.

How safe are Portugal, Spain, Italy and Greece?

Portugal is the safest of the four southern European countries Movingto readers compare most often: 7th of 163 in the GPI 2026 with a score of 1.427, the same rank as in 2025. Spain ranks 27th, Italy 35th and Greece 53rd, and all four sit far ahead of the United States (134th).

Country scores are only a starting point. Our safety in Portugal guide covers crime and city-level risk, and Portugal for LGBT expats the legal protections; for Greece see how safe Greece is, and for Italy is Rome safe?. To weigh safety against cost, climate and healthcare, see the best countries to live in.

If safety puts Portugal on your shortlist, the Portugal Golden Visa guide covers the €500,000 investment-fund route and the Golden Visa cost guide the full budget; US citizens can start with our guide to choosing a Portugal residency advisor. With Movingto, the Portugal Golden Visa service is €6,000 flat whichever qualifying fund you choose, with AIMA fees extra; Movingto may receive commissions from some funds (how Movingto gets paid).

Movingto is a Portugal-first immigration firm that puts a named, Bar-registered lawyer from its in-house legal team on your case and publishes its fees.

Strategic Imperatives: Safety as a Corporate and National Asset

The findings of the 2026 Global Safety Index extend far beyond a mere assessment of national security, presenting critical strategic imperatives for businesses, governments, and international organizations.

1. The "Talent Magnet" Effect: Winning the War for Global Talent

In an economic landscape increasingly defined by remote work and cross-border collaboration, the competition for elite talent is fierce. In this environment, a city or nation's quality of life, particularly its safety profile, has transitioned from a "nice-to-have" perk to a decisive competitive advantage.

Highly skilled professionals, who now have more choice than ever about where they live and work, are increasingly prioritizing factors beyond salary. The core metrics of living standards — including:

• Public safety
• Reliable transportation
• Quality schooling for their children
• Accessible healthcare

— are now significant drivers of relocation decisions.

A city like Copenhagen, with its strong social protections, green policies, and safe environment, can act as a powerful "talent magnet," drawing in ambitious global workers who might otherwise choose a traditional economic hub.

For companies, understanding these preferences is key to building effective staffing strategies, informing decisions about where to establish targeted hiring projects or new remote offices to attract the best and brightest.

2. A New Lens for Risk Assessment and Site Selection

The 2026 index demonstrates that safety is now inextricably linked to corporate risk management.

The increasing volatility of the Stability category means the index now serves as a valuable early warning system for social and political instability that could directly impact:

• Business operations
• Supply chains
• Investments

A C-suite executive can utilize the index not just to determine the best location for an expatriate assignment but to gain a nuanced understanding of regional risk profiles.

• Declining stability scores in Western Europe due to social unrest, or downgrades in Asia due to military tensions, are critical data points for any company with a global footprint.
• Conversely, the improving scores in the MENA region, driven by strategic government investment, may signal new opportunities for expansion into markets that are becoming more stable and well-serviced.

The index provides a data-driven framework for making smarter, more resilient decisions about site selection for new offices, manufacturing facilities, and regional headquarters.

3. Navigating the Complexities of Global Mobility

A strategic dilemma for many multinational corporations is the growing disconnect between the world's most attractive cities and its largest economic centers.

A company may be headquartered in London but find that the software engineer it wants to hire would prefer to live in Melbourne. This gap creates significant logistical and administrative challenges.

International relocation is fraught with complexity, including:

• Navigating disparate work permit and visa regulations
• Convoluted international and local tax laws
• Drafting employment contracts that comply with multiple legal frameworks

These bureaucratic hurdles can lead to costly delays, compliance risks, and a frustrating experience for the employee.

This is where strategic solutions like an Employer of Record (EOR) become invaluable. An EOR is a third-party organization that acts as the legal employer for staff in a foreign country, managing all aspects of:

• Payroll
• Benefits
• Taxes
• Visa sponsorship, where the country allows it (requirements vary by jurisdiction)

This model allows a company to rapidly and compliantly hire talent in a high-safety city like Zurich without needing to establish a costly and time-consuming local legal entity.

The rise of EORs is the market's direct response to the strategic dilemma highlighted by safety indices, providing the agility needed to build a distributed global workforce that bridges the gap between talent preference and business necessity.

Furthermore, research indicates that peace acts as a reliable predictor of a country's future economic performance, with higher levels of peacefulness associated with:

• Higher levels of business and technological innovation
• Higher worker productivity
• More access to credit
• Increased foreign direct investment

This reinforces the business case for prioritizing safety in global strategies.

Concluding Analysis and Forward Outlook

The 2026 Global Safety Index shows a world growing steadily less peaceful: average peacefulness fell for the 12th consecutive year, even as some countries, led by Poland, improved.

Looking forward, Stability is expected to remain the most volatile and decisive factor shaping global safety. Its decline is driven by structural challenges such as:

• Geopolitical conflicts
• Social polarization
• Civil unrest
• Economic fragility

IEP finds more active state-based conflicts than at any point since the end of the Second World War, so these pressures are unlikely to ease soon.

Regional trajectories will likely continue:

• Western and Central Europe must defend their top rankings despite mounting internal tensions.
• North America faces critical tests of social contracts, with Canada’s healthcare strains and the US grappling with deep-rooted stability issues.
• The MENA region’s gains from economic diversification hinge on the long-term success of reforms.
• South Asia’s internal and cross-border tensions are expected to persist.

Long-term risks, like climate change, threaten to destabilize societies further, underscoring the cascading nature of environmental threats.

Ultimately, the ideal global city or nation of the 21st century will not only be prosperous and well-serviced but, above all, resilient. It must deliver a high quality of life while actively managing and absorbing the shocks of an increasingly unpredictable world.

Sources

• Global Peace Index 2026 — Vision of Humanity
• Institute for Economics & Peace, Global Peace Index 2026 report (PDF)
• Institute for Economics & Peace, Global Peace Index 2025 report (PDF)
• EIU, The Global Liveability Index 2025 summary report (PDF copy hosted by RTL)
• Global Risks Report 2026 — World Economic Forum
• Global Assessment Report (GAR) 2025 — UNDRR
• Numbeo Safety Index
• Movingto Safety Index by Country (GPI 2026 data)