Skip to main content

Political Risk Report 2022

Political risk at sea

Most focus on inland water, such as hydropower projects, which could ignite interstate conflicts over transnational river basins in Africa or contribute to sovereign debt distress.
Fishing vessels on a calm sea in good weather

Water-related projects planned or underway around the world exceed US$185 billion in value.[1] Most focus on inland water, such as hydropower projects, which could ignite interstate conflicts over transnational river basins in Africa or contribute to sovereign debt distress. Water may also be channelled to serve manufacturing facilities and mining operations, thus increasing social unrest and contract frustration risks as water scarcity is perhaps the most socially unifying threat across the planet. Oceans represent one of the most promising frontiers for meeting the growing demand for food, raw materials, and even space to expand.

The “blue acceleration” refers to the unprecedented surge in economic activity in the ocean, with its immense potential for exploration. Much of the activity occurs in exclusive economic zones (EEZs), areas of the sea that generally extend 200 nautical miles (230 miles) beyond a nation's territorial sea, within which a coastal nation has jurisdiction over both living and non-living resources. When an overlap occurs between contested EEZs it is up to each state to decide the actual maritime boundary, which generates further areas of tension. The exploration and mapping of these resources is the first step towards extracting economic value, and also serves to guide patrols in these areas to help create favourable environments for domestic companies and international trade (see Figure 1). By extending jurisdictions, EEZs have the potential to increase political tensions.

 [1] Source: Fitch Solutions, calculation by Marsh

[2] ASEAN members are: Brunei,  Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam.

Figure 1:

Extent of seabed mapping in countries’ exclusive economic zones varies considerably

The likely shift towards the diversification of supply chains resulting from the crisis in Ukraine — for example, towards Australia, India or Indonesia to substitute imports from Russia — could increase the focus on already congested sea areas, particularly in the Indo-Pacific region. Tense confrontation in the South China Sea adds to growing disturbances in coastal states’ domestic environments. This area has become a flashpoint for the region, as US$3.4 trillion of goods pass each year through Beijing’s “nine-dash line,” a boundary unrecognised internationally that China has drawn around 85% of these waters. There is growing frustration with the slow pace of talks between the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and China on a code of conduct for the South China Sea, as ASEAN countries fear losing EEZs and rights to map and explore, ultimately leading to an increase of revenues and geostrategic influence to the benefit of China.[2] Due to the pandemic, there were no in-person negotiations in 2020-21, although virtual meetings resumed last year. ASEAN membership has helped members reduce frictions and seek common ground, even though ASEAN coastal members reject the nine-dash line.

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) estimates that the largest sector of the ocean economy is the offshore oil and gas industry, which generates one-third of the value added by all economic activities in the ocean. About 70% of the major hydrocarbon deposits discovered between 2000 and 2010 are located under the sea, and, as fields in shallow waters (less than 400 metres) become depleted, production is moving to greater depths. While greenfield offshore exploration is concentrated in developing countries, a new study led by Duke University shows that multinational offshore companies that generate the most revenue from the ocean are generally headquartered in high-income countries. Offshore extraction is generally more expensive, but is also less affected by political tensions within individual countries. If the energy transition to a low carbon economy were to bring a reduction in offshore activities, the impact on host countries’ revenues and consequent political tensions would be significant.

The blue acceleration towards ocean resources is fuelling tensions and geopolitical ambitions.

  • Indonesia lost 25 islands as a result of exporting sand to Singapore, bringing about border demarcation talks. Singapore’s population has doubled in the last 30 years, so it is stockpiling sand as its building areas would otherwise be saturated. Singapore’s reclamations have increased landmass by 20%, inducing Indonesia, Malaysia (2018), and Cambodia (2017) to stop sand sales to selected countries. Procurement and marketing of sand has also unleashed criminal cartel activity — crime syndicates procuring Indian sand control several illegal mining sites, adding to security risks in the region.
  • France has accumulated the largest EEZ in the world. The EEZ from French overseas territories and departments is about 8% of the world’s total, while France represents less than 0.45% of the world’s land area. Even though EEZs are not considered to be part of the territory of a state, they grant special rights to resources, such as fishing and mineral extraction, in an area extending 200 nautical miles (370km) from a country’s coast. This incentivised France in 2018 to become the first European nation to articulate its own Indo-Pacific strategy, with a dedicated defence strategy completed in 2019. More than 7,000 French troops and several vessels are deployed permanently to the region.

Exclusive economic zones expand areas of intersection between countries, potentially heightening political tension

Source: Flanders Marine Institute (2019). Maritime Boundaries Geodatabase, version 11. Available online at

In the leading countries by EEZ extension, the risks of war and expropriation are relatively low, but the risks of terrorism, violence, and war itself have increased significantly on a relative basis (see Figure 2).

Marsh’s risk ratings are generated monthly by a proprietary, algorithm-based modelling system incorporating over 200 international indices across 197 countries. For each peril, countries are scored on a scale from 0.1 to 10.0, with intervals of one decimal; 0.1 represents the lowest risk score, 10.0 the highest. Five risk bands are identified within the scale, correspond to distinct risk environments.

Figure 2:

Political risk ratings for selected countries with large EEZs

Source: Marsh

Figure 3:

Number of transit voyages along the Northern Sea Route continues to increase


Political Risk Report 2022

Read the full report.

Related articles

"This publication is not intended to be taken as advice regarding any individual situation and should not be relied upon as such. The information contained herein is based on sources we believe reliable, but we make no representation or warranty as to its accuracy.  Marsh shall have no obligation to update this publication and shall have no liability to you or any other party arising out of this publication or any matter contained herein. Any modelling, analytics, or projections are subject to inherent uncertainty, and the analysis could be materially affected if any underlying assumptions, conditions, information, or factors are inaccurate or incomplete or should change."

LCPA: 22/136

Marsh Pty Ltd (ABN 86 004 651 512, AFSL 238983) (“Marsh”) arrange this insurance and is not the insurer. The Discretionary Trust Arrangement is issued by the Trustee, JLT Group Services Pty Ltd (ABN 26 004 485 214, AFSL 417964) (“JGS”). JGS is part of the Marsh group of companies. Any advice in relation to the Discretionary Trust Arrangement is provided by JLT Risk Solutions Pty Ltd (ABN 69 009 098 864, AFSL 226827) which is a related entity of Marsh. The cover provided by the Discretionary Trust Arrangement is subject to the Trustee’s discretion and/or the relevant policy terms, conditions and exclusions. This website contains general information, does not take into account your individual objectives, financial situation or needs and may not suit your personal circumstances. For full details of the terms, conditions and limitations of the covers and before making any decision about whether to acquire a product, refer to the specific policy wordings and/or Product Disclosure Statements available from JLT Risk Solutions on request. Full information can be found in the JLT Risk Solutions Financial Services Guide.”