Likelihood, two years3Possibleto end-2028
Likelihood, ten years4Likelyto end-2036
Systemic impact3Significantglobal
National impact5Catastrophictypical highly exposed nation
OnsetGradual (one season)
Duration (acute phase)1 year (two seasons)
Warning timeMonths
ScopeGlobal
Recovery horizonYears
Capability loadHard 0/3Soft 3/3Economic 2/3domains loaded High
ConcurrencyStandalonetriggers 3 · triggered by 5
Confidence · movementmediumnew

Rated at Standard Severe. Likelihood type: systemic. Source of scores: ginc-desk-v0.2.

03Narrative

Dateline: August 2028

The two breadbaskets fail in the same season: drought in one, floods at harvest in the other. Wheat and rice prices are up 80 per cent by the time the second crop report is published and the first exporter to ban shipments does so 'to protect domestic consumers'; four more follow within a month. Importing governments that hold 90 days of grain discover that the ships they had contracted have been resold. Bread prices rise 50 per cent in the cities that toppled governments over bread in 2011; subsidies that already cost 2 per cent of GDP double. Upstream, a government opens and closes the gates on a shared river to the schedule of its own farmers and tells its neighbour to take the matter to a treaty body it has suspended. Fertiliser is the second wave: the energy shock has closed ammonia plants and the next planting season starts short. Humanitarian appeals are funded at a third. The nations that come through are the ones with reserves of the right grains in the right places, functioning safety nets and farmers who could switch crops in a season.

The dateline is illustrative, not a forecast. The narrative is hypothetical; the historical anchors below are real events.

04Summary

Simultaneous crop failures in two major exporting regions, compounded by export bans, double staple prices for two seasons; or an upstream state restricts a shared river. v0.2 split this from the climate scenario because the Lloyd's food and water shock (US$5 trillion over five years) and Eurasia Group's 2026 'water weapon' show it as a distinct systemic risk, and because India's suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty in April 2025 made water a live instrument.

05Historical anchors

EventDateWhat happenedCalibrates
Black Sea grain disruption2022Wheat and sunflower exports from Ukraine blocked; prices spiked; the grain corridor restored partial flowsexport shock
India rice export banJuly 2023Non-basmati white rice exports banned; global rice prices at 15-year highsexport bans by major exporters
Russian wheat export ban2010Drought-driven ban; prices rose ahead of the 2011 unrestfood–politics channel
Indus Waters Treaty suspension23 April 2025India placed the treaty in abeyance after the Pahalgam attackwater weaponisation
Panama Canal drought2023–2024Transits restricted by low reservoir levelswater–trade channel
Cape Town 'Day Zero'2018City-scale water rationing narrowly avertedurban water failure
Lloyd's food and water shock scenarioOctober 2023Five-year global loss US$5 trillion; Greater China and Asia Pacific most exposed; the Caribbean losing 19 per cent of GDPsystemic impact

06Parameters

Shown at their preset values. Parameters are not adjustable in this release and nothing on this page is computed from them. Custom settings run (Phase B) but are labelled 'non-standard run' and excluded from comparisons.

Common sliders at Standard Severe · read-only

1. Severity
majorsevere (Standard Severe)extreme
2. Duration (acute phase)
30 days90 days1 year (Standard Severe)3 years5 years
Standard Severe: 1 year (two seasons)
3. Onset
suddenrapid (weeks)gradual (years) (Standard Severe)
Standard Severe: gradual (one season)
4. Warning time
nonedaysmonths (Standard Severe)
5. Scope
nationalregionalglobal (Standard Severe)
6. Origin
natural (Standard Severe)accidentaladversarial (great power / neighbour / non-state)
Standard Severe: natural with adversarial export bans or water weaponisation
7. External support
fullpartial (Standard Severe)none
8. Concurrency
standalone (Standard Severe)plus one named scenarioplus two
9. Policy response assumed
none (pure exposure)current plans executed (Standard Severe)best practice
Standard Severe: current plans
10. Recovery horizon
monthsyears (Standard Severe)structural

Scenario-specific parameters · read-only

ParameterDefaultRange or optionsNote
Breadbaskets failing21–3—
Export bans by major exportersyes——
Staple price multiple×1.8×1.3 to ×3—
Water weaponisationone basinoptions: none / multiple—
Durationtwo seasons1–4—
Fertiliser disruptionpartial—Coupled to S09

07Transmission channels

  1. Harvest failure and price spike.
  2. Export bans amplify scarcity for importers.
  3. Reserve inadequacy and resale of contracted cargoes.
  4. Subsidy cost and fiscal stress.
  5. Urban unrest and political consequences.
  6. Fertiliser shortfall carries the shock into the next season.
  7. Transboundary water disputes escalate.

08Capability loading

High: capability band shifts expected under current plans. Medium: band shifts under 'none' policy response only. Low: strain without band shift. Loads are judgement-based until the Atlas connects. Domains link to the Atlas.

DomainLoadChannel
Hard
Defence and securityMediumwater-dispute escalation; unrest
Strategic infrastructureMediumstorage, irrigation, water treatment, ports
Critical technologyLowagritech and forecasting
Soft
Government effectivenessHighreserves, safety nets, price policy, treaty diplomacy
Human capitalHighnutrition, child health, schooling
Influence and cohesionHighurban unrest, regional relations
Economic
Macro-financialMediumsubsidies, current account, inflation
Industry, trade and supplyHighimport logistics, agricultural output
Energy and resourcesHighwater, land, fertiliser

09Stakeholders

Government

Relevance 4/5
Exposure
Reserve policy by grain, safety-net triggers, water treaties
Actions
  • Hold physical reserves where the people are
  • Index transfers to prices
  • Diversify import origins
  • Pre-negotiate basin rules
Watch
  • FAO Food Price Index
  • Stocks-to-use ratios
  • Reservoir levels

Technology

Relevance 2/5
Exposure
Forecasting, irrigation, cold chain
Actions
  • Yield and water analytics for governments
Watch
  • Crop condition indices

Investors

Relevance 4/5
Exposure
Agribusiness, sovereigns of food importers, fertiliser
Actions
  • Scenario on ×1.8 staples
Watch
  • Export-ban announcements

Public

Relevance 5/5
Exposure
Prices and availability
Actions
Not specified in v0.2
Watch
  • Subsidy and ration announcements

10Regional exposure

RegionExposureRationale
North AmericaLowExporter
EuropeLowMedium for water stress in the south
ChinaMediumImports of soy, feed; water stress in the north
Indo-PacificMediumRice importers; Pacific islands
South AsiaHighIndus and Ganges–Brahmaputra basins; rice and wheat
Gulf and Middle EastHighImport dependence above 80 per cent for staples; Nile, Tigris–Euphrates
AfricaHighSahel, Horn, Nile; fertiliser
Latin America and CaribbeanMediumCaribbean import dependence; Central American dry corridor
Russia and EurasiaMediumCentral Asian water; exporter windfalls

11Early-warning indicators

IndicatorSourceThreshold
FAO Food Price Index——
Stocks-to-use ratiosUSDA, AMIS—
Export restriction trackerIFPRI—
FEWS NET and IPC phase classifications——
Reservoir levels and SPEI drought index——
Fertiliser prices——
Transboundary basin incident reports——
Food subsidy budgets——

12Compounds

Triggers
Triggered by
Amplifying trends
climate changewater stressexport concentration in a few breadbasketspopulation growth in import-dependent regions
Key trends

From the GINC 250: trends rated Very high or Critical for this scenario. All S11 trend scores.

13Rating rationale

RatingBand or levelWhy
Likelihood, two years3PossibleA two-breadbasket failure with bans is rarer than single-country shocks; 2022–2023 came close on rice and wheat.
Likelihood, ten years4LikelyUnder climate change.
Systemic impact3SignificantOn Lloyd's estimate.
National impact5CatastrophicFor import-dependent low-income states.
ConfidencemediumClimate attribution and policy responses are uncertain.

Source of scores: ginc-desk-v0.2. Confidence refers to the rating, not the scenario. Calibration sources are listed with the anchors above and on the methodology page.

14Open questions

Contested assumptions for the panel to resolve.

  • Whether water weaponisation should be its own scenario.
  • How to represent exporters that gain.
  • Whether to rate at the two-breadbasket or one-breadbasket level as Standard Severe.

15Commentary

No signed commentary in this build.

16Version and citation

Version
0.2.0 · active
Change log
0.2.0 · 2 October 2026 · Entered the Library at v0.2 with GINC desk scores.
Full change log
Cite asGINC (2027). Scenario S11 Food and water system shock, Scenario Library v0.2. scenarios.ginc.org/library/food-water-system-shockContent and data are published under CC BY 4.0.