{
  "edition": 2027,
  "name": "Scenarios 2027",
  "status": "development",
  "version": "2027.0-dev",
  "library_version": "0.5.0",
  "release_date": null,
  "release_note": "TBC January 2027",
  "release_venue": "Davos",
  "framing": "A stable, versioned library of severe but plausible shocks, specified on a common grammar, rated for likelihood and impact and mapped to the capabilities each one stresses.",
  "horizons": {
    "likelihood_2y": "to end-2028",
    "likelihood_10y": "to end-2036"
  },
  "scores_source": "model-panel-v0.5",
  "scores_note": "Scores are provisional. In this second pass they are the median of the ratings proposed by three AI models working first separately and then together. They exist so the site can be built and tested. The 2027 Edition replaces them with the results of the structured expert elicitation.",
  "panel": null,
  "previous_edition": null,
  "paper_url": null,
  "data_url": "/data/",
  "citation": "GINC (2027). Scenarios 2027: Scenario Library v0.5 Oxford: Global Institute for National Capability. scenarios.ginc.org/scenarios",
  "ranking": [
    {
      "rank": 1,
      "id": "S01",
      "movement": "new"
    },
    {
      "rank": 2,
      "id": "S02",
      "movement": "new"
    },
    {
      "rank": 3,
      "id": "S03",
      "movement": "new"
    },
    {
      "rank": 4,
      "id": "S06",
      "movement": "new"
    },
    {
      "rank": 5,
      "id": "S08",
      "movement": "new"
    },
    {
      "rank": 6,
      "id": "S04",
      "movement": "new"
    },
    {
      "rank": 7,
      "id": "S10",
      "movement": "new"
    },
    {
      "rank": 8,
      "id": "S05",
      "movement": "new"
    },
    {
      "rank": 9,
      "id": "S07",
      "movement": "new"
    },
    {
      "rank": 10,
      "id": "S09",
      "movement": "new"
    }
  ],
  "library_only": [
    {
      "id": "S11",
      "movement": "new"
    },
    {
      "id": "S12",
      "movement": "new"
    },
    {
      "id": "S13",
      "movement": "new"
    },
    {
      "id": "S14",
      "movement": "new"
    },
    {
      "id": "S15",
      "movement": "new"
    },
    {
      "id": "S16",
      "movement": "new"
    },
    {
      "id": "S17",
      "movement": "new"
    },
    {
      "id": "S18",
      "movement": "new"
    },
    {
      "id": "S19",
      "movement": "new"
    },
    {
      "id": "S20",
      "movement": "new"
    }
  ],
  "judgements": [
    {
      "ids": [
        "S01",
        "S02"
      ],
      "note": "S01 and S02 tie on priority, systemic impact, confidence and ten-year likelihood; they are placed in Library order."
    },
    {
      "ids": [
        "S02",
        "S03"
      ],
      "note": "S02 and S03 tie on priority, systemic impact, confidence and ten-year likelihood; they are placed in Library order."
    },
    {
      "ids": [
        "S05",
        "S07"
      ],
      "note": "S05 and S07 tie on priority, systemic impact, confidence and ten-year likelihood; they are placed in Library order."
    },
    {
      "ids": [
        "S11",
        "S12",
        "S13",
        "S14",
        "S15",
        "S16",
        "S17",
        "S18",
        "S19",
        "S20"
      ],
      "note": "The ten upside scenarios are rated on the same scales but not ranked: the ranked ten order downside risk, and a priority score would read a large gain as a large threat."
    },
    {
      "ids": [
        "S01",
        "S02",
        "S03",
        "S06",
        "S08",
        "S04",
        "S10",
        "S05",
        "S07",
        "S09"
      ],
      "note": "The second pass holds ten downside scenarios, so the ranked ten are the whole downside set. The ranking orders them; it no longer selects among them."
    }
  ],
  "ranking_basis": "Provisional ranking by priority score with the published tie-break rules: systemic impact, then confidence, then ten-year likelihood. This is the development default; the panel's results replace it before release.",
  "findings": [
    {
      "n": 1,
      "placeholder": true,
      "text": "No scenario reaches Tier I in the second pass. The panel rated two-year likelihood lower than the first-pass desk scores did, and six of the ten downside scenarios tie at a priority of 12."
    },
    {
      "n": 2,
      "placeholder": true,
      "text": "The scenarios that strike one nation at a time (hybrid coercion, legitimacy rupture and a disaster in the core) carry a national impact of 4 against a systemic impact of 1 or 2, and do not appear in global risk rankings."
    },
    {
      "n": 3,
      "placeholder": true,
      "text": "The one wholly new downside scenario, a break in cryptographic trust, is the least likely of the ten and the only one that leaves physical networks running while digital trust fails."
    }
  ]
}