The Global Risk Report 2026 revealed that storms have become one of the most destructive natural hazards in the world, not only because of the strength of the wind, but as a result of climate change overlapping with social fragility and weak infrastructure and warning and protection systems, which makes the storm itself go through limited damage in one country and turn into a humanitarian and economic disaster in another.
And the report is issued annually by the Bündnis Entwicklung Hilft Alliance in cooperation with the Institute of International Law for Peace and Armed Conflict IFHV at the Ruhr University in the German city of Bochum, and in its 2026 edition, the storms chose a main theme under the title: "Why do storms turn into disasters?».
And earthquakes, floods and storms only become massive humanitarian crises when they hit communities with high levels of fragility, especially in low- and middle-income countries, where poverty, poor infrastructure and inadequate preparedness multiply the repercussions of extreme natural events.
108 storms and more than $107 billion annually
The report, based on the EM-DAT international disaster database, reveals an average of 108 storm-related events recorded annually between 2005 and 2024, causing more than 10,000 deaths annually, and economic losses averaging more than $107 billion each year.
And storms alone account for about 50% of economic losses caused by disasters globally, although their share of deaths is much lower, reflecting the extent of the destruction they can inflict on housing, infrastructure and economic sectors.
But absolute numbers do not always reveal the true scale of the disaster. The large financial losses that rich economies can absorb could be equivalent to years of economic output for a poor country or a small island.
The report cites Hurricane Katrina, which hit the United States in 2005 and caused $186.3 billion in losses but remained less than 1% of U.S. gross national income, while a similar storm could destroy the outcome of years of economic activity in a small or poor country.
Storms don't increase in number, but they get more intense
The report notes that the total number of tropical cyclones globally has not increased significantly, but scientific evidence shows that their intensity is increasing due to human-induced climate change.
And the warming of the sea surface provides more energy for tropical cyclones, which increases the speed of winds and the quantities of rain associated with them, while the share of stronger cyclones, especially those classified in the third, fourth and fifth categories, rises.
And one of the most dangerous phenomena monitored by the report is what is known as **“rapid intensification”**, when the speed of the storm winds increases by at least 55 kilometers per hour in just 24 hours.
And the danger of this phenomenon is that it reduces the time available to evacuate the population and prepare for the storm significantly, as the storm may jump within hours from one category to another higher, so that emergency plans developed to confront a limited storm turn into insufficient measures in the face of a severe hurricane.
Water is more deadly than wind
And while storms are associated in the minds of many with high winds, the report notes that storm surges and flooding are one of the biggest sources of risk to life.
Storms are often accompanied by heavy rains, flooding, landslides, and power, water, and communications outages, which can lead to a series of crises lasting days or weeks after the storm itself ends.
The report asserts that storm surges, not wind, were historically responsible for the majority of tropical cyclone-related deaths. In 1970, Bangladesh was devastated by cyclone Bhola, which killed at least 300,000 people, most of them from storm surge.
And sea level rise increases the threat, as previously safe coastal areas can become vulnerable to flooding, while coastal protection facilities designed to meet current sea levels lose part of their future effectiveness.
Poverty and Fragility Turn Risk into Disaster
The report puts societal fragility at the heart of explaining the huge difference in storm outcomes between countries.
"The equation is not just about the strength of the wind or the amount of rain, but also where people live, the solidity of the houses, the efficiency of the electricity, water and health networks, the existence of early warning systems, and the state's ability to carry out evacuations, provide aid, and then rebuild."
The risks are particularly high in fast-growing coastal cities, where large populations, ports, hospitals, power grids and economic facilities are concentrated in areas prone to hurricanes and floods.
Small island States also face a double risk, as they often do not have secure inland areas to which populations and resources can be relocated when a disaster strikes.
The report cites the example of Hurricane Maria, which hit Dominica in 2017, with damage amounting to 226% of the country's GDP.
Cuba and Haiti. The storm is one and the results are different
One of the most striking examples the report provides of a comparison between natural hazard and social fragility is what happened when Hurricane Matthew passed in 2016.
The hurricane hit Haiti and then Cuba in very close weather conditions, with winds of about 230 kilometers per hour, but the results were radically different.
In Haiti, more than 500 people have been killed and hundreds of thousands have lost their livelihoods, while Cuba has recorded no direct hurricane-related deaths.
The report links this difference to Cuba having a vast civil defense system, mandatory evacuation plans, early warning systems, and community disaster preparedness developed over the years.
Haiti suffered from weak infrastructure, limited institutional capacity, poverty and political instability, as well as the continuing repercussions of the 2010 earthquake.
Hence the report concludes that the storm alone does not determine the size of the disaster, but the tools that society has to confront it.
Philippines most at risk of storms
The report reveals a severe global disparity in storm exposure, with 123 of 193 countries almost unexposed to this type of hazard, while ten countries bear the bulk of global storm exposure.
The Philippines leads the storm risk index for 2026 with 69.27 points, followed by Mexico with 47.40 points, and Madagascar with 44.99 points.
In terms of storm exposure alone, the Philippines also comes out on top, followed by Japan, China, South Korea, Mexico, Mauritius, Madagascar, the United States, Micronesia and Australia.
And this concentration makes storms one of the most unequal natural hazards in their geographical distribution around the world.
The Philippines, India and Indonesia are at the forefront of global risks
And the report is not limited to storms, as it presents the Global Risk Index 2026, which measures disaster risk by combining the level of exposure to natural hazards with the degree of societal fragility.
And the Philippines came first in the world on the index with a score of 46.69 points, followed by India with 44.97, and Indonesia with 44.63.
The ranking of countries most at risk has remained relatively stable over the past 25 years, but countries driven by conflict and instability to high levels of fragility are increasingly emerging in the top ranks.
Early warning isn't enough if it doesn't reach everyone
The report attaches great importance to early warning systems, but stresses that the presence of technology alone is not enough to save lives.
The warning loses its value if it arrives late, is issued in a language that the population does not understand, or does not reach people who do not have phones or means of communication, the elderly and people with disabilities, or families who cannot afford to move to a safe place.
The report therefore calls for human-centered warning systems, which not only inform the population at wind speeds, but also take into account the ability of different groups to respond.
The report cites the experience of Bangladesh, where the development of an extensive network of cyclone shelters and community warning systems has dramatically reduced the number of victims; After Hurricane Paula killed at least 300,000 people in 1970, Cyclone Sidr in 2007 killed about 3,400 people despite its extreme strength.
Insurance gap between North and South
The report also reveals a significant gap in disaster recovery capacity.
In the global North, insurance companies cover about half of storm damage, while in the global South the proportion is less than 10%, and in some countries it drops to much lower levels.
And the lack of insurance means that after disasters, affected families are forced to use their savings, borrow or sell land, livestock and work tools, and may even have to remove children from school, which can turn a temporary disaster into a cycle of poverty that spans years or generations.
Migrant remittances: an informal rescue network
The report points to the role of a little-noticed in disaster management, which is the remittances of migrants to their families in their countries of origin.
After storms, remittances from expatriates rise and in many cases arrive faster and more directly than government or international assistance, and the volume of these remittances globally exceeds official emergency assistance.
But at the same time, the report warns against relying on them as an alternative to formal protection systems, as they only reach families with relatives abroad, which could widen the gap between them and families without external support networks.
Protection is the decisive factor
And the 2026 Global Risk Report concludes that reducing storm losses requires not only improving weather forecasts, but building an integrated system that includes early warning, evacuation plans, disaster-resistant infrastructure, social protection, insurance and disaster financing, as well as supporting local solidarity networks.
The central message of the report is that storms turn into disasters when protection is lacking, and that it is the most vulnerable who pay the biggest price.
Thus, the magnitude of the catastrophe is not a destiny determined by the power of nature alone; "The storm itself could pass through containable damage in a prepared society, while turning into a protracted humanitarian crisis in a society with weak infrastructure, institutions, and social protection."
Hence, the report places the responsibility of risk reduction at the heart of public policies, stressing that reducing fragility is possible, and that protection is not real protection unless it includes everyone without exception.
comments