The global economy has so far absorbed a major energy shock without falling into recession. But the latest forecasts suggest that resilience is masking a widening divide: economies linked to artificial-intelligence investment and favorable trade conditions are gaining momentum, while energy importers and lower-income countries face slower growth, higher inflation and less room to respond.
The International Monetary Fund’s October World Economic Outlook projects global growth of 3.1 percent in 2026, rising to 3.4 percent in 2027. The forecast is slightly stronger than the IMF’s previous estimate, but still below the 3.5 percent expansion recorded in 2025. Global inflation, meanwhile, is expected to reach 4.7 percent this year before easing to 4.1 percent in 2027.
Why growth has held up
Three forces have helped prevent the energy crisis from becoming a broader global downturn. Governments have used public support measures, companies have adjusted supply chains and many countries entered the shock with energy reserves. At the same time, investment connected to artificial intelligence has supported trade, technology demand and activity in several advanced economies.
A CaixaBank Research assessment describes the economy as resilient “for now,” citing stockpiles, policy support and AI-related investment. It also reports that the OECD has raised some 2026 growth forecasts while remaining more cautious about 2027.
That resilience does not mean the shock is harmless. Higher fuel costs feed into transport, electricity, food distribution and household budgets. The United States has seen upward pressure on inflation even as its labor market becomes more volatile, while European activity indicators remain stronger than some hard economic data, particularly in Germany.
An uneven recovery
The IMF’s central warning is distributional. Advanced economies are projected to grow 2.1 percent in 2026, while emerging and developing economies are expected to expand by 3.7 percent, down from 4.5 percent in 2025. Countries that import substantial amounts of oil and gas face a double burden: a larger import bill and weaker domestic demand as consumers and businesses absorb rising costs.
The Middle East and Central Asia, directly exposed to the regional conflict and energy disruption, are forecast to contract by 0.3 percent. By contrast, economies positioned inside the AI supply chain, including Taiwan and South Korea, are benefiting from strong demand for advanced computing infrastructure.
The pattern raises a broader question about what “global growth” means when gains are concentrated. The IMF says 32 countries account for 95 percent of projected global expansion, leaving many countries with limited influence over the forces determining their economic conditions.
The World Bank’s June outlook is more pessimistic, projecting 2.5 percent global growth in 2026 and warning that emerging markets face their weakest per-capita income growth since the pandemic. The difference between the two institutions reflects uncertainty over the duration of commodity disruptions, shipping recovery and the persistence of the energy shock.
The AI boom is both cushion and risk
AI investment is currently acting as a stabilizer, but the IMF also identifies it as a potential source of financial instability. Expectations about productivity and profits may prove too optimistic, particularly if investment is concentrated in a small number of companies and markets. A sharp correction could hit equity valuations, business spending and confidence at the same time.
Supporters of the boom argue that AI can raise productivity, create new demand and help offset aging populations and weak investment. Critics counter that the benefits are concentrated among firms with access to capital, data, chips and electricity. For countries outside those networks, AI may widen rather than close the productivity gap.
What comes next
The immediate test is whether energy prices remain elevated long enough to become embedded in wages and broader consumer prices. The IMF warns that rising sovereign bond yields, renewed trade tensions and an escalation of conflict could compound the pressure. Higher borrowing costs would be especially damaging for heavily indebted developing countries, where governments already face difficult choices between debt service, subsidies and public investment.
For richer economies, the policy challenge is to contain inflation without undermining investment. For poorer economies, it is to protect households without exhausting fiscal resources. International assistance, debt restructuring and targeted energy support could reduce the divergence, but geopolitical tensions make coordinated action harder.
The most likely near-term outcome is neither a global boom nor an immediate collapse, but a prolonged adjustment. Growth may remain positive while living standards diverge, inflation falls unevenly and financial markets reassess the value of AI. The headline numbers show endurance; the underlying trend points to a world economy becoming less evenly shared.