IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i15p9743-d882846.html

Comprehensive Assessment of Geopolitical Risk in the Himalayan Region Based on the Grid Scale

Author

Listed:
  • Shihai Wu

    (College of Resources and Environment, Southwest University, Chongqing 400716, China)

  • Yili Zhang

    (Key Laboratory of Land Surface Pattern and Simulation, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
    CAS Center for Excellence in Tibetan Plateau Earth Sciences, Beijing 100101, China)

  • Jianzhong Yan

    (College of Resources and Environment, Southwest University, Chongqing 400716, China)

Abstract

The Himalayan region serves as a land bridge between China and South Asia but is vulnerable to geopolitical factors. It is important to conduct geopolitical risk assessments to facilitate the restoration and construction of traditional trade routes in the Himalayan region. Based on multisource natural, political, and socioeconomic data, we selected 12 indicators, including topographic relief, landslide risk, multi-hazard index, population density, territorial disputes, conflict risk, corruption perception index, transboundary water disputed risk, night light index, GDP, accessibility, and economic freedom, to assess these risks. A comprehensive assessment of the geopolitical risk in the Himalayan region is presented using the random forest (RF) model, analytic hierarchy process (AHP), entropy weight method, and AHP-entropy weight method. The results indicated that the geopolitical risk in the Himalayan region is generally high in the north and low in the south, with high level of risk primarily concentrated in the Kashmir valley and south, south-central Nepal and southern Tibet, and low level of risk mainly concentrated in the Bhutan and Tibet border areas of China. The high likelihood of natural risk is largely concentrated in the Indian states of Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand, Nepal, southeastern Bhutan, and southern Tibet. Significant political risk is mostly confined to the Kashmir valley and its south, while economic risk is mostly concentrated in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa of Pakistan, Pakistani-administered regions of Kashmir, and Nepal. Geopolitical risk assessment based on the grid scale can better reveal and portray the spatial distribution of geopolitical risk in the Himalayan region and provide a basis for the restoration and construction of traditional trade routes in this region. According to the results of the geopolitical risk assessment, it is recommended that priority be given to construction in areas of relatively low risk, such as those close to Burang Country and Mustang, and that integrated planning be carried out for the restoration and construction of the predominantly low-risk trade routes between China and Bhutan, with further comprehensive analysis of each route conducted in conjunction with field surveys and proposed construction and control strategies.

Suggested Citation

  • Shihai Wu & Yili Zhang & Jianzhong Yan, 2022. "Comprehensive Assessment of Geopolitical Risk in the Himalayan Region Based on the Grid Scale," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-20, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:15:p:9743-:d:882846
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/15/9743/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/15/9743/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Caetano, José & Caleiro, António, 2009. "Economic Freedom and Foreign Direct Investment -- How different are the MENA countries from the EU?," EconStor Preprints 144148, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    2. Dario Caldara & Matteo Iacoviello, 2022. "Measuring Geopolitical Risk," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(4), pages 1194-1225, April.
    3. Mengmeng Hao & Jingying Fu & Dong Jiang & Fangyu Ding & Shuai Chen, 2020. "Simulating the Linkages Between Economy and Armed Conflict in India With a Long Short‐Term Memory Algorithm," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(6), pages 1139-1150, June.
    4. Stephen J Kobrin, 1979. "Political Risk: A Review and Reconsideration," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 10(1), pages 67-80, March.
    5. Feng, Yuhao & Wu, Shufan & Wu, Peixin & Su, Shiliang & Weng, Min & Bian, Meng, 2018. "Spatiotemporal characterization of megaregional poly-centrality: Evidence for new urban hypotheses and implications for polycentric policies," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 712-731.
    6. Xiaohui Sun & Jianbo Gao & Bin Liu & Zhenzhen Wang, 2021. "Big Data-Based Assessment of Political Risk along the Belt and Road," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-20, April.
    7. Chen, Stephen, 2017. "Profiting from FDI in conflict zones," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 52(6), pages 760-768.
    8. Vaidya, Omkarprasad S. & Kumar, Sushil, 2006. "Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(1), pages 1-29, February.
    9. Fatemeh Zahedi, 1986. "The Analytic Hierarchy Process---A Survey of the Method and its Applications," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 16(4), pages 96-108, August.
    10. Robert F. Engle & Susana Campos-Martins, 2020. "Measuring and Hedging Geopolitical Risk," NIPE Working Papers 08/2020, NIPE - Universidade do Minho.
    11. Cullen S. Hendrix, 2019. "Keeping Up with the Future: Upgrading Forecasts of Political Instability and Geopolitical Risk," Policy Briefs PB19-10, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
    12. D. J. Weiss & A. Nelson & H. S. Gibson & W. Temperley & S. Peedell & A. Lieber & M. Hancher & E. Poyart & S. Belchior & N. Fullman & B. Mappin & U. Dalrymple & J. Rozier & T. C. D. Lucas & R. E. Howes, 2018. "A global map of travel time to cities to assess inequalities in accessibility in 2015," Nature, Nature, vol. 553(7688), pages 333-336, January.
    13. Muñoz, Beatriz & García-Verdugo, Javier & San-Martín, Enrique, 2015. "Quantifying the geopolitical dimension of energy risks: A tool for energy modelling and planning," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 479-500.
    14. Busse, Matthias & Hefeker, Carsten, 2007. "Political risk, institutions and foreign direct investment," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 397-415, June.
    15. Asamoah, Michael Effah & Adjasi, Charles K.D. & Alhassan, Abdul Latif, 2016. "Macroeconomic uncertainty, foreign direct investment and institutional quality: Evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 612-621.
    16. Yuxin Zhu & Dazuo Tian & Feng Yan, 2020. "Effectiveness of Entropy Weight Method in Decision-Making," Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Hindawi, vol. 2020, pages 1-5, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Izhar Ahmad & Rashid Farooq & Muhammad Ashraf & Muhammad Waseem & Donghui Shangguan, 2025. "Improving flood hazard susceptibility assessment by integrating hydrodynamic modeling with remote sensing and ensemble machine learning," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 121(7), pages 7839-7868, April.
    2. Wei Hu & Yue Shan & Yun Deng & Ningning Fu & Jian Duan & Haining Jiang & Jianzhen Zhang, 2023. "Geopolitical Risk Evolution and Obstacle Factors of Countries along the Belt and Road and Its Types Classification," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-24, January.
    3. Dafni M. Nalmpant-Sarikaki & Alexandros I. Theocharis & Nikolaos C. Koukouzas & Ioannis E. Zevgolis, 2025. "A comparative analysis of semi-quantitative multi-hazard methodologies with an application to a post-mining area," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 121(10), pages 12327-12352, June.
    4. Lan Khanh Chu & Dung Phuong Hoang & Ha Thanh Le, 2025. "The interaction of public–private partnership investment in energy and geopolitical risk in influencing carbon dioxide emissions in E7 countries," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 27(7), pages 16417-16449, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dimitrova, Anna & Triki, Dora & Valentino, Alfredo, 2022. "The effects of business- and non-business-targeting terrorism on FDI to the MENA region: The moderating role of political regime," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(6).
    2. Bussy, Adrien & Zheng, Huanhuan, 2023. "Responses of FDI to geopolitical risks: The role of governance, information, and technology," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(4).
    3. Witte, Caroline T. & Burger, Martijn J. & Pennings, Enrico, 2020. "When political instability devaluates home-host ties," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 55(4).
    4. Layal Mansour-Ichrakieh, 2021. "The Impact of Israeli and Saudi Arabian Geopolitical Risks on the Lebanese Financial Market," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-24, February.
    5. Daniel S. Andrews & Stav Fainshmidt & Michael A. Witt & Ajai Gaur, 2025. "Foreign policy: implications for multinational firms," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 105-119, March.
    6. Akbar, Yusaf H. & Kisilowski, Maciej, 2015. "Managerial agency, risk, and strategic posture: Nonmarket strategies in the transitional core and periphery," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 984-996.
    7. Brahim Bergougui & Syed Mansoob Murshed, 2023. "A sectoral analysis of institutional quality and foreign direct investment in Mena countries: does sector type matter?," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 159(4), pages 987-1012, November.
    8. Rao, Sandeep & Koirala, Santosh & Aldhawyan, Sulaiman & Corbet, Shaen, 2023. "Geopolitical risk and M&A: The role of national governance institutions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 225(C).
    9. Yixing Yang & Md. Qamruzzaman & Mohd Ziaur Rehman & Salma Karim, 2021. "Do Tourism and Institutional Quality Asymmetrically Effects on FDI Sustainability in BIMSTEC Countries: An Application of ARDL, CS-ARDL, NARDL, and Asymmetric Causality Test," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-29, September.
    10. Ziyue Zeng & Guoqiang Tang & Di Long & Chao Zeng & Meihong Ma & Yang Hong & Hui Xu & Jing Xu, 2016. "A cascading flash flood guidance system: development and application in Yunnan Province, China," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 84(3), pages 2071-2093, December.
    11. Yapatake Kossele Thales Pacific & Ngaba Mbai-Akem Gabriella Magalie, 2023. "One Bad Turn Deserves Another: How Energy Production, Financial Instability, and Political Governance Crisis Sustain the Decline of FDI Inflows in the Central African Republic," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 14(2), pages 831-853, June.
    12. Oh, Chang Hoon & Shin, Jiyoung & Oetzel, Jennifer, 2021. "How does experience change firms' foreign investment decisions to non-market events?," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 27(1).
    13. Chen-Yu Lin & Enmi Chung, 2015. "Evaluating the criteria of social media network users," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 49(5), pages 1791-1802, September.
    14. Dimitra Mitsi & Constantina Kottaridi, 2022. "Fiscal and non-fiscal institutional context effects and foreign direct investment: empirical evidence in developing countries," SPOUDAI Journal of Economics and Business, SPOUDAI Journal of Economics and Business, University of Piraeus, vol. 72(1-2), pages 11-33, January-J.
    15. Debaleena Chatterjee & Protik Basu, 2023. "Classification Analysis for Brand Loyalty Determination," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 24(1), pages 106-120, February.
    16. Saâdaoui, Foued & Ben Jabeur, Sami & Goodell, John W., 2022. "Causality of geopolitical risk on food prices: Considering the Russo–Ukrainian conflict," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    17. Garbuzova-Schlifter, Maria & Madlener, Reinhard, 2016. "AHP-based risk analysis of energy performance contracting projects in Russia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 559-581.
    18. Tuğba Akın, 2019. "The Effects of Political Stability on Foreign Direct Investment in Fragile Five Countries," Central European Journal of Economic Modelling and Econometrics, Central European Journal of Economic Modelling and Econometrics, vol. 11(4), pages 237-255, December.
    19. Segnon, Mawuli & Gupta, Rangan & Wilfling, Bernd, 2024. "Forecasting stock market volatility with regime-switching GARCH-MIDAS: The role of geopolitical risks," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 29-43.
    20. Hartwell, Christopher A. & Devinney, Timothy, 2021. "Populism, political risk, and pandemics: The challenges of political leadership for business in a post-COVID world," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 56(4).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:15:p:9743-:d:882846. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.