The winner that still loses
Change the scenario and sector; inspect every author-assigned score.
The conflict scenario calls South Asia a relative winner. Inspect the 168 scores before treating that as an absolute gain or a country-level forecast.
A relative winner can still decline.
The source scores seven regions across eight sectors. The conflict case is shown below; the complete matrix follows it. With scripts enabled, choose a future and sector to test the label “winner”.
Conflict: South Asia has the least negative equal-weight mean (−0.125), but four of its eight sectors decline.
| Region | Score | Sector balance |
|---|---|---|
| North America | −0.75 | 5 down · 0 flat · 3 up |
| Europe | −3.25 | 8 down · 0 flat · 0 up |
| East Asia | −4.375 | 8 down · 0 flat · 0 up |
| South Asia | −0.125 | 4 down · 1 flat · 3 up |
| Africa | −1.875 | 7 down · 1 flat · 0 up |
| Latin America | −0.875 | 5 down · 3 flat · 0 up |
| Oceania | −0.625 | 4 down · 3 flat · 1 up |
Scores are ordinal author judgments versus a 2025 baseline, not measured impacts. Equal-weight means are only a diagnostic of the source matrix. “Down” counts a negative cell; it does not measure population affected.
Inspect all 168 source scores
Systemic conflict
| Sector | North America | Europe | East Asia | South Asia | Africa | Latin America | Oceania |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Economy | −3 | −4 | −5 | −2 | −3 | −2 | −2 |
| Science & technology | +1 | −2 | −3 | +1 | −1 | 0 | +1 |
| Education | −1 | −3 | −4 | 0 | −2 | −1 | 0 |
| Birth rates | −2 | −3 | −4 | −1 | 0 | −1 | −1 |
| Housing | −2 | −4 | −5 | −1 | −2 | −1 | −2 |
| Infrastructure | +1 | −3 | −5 | +1 | −2 | 0 | 0 |
| Construction | +1 | −3 | −4 | +2 | −2 | 0 | 0 |
| Finance | −1 | −4 | −5 | −1 | −3 | −2 | −1 |
US-led renewal
| Sector | North America | Europe | East Asia | South Asia | Africa | Latin America | Oceania |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Economy | +3 | +1 | −1 | +3 | +1 | +1 | +2 |
| Science & technology | +4 | +1 | −2 | +2 | 0 | 0 | +2 |
| Education | +3 | +1 | −1 | +2 | +1 | +1 | +2 |
| Birth rates | 0 | −1 | −2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Housing | +2 | +1 | −1 | +2 | +1 | +1 | +1 |
| Infrastructure | +3 | +1 | 0 | +3 | +1 | +1 | +2 |
| Construction | +3 | +1 | −1 | +3 | +1 | +2 | +1 |
| Finance | +3 | +1 | −2 | +2 | 0 | 0 | +1 |
Cooperative breakthrough
| Sector | North America | Europe | East Asia | South Asia | Africa | Latin America | Oceania |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Economy | +2 | +3 | +2 | +3 | +3 | +2 | +2 |
| Science & technology | +3 | +3 | +3 | +2 | +2 | +1 | +2 |
| Education | +2 | +3 | +2 | +3 | +4 | +2 | +2 |
| Birth rates | +1 | 0 | −1 | 0 | +1 | 0 | 0 |
| Housing | +1 | +2 | +1 | +3 | +2 | +1 | +1 |
| Infrastructure | +2 | +3 | +2 | +4 | +4 | +2 | +2 |
| Construction | +2 | +3 | +2 | +4 | +4 | +2 | +2 |
| Finance | +1 | +2 | +1 | +2 | +2 | +1 | +1 |
What was actually scored
The supplied Czech HTML defines three futures for 2026–2060: systemic conflict, US-led renewal and a cooperative breakthrough. It assigns ordinal impact scores from −5 to +5 versus 2025 to seven regions in eight sectors. AU transcribed the cells and recalculated simple regional means. In conflict, South Asia has four negative, one zero and three positive cells, for a mean of −0.125.
A region is not India
The original country-level winner claim cannot be resolved by a regional table. It requires separate Indian scores, explicit welfare weights and concrete definitions of the conflict and time horizon. A relative advantage can coexist with a negative absolute impact.
Provenance, assumptions and corrections
Source: author-supplied modelski_impact.html, undated, received 1 October 2026. The original 40/35/25 scenario weights are subjective and are not used to calculate the display. The seven regions are equally weighted in sector summaries; the eight sectors are equally weighted in regional means. Because the −5 to +5 scores are ordinal, means are a diagnostic reading of the author’s table, not a precise forecast or a comparable welfare measure. No sensitivity analysis or country-level observations were supplied. Version 1, 1 October 2026; no corrections recorded.
For context, Modelski’s 1987 book is a historical framework, not the source of these scores. SIPRI’s 2024 expenditure data supports a dated US–China spending comparison in the original file, not its scenario probabilities.
Source and status: Author-supplied modelski_impact.html, received 1 October 2026. Scenario scores are subjective; AU arithmetic is labelled.