In highly complex sectors such as engineering, infrastructure, mining, and energy, risk is embedded in the very structure of the business. Political uncertainty, economic volatility, regulatory pressure, and increasing judicialization directly affect contract performance. When these factors are neither anticipated nor addressed in an integrated manner, the outcome tends to repeat itself: loss of predictability, rising costs, the emergence of claims, and the escalation of disputes.
With the aim of shedding light on this environment of uncertainty from a practical perspective, a qualitative survey was conducted with C-level executives operating in Brazil, gathering their perceptions of the main risks projected for 2026 under the PESTEL framework (Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Environmental, and Legal). The study, led by Prof. Italo Coutinho and published on January 15, 2026, did not seek to establish rankings or deterministic forecasts. Rather, it aimed to capture, based on the experience of these leaders, which external factors are already shaping, and will continue to shape, strategic planning, project execution, and contract management throughout the year.
The findings reveal a central point: the identified risks do not operate in isolation.
On the contrary, they form a systemic environment in which political, economic, social, technological, environmental, and legal factors reinforce one another, increasing organizations’ contractual and operational exposure. This observation underscores the importance of contractual planning, proper risk allocation, and the adoption of preventive dispute management mechanisms.
The high recurrence of political and legal risks, for example, reflects a scenario of low predictability. Electoral polarization, legislative fragility, judicial protagonism, and regulatory instability emerge as vectors capable of directly impacting contracts in general—particularly long-term agreements. In sectors such as construction and infrastructure, where time, cost, and scope are highly sensitive to external decisions, this scenario reinforces the need for contractual instruments capable of absorbing uncertainty, such as a well-structured risk allocation matrix.
Institutional instability also projects almost automatically onto the economic axis. High interest rates, elevated cost of capital, restricted access to credit, and uncertainties related to tax reform affect project feasibility and compress margins. When these factors are not properly mapped at the contracting stage, they become fertile ground for claims, economic rebalancing requests, and disputes over responsibility for supervening events, precisely the type of conflict that tends to escalate when there is no prior clarity regarding risk allocation.
The survey also highlights social, technological, and environmental risks which, although sometimes less visible than political and legal risks, exert a direct impact on contract execution. The shortage of qualified labor and social polarization affect productivity, timelines, and overall project management, reinforcing the idea that many disputes arise from the accumulation of small misalignments.
In the technological sphere, particular concern was expressed regarding the uncritical use of artificial intelligence and the growing risks of cybersecurity breaches. These factors may give rise to complex technical disputes and require more specialized and agile prevention and resolution mechanisms, such as arbitration and dispute boards. On the environmental front, executives noted that extreme climate events and regulatory bottlenecks are no longer merely reputational risks; they now directly affect operational performance and competitiveness. This reinforces the importance of properly allocating such risks within contractual matrices and adopting preventive dispute management structures.
In summary, the PESTEL analysis presented in the study supports a cross-cutting conclusion: in a systemic risk environment, efficient management must begin long before conflicts arise. Anticipating risks, drafting clear contracts, investing in contract administration, and defining from the outset how disputes will be addressed are strategic decisions. Companies that incorporate this logic tend not only to reduce litigation but also to preserve projects, relationships, and long-term value.
Access the full study at: https://www.italonaweb.com.br/pesquisa-sobre-riscos-em-2026-com-executivos-c-level-no-brasil/
