Country risk profile
Belarus
- ISO
- BLR
- Region
- Europe
- Population
- 9.1M
- Profile
- updated 9 Oct 2026, 06:01 UTC
Composite risk
73/100
HighAssessment summary
The published high-risk rating is led by Economic Fragility and Governance, based on 7 of 7 risk groups.
At-a-glance evidence
Risk ratings and primary indicators
Ratings apply published thresholds to each source value. Low means the observed value is below elevated-risk thresholds; no data means no verified observation.
Primary source indicators
Full evidence and limitations ↓Governance
High30.8 / 100
Higher means stronger governance
Corruption perception
Moderate31.0 / 100
Higher means cleaner public sector
Humanitarian risk
Low2.4 / 10
Higher means greater crisis risk
Listed labour-risk goods
Moderate2 goods
Count of listed country-good observations
Sanctions designations
Moderate1123 recorded
Recorded designations, not unique subjects
Violent-event intensity
Moderate13 / 100
Higher means greater reported intensity
FATF status
LowNot listed
Published jurisdiction list status
State fragility
Moderate69.9 / 120
Higher means greater fragility
Press freedom
High27.7 / 100
Higher means greater press freedom
Environmental performance
Moderate58.2 / 100
Higher means better performance
Published score inputs
What drives the score
01Economic Fragilitysevere 3 / 3
- OECD country risk category 7/7 — highest risk (OECD CRC 2026)
02Governancehigh 2 / 3
- low governance score (30.8/100, WB WGI 2025)
- poor press freedom (28/100, RSF 2026)
03Environmentalmoderate 1 / 3
- below-average environmental performance (EPI 58/100, Yale 2024)
- elevated climate vulnerability (ND-GAIN 53/100 2023)
Calculation and all contributing groups
Group total 10 ÷ 7 available groups. Base 47.6 → published 73/100.
- Governance
- high · 2/3
- Corruption & Financial Crime
- moderate · 1/3
- Labour & Human Rights
- moderate · 1/3
- Conflict
- moderate · 1/3
- Sanctions
- moderate · 1/3
- Economic Fragility
- severe · 3/3
- Environmental
- moderate · 1/3
Published assessment rationale
High risk driven by Economic Fragility (severe — OECD country risk category 7/7 — highest risk (OECD CRC 2026)), Governance (high — low governance score (30.8/100, WB WGI 2025)), Corruption & Financial Crime (moderate — elevated corruption perception (31/100, TI CPI 2025)), Labour & Human Rights (moderate — child- or forced-labour evidence across 2 goods (US DOL TVPRA 2024)), Conflict (moderate — elevated violent event intensity (13/100, 180-day GDELT CAMEO)), Sanctions (moderate — notable sanctions exposure (1123 designations, 123/M pop.)), and Environmental (moderate — below-average environmental performance (EPI 58/100, Yale 2024)).
Coverage measures available evidence, not certainty. See the exact formula and thresholds.
Belarus narrative assessment
Belarus carries a composite risk score of 73 out of 100 on the [S/1] scorecard, placing it in the high risk band as of 9 October 2026. The result is based on 7 of 7 indicator groups (complete evidence coverage); unavailable groups are excluded rather than treated as low risk. It records a World Bank governance score of 30.8 out of 100 (2025, higher is better), a Transparency International CPI score of 31 out of 100 (2025, higher is cleaner) and an INFORM crisis-risk index of 2.4 out of 10 (2026, higher is worse). Exposure includes 1,123 sanctions or debarment designations linked to Belarus within [S/1]'s 18-source configured coverage model, using the source data currently available and 2 forced-labour category observations across 2 source-listed goods (US DOL TVPRA 2024). The groups driving the assessment are governance and economic fragility. All figures are drawn from official open-data sources and carry their own publication year. This is a country-level screening input, not an entity-level determination.
Continue the assessment
Apply the country context.
Project assessment uses this profile as regional context. Establish site-specific impacts through project and stakeholder evidence.
Country annex: €29 once · included in Pro.
Indicator evidenceSource values, publication years and links
Published values retain their original units and scale directions. Open each source before using an indicator in a decision.
CHILD / FORCED LABOUR · US DOL
2 GOODSModerate
Furniture, Lumber
Child-labour category 0 · Forced-labour category 2
SOURCE: US DOL TVPRA · 2024 · link ↗
SANCTIONS · 18 CONFIGURED SOURCES
1123 DESIGNATIONSModerate
Selected lists: EU 432 · OFAC 254 · UN 0 · UK 149 · SECO 251
A country-level count is a screening signal, not a finding about any specific entity or evidence of national culpability.
VIOLENT EVENTS · GDELT
13/100 INTENSITYModerate
180-day CAMEO violent event intensity (normalized 0-100)
SOURCE: GDELT · queried 09/10/2026 · link ↗
FATF STATUS
NOT LISTED Low
Not in the FATF list — not subject to FATF monitoring or call for action
SOURCE: FATF · link ↗
FRAGILE STATES INDEX
69.9/120Moderate
Fund for Peace — higher = more fragile
SOURCE: Fragile States Index · 2023 · link ↗
PRESS FREEDOM · RSF
27.7/100High
Reporters Without Borders — higher = more free
SOURCE: RSF Press Freedom · 2026 · link ↗
ENV. PERFORMANCE · YALE EPI
58.2/100Moderate
Yale Environmental Performance Index — higher = better
SOURCE: Yale EPI · 2024 · link ↗
CLIMATE RISK · ND-GAIN
53/100Moderate
Notre Dame Global Adaptation Index — higher = better adapted (vuln. 34%, ready 40%)
SOURCE: ND-GAIN · 2023 · link ↗
LABOUR RIGHTS · ILO NORMLEX
8/8
Legacy eight-convention ratification aggregate. C155 and C187 are excluded; ratification does not establish enforcement or project practice.
SOURCE: ILO NORMLEX · 2026 · link ↗
CHILD LABOUR · ILO ILOSTAT
2%
Children aged 5–17 in child labour — ILO survey estimate
SOURCE: ILO ILOSTAT · 2021 · link ↗
POLITICAL FREEDOM · FREEDOM HOUSE
Data not available
Source last ingested: —
Additional inputs
- War events · 180-day GDELT
- 5.8/100 intensity2026-10-09 · Source ↗
- OECD country risk category
- 7/72026 · Source ↗
- IMF programme severity
- No country observation
- Trade circumvention signal
- No country observation
- EU forced-labour product groups
- No country observation
- PM2.5 annual mean
- No country observation
- Water stress
- No country observation
- Land degradation
- No country observation
- Human development · context only
- 82/1002023 · Source ↗
Source dates and coverageIngestion and publication context
Observation periods, recorded pipeline dates and fallback status are distinct. A recent pipeline date does not verify the observation or establish complete coverage.
Scorecard computed9 Oct 2026, 06:01 UTC
- Governance · WB WGI
- Observation period: 2025
Pipeline date: 1 Oct 2026, 04:02 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Corruption · TI CPI
- Observation period: 2025
Pipeline date: 1 Oct 2026, 04:00 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - INFORM Risk · JRC
- Observation period: 2026
Pipeline date: 1 Oct 2026, 04:05 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Child / forced labour · US DOL
- Observation period: 2024
Pipeline date: 1 Oct 2026, 04:05 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Sanctions · aggregate ingestion marker
- Observation period: Unknown or not supplied
Pipeline date: 9 Oct 2026, 03:01 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Violent events · GDELT
- Observation period: Unknown or not supplied
Pipeline date: 9 Oct 2026, 04:36 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - FATF
- Observation period: Unknown or not supplied
Pipeline date: 1 Oct 2026, 04:00 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Fragile States Index
- Observation period: 2023
Pipeline date: 1 Oct 2026, 04:06 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Press freedom · RSF
- Observation period: 2026
Pipeline date: 1 Oct 2026, 04:06 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Environmental performance · Yale
- Observation period: 2024
Pipeline date: 1 Sept 2026, 04:06 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Climate risk · ND-GAIN
- Observation period: 2023
Pipeline date: 1 Oct 2026, 04:05 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Labour rights · ILO NORMLEX
- Observation period: 2026
Pipeline date: 1 Oct 2026, 04:05 UTC
Legacy eight-convention aggregate; individual convention provenance requires validation. - Child labour · ILOSTAT
- Observation period: 2021
Pipeline date: 1 Oct 2026, 04:05 UTC
Survey provenance requires validation before project-assessment use. - Political freedom · Freedom House
- Observation period: Unknown or not supplied
Pipeline date: Not recorded
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Country risk category · OECD
- Observation period: 2026
Pipeline date: 1 Oct 2026, 04:05 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Lending programmes · IMF
- Observation period: Unknown or not supplied
Pipeline date: 1 Oct 2026, 04:05 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Trade patterns · UN Comtrade
- Observation period: Unknown or not supplied
Pipeline date: 3 Oct 2026, 02:01 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Human development · UNDP
- Observation period: 2023
Pipeline date: 1 Oct 2026, 08:06 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Forced labour · EU
- Observation period: Unknown or not supplied
Pipeline date: Not recorded
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Air quality
- Observation period: Unknown or not supplied
Pipeline date: 1 Oct 2026, 04:11 UTC
Fallback status not supplied by this source record. - Water and land · ingestion paused
- Observation period: Unknown or not supplied
Pipeline date: 1 Oct 2026, 04:12 UTC
Historical fallback observations are unverified. UN SDG ingestion is paused pending reuse-term verification.
Sector exposureCountry × sector and commodity signals
Sector Risk Intelligence
Child labour by sector · Conflict minerals · EUDR commodity risk · Forced labour detentions
Published model changes · 12 months
Recent score changes
Loading material changes…
These entries record changes in published model outputs. Review the source dates and evidence before relying on a change.
Research and reuseSources, methods and related evidence
Common questions about Belarus risk
What is the overall risk level of Belarus?
Belarus scores 73 out of 100 on the [S/1] composite risk scorecard, which places it in the high risk band as of 9 October 2026. The result uses 7 of seven indicator groups and has complete evidence coverage; The composite uses the available scores across seven indicator groups: governance, corruption and financial crime, labour and human rights, conflict, sanctions, economic fragility, and environmental. Groups score 0–3; the available-group average is converted to a base percentage and calibrated using the formula published on the methodology page.
Is Belarus on the FATF grey list?
No. Belarus does not appear on the FATF grey list or black list in the current FATF data [S/1] holds as of 9 October 2026. FATF updates its lists three times per year, so check the current FATF statement before relying on this.
How many sanctions designations are linked to Belarus?
[S/1] records 1,123 sanctions or debarment designations linked to Belarus within its 18-source configured coverage model, using the source data currently available as of 9 October 2026. These include 254 on the US OFAC SDN list, 432 on the EU consolidated list and 149 on the UK FCDO list. Source availability varies and is published separately. A country-level count is a screening signal, not a finding about any specific entity.
What is Belarus's corruption score?
Belarus scores 31 out of 100 on the Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index for 2025. The CPI runs from 0 (highly corrupt) to 100 (very clean) and measures perceived public-sector corruption based on expert assessments and business surveys.
Are goods from Belarus linked to forced labour?
The US Department of Labor's TVPRA list (2024 edition) records 2 forced-labour category observations across 2 source-listed goods from Belarus: Furniture, Lumber. 1 of the 2 goods currently map conservatively to the shared S1 sector taxonomy; unmapped goods are retained rather than assigned by guesswork. This is a country-and-good screening signal, not a finding about any specific supplier, product or shipment.
How well governed is Belarus?
Belarus scores 30.8 out of 100 on the World Bank's Worldwide Governance Indicators for 2025, where a higher score is better. The WGI aggregate combines Voice and Accountability, Political Stability, Government Effectiveness, Regulatory Quality, Rule of Law, and Control of Corruption.
Is there active conflict in Belarus?
[S/1] records a normalised conflict-event intensity of 12.8 out of 100 for Belarus, derived from CAMEO-coded violent event data in GDELT. This measures the volume and severity of reported events over a rolling window; it reflects what has been reported in media, not a verified operational assessment.
Where does the Belarus risk data come from?
The Belarus scorecard aggregates official open-data sources including the World Bank Worldwide Governance Indicators, Transparency International CPI, the European Commission JRC INFORM index, US DOL TVPRA, FATF, the Fragile States Index, RSF, ILO NORMLEX and GDELT, together with an 18-source configured sanctions and debarment coverage model including OFAC, the EU consolidated list, UK FCDO and the UN Security Council. Each indicator carries its own publication year, shown on the page, and current pipeline health is published in the source directory. The scorecard was last generated on 9 October 2026.
From context to decision
What should happen after a country-risk signal?
Country indicators should route diligence, not decide whether a specific supplier is acceptable. Add sector exposure, resolve the legal entity, reconstruct ownership and control, screen connected parties, and verify the facts that matter to the transaction.
Use this evidence in your work
Cite this profile in a briefing or embed a live card in your research portal. Keep the source date and country-level limitations alongside the evidence.
Salient One (2026-10-09). Belarus Country Risk Profile. https://s1.salientone.eu/scorecard/belarus. Country-level context; not an entity determination.