For Rudolph Lohmeyer, Partner at Kearney’s National Transformations Institute, the Gulf’s economic and strategic ambitions aren’t just about adaptation—they’re about global leadership. As nations in the region drive forward with ambitious transformation plans, Lohmeyer believes they are not only shaping their own futures but also influencing the world order.
“We are in a period of profound global change, and the Gulf is moving from being a participant to a key architect of what comes next,” he told TRENDS in an exclusive interview on the sidelines of the Davoc summit,, pointing to shifting economic power, technology-driven transformation, and a redefined geopolitical landscape.
Lohmeyer also discussed the region’s evolving role on the world stage, the strategic imperatives for Gulf economies, and why long-term vision is more crucial than ever.
Excerpts from the interview:
What is the mandate of the National Transformation Institute in Davos, in particular? What were your objectives, priorities, and what are the takeaways after four days of meetings and collaborative touchpoints?
The mandate of the National Transformations Institute in general is to support the accelerating transformations occurring across the Middle East in general, and the GCC in particular. It is the most dynamic laboratory of institutional change in the world. We established this institute to think about the levers by which countries can accelerate positive change or progress through innovation in policy design, through partnership with the private sector, by harnessing technology et cetera. The MTI, as we call it, is focused on helping to accelerate human progress. It was established in the Middle East because the countries of the Middle East are, as you know, driving unprecedented transformations, historically unprecedented, and we established it to support that. Of course, Davos shares this broad intent. For that reason, the discourse that occurs at Davos is very aligned with the things that we think about every day, which is what is the frontier of change regarding how we can navigate difficulty, certainly, manage risk. But our focus is actually primarily on how we can transform risk and challenges into opportunities. And so in having Carny’s NTI here, our purpose is to engage in discussion regarding this frontier of change, but also to form new partnerships by which we can advance the change, and every year it happens.
The intent of Davos is aligned with the intent of the NTI. We come away with new understanding. We offer our understanding, and also with new partnerships by which we can do that together.
Any reactions or thoughts on President Trump’s address at Davos?
So last year’s Davos meeting had a very serious and intense tone. My takeaway last year was that the coming year was going to be a year of reckoning, and I suppose it has been. This year, the feeling in Davos 2025 was very different. It had a combination of genuine concern about the extent of uncertainty and also exhilaration about the range of opportunities emerging. The way I’ve compared it is at the top of a double black diamond ski slope, there’s a sense of we are entering something very intense. It is highly uncertain, but there’s also a tremendous amount of opportunity. There’s this odd combination of exhilaration and fear. The reaction to the President’s speech, I think, was very bifurcated. I think there were many in the community who felt inspired by it. They see the opportunity for greater economic growth in the US, greater investment opportunity. So business people see a tremendous amount of opportunity. And of course, many others deeply concerned with sustainability or other diversity initiatives, of course, have concerns that the United States will be less strongly supporting it. Of course, at the same time, I think they know that the United States is a large country.
We’ve got a diverse range of states and perspectives, and all of those people and all of those institutions will not be entirely unified. It’s not as if progress on all of those other fronts and those other stakeholders will go away. But of course, the national direction will change. I think many people received it with a great deal of concern, but many others, especially the business people, see a lot of opportunity.
With regards to the global risk thought that was circulated at the start of Davos, rising geopolitical tensions, and the increasing economic fragmentation, those were some of the key highlights. How can governments, corporations, the business world, in the Middle East in particular, develop a more resilient long-term strategy from your perspective?
They have been systematically building that resilience for a long time. How? First and foremost, through diversification of relationships. Diversification of their supply chains, diversification of their diplomatic relationships. The leading countries of the GCC have made it clear that they don’t want to be pushed into a false choice between sides in a bifurcated world. They see an opportunity not just to be a bridge between those sides, but to be a center of gravity for the rest of the world. They sit at the center of the internal crescent of Eurasia, that centers on the Indian Ocean, if you will. As you know, one of the primary nodes of transhipments connecting the continents that they connect, sitting at the demographic center point. They realize they have a strategic opportunity to be a connecting hub and gateway for the rest of the world, and they’re determined to preserve it. I think they know that if they lose that balanced position, their unique value proposition will be damaged. So that is the answer. They have been relentlessly preparing not just to be resilient, but to be able to harness what’s happening. And I think in many ways, they’re becoming more valuable to the world because of that autonomy that they have.
But in the case of the GCC, in particular, in proximity to Africa, that relationship has so much complementarity that also conveys a great deal of resilience. Now, on the geopolitical front, this is quite interesting. This is a primary field of expertise of mine. I entered Davos feeling that the world had rarely been in such a fragile geopolitical moment. The reason is, of course, not just the intense competition between great powers, dynamics in Ukraine, in the South China Sea. By the way, even between China and the Philippines, of course, dynamics on the Korean Peninsula. There are many domains, and of course, we have to mention it, in Gaza. This is before the ceasefire. There were many active conflicts, and also there was a great weakening of the institutions of global governance that should prevent or mitigate conflicts. They were showing themselves to be very weak. But I must say that the commitment of this new administration to peace in multiple domains, so strongly stated, suggests to me that although those risks are still there, I think they have been slightly mitigated. I think the sheer commitment of this administration to stabilize things in Ukraine, though it will be extremely difficult.
The ceasefire in Gaza, although fragile, has happened. And elsewhere in the world, there seems to be a commitment to really stabilize things. So I actually think that the geopolitical risk may be easing. One domain that does concern me, however, is the civil war in Sudan. As you know, there are seven countries bordering it. But it was interesting to see the Houthis’ announcement that the attacks on ships will diminish. I think I have two answers to your question. First, I think the countries of the region have already done a great deal in in terms of positioning themselves as a neutral, balanced hub and by diversifying their supply chains. Then, secondly, I think events in the world suggest at least the possibility that perhaps we can enter a period of some stabilization and a reduction of the risk of conflict.
What trends or disruptions do you believe will most significantly shape the Middle East transformation over the next year, two, five, short term, long term?
We’re actually going to soon be releasing a report on this exact topic, so I thank you for asking. I would highlight six. First is this trend of geopolitical entropy, as we call it. The geopolitical dynamics, We are entering a new order. We’re not exactly sure how the Trump administration’s foreign policy will unfold, how China will respond, and of course, how these conflicts will unfold. But nevertheless, the international order is in a state of transition, and that’s going to significantly affect the Middle East. Second is the geo-economic fragmentation of the world. You mentioned it earlier. Countries around the world are trying to reduce their exposure to geo-economic coercion from the great powers. They’re also increasingly trying to increase their own resilience, as you know, through industrial policy, for example. And this trend will continue. In its first form, this trend is going to make countries less competitive. I think for the Middle East, the challenge is, how do we achieve resilience and economic growth without sacrificing long-term competitiveness? That’s the challenge of industrial policy everywhere.
But that trend will affect the Middle East. The fragmentation of the global trading environment will affect the Middle East, but it’s positioning itself in ways to reduce that risk. Third, of course, is the environmental condition. It’s clear that global warming is accelerating. As you know, we passed the 1.5 degree threshold that was set last year. The Middle East, by virtue of its geographic position, is at the front lines of climate change. So I think we can expect more extreme weather events, and this will affect the Middle East and it’s ability to adapt. But of course, also the regulatory changes, the regulatory environment is becoming very fragmented globally. Actually, the announcement of the President last night with respect to oil prices, This response, in his case, is driven by energy security. On energy security, of course, there’s an alignment. But this push for a reduction of prices represents a significant uncertainty. Next, I would say, is the macroeconomic environment. It seemed clear to me in this Davos that we fight against inflation, although we’ve made tremendous progress, the IMF has suggested that we have achieved victory, I think that might be less clear. As a result, I think, by the way, there are many sources of risk that still drive inflation.
So I think the risk of inflation either proving to be stubborn or even returning are reasonably high. Then this could suggest that there will be interest rate volatility. All of this is unfolding in the context of the highest levels of public debt as a percentage of GDP we’ve seen. So for many countries, this is going to be very difficult. High debt, high interest rates is going to place many countries in a very fragile position. In parallel to that, we are watching the transformation of the financial system. And by the way, major theme at Davos this year was crypto, of course, fueled by this new administration or supported by it so loudly, but it spread. That can have tremendous benefits in terms of financial inclusion, but it can also cause instability because it cannot be governed. And perhaps most significantly, because it is costly to build the government structures to govern crypto, to monitor it, many countries don’t have those resources. The authorities that are needed to manage and monitor the digital currencies are not equally distributed. Whether or not those countries can fully benefit is a question.
Finally, and very importantly, a huge subject of discussion with Davos this year is productivity. Productivity, as you know, has been stagnant around the world for many years. But over the last three years, the United States has started to show a significant return to the growth of productivity. Productivity solves many economic problems. In the equation of economic growth, productivity has incredible power, and it’s starting to improve the United States. For example, far in excess of what’s happening in Europe, where productivity has been very stagnant. We understand how it requires flexible labor markets. It requires business dynamism and an active VC environment, and Europe is struggling to create those. We’re learning from what happened in the US, some of those things that can contribute to productivity. But I think a major driver over the next four years is going to be artificial intelligence. Now, this is much debated. There are a spectrum of views from those that think the productivity gains will be very minimal to those that suggest they’ll be significant. But it seems very likely that there will be at least a steady growth in productivity for the countries, the economies that can harness artificial intelligence.
But again, in all of these areas, in terms of debt, exposure to sovereign risk, ability to manage the financial transformation and productivity, the key message across all of those is divergence. Not all countries will be equally able to either navigate those challenges or harness those opportunities. I think for the Middle East, there’s already significant economic inequality in the region. And I think there’s a risk that these trends will make the economic inequality in the MENA region wider. And the opportunity for the region is to deepen its financial integration because then it can benefit from more resilience to global instability. It can harness the economic complementarities across the MENA region, given its great diversity, and lift all ships. So I think it has to really work against this global trend of economic divergence, which I think is very strong. It needs to work against it. It needs to take the counter position and drive integration and more unity.
What is your view on AI as a disruptor? Is it going to affect the way with regards to productivity and transformation of economies and societal interactions?
This has been a remarkable Davos. We have been doing our own analysis, which has confirmed to me that this is not a hype cycle, that AI is going to be transformative. But that perception was further strengthened by the discussions in Davos for some very specific reasons. As you say, productivity is one. The single most compelling thesis. The thesis that I think will end up being most important over the next five years is the ways in which AI is going to accelerate knowledge creation and scientific discovery and help us thereby solve problems. Because of the advance of agentic AI, agentic AI, as you know, is distinguished by its ability to pursue a purpose or a set of objectives, so it can independently act. Well, in the case of the scientific method, this means that we can use AI to drive the scientific method generating and testing hypotheses autonomously.
This means we can massively magnify our ability to explore hypotheses, to, for example, design pharmaceuticals, but in a whole host of other domains where there’s a well-established body of scientific knowledge and quantitative data, I think AI is going to yield stunning breakthroughs. For example, with respect to cancer, you saw the announcement that the President made regarding this large initiative that’s targeting that, but that’s just one among many. I think we’re going to see a renaissance in knowledge creation that will be transformative. But also AI, as you suggest, I couldn’t agree more, has the opportunity to transform government services by understanding and anticipating citizens’ needs, by helping meet them more quickly. Ai will be extremely powerful in this regard. It does move across borders, but it has such geopolitical importance and really national security importance that it will also be contained within borders. Certain aspects of its innovation, and certainly the compute that’s so crucial to its advance, that is where the competition is, geopolitically. I see that there are two or three nodes competing for leadership in AI around the world, but there is enough territory of knowledge and science that is not national security related and not directly related to the competitiveness at a given firm that I still think great collaboration of progress can happen.
In reference to the GCC, would you say it’s Laggards or early adopters, considering that the UAE is the first country in the world that appointed an AI minister? What can other countries learn from the UAE’s example, and how can they find collaborative touchpoints to accelerate knowledge sharing in the next phase of AI growth?
I think it goes back to the point I made about divergence. The UAE, but also the Kingdom (KSA), are investing decisively in the infrastructure, the hardware, and the talent of AI. So they realize what a game changer it is, and they are doubling down. Other countries would be well suited by matching them. But the resources, the investment capacity of those countries at this moment in history is even more valuable than it has been historically, because as you know, the investments to really capitalize on AI are vast. They’re mind boggling, the amount of investment required. But the region has two advantages, not just the ability to invest, but it also has energy resources, which are so crucial to making AI work, not just its hydrocarbon assets, of course, but also its renewable assets. I think the region is poised to be a major hub. I think other countries should partner and plug in. But for many countries, less developed economies, as I said about divergence, they can’t compete on the same level, so they’ll probably benefit from partnering. That’s the key as the MENA region can become more integrated to the extent that it can become more integrated, then these benefits of AI, for example, can be further disseminated.
One crucial thing, it’s an important difference between the UAE and the kingdom. Demographically AI is going to displace a significant amount of labor. This is where I think finding human complementary applications of AI as a policy priority is so important. That means setting policies that encourage the deployment of AI that helps people do their jobs better rather than take their jobs away. That’s the choice policymakers can significantly shape. I think for the kingdom, they’ll do that. For the wider region, that’s crucial given this useful demographics.
Last question. Packing tonight mentally, what will be next week like for you and next year rolling with the knowledge share, with the coffee conversations, with the collaborative discussions, with the sessions and knowledge share across multiple industries, stakeholders, government, as well as all attendees?
Well, it’s a great question. I thank you for asking. My primary domain of professional expertise is long-range planning and scenario planning in particular. And already we’ve seen for the last two months, the biggest surge in demand for scenario planning I’ve seen in my career. I’ve been doing it for 25 years. So next week already, it’ll start with scenario analysis. Scenario analysis, as you know, is all based entirely not saying we have trends. Trends have a direction and a probability distribution. But some things are so uncertain that we can only prepare by considering multiple scenarios. And so this next year, I can already see it’s already filling up with scenario planning work that is so necessary to be resilient, to be ready, and to take advantage of what’s happening. But I must say, it seems that economic growth will be strong, opportunity will be strong. I just hope that we can maintain and improve the stability of the geopolitical environment so that we can minimize war and conflict because that’s the thing that can disrupt our progress. Despite AI, despite many other things, if we descend into conflict, which remains a risk, that progress will all be put in jeopardy.
If that doesn’t happen, I think the year is going to be full of growth, full of opportunity, and certainly the need for a great deal of scenario planning, which we’re already seeing.