What major controversies have surrounded the World Economic Forum since 2020?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Since 2020 the World Economic Forum (WEF) has been at the centre of multiple controversies: the launch and politicisation of the “Great Reset” in 2020 spawned long-running conspiracy claims and fact-checking disputes (Reuters and CTV coverage) [1] [2]; more recently the organisation has faced internal-crisis headlines including allegations of workplace discrimination and an independent probe into founder Klaus Schwab after his resignation in 2025 (Financial Times, AP, swissinfo) [3] [4] [5].
1. “Great Reset”: policy idea turned conspiracy lightning‑rod
The WEF’s June 2020 proposal for a post‑pandemic “Great Reset” — framed as a five‑point plan to rebuild economies more sustainably — triggered fierce criticism and became the seedbed for conspiracy theories. Media and fact‑checkers documented both the Forum’s original policy framing and the viral falsehoods that followed; Reuters and CTV note the WEF pitched systemic reforms in 2020 while fact‑checking viral memes and clarifying that many purported WEF memos were fabricated [1] [6] [2]. Critics argue the language masked elite agenda‑setting; defenders say it was a public policy agenda meant to spark debate [1] [2].
2. Misinformation and the battle over credibility
The WEF’s high profile magnified the reach of false claims about its intent. Reuters specifically debunked a widely shared “urgent memo” screenshot tied to the Great Reset narrative, reporting the WEF told reporters the post was fake [6]. Other outlets have flagged how the Forum’s reports on risks — for example elevating “disinformation” in its Global Risks Report — fuel partisan readings that the WEF seeks more oversight of information flows, a claim cited by critics who see this as justification for tighter controls [7] [8].
3. Davos as elite theatre and taxpayer resentment
The annual Davos meeting remained a flashpoint. Reporting and encyclopedic summaries highlight long‑standing critiques that Davos gathers the wealthy and powerful and imposes costs on host regions; Swiss critics have quantified local taxpayer burdens and political complaints in national debates [1] [9]. The Forum insists Davos fosters cross‑sector dialogue and broader participation, but skeptics characterise it as emblematic of plutocratic influence [1] [9].
4. Workplace culture and a legal challenge
In mid‑2024 the Forum faced concrete internal controversy when the Financial Times reported a lawsuit alleging a workplace culture “hostile to women and Black employees” at the Swiss non‑profit that organises Davos [3]. That coverage presents a direct institutional challenge distinct from the external conspiracy disputes: this is litigation alleging discrimination and workplace dysfunction, and it framed public questions about governance and internal reforms at the organisation [3].
5. Founder’s resignation and misconduct probes
The abrupt retirement and subsequent investigations into founder Klaus Schwab in 2025 moved controversy from reputation to governance. AP and swissinfo reported the WEF board backed an independent probe into allegations of misconduct shortly after Schwab’s retirement, and other outlets described a succession crisis and debate about his legacy [4] [5]. Some coverage portrayed Schwab’s exit as precipitated by scandals and internal pressure; available sources document the board‑level inquiry but differ in tone about scale and cause [5] [4].
6. Political polarisation and the WEF’s shifting audience
By 2024–25 the Forum’s relevance and the roster of Davos attendees reflected global political shifts: some leaders skipped Davos while others — including polarising figures like Donald Trump in 2025 — used the platform to advance national agendas, underscoring how the WEF is both a convening place and a stage for geopolitical competition [10] [11]. Commentators noted that anti‑establishment sentiment reduced Davos’s aura for parts of the public even as it retained attraction for many business and government leaders [10].
7. Disagreement in sources and limits of reporting
Public reporting shows consistent threads — Great Reset backlash, conspiracy debunking, workplace allegations, and investigations into Schwab — but differs on interpretation and emphasis. Reuters and AP focus on factual debunks and the board’s probe [6] [4]; the Financial Times details legal action over discrimination [3]; swissinfo and other outlets trace succession and reputational fallout [5]. Available sources do not mention some popular online claims about WEF controlling governments or having secret binding powers; those claims are documented more as conspiratorial narratives than as substantiated reporting [6] [2].
8. Why this matters going forward
The controversies shifted the WEF from a convenor of elite dialogue to an organisation under scrutiny over its internal culture and public legitimacy. Legal challenges and governance probes create tangible risks to its operations; competing narratives about its purpose — reformist multistakeholder forum versus elite power broker — will shape whether the Forum can rebuild trust or remain a perpetual target of both legitimate critique and misinformation [3] [5] [6].
Limitations: this analysis uses only supplied reporting; it does not attempt to adjudicate allegations beyond cited coverage and notes where sources differ [3] [4].