It is often said that I am a clairvoyant, but looking toward 2026 requires neither prophecy nor bold forecasting. Today’s economy is no longer driven primarily by numbers, nor guided mainly by models. It is shaped by expectations and sustained, or undermined, by confidence. That is precisely why my strongest wish for the year ahead can be expressed in a single word: trust.
As we approach 2026, we are not merely turning the page on another calendar year; we are also closing the first quarter of the 21st century. This period has been defined by financial crises, a global pandemic, wars, trade conflicts and unprecedented experiments in monetary policy. Yet when viewed in retrospect, these shocks share a common outcome: economic forecasts have failed with increasing frequency. The issue is not a lack of data, but a steady erosion of trust.
The central question confronting economic actors today is no longer “How fast will we grow?” but rather, “What do we believe in?” For households, firms and investors alike, decision-making is shaped less by mathematical projections and more by perceptions of the future. Where confidence is absent, even the most consistent forecasts fail to persuade; where expectations deteriorate, even the best-designed policies lose their effectiveness.
This is why 2026 is likely to be remembered not as a year when forecasts multiplied, but as one in which they failed more often. As the global economy enters the second quarter of the 21st century, economics is increasingly evolving from a technical discipline into a psychological equilibrium, where trust has become the most valuable and the most fragile economic asset.
This does not mean that numbers have lost their relevance. On the contrary, confidence can only be built on solid data, consistent indicators and transparent measurement. Trust without numbers is not trust at all; it is often nothing more than an illusion. Even more dangerously, falsely constructed confidence can be more destructive than uncertainty itself, as it obscures risks, normalizes errors and ultimately blinds decision-making processes.
Therefore, as we move toward 2026, the challenge is not to sideline data, but to advance guided by numbers while remaining fully aware of the power of expectations and confidence. Sound economic reasoning neither surrenders entirely to figures nor becomes a captive of sentiment; it gains meaning precisely by maintaining a disciplined balance between the two.
The numbers are in place, but the world has changed. At the beginning of every year, global institutions release growth, inflation and risk forecasts with impressive precision. Recent experience, however, shows that these numbers are becoming less reliable. From inflation surprises to sudden financial stress and geopolitical shocks, economic forecasts are missing turning points more often than before.
The reason is not a shortage of data or analytical capacity. It is structural. The global economy is no longer primarily shaped by market cycles, but by geopolitical decisions, policy interventions and sudden shocks. Models designed for a predictable world are now being asked to explain an economy driven by uncertainty.
To understand the global landscape heading into 2026, it is no longer sufficient to focus on individual crises. What truly matters is the accumulated balance of uncertainty these crises have produced. The primary challenge facing the global economy today is not the presence of isolated shocks, but the fact that shocks have become persistent and predictability has been systematically eroded.
One of the most visible components of this uncertainty balance is the return of U.S.-centered protectionism. Trade wars that were largely interpreted as “election rhetoric” throughout 2025 are now evolving into a tangible policy risk as 2026 approaches. The rhetoric associated with U.S. President Donald Trump, or similar political reflexes, represents far more than a debate over tariffs for China, the European Union, or emerging economies. The real issue is the erosion of trust in the rules governing the global trading system. Trade volumes can contract and, over time, recover. But when predictability disappears, investment decisions are postponed. This creates damage that is far more persistent than a temporary slowdown in growth.
A second critical pillar of global uncertainty is the deepening crisis of confidence in monetary policy. While the central question in 2025 was “When will rate cuts begin?” the debate in 2026 turned to a more fundamental issue: Are central banks still capable of providing direction, or have they become institutions that merely react to developments? Although the fight against inflation continues on a technical level, one of the most essential elements of monetary policy, communication, has significantly weakened. Forward guidance no longer anchors expectations; in many cases, it amplifies uncertainty. This produces a silent but powerful erosion that steadily undermines the effectiveness of monetary policy.
Third, the global economy is undergoing a clear transition from rational efficiency toward perceived security. Supply chains are no longer optimized for being the cheapest, but for being politically and strategically safe. This choice implies a deliberate sacrifice of efficiency. A more expensive yet more controlled economic structure is taking shape. What existing economic models struggle to capture in 2026, however, is precisely this point: the economic cost of security-driven preferences. As long as this cost remains invisible, forecasting errors become unavoidable.
Finally, a marked shift is taking place in global investor psychology. While the dominant mindset in 2025 was “wait and see,” the approach entering 2026 has increasingly become “protect and preserve.” Capital is no longer chasing returns; it is prioritizing risk avoidance. As this behavior becomes entrenched, investor responses grow less linear and more sensitive to shocks. This is why economic forecasts continue to miss the mark: models are ill-equipped to fully incorporate psychology.
Against this global backdrop, 2026 represents a critical threshold for Türkiye, not a year for announcing new ambitions, but a test of whether hard-earned trust can be preserved. The delicate balance between trust, confidence and credibility is becoming the single most decisive factor shaping economic performance.
The impact of the rational steps taken throughout 2025 will depend less on their existence than on their continuity, effective communication and political ownership in 2026. In economic policymaking, trust is not built solely through correct policy choices but through the consistent and determined implementation of those policies over time.
At this stage, Türkiye’s challenge is less about forecasts and more about managing expectations. Growth projections may be revised and inflation trajectories may change. These are, in technical terms, manageable fluctuations. The truly critical question is this: Do households and the real sector believe in 2026? If that belief weakens, investments are postponed, savings gravitate toward foreign currency, and policy effectiveness deteriorates. In an environment devoid of trust, even the most accurate diagnosis fails to produce results.
That said, Türkiye also possesses significant advantages that should not be underestimated. In a period of global turbulence, its rare strengths include a flexible economic structure, diversified trade relations and its position as a geopolitical hub. Yet these advantages do not function automatically. They depend on a single condition: policy confidence, that is, sustained trust in economic decision-making processes.
