Showing up in the Alps: The economic value of Davos in World Economy News 07/02/2026 Attending the World Economic Forum in Davos is costly, with estimates ranging between $20,000 and $70,000 per delegate. This column uses data on attendees from 2009 to 2018 to examine whether attending the Forum yields tangible benefits for companies. The findings suggest that while attending Davos does not generate measurable financial gains for shareholders, with no evidence of improvements in stock market performance or credit ratings, it is associated with changes in firms’ social performance that are consistent with the Forum’s stakeholder-oriented mission. The latest World Economic Forum (WEF) Annual Meeting in Davos has just concluded, with geopolitical tensions dominating the agenda. Headlines focused less on climate cooperation or inclusive growth than on the prospect of escalating tariff wars (e.g. Hinz et al. 2026), including US President Donald Trump’s renewed threats toward Greenland. Yet Davos was meant to be about something else. The WEF has long championed the idea of stakeholder capitalism – the notion that firms should serve not only shareholders, but also workers, communities, and the environment. This raises a more concrete economic question: Does participation in Davos actually improve firms’ environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance, and are the substantial participation fees worth paying? Put differently, do companies measurably benefit from showing up in the Alps? The costs and benefits of attending Davos The WEF Annual Meeting in Davos-Klosters, Switzerland brings together about 3,000 participants from all over the world (see Figure 1). The summit attracts the leadership of global corporations, governments, NGOs, media organisations, and public figures from arts, culture, and sports. Attending Davos is costly for companies. Estimates range between US$20,000 and $70,000 per delegate (Ross 2011 Armstrong and Kottasova 2014). These expenses may be considered relatively small if WEF attendance generates a significant value added for companies. For example, attending Davos might help firms to strengthen business networks and attract possible top managers from which companies could benefit in the short and long run. The Annual Meeting may also serve as a valuable opportunity to garner political support from country leaders and other government representatives, or to foster goodwill among civil society representatives. There are reasons for scepticism. Davos has been described as the “Super Bowl of schmoozing” (Blodget 2015), raising the possibility that attendance yields private benefits to executives rather than measurable gains for firms. Participation may even impose indirect costs, for example if managers are poached by competitors they meet at the summit. A growing body of research examines the economic consequences of international organisations and firms’ political connections. Much of this work focuses on country-level outcomes such as trade, investment, or reputational effects (e.g. Maggi 1999, Rose 2004, 2005, Nitsch 2007, Egger and Larch 2011, Gray and Hicks 2014, Dreher et al. 2015). A related literature studies how political ties shape firm-level outcomes, including stock market performance and credit ratings (e.g. Dreher and Voigt 2011, Moser and Rose 2011, Davies and Studnicka 2018, Gehring and Lang 2020, Luechinger and Moser 2014, 2020, Acemoglu et al. 2014, Brown and Huang 2020, Child et al. 2021). Yet l