AI-Powered Trade Surge: WTO Sees ~35% Jump by 2040 but Warns on Fairness
AI’s Big Promise for Global Trade
A new World Trade Organization study projects that artificial intelligence could reshape cross-border commerce, expanding global trade volumes by roughly 34–37% and lifting worldwide GDP by about 12–13% by 2040. Those headline figures capture the potential scale of change, but the report also sounds a clear alarm: gains are not guaranteed to be shared evenly.
How AI Cuts Trade Friction
The WTO highlights several concrete mechanisms through which AI lowers costs and widens market access. Machine translation helps exporters reach customers across language barriers. Automated compliance and paperwork reduce administrative burdens and processing times. Smarter logistics and routing improve efficiency across every mile of transport. In practical terms, AI absorbs many routine, repetitive tasks that previously created friction in trade.
Who Wins First, Who Might Be Left Behind
Modeling in the study suggests high-income economies are likely to capture gains more rapidly unless lower-income countries invest aggressively in digital infrastructure and workforce skills. That equity concern was echoed across press coverage and related reports: the Financial Times emphasized the risk of repeating patterns of uneven globalization, and UNCTAD has repeatedly warned that AI market benefits could concentrate in a small group of countries and firms.
Hardware, Investment, and the Compute Bottleneck
The shift toward AI-driven trade also follows where capital flows. Investment is pouring into AI chips and inference hardware, making compute capacity a core constraint and advantage. Recent funding rounds for U.S. AI-chip startups illustrate how quickly valuation and capacity can accelerate, reinforcing the role of hardware as the tollbooth of the AI-trade engine.
Policy Gaps and International Support
Inclusive AI-driven growth isn’t only about fiber and GPUs. It also depends on who receives technical assistance, skills training, and market access. A European Court of Auditors review flagged that the EU may miss its own targets for Aid for Trade to least-developed countries, an awkward timing given calls for broader AI adoption support from the WTO. UNCTAD’s 2025 Technology & Innovation Report further documents how few developing countries have national AI strategies.
Demand, Services, and the Baseline Outlook
On the demand side, the WTO’s recent trade outlook warned of a softer baseline for services even before considering AI’s upside. If AI succeeds in trimming costs in transport, customs, and back-office services, these sectors could outperform that muted forecast. But such a rebound will depend on stable rules, predictable market access, and investments in interoperability.
Where Rules Need to Catch Up
Geneva is already moving to update the trade rulebook for a digital age. Discussions on data flows, source-code protections, and interoperability matter more than old tariff debates when it comes to AI-enabled commerce. These modernized disciplines are the plumbing that lets algorithms and digital services actually move across borders.
Reporter Q&A: Practical Questions
How exactly does AI add that much trade? The WTO’s models assume cost reductions that let small exporters access global markets and allow large firms to run leaner, more responsive supply chains. What could derail the upside? Key risks include uneven access to infrastructure and compute, lack of skills, concentrated investment flows, and insufficient international coordination on digital rules.
A Simple Policy Read
The WTO has made a clear claim: AI is not just an add-on to e-commerce but a general-purpose cost cutter for the entire trading system. The caveat in the footnotes is essential: the projected gains depend on broad access to infrastructure, compute, and skills. If policymakers pair those investments with updated digital rules and assistance to developing economies, the ‘40% by 2040’ line moves from headline-grabbing projection toward a feasible outcome. If they do not, the world risks repeating uneven patterns of past globalization with more frustration to come.