The Bond-film gold story with a boardroom lesson: geographical exposure is becoming a recurring issue

There is something oddly cinematic about the idea of gold bars being physically moved across seas in secret. It sounds less like central banking and more like the opening scene of a Bond film.

But that is not why the story caught my attention. The Dutch Central Bank’s decision to move 86 tonnes of gold reserves (This link opens in a new window or tab) from North America to London was described in practical terms: custody, tradability and crisis preparedness. The wider signal is more interesting. In a volatile world, geography is becoming a constant strategic consideration: where assets sit, where contracts are governed, where supply chains run and where organisations can still act quickly when assumptions change.

Geopolitical volatility is not new. Businesses have been dealing with wars, sanctions, tariffs, energy shocks and supply-chain disruption for years. What feels different is how embedded location risk has become in everyday commercial decision-making.

Volatility planning is moving from ideas to action

Companies, investors and governments are not just asking where capital can earn the best return. They are asking where assets can be accessed, which laws govern key contracts, whether suppliers can still deliver, how payments will move, where disputes can be resolved and how quickly decisions can be made if conditions change.

In uncertain markets, clients place greater value on jurisdictions, institutions and advisers that offer liquidity, legal certainty, enforceability and access. The winners will not always be the largest financial centres or biggest manufacturing countries as diversification becomes paramount to hedge risk.

Recent surveys suggest companies are already turning geopolitical risk into practical action. In Allianz Trade’s 2026 global survey, (This link opens in a new window or tab) 65% of companies ranked geopolitical and political risk as their leading concern, while the most common responses were inventory building and diversification into new markets, both cited by 64% of respondents. CFOs are also moving defensively: reassessing currency exposure and building cash buffers. This is moving behaviour from operational policy and fall-back plans to decisions with real life consequences.

London is one example, not the whole story

That is where the London angle of the article becomes interesting. London’s advantage is not that it is risk-free. It has political, regulatory and economic pressures of its own. Its strength is that it brings together many of the things clients need when risk becomes more complicated: deep markets, English law, dispute resolution, insurance and a dense professional services ecosystem.

Other financial centres will have their own roles. Paris, for example, has become increasingly important as a eurozone and EU financial centre. But the more useful comparison is not which city “wins”; it is which kind of confidence each centre offers. Like for central banks - for many organisations, the answer may be several locations at once.

The value of coordination

If clients are making geographic decisions, law firms need to think geographically too: not as separate offices or disconnected country teams, but as one coordinated advisory platform, whether through physical offices, alliances or referral networks.

A client’s decision to relocate assets, suppliers, treasury exposure or operations rarely sits neatly in one country or one practice area. Law firms can only help clients navigate that risk properly if they understand where the business actually operates and trades today, and it’s a step that most firms don’t look at periodically. Without that map, advice risks becoming too narrow, too reactive or too theoretical.

Coordination begins with practical mapping questions:

Once firms understand that operational footprint, they are in a stronger position to help clients navigate risk and change: spotting exposed suppliers, concentration risk, jurisdictional issues and gaps between what the client thinks is covered and what actually is.

That point matters for companies that appear to be domestic on paper. Currency exposure is often the most obvious example cited by companies, but it is rarely the only one. A UK-focused business may still depend on overseas suppliers, imported components, outsourced technology, international capital, shipping routes, insurance markets or customers affected by conditions elsewhere. Geographic risk is not just about where a company sells. It is also about where its inputs, dependencies, contractual protections and fall-back options sit.

The firms that understand a client’s exposure will be better placed to help them manage risk, spot gaps and prepare for change.