Although economists are generally bullish in their outlook for the global economy, they list world oil supply and prices and terrorism as the top of threats to both short-term and long term economic performance.

These findings are from a poll of economists from around the world conducted by the Goldman Sachs Global Markets Institute.

The survey also uncovered differences of opinion between U.S. and non-U.S. economists on a host of issues, with non-U.S. economists seeing greater growth potential in India, more risk from terrorism than their U.S. counterparts, and expressing more concern about the potential impact of global environmental and public health crises.

World oil supply, global terrorism, U.S. deficits and dollar value, the role of China and regional geopolitical conflict are viewed as the top five risks to the global economy in both the short and long term. The greatest consensus, however, emerges around the risks presented by oil supply and terrorism.

The majority of both U.S. and non-U.S. economists have an overall positive outlook for the global economy in both the short and long term. U.S. (69%) and non-U.S. (70%) alike describe their outlook for the next two or three years as positive. U.S. economists see the greatest strength in North America (39%) and China (36%), with Europe barely registering (9%), while non-U.S. economists are more evenly divided among the three regions (Europe, 25%; North America, 23%, China: 24%).

Economists in the U.S. and abroad say oil prices will very likely have a negative impact, with nearly half from each group believing that the potential impact of the risk is “very serious.”

Both groups of economists see significant growth potential in China and, to a lesser degree, in India. 51% of U.S. economists said that China had the greatest potential for economic growth over the next five to 10 years, while 16% identified India. Outside of the U.S., economists are more evenly divided, with 44% believing that China has the strongest growth potential and 28% saying India.

In the short term, 46% of U.S. economists believe that oil and gas prices are the greatest risk to the global economy, while 37% of non-U.S. economists think the greatest threat comes from terrorism. The split is roughly the same in the long-term view.

Neither group of economists views derivatives or hedge funds as a significant risk. A greater percentage of non-U.S. economists say that derivatives create more stability and liquidity, while greater numbers of U.S. economists tend to favor the opposite view. A third of both groups say that they don’t pose much of a threat either way.

Economists in the U.S. and abroad say environmental problems are a bigger concern than the internal agreements that mandate standards. 48% of all economists believe that the negative impact of environmental issues is very or fairly likely, with more concern coming from non-U.S. economists. By two-to-one, economists believe that the cost and impact of environmental problems themselves constitute a greater risk than the cost and impact of agreements that mandate specific expenditures and standards.

The potential impact of U.S. budget and trade deficits are viewed with equal concern among both groups. Though not considered a risk as serious as oil supply or terrorism, surveyed economists believe that negative impact of the deficits on the global economy is both likely (61%) and potentially serious (63%).

Public health issues, particularly the spread of disease and access to care, are viewed with concern by greater numbers of non-U.S. economists. 46% of non-U.S. respondents believe that the negative impact of global public health issues and crises is very or fairly likely, while only 33% of U.S. economists share the same level of concern.