Читать книгу Economics of G20 - Группа авторов - Страница 35

Manmohan Agarwal

Centre for Development Studies Thiruvananthapuram, India manmohan44@gmail.com

John Whalley

Western University, London, Canada Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI)/NBER jwhalley@uwo.ca

Abstract

The G20 has grown beyond its initial crisis management focus stemming from the 2008 global financial crisis. In the development areas, it adopted the Seoul Development Consensus at its 2010 meeting and has initiated interactions with international agencies in the two areas of food security and infrastructure as they relate to development goals and the successful attainment of Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and later the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The G20, however, lacks both resources under its direct control and a clear legal structure and faces issues of legitimacy in any discussion of development since most developing countries are not its members. Its legitimacy can be further questioned because of its inability to deliver on its promise of strong, sustainable and balanced growth (SSBG). Here we ask what realistically can the G20 contribute to development in such circumstances. We argue that the potential contributions are significant even if its initial steps thus far are modest. At the leaders’ level, it can provide the overall framework for cross-agency development initiatives and objectives, and its legitimacy in the area can be enhanced by regional consultative processes already initiated. We provide detail on actions thus far on development, plus discuss possibilities for the future. But the realisation of such a goal will require it to go beyond its currently limited analytical framework. The G20 alone in our view cannot drive global development policy, but through its positioning across agencies, it can play a constructive role. The G20 also could decide on a more activist approach by proposing improved global resource management for development, moving towards a global legal structure and providing strengthening of international disciplines. These latter steps may be years or decades away, but strengthened global disciplines would be positive for smaller countries and for development.