The report has been initiated and produced by an international network of scholars under the leadership of the International Organizations Research Institute of the National Research University Higher School of Economics (IORI HSE) and the G20 Research Group of the University of Toronto in the run-up to the Russia’s G20 Presidency in 2013. Presented and discussed within the G20 Civil Society Track, it provides an independent analysis and evidence base for a dialogue between a wide range of stakeholders and G20 governors on the future agenda of the forum.
The report has been initiated and produced by an international network of scholars under the leadership of the International Organizations Research Institute of the National Research University Higher School of Economics (IORI HSE) and the G20 Research Group of the University of Toronto in the run-up to the Russia’s G20 Presidency in 2013. Presented and discussed within the G20 Civil Society Track, it provides an independent analysis and evidence base for a dialogue between a wide range of stakeholders and G20 governors on the future agenda of the forum.
he report reviews G20 members’ implementation of the commitments made at G20 summits on seven priority areas of the G20 cooperation. These include implementation of commitments on structural reforms and overcoming imbalances, reform of international financial institutions and financial markets regulation. The analysis includes an assessment of compliance with the commitments to resist protectionism and to rationalize and phase out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies. The analysis of development commitments includes an evaluation of the decisions in key areas agreed at the 2010 Seoul Summit. These cover infrastructure, private investment and job creation, human resource development, trade, financial inclusion, growth with resilience, food security, domestic resource mobilization and knowledge sharing.
To stimulate the dialogue on the G20’s future agenda, each section and respective pieces of the executive summary conclude with recommendations for the G20’s future actions. The recommendations are also summed up in a separate section for the readers’ convenience.
The monitoring timeframe spans the period from the first adoption of a decision to October 31, 2012. Where there have been changes in the commitments observed, those changes are summarized. The analysis of implementation is based on official documents issued by international organizations and G20 countries, media reports and other publicly available information. To ensure accuracy, comprehensiveness and integrity, we encourage comments. Indeed, scores can be recalibrated if new material becomes available. All feedback remains anonymous. Responsibility for this report’s contents lies exclusively with the authors and analysts of the IORI HSE and their partners at the G20 Research Group.
The evaluation methodology is defined according to the policy area and the concrete decisions and is described in each section. Two types of pledges have been included into the analysis: commitments, which require actions at the national level, or “G20 members’ individual commitments”; and pledges and mandates, which require action by the G20 as an institution, or “institutional commitments”. Each of the commitments was assessed using the following scoring system: +1 for full compliance, 0 for partial compliance or work in progress, and -1 for non-compliance.
On December 12 the report was presented to the G20 sherpas at their first meeting in Moscow by IORI head Marina Larionova and G20 Research Group co-director John Kirton. It was also presented to the civil society representatives of G20 and other countries at the Civil 20 conference.
The report has been produced with support of the Russian International Affairs Council and the United Nations Development Programme.
Executive summary (eng, rus)
Talking points for presentation to G20 sherpas
Full report
Presentation
Source: IORI National research university ‘Higher school of economics’
