From the G20 Buenos Aires Summit to the Osaka Summit. The G20 compliance confirms the Argentinian G20 Presidency success
On the eve of the G20 Osaka Summit, which will take place on 29-30 June, we present the results of the G20 compliance with the priority commitments made by the G20 leaders in Buenos Aires on 1-2 December 2018.
Despite the tensions of protectionism, persistent challenges of growing inequalities, digital divide, climate change, Paris Agreement implementation and the WTO crisis, in Buenos Aires the leaders adopted a Buenos Aires declaration and an Action Plan with the total of 115 concrete specific commitments.
The monitoring period for the Argentine presidency decisions was seven months, which is two times shorter than, for example, for the previous G20 summit in Hamburg. However, the overall performance for the 2018 summit was 78% (Table 1). This is higher than the average score for all G20 summits, which equals 74%. A higher compliance level was registered for only four summits: Hamburg (87%), Hangzhou and Cannes (80%) and Los Cabos (79%). Thus, given the much shorter compliance period, the performance is quite high.
The highest compliance of 93% was scored for the health and digital economy commitments. All G20 members have taken action to increase access to health services and improve their quality within their countries, and almost all members have also participated in international initiatives to strengthen the health care system around the world. Almost all G20 members have taken actions to develop digital infrastructure domestically and internationally. For the commitment on promoting energy efficiency in line with SDG 7 G20 members reached 90% compliance level. The same score was achieved for the commitment on addressing the challenges of food security, which is crucial to achieving a world free of hunger and all forms of malnutrition. For another energy commitment (encourage energy transitions that combine growth with decreasing greenhouse gas emissions towards cleaner, more flexible and transparent systems) compliance is also high – 88%.
All G20 members, except the US, which did not accede to the commitment, demonstrated high compliance on the Paris agreement implementation pledge. Most members took actions in all three main action areas (keeping temperature growth below the designated level, implementing measures on climate change adaptation, as well as allocating financing for climate programs). Such a high level of compliance reinforces the success of the Buenos Aires summit in advancing the Paris Agreement, despite the existing differences. At the same time the compliance score for the commitment on supporting climate change cooperation in developing countries, especially those that are particularly vulnerable, including small island states such as those in the Caribbean is much lower - 70%.
For the macroeconomic policy decision to ensure that growth is inclusive and that the benefits are shared widely amongst all citizens through investment in human capital, regional development, support of inclusive business environment and raising quality of governance G20 members reached 85% compliance level.
Compliance score for the three Argentine priority commitments equals 83%. G20 members successfully implemented the decision to ensure gender equality in the economic sphere, including through cooperation with the private sector. The same level of performance was reached for the commitment on infrastructure development and increasing its private financing. Another priority area for the Argentine presidency was cooperation on employment and the future of work, namely harnessing technology to strengthen growth and productivity to ensure the development of the labor market. To implement this decision, the G20 members carried out internal reforms and participated in international initiatives. Another commitment on employment was aimed at vocational training and skills development. G20 members reached the compliance level of 70%.
For the second priority area of the Argentine Presidency - agriculture - the compliance score was 78%: the G20 members, conscious of the importance of sustainable soil, water and riverbanks management, took actions to promote dynamism in rural areas and sustainable agriculture.
The G20 complied with the decision on WTO reform, the average level is 80%. Practically all G20 members openly supported the need to reform the WTO and some of them developed concrete reform proposals and submitted them to the international community. The outcomes of the Osaka summit will show whether members will succeed in reaching consensus on reform parameters.
The level of compliance performance was slightly below the summit average for the commitments to implement programs in early child development, as well as for cooperation with developing countries on tax administration issues. It equals 73%. For the commitment to ensure globally fair, sustainable, and modern international tax system through domestic and multilateral initiatives, the compliance score was 80%.
The G20 members struggled to implement decisions on IMF reform (with 68% compliance score), data governance in digital economy (55%) and policy development in financial technologies sector (53%). The IMF reform is one of the G20’s priority issues, however progress is slow. The new quota formula is being discussed under the 15th General quota Review in the IMF, where the US has the largest share of votes and, together with the EU and other leading Western states, can exercise control over the decision-making process.
The areas of big data management, as well as new financial technologies, emerged very recently in the G20 agenda and compliance is modest.
Among the G20 members the highest level of performance was demonstrated by the EU - 100% and Australia - 90%. The compliance rate of 88% was achieved by Canada, China, Germany, United Kingdom, and Argentina, which confirms the tendency that the presiding member shows a higher than usual compliance level. The lowest level of compliance was demonstrated by South Africa (53%).
Russia’s compliance score is 73%. The score “-1” was given for the commitment on climate change cooperation with developing countries. Though Russia is implementing several projects in this area within the framework of cooperation with UNDP in 2019, the agreement signature and the allocation of funds took place before the compliance period.
The compliance performance indicates that the G20 members successfully implemented most priority decisions. A low level of compliance was registered for new and very specific areas of big data management and technologies in the financial sector, and in the traditionally problematic area of IMF reform. The commitments on the Argentine Presidency key priorities were successfully fulfilled, the compliance score of Argentina is high, which confirms the success of the presidency.
Full G20 2018 Buenos Aires Compliance Report can be downloaded here.
Table 1 – 2018 G20 Buenos Aires Summit Final Compliance Scores
|1||Climate Change: Disaster Resilience||0||+1||0||+1||0||+1||+1||+1||−1||+1||+1||+1||0||−1||0||−1||0||+1||+1||+1||+0.40||70%|
|2||Development: Early Childhood Development||+1||+1||+1||+1||0||0||+1||0||0||0||0||+1||0||0||+1||0||−1||+1||+1||+1||+0.45||73%|
|3||Digital Economy: Data Governance||0||+1||0||0||+1||0||0||−1||+1||0||0||0||0||+1||0||−1||0||0||−1||+1||+0.10||53%|
|4||Employment: Skills Development||0||+1||0||+1||0||+1||+1||+1||+1||0||−1||0||0||+1||0||0||0||0||+1||+1||+0.40||70%|
|5||Energy: Cleaner, Flexible and Transparent Systems||0||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||0||+1||0||+1||−1||+1||+0.75||88%|
|6||Financial Regulation: Tax Administration||+1||+1||0||0||+1||+1||+1||+1||0||−1||0||0||0||+1||0||+1||0||+1||0||+1||+0.50||75%|
|7||Food Security: Malnutrition||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||0||+1||+1||+1||+1||0||0||0||+1||+1||0||+1||+0.80||90%|
|8||Gender: Economic Empowerment||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||0||0||+1||0||+1||0||0||+1||+1||0||0||+1||+1||+0.65||83%|
|9||IFI Reform: IMF||+1||0||+1||+1||+1||0||0||+1||−1||−1||+1||0||+1||0||0||0||0||−1||+1||+1||+0.35||68%|
|10||Macroeconomics: Inclusive Growth||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||0||0||0||+1||+1||0||0||+1||+1||0||0||+1||+1||+1||+1||+0.70||85%|
|11||Climate Change: Paris Agreement||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||0||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||0||0||0||0||+1||n/a||+1||+0.74||87%|
|12||Digital Economy: Digital Infrastructure||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||0||+1||+1||+1||0||+1||0||+1||+1||+1||0||+1||+0.85||93%|
|13||Employment: Future of Work||+1||+1||0||0||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||0||+1||0||0||0||+1||0||+1||+0.65||83%|
|14||Energy: Energy Security||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||0||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||0||0||0||+1||+1||+1||+0.80||90%|
|15||Financial Regulation: Technology||0||0||0||0||0||0||0||−1||0||0||+1||0||−1||0||0||0||0||+1||0||+1||+0.05||53%|
|16||Financial Regulation: International Taxation||+1||+1||+1||0||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||0||−1||0||+1||0||0||+1||0||+1||+0.60||80%|
|17||Food and Agriculture: Sustainable Agriculture||+1||0||+1||+1||+1||0||+1||0||0||+1||+1||0||0||0||+1||0||+1||+1||0||+1||+0.55||78%|
|19||Infrastructure: Infrastructure Investment||+1||+1||+1||+1||0||+1||0||0||+1||+1||0||+1||+1||+1||+1||0||0||+1||+1||+1||+0.60||83%|
|20||Trade: WTO Reform||+1||+1||+1||+1||+1||0||+1||0||+1||0||+1||+1||+1||0||−1||−1||+1||+1||+1||+1||+0.60||80%|
- A commitment is defined as a discrete, specific, publicly expressed, collectively agreed statement of intent; a promise by summit members that they will undertake future action to move toward, meet or adjust to an identified target. [Kirtonetal., 2014]
- Compliance is understood as national governments’ actions geared toward the domestic implementation of the necessary formal legislative and administrative regulations designed to execute summit commitments. Compliance is assessed according to the criteria of official reaffirmation of a summit commitment, internal bureaucratic review and representation, budgetary and resource allocations made or changed, and new or altered programmes, legislation and regulations.
- The methodology uses a scale from −1 to +1, where +1 indicates full compliance with the stated commitment, −1 indicates a failure to comply or action taken that is directly opposite to the stated goal of the commitment, and 0 indicates partial compliance or work in progress, such as initiatives that have been launched but are not yet near completion and whose final results can therefore not be assessed. Each member receives a score of −1, 0 or +1 for each commitment. For convenience, the scientific scores reported in the tables in this summary have been converted to percentages, where −1 equals 0% and +1 equals 100 The formula to convert a score into a percentage is P=50×(S+1), where P is the percentage and S is the score.
- Compliance on 20 priority commitments made by G20 members at the summit in Buenos Aires, which was held from 1 to 2 December 2018, was assessed this year. The analysis examined the actions of member countries in the period from 3 December 2018 to 10 May 2019.