Advertisement

G20 performance on macroeconomic policy
Share Share on Linkedin Share on Twitter

G20 performance on macroeconomic policy

UPDATED Oct 20, 2021

Embedding particular catalysts can boost G20 compliance on macroeconomic commitments, which can help play a vital role at this time of crisis

Global cooperation on macroeconomic policy is vital amid the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and its devastating economic impact. The G20 can play a particularly significant role in such cooperation. Macroeconomic policy cooperation has been at the core of the G20’s agenda since the summit’s start. Since 2008, its macroeconomic policy deliberation and decision-making have been strong and stable. Its delivery of commitments has been outstanding. Leaders can further improve that delivery by embedding compliance-increasing catalysts in the commitments they make at their Rome Summit.

Deliberation

Since 2008, G20 leaders have dedicated more than 4,800 words, or about 34% of the total, to macroeconomic policy per summit.

The first phase of increasing deliberation from 2008 to 2013 began at Washington in 2008 with 651 words (18%). That number increased to a peak at St Petersburg in 2013 with 12,000 words (42%), the most ever.

The second, short phase of relatively stable and high deliberation from 2014 to 2016 started at Brisbane in 2014 with 4,939 words, for a high 54%. Hangzhou in 2016 had 10,600 words (29%).

A third phase of decreasing deliberation from 2017 to 2020 started at Hamburg in 2017 with 7,964 words (23%), dropping to 673 words (10%) at Osaka in 2019, but rising at Riyadh in 2020 to 3,384 words, for an all-time high of 60%, to counter the recession caused by COVID-19 that year.

Decisions

G20 decision-making has been strong but has recently declined. Since 2008, the G20 has made 484 macroeconomic policy commitments, for 17% of the total, putting this subject first.

The first phase of increasing decision-making from 2008 to 2011 started with six commitments (6%) in 2008, then increased to a peak of 91 commitments (32%) at Cannes in 2011.

The second phase of decreasing decision-making started in 2012 and reached nine commitments at both Osaka 2019 and Riyadh 2020, for 6% and 8%, respectively.

Delivery

On the 30 macroeconomic policy commitments assessed by the G20 Research Group, members’ compliance averaged 82%, well above the G20’s all-subject average of 71%.

This strong compliance has been somewhat stable. It started with commitments made at Washington in 2008 at 88%, dropped to 68% with London in April 2009, then climbed above 85% with Pittsburgh in September 2009, 87% with Toronto in 2010 and 85% with Seoul in 2010. Compliance dropped to 72% with the 2011 Cannes Summit, rose to 88% with 2012 Los Cabos and 80% with 2013 St Petersburg. It dropped again to 70% with 2014 Brisbane, rose to 85% with 2015 Antalya, dropped to 69% with 2016 Hangzhou, and then soared to 90% with 2017 Hamburg. It remained high at 85% with 2018 Buenos Aires and 89% with 2019 Osaka. Halfway between the 2020 Riyadh and 2020 Rome summits, compliance was stronger still, at 91%.

The top compliers were Canada with 97%, Germany with 94% and the European Union with 92%.

Causes of compliance

Compliance on macroeconomic commitments is strongest when particular catalysts are embedded in their text. Commitments with a multi-year timetable averaged 92% compliance, compared with 80% for those without one. Those with a one-year timetable averaged 90%, compared with 80% for the others. Those that referred to a past summit averaged 85%, compared with 81% for those that did not.

Corrections

At the Rome Summit, G20 leaders can raise their deliberation and decision-making on macroeconomic policy, including by building on the momentum of the Riyadh Summit. They should embed a multi-year or one-year timetable in their commitments and refer to a past summit to help maintain their high compliance levels. This matters, because countering the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic calls for strong leadership from the G20.