從G8到G20：全球經(jīng)濟(jì)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)體系的變革(英文論文)

1、From the G8to the G20:reforming the global economic governance systemDr Claudia Schmucker 1, German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP,Berlin and Katharina Gnath 2, Hertie School of GovernanceGARNET Working Paper No:73/09January 20103BSTRACTThe paper reviews the thematic and institutional developmen

2、ts in the context of the G8and G20summits from November 2008until the end of 2009. It first analyses the topics and results of the four summits at leaders level in Washington, London, LAquila and Pittsburgh. Subsequently, the paper examines three possible scenarios for the future relationship betwee

3、n the G8and the G20under the labels competition, cooperation or co-existence. It concludes that the G8will not be abolished as a consequence of the newly-upgraded G20, but will instead become a more informal coordination forum ahead of the G20. The G8will most likely focus on foreign and security is

4、sues, while the main financial and economic questions will be discussed within the new G20.G8 G20 Institutional Reform Global Financial Architecture Financial Crisis Financial Regulatory Reform IMF Financial Stability Forum G8-Outreach International Trade Global ImbalancesAddress for correspondenceD

5、GAP, Rauchstraße17/18,10787Berlin, Germany1Head of Globalisation and World Economy Programme, German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP, Berlin, email:2Associate Fellow, DGAP Berlin, and PhD candidate, Berlin School for Transnational Studies, Hertie School of Governance, email:3Chapter prepared

6、 for Herrmann/Terhechte,European Yearbook of International Economic Law, Vol. 2, forthcoming.A. I NTRODUCTION :W HAT A D IFFERENCE A Y EAR C AN M AKEThe recent financial crisis has depicted a critical juncture in economic and financial policy-making, triggering profound changes in the system of glob

7、al governance particularly in the area of G group summitry. Over the course of the crisis, formal and informal international coordination venues and fora have proliferated. Yet the most far-reaching development in 2008and 2009has been the establishment and permanent institutionalisation of the leade

8、rs G20forum:The group that started as a ministers round on financial stability roughly ten years before has made a remarkable career over the past twelve months. 5The chapter reviews the thematic and institutional developments in the context of the G summits from November 2008until the end of 2009.

9、It first traces the four summits at leaders level before portraying possible scenarios for the future relationship of the G8and the G20. The last section provides an outlook and concludes the paper.B. S UMMIT H OPPING 2008&2009Over the review period, the world saw a proliferation of G summits at

10、 leaders level 6:In November 2008, the G20gathered in Washington. In 2009, the G20met in London in April and in Pittsburgh in September, while the G8convened in LAquila, Italy, in July.I. First G20summit in Washington at leaders level, November 2008As the world was hit by a rapidly-deepening financi

11、al crisis in the wake of the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy in September 2008, then-US President George W. Bush called a “Summit on Financial Markets and the World Economy” in Washington, DC, on 15and 16 November. The meeting, at which the representatives of the worlds twenty leading countries and of re

12、levant international organisations were present, was aimed at understanding the5The original finance ministers G20consists of Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Russia, Saudi-Arabia, South Africa, South Korea, Turkey, the UK, and the

13、 US. The 20th member is the EU, which is represented by the rotating Council presidency and the European Central Bank. In addition, the IMF, the World Bank and the chairs of the International Monetary and Financial Committee (IMFand Development Committee (WorldBank also participate. Several other co

14、untries took part in the G20leaders summits of 2008and 2009:The Czech Republic and Sweden (asEuropean Presidency representatives in Washington 2008and London 2009; and Pittsburg 2009, respectively; Spain (allthree summits; the Netherlands (allthree summits, Ethiopia and Thailand (asrepresentatives o

15、f NEPAD and ASEAN in London 2009. However, given the groups informality and recency, membership is not fixed and can be changed by the individual presidency.6Even more meetings took place at ministers or official level. The paper focuses on the leaders summits that structure the ongoing work of the

16、international summit community and receive the highest public attention.causes and cures for the crisis; at reaffirming the commitment to an open global economy and the fight against protectionism; and at rebuilding confidence in the global financial markets by demonstrating international political

17、unitedness and cooperation. 7Discussions included inter alia better regulation of all financial service providers, markets and products (includinghedge funds; an enhanced supervision of rating agencies; an increase in consumer protection in financial products; the curbing of tax havens; a reform of

18、international financial institutions in favour of emerging countries representation; and adjustments to mangers remuneration policies. Above all, the meeting was intended to identify broad principles for reforming the financial and regulatory system rather than to spell out concrete policy recommend

19、ations. The leaders developed an action plan with 47short-and medium-term action points to be elaborated and implemented subsequently.The meeting can be considered historical not for the results achieved, but for the change in international governance structures that it heralded:Instead of convening

20、 an additional G8 meeting in autumn 2008, it was decided that the old forum was not the appropriate venue to discuss the global financial crisis causes and solutions. The Washington summit lifted the G20 a group that until then had only existed at the level of finance ministers and central bankers t

21、o the leaders level, laying the institutional foundation for a revised membership structure of the summits in the following months.II. Second G20summit in London, April 2009On 2April 2009, the heads of states of the G20met in London for the second time in order to continue coordinating their crisis

22、management and to “restore confidence, growth, and jobs.” 8 As a measure to dampen the financial crisis repercussion, G20countries pledged 1.1trillion USD for the International Monetary Fund (IMFand other multilateral organisations, consisting of 750billion USD of direct aid and 250billion USD in sp

23、ecial drawing rights (SDRfor the IMF, as well as 100billion USD for multilateral development banks to increase lending.7Declaration, Summit on Financial Markets and the World Economy, Washington, DC, 15/11/2008,(lastaccessed 13/11/2009.8G20, The Global Plan for Recovery and Reform, London, 2/4/2009,

24、(lastaccessed 28/10/2009.Furthermore, UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown announced in his role as G20president the establishment of a “new world economic order”:Most importantly, the G20leaders agreed to create a Financial Stability Board (FSB,replacing and expanding the former Financial Stability Forum

25、. 9Together with the IMF, the newly-established FSB was to be designed as part of an early-warning system to identify and address international macroeconomic and financial risks. With regard to global financial regulatory reform, the G20agreed among other issues on the following measures in form of

26、the “Declaration on Strengthening the Financial System” 10:an increase of capital buffers in good times and the enhancement of the quality of capital; a gradual adoption of the Basel II framework for all G20countries including the United States; the registration of hedge fund managers; the standardi

27、sation of the credit derivates markets; and the development of global accounting standards. In addition, the G20 decided that compensation practices had to be consistent with the long-term goals of banks and companies and should support prudent risk taking.A further key issue at London was the aboli

28、shment of tax havens. On the basis of the previously-published OECD list of non-cooperative jurisdictions (blackand grey list, 11the targeted countries increased their commitment to implement international standards for the exchange of tax information. The G20pushed for greater action against countr

29、ies that continued to be unwilling to cooperate and promised in the final document:“The era of banking secrecy is over.”III. G8summit in LAquila, July 2009The topic that received most attention at the G8leaders summit in LAquila, which took place from 8to 10July 2009, was climate change. Further dis

30、cussions centred on security issues; development policy especially with a view to Africa; and trade. The summit took place in the face of the ongoing global financial and economic crisis. Yet, while many references were made to the economic situation of the previous months, hardly any concrete steps

31、 or decisions were taken in this area. In fact, especially the US administration conceived9The new FSB includes all G20members, Spain, Hong Kong, the Netherlands, Switzerland, as well as representatives from the BIS, OECD, ECB and the European Commission, the IMF, The World Bank and some further sta

32、ndard-setting bodies. See FSB, Members,(lastaccessed 11/11/2009.10G20, Declaration on Strengthening the Financial System London Summit, 2/4/2009,(lastaccessed 24/11/2009.11OECD, A Progress Report on the Jurisdiction Surveyed By the OECD Global Forum in Implementing the Internationally Agreed Tax Sta

33、ndard, Original Report of 2/4/2009,(lastaccessed 11/11/2009.of the 2009G8summit in LAquila rather as an intermediate step with regard to questions of world economic and financial order. 121. Climate ChangeSimilar to past years summits, the leaders G8meeting in 2009was dominated by the debate over gl

34、obal warming. In the run-up to the UN Climate Change Conference (COP15in Copenhagen at the end of 2009, the LAquila summit intended to send a signal of the industrialised states willingness to come to an agreement and to encourage emerging countries to offer further emission reductions themselves. F

35、or the first time, the leaders of both the G8and big emerging countries agreed within the framework of the Major Economies Forum (MEF13, which took place on the second day of the summit, that climate change must be restricted to two degrees. In order to achieve this goal, the industrialised states c

36、ommitted to reducing their emissions by 80%or more until 2050. However, no target was formulated for the period until 2020, the reference time horizon of the UN discussions. Furthermore, no concrete steps were taken to finance the necessary emission reductions and climate mitigation schemes.2. Afric

37、aAnother recurring topic of G8summits is developing aid, particularly towards Africa. In order to counter the heightened risk following the volatile food prices of the months prior to the LAquila summit, the leaders agreed that local food markets should be made more profitable and competitive instea

38、d of continuing with the policy of direct food aid. To this end, the G8 committed to provide 20billion USD in aid over the coming three years and established a special fund for local agricultural development (LAquila Food Security Initiative. 14 Furthermore, the G8reaffirmed their previous developme

39、nt commitments despite Italy and other members having come under heavy criticism for cutting its promised G8aid payments substantially.12See, e.g., Mike Froman, US G8Sherpa in Baker/Donadio,Group of 8is Not Enough, Say Outsiders Wanting In, New York Times, 10/7/2009,p. 13; see also Andrews, Group of

40、 20nations will replace elite G-7, The International Herald Tribune, 26/9/2009,p. 4.13The 17major economies participating in the Major Economies Forum are:Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, the European Union, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Russia, South Africa, the U

41、nited Kingdom, and the United States. Denmark, in its capacity as the President of the December 2009 Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, and the UN were also invited to participate in the discussions. See US Department of State, Major Economies Forum on Energy

42、 and Climate, (lastaccessed 13/11/2009.14Under the aegis of the United States and Japan, financing means will be provided to increase the quality of cropping methods and to deepen local markets. This initiative marks a shift especially for US development policy which focused on direct food support p

43、reviously.3. Security policyLeaders deplored post-electoral violence in Iran and committed to closely observe further developments especially with regard to Irans nuclear programme. 15In contrast to previous discussions, Russias President Dmitri Medvedev agreed to toughen the tone on Iran together w

44、ith the other G8members. Further security-related discussions at LAquila included the fight against piracy; North Korea and non-proliferation; the Middle East; and the war in Afghanistan. Obama used the LAquila gathering to announce its intention to convene a nuclear security summit in early 2010in

45、Washington.4. Trade and the Doha RoundAs a reaction to the economic downturn following the recent financial crisis, global free trade has come under pressure. To curb protectionist developments, the leaders reiterated their commitment in LAquila to reopen the flagging multilateral trade negotiations

46、 at the WTO and to finish the Doha round in 2010.5. The Heiligendamm-LAquila Process and variable summit geometryIt was decided at the 2007Heiligendamm summit to establish a structured Outreach dialogue with five big emerging countries (“O5”:Brazil, China, India, Mexico, and South Africa. The “Heili

47、gendamm Process” was established for an initial period of two years. A final report of the first phase was issued at LAquila, and it was decided to continue the Process now coined Heiligendamm-LAquila Process (HAP for at least another two years, albeit in a more flexible format than before. 16Howeve

48、r, the HAP was not the only Outreach format at the G8Leaders summit in LAquila. In fact, the summit stands out for its very flexibility in terms of country groupings:Leaders from around 40countries and international organisations met in seven different constellations over the course of the three day

49、s, leading to a proliferation of documents and statements adopted in LAquila. 17While the G8met on its own on the first day, discussions took place in a range of different formats from the second day onwards, depending on the subject under15G8, Political Issues, LAquila, 8/7/2009,(lastaccessed 21/10

50、/2009.16G8, The Agenda of the Heiligendamm-LAquila Process, LAquila, 9/7/2009,(lastaccessed5/10/2009.17See G8Chairs Summary, LAquila, 10/7/2009,(lastaccessed 22/10/2009.discussion. This included inter alia meetings of the G8with the O5and Egypt, with international organisations, and with African lea

51、ders. 18Furthermore, US President Barack Obama convened a MEF meeting of around twenty countries to discuss global warming on top of the G8talks. 19As a consequence, the G8has effectively transformed into a network of overlapping circles of countries, and it is unlikely that it will return to the sm

52、all summit format in the future.IV.Third G20summit in Pittsburgh, September 2009The London G20summit had mainly dealt with economic recovery from the financial crisis. The Pittsburgh summit, which took place on 24and 25September 2009against the background of a gradually improving global economic out

53、look, focused instead more on financial regulatory reform and macroeconomic imbalances. Further important topics included the reform of compensation practices (bonusesand IMF reform.1. Global imbalancesAt the Pittsburgh summit, the United States in particular pushed for greater international coopera

54、tion to counter global macroeconomic imbalances:Over the past years, countries such as the US have accumulated a large budget and current account deficit, whereas countries like China, Japan or Germany have experienced export surpluses. The resulting sizable capital flows pose a destabilizing risk t

55、o the global economy. President Obama therefore asked the leading export countries in Pittsburgh to increase domestic demand in order to fill the gap left by US consumers. In addition, the US committed itself to increase its savings rate, and to reduce its trade and budget deficit.In this context, a

56、 new “Framework for Strong, Sustainable and Balanced Growth” was initiated. From now on, G20members will meet periodically to review each others national economic policies. The IMF was mandated to supervise the framework:It will prepare technical analyses on the consistency of the individual G20memb

57、ers economic policies and their support of a more sustainable and balanced growth for the global economy. Enforcement mechanisms, such as penalties or sanctions, were left out of the agreement. This was a18See, e.g., Ehrlich, Experimente auf dem Gipfel Experimentsat the summit,Financial Times Deutsc

58、hland, 10/7/2009,p. 27; Baker/Donadio,Group of 8is Not Enough, Say Outsiders Wanting in, New York Times 10/7/2009,p. 13.19Lee, Financial Crisis, Los Angeles Times, 8/7/2009,p. 1.necessary precondition to gain the consent of large emerging countries such as China, India and Brazil and of industrialis

59、ed countries (Germanyand Japan. The main coordinating instrument is now a process of mutual assessment and peer pressure obviously a much weaker force to adjust.At their meeting in St. Andrews (UKin November 2009, the G20finance ministers added a timeframe to the Pittsburgh agreement:They decided to prepare and present national policy frameworks until the end of January 2010; to conclude th