The Century Foundation Releases a New Publication on Opportunities for More Effective Multilateralism for the G20 and the United States

Oct 28, 2010

Authors: TCF

Publisher(s): The Century Foundation

New York, October 28th, 2010—When the global economy suffered its severe systemic shock in the fall of 2008, the usual international mechanisms for policy coordination clearly seemed inadequate to chart a global response—some because their formal procedures were too balky, others because their membership did not include all the needed actors.  For this emergency, the G20—a quiet forum for finance ministers for a decade—was upgraded to a summit-level grouping whose speedy action is credited with having saved the world economy from severe depression.  It emerged as what President Obama called the world’s “premier forum” for international economic cooperation.  But how, really, can this heterogeneous hodge-podge of the rich, the middling, and the striving poor function in the long term?

Amid many continuing questions as to the capacity, agenda, and very legitimacy of the G20, and with another summit looming in Seoul in November 2010, The Century Foundation has commissioned a paper of Stewart Patrick, director of the international institutions program at the Council on Foreign Relations, which examines the relevance of the G-20 framework in a web of existing multilateral institutions—the United Nations, the World Bank and International Monetary Fund—and of smaller multilateral groupings.  The G20 and the United States: Opportunities for More Effective Multilateralism argues the G20 as far more than another talk-shop, but a major new development for effective international policymaking.

More From The G20 and the United States

·         The Future Potential of the G20. While attention to the G20 has focused on its crisis response to the 2008 economic implosion, Patrick argues that the G20’s potential extends far beyond the health of the global economy. “The advent of the G20 provides a promising vehicle to advance the cause of global institutional reform. It has the potential to transform world order in at least three important ways: providing a more fluid negotiating environment, including for the United States; building multilateral consensus on the responsibilities of power; and prodding the United Nations to improve its performance.”

·         The G20 and the United Nations. Though sometimes seen in Washington as a potential alternative to the United Nations, the G-20 in fact can only be a natural complement, Patrick says, allowing for discussions and consensus-building outside of the sometimes restrictive formality of a truly universal organization. “The creation of the G20 promises to give the United Nations a bit of healthy competition in shaping the global agenda, as well as providing a forum in which the world’s most powerful actors can reach preliminary agreement on constructive approaches to common global problems. The G20 will never replace the world body and its specialized programs and agencies (which retain unmatched legitimacy, technical expertise, and implementation capacity).”

·         Remaining hurdles. The group’s diverse composition can complicate its effectiveness, especially for those accustomed to more like-minded frameworks, such as the G7. Patrick, however, sees this as an advantage: “At times, divergent interests will leave the G20 vulnerable to lowest-common-denominator decisions. On the other hand, major breakthroughs in world politics are unlikely—almost by definition—to be accomplished by countries that already agree with each other from the outset.”

·         Next steps for the U.S.: If the U.S. is serious about fashioning the G20  into a global steering group, integrated into the existing constellation of international organizations, it should, among other steps:

o        (1) Keep the membership of the G20 from expanding further, while also encouraging its interactions with non-member states and international organizations (especially regional groupings such as the African Union);

o        (2) Be open to a broader agenda, which will allow the group to address development, climate change, and peace and security issues;

o        (3) Facilitate G20 consultations with the U.N. and the World Bank and IMF, thereby demonstrating that the G20 is not meant as an alternative to the premier treaty-based international institution;

o        (4) Create a staffing infrastructure.

About the author:

Stewart Patrick is senior fellow and director of the program on international institutions and global governance at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). From 2005 to April 2008, he was research fellow at the Center for Global Development. He also served as a professorial lecturer in international relations/conflict management at Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies. From September 2002 to January 2005, Dr. Patrick served on the secretary of state’s policy planning staff, with lead staff responsibility for U.S. policy toward Afghanistan and a range of global and transnational issues. His portfolio included conducting analysis and providing recommendations for U.S. policies on weak and failing states, post-conflict reconstruction, development, refugees and migration, international law enforcement, and global health affairs. Prior to government service, he was from 1997 to 2002 a research associate at the Center on International Cooperation at New York University. Dr. Patrick graduated from Stanford University and received his doctorate in international relations, as well as two masters’ degrees, from Oxford University, where he was a Rhodes Scholar.

The G20 and the United States: Opportunities for More Effective Multilateralism  is available on The Century Foundation web site at www.tcf.org. For more information or to schedule an interview, contact Christy Hicks at hicks@tcf.org or (212) 452-7723.