G20 performance on development
Despite fluctuating development compliance in recent years, the 2024 Rio Summit, led by Brazil, seeks to integrate economic growth with social inclusion, aiming for high adherence to development commitments
As the first G20 summit with the African Union as a permanent member, the 2024 Rio Summit will likely focus on Africa. To ensure high compliance with its development commitments, it must refer to the Sustainable Development Goals. As host, Brazil is championing global economic and social development, specifically reducing hunger, poverty and inequality. Supported by the new Global Alliance Against Hunger and Poverty and the development ministers’ meeting in July, the Rio Summit should thus recommit to the 2030 Agenda as a whole.
Deliberation
From 2008 to 2023, the G20 gave an average of 22% of its communiqués to development at each summit. The 2008 Washington Summit gave 18%, 2009 London gave 28% and 2009 Pittsburgh gave 25%. The 2010 summits in Toronto and Seoul gave 35% and an all-time peak of 58%, respectively.
Cannes in 2011 produced 18%, which rose to 32% at the 2012 Los Cabos Summit and 27% at the 2013 St Petersburg Summit. At Brisbane in 2014, development fell to 22%, then to 16% at Antalya in 2015. It jumped to 25% in 2016 at Hangzhou but plummeted to 17% for the next three years. It rose to 26% at Rome in 2021 and leapt to 48% at the 2022 Bali Summit. The 2023 New Delhi Summit produced the second-most words on development, at 52%.
Decisions
The 3,482 commitments made by G20 leaders since 2008 include 390 (9%) on development, ranking below macroeconomic policy and above financial regulation. They started with four (4%) commitments in 2008, increased to 15 (12%) at London in 2009, and decreased to nine (7%) at Pittsburgh in 2009 and eight (13%) at the 2010 Toronto Summit. The 2010 Seoul Summit made 22 (14%), followed by 17 (6%) in 2011, 10 (6%) in 2012 and 43 (15%) in 2013. In 2014, they made 18 (8%), then 33 (21%) in 2015 and 18 (8%) in 2016. In 2017, they produced an all-time high of 71 (13%), followed by an all-time low of four (3%) in 2018. This rose to 24 (17%) in 2019, fell to seven (7%) in 2020, and rose to 18 (8%) in 2021 and 23 (10%) in 2022. The 2023 summit made 47 (19%) of its 242 commitments on development – the most on a single subject at New Delhi by a significant margin.
Compliance
Members’ compliance with the 56 development commitments assessed by the G20 Research Group averaged 67%, below the G20’s overall average of 71%.
Development compliance started strong at 90% for 2008, plummeted to 58% for London 2009 and 63% for Pittsburgh in 2009, then rose to 68% for Toronto, 65% for Seoul in 2010, and 67% for 2011. It jumped to 89% for 2012, plunged to an all-time low of 52% for 2013, rose to 64% each for 2014 and 2015, soared to 93% in 2016, and declined to 79% in 2017 and 73% for 2018. Osaka’s 2019 summit returned to 90%. The 2020 Riyadh Summit had 83% compliance. The all-time high came for the 2021 Rome Summit with 95% compliance. Compliance with the 2022 commitments plummeted to 50%. By May 2024, compliance with the two assessed development commitments from the 2023 New Delhi Summit was 73%.
Overall, development compliance was led by the United Kingdom at 86%, Germany at 85% and the European Union at 83%. The current G20 governing troika is much lower, with the 2023 host India at 69%, the 2025 host South Africa at only 57%, and the 2024 host Brazil slightly below average at 64%.
Causes and corrections
High compliance with development commitments coincides with fewer development conclusions and development commitments at a summit. At the nine summits with the highest compliance (average 83%), 25% of the communiqués focused on development and had 8% of total development commitments. In contrast, at the eight summits with the lowest compliance (60%), 30% of the communiqué focused on development, contributing 13% of total commitments.
Thus, the Rio Summit should make fewer commitments on development and limit the number of words on development in the communiqué.
Development commitments that referenced Africa averaged only 49% compliance, compared to 70% for those that did not. At Rio – the first summit with the AU as a full member – the communiqué will likely refer often to Africa. To ensure higher compliance with development commitments, G20 leaders should focus on the SDGs and the 2030 Agenda as those commitments averaged 83% compliance versus 64% for those that did not. Also, commitments that referred to macroeconomics or financial regulation averaged 4% higher compliance at 68% than siloed development commitments.
Conclusion
In July, G20 development ministers reaffirmed their strong commitment to the full, effective implementation of the 2030 Agenda. This suggests that their leaders’ communiqué will also address global inequalities through the fulfilment of the SDGs. This year bodes well for high compliance on development commitments, as Brazil is focused on incorporating economic prosperity and social inclusion in fair trade agreements. The intermingling of development commitments and economic aims is integral to achieving the 2030 Agenda.
