Economics of G20

The following sections are included:

• Dedication
• About the Editors-in-Chief
• Acknowledgements
• Contents
• Introduction

With Brexit looming, populism rising and resentment against globalisation increasing worldwide, it is safe to say that free trade is at a crossroads and the future of the world trade system as we know it is highly unclear. This is a huge challenge, given the fact that globalisation, especially in the guise of free trade, has raised welfare in participating countries and that its stalling may lead to a decrease in people’s prosperity worldwide. However, the current situation is also an opportunity to rethink the basic conditions that have to be met in order for free trade to actually lead to an improvement in people’s living conditions and to ensure that the benefits of globalisation are distributed more equally not only among but also within nations. This contribution therefore focuses on the question of how international trade could become more inclusive and discusses some of the lessons that could be drawn from how globalisation has worked so far.

The current global economic governance is entering a new phase of more balanced and mutually beneficial forces. There is a growing consensus on reforming and innovating global governance mechanisms. After 30 years of rapid economic growth and integration into globalisation, China has embarked on a path to good governance with its own characteristics, namely, responsible state governance and global partnership governance. China’s participation in global governance is manifested in three aspects: speeding up the reform of current global governance system based on the platform of G20; innovating new mechanism to supplement, not replace, existing governance system, such as BRICS New Development Bank, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) and Belt and Road Initiative; actively supporting regional economic growth and prosperity through free and open trade and investment. The goals of China’s participation in global governance are mainly reflected in the following five aspects: to realise the Chinese dream with two goals in 100 years, namely, to make the country rich and the people strong; to ensure the sovereignty and security of territory and maritime rights and to safeguard national unity; in-depth share of global rule-making authority through global governance, regional cooperation and decision-making procedures of international organisations; to promote the internationalisation of the Chinese Yuan, making it one of the world’s key currencies; to innovate development model and enhance China’s soft power.

This chapter discusses how far the developing country regions and the major developing country regions have been able to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and what this implies for their success in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa have not reached their MDGs while the other regions have done so. However, performance in all regions improved after the acceptance of the MDG declaration in 2000. Past trends suggest that most regions would reach their SDGs except Sub-Saharan Africa. As far as the major developing countries are concerned, they have except for India been by and large successful in meeting their MDGs and this bodes well for achieving the SDGs. An important aspect of their performance is that growth in Asia is not very inclusive and very high growth rates are required to improve the social conditions. Growth in the other regions has a much larger impact on social improvement.

During its presidency, Germany was able to bring the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) agenda to the fore. This chapter argues that the Development Working Group mandated to work towards achievement of the 2030 agenda is structurally bound to fail as its members do not command much clout within governments. The chapter bemoans the concentration of international scholars on process and modalities rather than on substantive reform. This chapter finds some hope in the emergence of the BRICS as a strong voice. It also makes a number of suggestions, whereby the G20 can act as a catalyst towards achieving the 2030 agenda.

The UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, adopted in 2015, is a very good starting point for efforts of the G20 to define collective action that addresses the challenges of globalisation. In 2016, the G20 made important progress at the Hangzhou Summit by adopting the “Action Plan on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”. During the 2017 Hamburg Summit, the G20 re-emphasised their commitment to the 2030 Agenda in the official Summit communique and decided to take additional steps to promote the implementation of the 2030 Agenda. In the Buenos Aires Update, adopted in 2018, G20 leaders committed to highlighting collective G20 actions taken so far on implementing the Action Plan. The Osaka Update, adopted in 2019, highlights priorities and new collective actions put forward by the Japanese G20 Presidency, strengthens the multistakeholder dialogue on the 2030 Agenda and continues the peer learning mechanism on the implementation of the Action Plan. While these commitments represent steps into the right direction, more needs to be done by the G20 to deliver on the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. This chapter discusses the main elements of the 2030 Agenda and assesses its specific implementation challenges. It also investigates the role of the G20 and outlines the main steps the G20 has to undertake in order to use its potential for promoting implementation. The chapter concludes by enumerating policy recommendations for future G20 summits with a view to the implementation of the 2030 Agenda.

The strength of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) with respect to health is that they have moved beyond the narrow focus on a very selective list of priorities that characterised the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) to a wider description of health outcomes and processes. The targets described under the health goals of the SDGs are categorised into three groups — those representing the unfinished agenda of the MDGs, essentially with regard to reproductive and child health and some communicable diseases; those that are new inclusions under the SDGs, largely relating to non-communicable diseases (NCDs), substance abuse, injuries and environment health; and a third sub-group, characterised as “means of implementation” targets. There is a vision underlying the SDGs that calls for development to be seen as much more than economic growth rates, and health as much more than a matter of achieving numerical targets restricted to maternal and child survival.

The importance of expanding the basket of “health targets” comes none too soon. The Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs) have a substantial burden of not only reproductive and communicable diseases but also higher age-standardised morbidity and mortality rates for NCDs. The large burden of disease due to NCDs in LMICs is not only due to risk factors but also due to poor access to good quality primary health care.

To realise such an ambitious, even aspirational, set of goals, the first and foremost requirement is that there is a political commitment to envision health, including access to quality health care services, as a fundamental right that nation states have the responsibility to fulfil. This commitment needs to be reflected in a matching increase in public health expenditure. Other than political will and public investment, there are three more essential policy requirements: a road map that guides progress towards achievement of the SDGs, a community-based plan of action to address the wider determinants of health, and a measurement and accountability framework which can measure and publicly display the progress that governments are making towards achieving the SDGs. In each of these policy dimensions, the needs of health equity have to be factored in.

The major concern of human beings from ancient days on, after food and other physical needs, most probably, has been “health”. Once thirst and the pangs of the stomach have been satisfied, they might have been, as is the case with modern men and women, searching for ways to keep themselves healthy, in the sense free from ailments and tiredness. This, of course, proved a very difficult task in that the natural tendency of nature has been towards disintegration and activating decay, so that newer bodies can be formed. But, Homo sapiens went on fighting the same, initially with natural remedies and later with chemicals. This has achieved some success but not total victory. It is an on-going war, which may continue, perhaps, as long as human beings are there. Of late, humans have realised the importance of combining the forces of all in this great struggle. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) have been aimed to achieve various goals with a concerted effort of all and universal healthcare is one such.

Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 4 on education considerably expands the global agenda beyond access to primary education, addressing each stage of formal education as well as the inclusion of several vulnerable groups, teacher supply and training, and provision of scholarships. However, in light of the author’s field experiences of education with children and adults in India, this chapter takes a critical view to explore the areas of learning that are likely to be crowded out by SDG 4 targets and indicators. These concerns emanate from an examination of the SDG vision of education, deviations from previous global agendas, problems with specific indicators and the financial prioritisation and legal status of education.

The chapter argues that at the root of these concerns are a series of assumptions inherent in global goal setting that limit the individual and collective abilities to set an agenda on education, causing a number of goals to be concealed within the goal on education. As a result, the SDG agenda advocates equity and inclusion while ignoring perspectives on learning that differ from the dominant model; it encourages entrepreneurship while failing to address the broken link between education and employment; it calls for sustainability while remaining silent on the growing aspirations of youth for consumption; and it attempts to ensure accountability through indicators that promote certain learning outcomes over others. The chapter concludes with a number of ways in which those setting future global goals can be mindful of their potential to benefit as well as undermine the project of global education, and proposes a set of process-oriented targets and indicators that may more effectively address concerns of equity, sustainability and accountability.

After analyzing the various arguments in favour of public investments in education, this chapter argues that one of the main reasons behind the problem of out of school children in India, in South Asia, is the lack of public investment. South Asia is home to about one-third of the out of school children. The present level of public investment in education in South Asia is the lowest among the developing country regions, and the existing literature holds this to be one of the major factors. The vast majority of out of school children of South Asia live in India. Based on the 71st round of the National Sample Survey data (2014), the chapter estimates that there are 15.52 million out of school children in the age group of 6–14 years and 46.84 million in the age group 6–18 years. The likelihood of being out of school is higher in rural areas compared to urban areas, girls compared to boys, lower caste compared to higher caste and low-income groups compared to high income groups. Financial constraint and distance to school are the major reasons to be out of school. A pattern of low share of expenditure on education as a share of state gross domestic product (SGDP) is associated with the high rate of out of school children. Although causality from education to economic growth is very clear, economic growth might or might not lead to better education. Moreover, economic growth is not a prerequisite for educational development, and economically poor developing countries can also achieve these lofty goals, if there is political will as illustrated by the ups and downs of public expenditure on education in India, from the pre-colonial age to the current neo-liberal era.

The following section is included:

• Index