G20 Summit, September 2016
Leaving No-One Behind? The G20 and the 2030
Sustainable Development Agenda
Jessica Peppiate
Department of Geography, University of Sheffield
International
G20
question that arises is whether the rhetoric
Hangzhou Summit. ‘Development’ has
of furthering global commitments to
been a consistent area of consideration for
achieving the SDGs will amount to tangible,
the G20 Leader’s Summit since its
coordinated and serious efforts.
conception,
Media
with
Centre
previous
–
summits
extending their original remit beyond an
Previous Involvement of the G20 on
exclusive focus to affect crisis management
Development
after the global financial crash to extended
attempts to cushion the effects of
Since its creation, the G20 has been
economic instability in low and middle
concerned with minimising the impacts of
income countries. However, with 2015
global economic instability on low and
seeing the global endorsement of the UN’s
middle income countries and has stated its
2030 Sustainable Development Agenda,
consistent commitment to promoting
the global audience now turns to the first
‘stable and sustainable world economic
G20 summit since its adoption for guidance
growth that benefits all’. This reflects the
on the implementation of the newly
role the G20 has adopted in balancing the
ratified Sustainable Development Goals
management of the global economy and
(SDGs). With the increased pressure that
stewardship of globalisation more broadly.
follows, the 2016 G20 agenda places
Issues surrounding development span the
‘sustainable and inclusive growth’ at the
range of topics the G20 is concerned with,
forefront of this year’s summit. The
G20 Summit, September 2016
and as such, development has consistently
Furthermore, the Multi Year Action Plan
been, to a certain degree, on the agenda.
(MYAP) identified key areas for inclusive
growth, including infrastructure, human
Previous summits have all shown their own
resource development, trade, private
interpretation of global development
investment and job creation, financial
concerns. In London in 2009 this was in
inclusion, growth with resilience, food
terms of the commitment to meeting the
security, domestic resource mobilisation
Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)
and knowledge sharing. The G20’s framing
and Official Development Assistance (ODA)
of development within economic terms for
pledges, including debt relief for sub-
promoting international economic and
Saharan Africa. In Pittsburgh in 2009 this
financial cooperation is what sets this
came in the form of ‘raising living
platform
standards in emerging markets and
governance bodies, such as the G7.
apart
from
other
global
developing countries’. In 2010, the Toronto
summit reaffirmed the G20’s commitment
The extent to which the G20 is an
to
the
appropriate and effective platform for the
Development Working Group (DWG) with
promotion of international development is
the view to elaborate ‘a development
much debated. It has previously been
agenda and multi-year action plans
argued that the G20 is the ‘wrong
consistent with the G20’s focus on
international forum for development’,
promoting
with
development
by
economic
creating
growth
and
criticisms
stemming
from
the
resilience’. The 2010 summit in Seoul
contention that the G20 should remain
marked a clear transformation in the way
focused solely on international economic
in which development was framed. The
cooperation. It has also been suggested
Seoul Development Consensus for Shared
that the development agenda adopted by
Growth
overarching
the G20 is too broad, without a central
principles for the G20, including economic
point of focus, and is thus too disconnected
growth, global development partnerships
from the main focus of the leaders’
and
discussions. One of the key criticisms of the
outlined
private
some
sector
participation.
G20 Summit, September 2016
G20 in tackling development issues is the
the SDGs call upon action from all
underrepresentation of the countries that
countries. The SDGs are also praised in
development purports to assist.
their
reflection
of
modern
developmentalist paradigms, influenced
The Sustainable Development Goals
predominantly by Amartya Sen, which
prioritise
On
25th
September, 2015 in New York,
world leaders gathered at the United
human
development
over
previously crude income-based measures
of development.
Nations to adopt the SDGs – an ambitious
set of aims and targets intended to push
Despite their eager anticipation and the
forward development policy. The SDGs
promise
comprise part of the UN’s 2030 Agenda for
development frontier beyond the MDGS,
Sustainable
their
the SDGs have already faced a great deal of
creation saw global collaboration and
criticism. This is a consequence of their
participation on an enormous scale with
sprawling nature and for consisting of
the view to making transformative steps
arguably
unquantifiable,
towards eradicating poverty in all forms.
targets,
promoting
Development,
and
of
development
progressing
ideals
the
global
unattainable
near
utopian
with
little
The SDGs were adopted to take over from
acknowledgement of the ‘how’ or ‘by
the previously unsuccessful MDGs, and
whom’. There are four main areas of
were thus designed to overcome many of
ambiguity within the SDGs: how should the
the criticisms faced by the MDGs. The SDGs
concept of universality be interpreted,
are therefore exceedingly more ambitious
who is financing the goals, will they reduce
in their aims, expanding from the previous
poverty and inequality, and who is
set of eight goals to a new series of 17 goals
responsible for delivering the goals?
and 169 targets. One of the major shifts of
the SDGs from the MDGs is their
Interpreting Universality – the SDGs
universality. Rather than the previous
embody the praised shift away from
narrow focus on donor-led development,
development considered in terms of aid
G20 Summit, September 2016
from G7 members to a more inclusive
(AAAA) set out to answer this question,
agenda that promotes actions from all
however it was strongly criticised by civil
countries. However, arguments have been
society
put forward from developing countries
commitment
that the degree of responsibility for
international tax reform and shunting of
implementing the goals should depend on
responsibility from traditional donors.
groups
for
to
lacking
issues
clear
such
as
the capacity of each country. The issue of
how to apply the principle of common but
Tackling Inequality – the SDG target for
differentiated responsibilities (CBDR) is
inequality reduction is the first ever global
contested. The EU, UK and USA contend
target to
that CBDR only applies to climate change
inequality. However, the goal focuses
negotiations.
developing
exclusively on income growth for the
countries highlight the need for developed
bottom 40% of the population. Not
countries to carry out their ODA assistance.
considering the top end of wealth
Alternatively,
decrease
national
income
distribution appears to directly contradict
Who is Financing the SDGs? – a major area
the objective of this goal by arguably
of controversy since endorsement of the
ignoring many key drivers of inequality.
SGDs has been where the responsibility lies
This sidelines the responsibility of the rich
for funding the goals. The financing needs
and powerful by refraining from discussing
for
are
issues of wealth and redistribution, and
enormous, with estimates varying from
reads more like a measure for pro-poor
$3tr to $17tr. Again a debate appears to
national development than as a measure
have surfaced between developed and
for reducing inequality.
sustainable
development
developing countries, with developed
domestic
Deliverability – another area open for
resource mobilisation and developing
interpretation within the agenda is where
countries pushing for a continuation of aid
the responsibility lies for delivering the
alongside reducing illicit financial flows.
goals. There is lack of consideration of who
The UN’s Addis Ababa Action Agenda
is responsible in following through on
countries
advocating
for
G20 Summit, September 2016
commitments to the SDGs, be this the G7,
The Role of the G20 in Implementing the
the G20, or UN agencies. Lack of
SDGs
governance coordination was one of the
reasons the MDGs were not successfully
With their targets even more ambitious
met, yet it is still unclear what institutional
than the previously failed MDGs, it is clear
architecture will be utilised to implement
that high-level political consideration and
the new agenda. Goal 16 in particular is
action will be essential if the SDGs are to
concerned with this, however only refers
succeed. This is where the G20 has the
to governance once, and further still does
potential to cement global commitment to
not define what it is. Target 16.7 argues the
these goals.
need to ‘ensure responsive, inclusive,
participatory and representative decision-
The potential power the G20 has in
making at all levels’, yet these terms are
pushing forward the implementation of
also
to
the SDGs in terms of governance is realised
interpretation, begging the question what
in that it combines advanced and emerging
is ‘good governance’ and how is this
economies, represents the majority of the
measured on a global scale? As Hulme
global sources of ODA, the largest
points out, there are conceptual and
contributors to CO2 emissions, and claims
methodological issues surrounding the 16th
authority over half of the world’s poor
goal, and fear of cultural imperialism
population. The G20 therefore has the
through
Western
‘convening power, the legitimacy and the
conceptualisations of ‘good governance’
responsibility to assume a leadership role
on low-income countries, alongside other
in achieving the SDGs’.
undefined
political
the
and
left
imposition
barriers
such
of
as
open
different
interpretations of governance, will all
impede the realisation of this highly
problematic goal.
In terms of reaffirming global commitment
to
the
SDGs,
adopting
national
implementation plans within the G20
member states will send a clear message
about
the
sustainable
development
G20 Summit, September 2016
agenda’s universality. This would reaffirm
and North-South cooperation to South-
the serious commitment of the G20
South cooperation, the G20 can facilitate
members to the goals.
understanding
regarding
these
approaches. China has demonstrated
Implementation of the SDGs requires
impressive growth to become arguably the
collective international action, due to the
world’s most dynamic economy, and has
international nature of many of the goals.
reduced domestic poverty levels through
Goal 17 specifically highlights the need to
agricultural
‘revitalise the global partnership for
industrialisation,
sustainable development’. The G20 is a
infrastructure
significant platform for global economic
China also displays many of the issues
cooperation for developed and developing
concomitant with rapid urbanisation, such
countries alike, and is in a unique position
as rising inequality and sprawling informal
to strengthen collective action towards
development. At a pivotal moment in
implementation of the goals. One area in
China’s development, the country is also
which this could be realised is in building
making financial resources available for
institutional
with
developing countries. Many countries have
development financing bodies and or with
therefore indicated their eagerness to hear
underwriting new bodies like the New
China
Development Bank.
development.
One particularly exciting aspect of the
While the G20 arguably has the potential
summit in Hangzhou is the opportunity it
for
presents
own
implementing
and
structural and ideological constraints that
development. As a platform bringing
somewhat limit the capacity for this to
together
different
extend beyond the rhetoric. While the G20
experiences of international development
provides the opportunity for countries
cooperation, from traditional donor led aid
with different political and economic
relationships
China
experiences
to
of
countries
discuss
its
urbanisation
with
development,
urbanisation
development.
share
its
furthering
the
However,
experiences
commitment
SDGs,
and
there
of
to
are
G20 Summit, September 2016
values to share experiences, the lack of
The structural constraints of the G20 still
ideological
the
act as a barrier, preventing development
relevance of specific goals to different
from being considered as an integral issue
contexts undermines the
of the summit. The Deveopment Working
consensus
collective
regarding
action
implementation
ability for
during
of
the
the
Group (DWG) is attended by development
sustainable
cooperation department officials, whereas
development agenda.
issues such as finance, agriculture and
employment are handled by separate
Furthermore,
the
disappointingly
departments.
This
differentiation
lacklustre commitment of the AAAA
undermines the multisectoral cooperation
regarding financing the SDGs has not
needed between different departments in
addressed persistent challenges caused by
order to coordinate efforts to realise the
the
SDGs. Mainstreaming development across
diverging
priorities
of
different
countries. The attempts of countries such
the
as the EU, USA, UK and Japan to shift the
coordination between the different sectors
discourse
is critical if the G20 is to make any concrete
away
from
North-South
relationships have been seen by many in
G20
agenda
and
encouraging
contributions to the SDGs.
the ‘Global South’ as evading the historic
responsibility of these countries to commit
Outcomes of the G20 for Sustainable
to their development contributions. The
Development – Leaving No-One Behind?
domestic and international environments
are, however, not as disparate as these
President Xi’s B20 opening speech was
arguments suggest. For example, domestic
positive in setting the tone for the 2016
resource mobilisation will only prove
G20 Leaders’ Summit by reaffirming
effective if international cooperation can
development as the key focal point. Xi
adequately monitor and reduce illicit
situated
financial flows.
development firmly within the Chinese
context,
discussions
drawing
on
of
sustainable
his
personal
experiences of witnessing development
G20 Summit, September 2016
alongside referencing China’s investment
Development Agenda ensured that issues
and development policy more broadly. Xi
surrounding
suggested that this year’s G20 Summit
were prioritised during this year’s summit.
sustainable
development
would result in a specific implementation
plan for the 2030 Agenda. The importance
This was realised in the creation of the G20
of this outcome was reiterated in the UN
Action Plan on the 2030 Agenda for
Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon’s G20
Sustainable Development – a 48-page
press conference on the 4th September,
document
when the UNSG praised China for
implementing both the SDGs and the
prioritising the SDGs and called for
AAAA. Broadly speaking, ‘inclusive and
renewed commitment to the goals from all
interconnected development’ consisted of
members. Ban Ki-Moon reflected on the
four thematic areas. Firstly, support for
new role of the G20 in the transition away
industrialisation
from crisis management towards setting
voluntary policy options is discussed,
the agenda for long term sustainable
including
growth.
speech
infrastructure and other industries. The
potentially over-played the role of China in
second area of consideration is in
contributing to the successful achievement
infrastructure
of MDG1: halving global poverty (a result
private investment. Thirdly, generating
arguably caused by China’s bias and not a
quality employment in order to increase
fair representative on global poverty
sustainable wage growth is outlined. And
reduction) and reaffirmed the arguably out
finally,
dated and dangerously simplistic definition
surrounding food security, which saw
of poverty as those living on less than $1.25
prioritisation of investment from scientific
a day, the pressure he placed on this year’s
and private sectors.
While
the
UNSG’s
outlining
in
investment
commitments
Africa
and
development
concerns
are
to
through
trade
in
through
articulated
summit to make substantial commitments
to both the UNFCC Climate Change
Yet,
as
stated
earlier,
whether
Agreement and the 2030 Sustainable
commitments to implement the 2030
Agenda extend beyond the rhetoric to
G20 Summit, September 2016
tangible and substantial actions from G20
seen as taking priority over collective
members remains a key question. This is
action.
particularly pressing in the face of the four
remaining SDG ambiguities outlined in the
Financing the SDGs – financing sustainable
previous section.
development was discussed in terms of a
continuation of the AAAA, and prioritised
Interpreting Universality – reflecting the
domestic resource mobilisation. There was
so-called ‘Hangzhou Consensus’, this year
some reflection on the potential negative
saw discussions of the G20’s transition
impacts of illicit financial flows, resulting in
from crisis management to managing long
a proposal to ‘support the principles of the
term
The
Addis Tax Initiative’. This discussion was
challenge that this presents is promoting
limited to the impact of illicit activities on
agreed upon, universal values aimed
mobilising domestic resources that can be
towards a long-term vision that applies to
utilised for development. However, the
all countries globally. While, broadly
main focus was on the potential of private
speaking, ‘sustainable development’ might
investment. The role of the private sector
be argued to be the universal long-term
for financing infrastructure, supporting
aim, in terms of the SDGs, the question of
industrialisation
which goals and targets different countries
employment and addressing food security
ought to prioritise was largely ignored.
was explicitly stated. Overall, the outcome
Outcomes of the Hangzhou Summit
of the G20 Summit prioritised the
included commitment to ‘contributing to
importance of developing countries to
the implementation of the 2030 Agenda by
‘further their own development’, arguably
setting
downplaying
macroeconomic
an
example
policies.
through
bold,
in
the
Africa,
generating
responsibilities
of
transformative collective and intended
developed countries to meet the SDGs. The
national actions in a wide range of areas’.
G20 members stated they would reaffirm
In this regard, efforts towards adopting
their ODA commitments, which consists of
national implementation plans could be
a 46-year-old measure of 0.7% of the
countries’ GNI, which so far only 6
G20 Summit, September 2016
countries
have
managed
to
meet.
Concerns over the suitability of this
significant potential resource for financing
development remains to be ignored.
measure therefore continued to be
Deliverability – rather than utilising the
ignored by G20 members in Hangzhou.
convening power the G20 has as a
Tackling Inequality – the outcomes of the
collective, while some lip service was paid
G20
Summit
concerns
over
to aligning the work of the G20 with the
cooperation
and
2030 Agenda, it was subsequently stated
advancing considerations of Base Erosion
that the ‘global follow-up and review of the
and Profits Shifting (BEPS). However, these
2030 Agenda is a UN-led process’. This
concerns were only briefly discussed in
arguably shifts responsibility away from
relation to development, reflecting the
the
structural barriers still apparent within the
subsequent discussions of commitment to
G20 in that discussions of economic
implementing the SDGs. The effect of this
governance and sustainable development
erodes the accountability of the G20
are still very much carried out in separate
members in implementing the 2030
streams. To further demonstrate this,
Agenda. It is hard to see the following
increasing sustainable wage growth was
discussions of sustainable development as
discussed as a priority for reducing
serious following this statement, which
inequality, arguably reflecting concerns
further demonstrated the lack of firm
that inequality is being considered solely in
commitments and actionable plans that
terms of the bottom end of wealth
make up the G20’s consideration of the
distribution and not in consideration of
2030 Agenda.
international
reflect
tax
G20
members
and
undermines
macro drivers of inequality. As long as
not
China had the potential to discuss
mainstreamed in the G20 agenda, and
development in its own terms, and the
redistribution is not directly related to
opening discussions of the 2016 Leaders’
poverty reduction and inequality, then a
Summit showed promise in terms of
sustainable
development
is
prioritising
development
and
making
G20 Summit, September 2016
sustainable development the focal point
commitments to achieving the SDGs and
for this year’s summit. However, reflecting
the AAAA, the lack of substantially outlined
the struggle of the G20 to shift its role
action means that this year’s G20 summit
beyond crisis management to long-term
did little in extending engagement with
economic reform, the G20 Summit in
sustainable development beyond mere
Hangzhou again gave little in the way of
rhetoric.
concrete and measurable actions.
Whilst the much-anticipated G20 Action
Plan on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable
Jessica Peppiate is a Researcher in the
Development was successful in outlining
Department of Geography, University of
the priority areas within the 2030 Agenda
Sheffield.
for
G20
members
and
confirmed