G-20 presents unique opportunity to do better

THE world needs more global governance than it has at present. At the same time, sovereign countries are reluctant to cede power to a supra-national body. As a result, there are big differences of opinion about just what form this global governance should take.

When G-20 (Group of 20) leaders first met in 2008, it seemed that this grouping might be the key institution for global governance of economic issues, taking over from the unrepresentative G-7 (Group of Seven). Its early years were promising. In the aftermath of the global financial crisis, it helped coordinate global fiscal stimulus and pressured countries to resist the sort of protectionist measures that had caused the downward spiral of global trade during the 1930s depression. As the crisis diminished, however, so too did G-20's relevance.

Today, there are many examples of the failure of global governance, even if we confine the list to economic issues. Voting rights and quotas in the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank have not been properly adjusted to reflect the greatly increased importance of the emerging economies, especially China. The World Trade Organization (WTO) has laboured on the Doha Round for more than a decade, with no result. The World Health Organization (WHO) still lacks the mandate and resources to do its job effectively, with the Ebola outbreak reminding us that there is no clear process for dealing with health emergencies.