IFPRI Blog / Issue Post / Dec. 21, 2018
Discussing the G20 Summit with
Eugenio
Diaz-Bonilla
By Smita Aggarwal
International trade and investment emerged as the top priorities for this years’ G20 Summit, which brought together heads of state and government, ministers, and other high level participation from the Group of 20 developed and developing countries that seeks to set the future global economic agenda. Eugenio Diaz-Bonilla, head of IFPRI’s Latin America and Caribbean program, represented the institute in the Agricultural Deputies meeting at the G20 Summit in Buenos Aires Nov. 29-Dec. 1. In this interview with IFPRI Communications Specialist Smita Aggarwal, he discusses the key takeaways from the summit and the way forward to achieving Sustainable Development Goal 2.
1
Eugenio Diaz-Bonilla: There are two sets of takeaways: One on process and other on substance. First, on process. In a world with many complex challenges and different interests, it is crucial that the presidents, prime ministers, and heads of state have the chance to meet and discuss personally the main issues affecting humanity. There is no other forum like the G20, with this level of personal participation by the highest authorities in the countries involved.
Furthermore, the G20 process has tried lately to enlarge the space for dialogue through engagement groups outside governments, an effort that the Argentine presidency continued and strengthened successfully.
Regarding substance, there are several key points that merit highlighting. First, it was important that all countries signed the document. Second, in that document countries renewed their commitment to work together to improve a rules-based international order (paragraph 5). Third, related to that there was the commitment to complete the review of IMF quotas (“further strengthening the global financial safety net with a strong, quota-based, and adequately resourced IMF at its centre;” paragraph 23), to expand the work of the Paris Club to include other emerging creditors (paragraph 24) and to “support the necessary reform of the WTO to improve its functioning,” while recognizing the contribution that the multilateral trading system has made to growth, productivity, innovation, job creation and development (paragraph 27). And there were several other commitments that would be too long to list here. It is true that people may differ about whether there could have been better or stronger language on other topics, such as the previously usual commitment to fighting protectionism, and the support of the Paris Agreement to tackle climate change. Also, more recently the United States seems to have moved away from supporting a permanent quota increase for the IMF. But, overall, I think the document outlines a solid agenda for the G20 going forward.
In your opinion, what are the key takeaways from the summit?
There is no other forum like the G20, with this level of personal participation by the highest authorities in the countries involved.
2
Eugenio Diaz-Bonilla: The presidential declaration reaffirms the commitment of the G20 countries “to tackling the challenges of food security,” in order to achieve “a world free of hunger and all forms of malnutrition,” which is similar to the SDGs wording (paragraph 11). The topic of this year was sustainable soil management, which was also linked to the adequate management of water and riverbanks, “taking into consideration the specific needs of family and small-holder farmers.” There was additional language about “the voluntary use and sharing of innovative as well as traditional agricultural practices and technologies”; the importance of “collaboration among public and private stakeholders to strengthen risk management, facilitate adaptation to a changing environment, protect biodiversity and provide effective responses to reduce the impacts of extreme weather on agriculture.”
The work on reduction of food waste and losses was ratified.
Argentina’s presidency put three key items on the G20 agenda: “The future of work: unleashing peoples' potential”; “infrastructure for development: Mobilizing private resources to reduce the infrastructure deficit”; and “a sustainable food future: Improving soils and increasing productivity.” Could you tell us about the progress made on the third goal of a sustainable food future?
3
Eugenio Diaz-Bonilla: The G20 emphasis was mainly on sustainable infrastructure in general, and ways of addressing the infrastructure financing gap, rather than on food systems per se. The Argentine focus was on attracting more private capital to infrastructure investment, by transforming that in an asset class, through greater contractual standardization and improved risk mitigation instruments. The emphasis on scaling up investments to build sustainable food systems was mainly a topic that we at IFPRI have been working on. With other co-authors or alone, I have written several papers on the issue, arguing that a similar approach of building an asset class for sustainable infrastructure can be used in the case of financing the transformation of food systems, considering employment, nutrition and health, and environmental objectives. In that regard, the commitment in paragraph 7 is relevant: “to further create enabling conditions for resource mobilization from public, private and multilateral resources, including innovative financial mechanisms and partnerships, such as impact investment for inclusive and sustainable growth, in line with the G20 Call on Financing for Inclusive Business.”
There was a huge emphasis on involving private and public sector financing to scale up investments to build sustainable food systems. Did we see any movement in this direction during the summit or commitment from the nations to enhance public spending?
4
Eugenio Diaz-Bonilla: As noted before, the G20 allows leaders of different countries to have bilateral conversations of topics of concern. The presidents of China and U.S. took the opportunity to continue a high-level dialogue on different topics that concern both nations (and that affect the whole planet). Regarding the Paris Agreement, the U.S. government asked for a separate paragraph, and the rest accepted, reiterating its decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement. In that paragraph 21, the U.S. government also affirmed “its strong commitment to economic growth and energy access and security, utilizing all energy sources and technologies, while protecting the environment.”
Did the U.S.-China trade war and U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement cast a shadow on some of the gains that could otherwise have been made at this global leadership summit?
There will always be differences of interests and
opinions, but the key is to maintain open the channels
for dialogue and to strive to build consensus.
5
Eugenio Diaz-Bonilla: The government of Argentina titled the document (and it was also the main emphasis for the opening document of this Presidency) “Building consensus for fair and sustainable development.” The emphasis was on dialogue and building of consensus with the common goal of “fair and sustainable development,” pursuing an agenda that, as it is mentioned in the final declaration, should be “people-centred, inclusive and forward-looking.” There will always be differences of interests and opinions, but the key is to maintain open the channels for dialogue and to strive to build consensus, working directly at the highest levels of authority in the countries involved. This is the unique role of the G20. IFPRI, along with other international organizations, have contributed, and will continue to support that necessary dialogue with timely, rigorous, fact-based and neutral policy research.
What is the way forward for these nations on the issues of common interest like ensuring food security, sustainable development and climate change?
Explore more research topics
