Community HomeGroupsMembersEldisHelpLogin/Join

Development Forum for G20, Seoul, 2010 Discussions

General Information on Development Forum for G20

Ilcheong - May 12, 2010 7:31 am (Discussion)  

To post, login or join the site and this group 
Posts: 47

 Please leave your questions and answers related to all the processes of Development Forum for G20 such as web-based forum, TV debate and Development Forum in Seoul. 



Starting at 13 of 21 messages (Prev msg:  12) << First | < Previous | Outline
  Show all messages in thread  

Laura Bolton - Jun 25, 2010 10:45 am (#13 Total: 21)  


Posts: 99
Replying to: CatherineCheng (Jun 24, 2010 4:15 pm)
SURVEY - YOUR INPUT ON THERE MAIN G20 ISSUES Dear Forum Participants, We are working on putting together a matrix...

I will look out for info on the UK stance in the first two questions. For question 3: What is your country's stance on the recovery and/or exit strategies; that is should more stimulus programs be delivered or should the control engage in deficit control?

Change in British government has affected this hugely. There is a massive swing towards deficit control. It is being dubbed as our recovery strategy. The new chancellor has announced an emergency budget: spending cuts and tax rises.
http://www.guardian....

[Last Editor: Laurab, Jun 25, 2010 10:49 am. Total Edits: 1]

Ilcheong - Jun 29, 2010 9:42 am (#14 Total: 21)  


Posts: 47
Development issues in G20 Seoul.

As the Toronto G20 Summit ended, major agendas of the G20 Seoul Summit emerged. The meaning of development, which is one of the major agendas Seoul is pushing, is not clear yet given the remark of the Spokesperson of the Presidential committee for the G20.

The following is the summary of the CIGI news briefing.
(http://www.cigionline.org/blogs/2010/6/looking-ahead-g20-seoul-summit)

As the Toronto G20 Summit ended, major agendas of the G20 Seoul Summit emerged. They would be
1) the framework for growth
2) financial regulation
3) reform of international financial institutions

Seoul will also contribute to the relevance of G20 for countries like Korea by focusing on
4) a ‘global safety net’ and
5) development

According to the Spokesperson for the Presidential Committee for the G20 Summit, development—facilitating growth and infrastructure and technology development— is an issue that Korea feels particularly strong about.

Seoul will be both significant in scope and symbolic in nature as Korea will be the first non-G8 nation to host and chair the G20 Summit.

Global growth is dependent on the private sector, as such, Seoul will be hosting a Business Summit with over 100 international CEOs immediately before the G20 Summit, November 10-11. There will be sessions between business leaders and G20 leaders to integrate the Business Summit into the G20 leaders’ discussion that will proceed it. The Business Summit is being organized through the private sector.



AGENDA OVERVIEW
I. G20 Commitments and Implementation

“In the short term, the G20 will try to build on the less-than-robust recovery and further enhance international cooperation to generate strong, sustainable and balanced growth.

1) Ensuring Global Economic Recovery

To be done through coordinated economic policies and growth-friendly measures that are tailored to individual countries.
2) Framework for Strong, Sustainable, and Balanced Growth

Leaders will agree on policy recommendations to strengthen international cooperation for future economic growth and stability—based on options presented today in Toronto.
3) Strengthening the International Financial Regulatory System

The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) will proposed rules regarding bank capital and banking requirements by the November 2010 Seoul Summit.
4) Modernizing the International Financial Institutions

G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors have called for reform of IMF to be completed by November Seoul Summit.
II. New Agenda & Initiatives

“Korea, as the G20 president for 2010, will also bring new perspectives and new issues to the G20, with a view to addressing the needs of the emerging and developing world as part of the effort to support sustainable growth globally.”

1) Global Financial Safety Nets

Korea is advocating strengthening global financial safety nets to assist countries to deal with capital volatility and Seoul will explore policy options to improve global financial safety nets through national, regional and multilateral efforts to deal with capital volatility.
2) Development Issues

Development issues are key to rebalancing the global economy and Korea will act as a bridge between advanced, emerging and developing worlds by applying lessons learned through experience.

3) Seoul G20 Business Summit

Korea will hold a Business Summit (top 100 global CEOs) one day ahead of the November 11-12 Summit.



KEY FUTURE MEETINGS FOR THE G20 IN 2010
September 4-5
G20 Deputies Meeting – Rep. Of Korea (Gwangju)

October
Sherpas Meeting – Rep. Of Korea

October 21-23
G20 Deputies Meeting and G20 Finance Ministers & Central Bank Governors Meeting – Rep. Of Korea (Gyeongju)

November 10-11
G20 Seoul Business Summit – Rep. of Korea (Seoul)

November 11-12
G20 Summit – Rep. Of Korea (Seoul)

Replies to this message
  • RLovelace (Jun 29, 2010 3:28 pm)


  • Moderator-UNRISD - Jun 29, 2010 11:32 am (#15 Total: 21)  


    Posts: 21
    --- A small note on the World Bank’s Background Paper for the G20 in Toronto (You can find the paper in the folder of this website).----

    What we are seeing is not just financial crisis, part two, it is sustainable growth challenge, part one.

    The report emphasized developing countries’ maintenance of growth enhancing investments in infrastructure and human capital, which will be driving engine of the global recovery. However, it points out that the ability of these countries to maintain spending in the face of a slow recovery is uncertain as their strong fiscal positions, ample reserves and capacity to reprogram lower priority spending have been depleted by the crisis, which is related to the slowed down or potential reverse of recent progress towards the MDGs. Maternal and child health, which has made the least progress, less than 1 % of the average maternal mortality rate per year between 1990 and 2005, is under threat and needs, the report argues, the investment in housing, water, sanitation, nutrition and education.

    However the report maintained the staunch position of fiscal conservatism and supply-side management of economy. It says “Through trade and finance linkages, economic outcomes in advanced economies have a significant effect on developing countries. As the recovery matures, the longer-term growth agenda should move to the center of policy coordination, with a shift in focus from demand to supply stimulus – fiscal, financial, and structural reforms that enhance medium- to long-term potential growth”.

    Although the paper did not urge to move our focus to “long-term” structure right now, a warning from a liberal with conscience against the proponents of the fiscal conservatism. “So saying that we need to focus on the long-term, and not worry our little heads about trivial short-term issues like the highest long-term unemployment rate since the Great Depression, may sound like wisdom-but its actually folly.” (Paul Krugman, 25, June, 2010. http://krugman.blogs...

    RLovelace - Jun 29, 2010 3:28 pm (#16 Total: 21)  


    Posts: 25
    Replying to: Ilcheong (Jun 29, 2010 9:42 am)
    Development issues in G20 Seoul. As the Toronto G20 Summit ended, major agendas of the G20 Seoul Summit emerged....

    Thank you for your post. The Korean government has made clear that development will be a part of the G20 agenda, but to many of us exactly how remains a mystery. A number of US organisations were told by a senior US official last Saturday that a more detailed plan would be elaborated on the following day by Korea, but no plan emerged.

    Here are the development-related portions of the Toronto recent G20 communiqué

    §13. We are committed to narrowing the development gap and that we must consider the impact of our policy actions on low-income countries. We will continue to support development financing, including through new approaches that encourage development financing from both public and private sources.

    §44. We recognize that 2010 marks an important year for development issues. The September 2010 Millennium Development Goals (MDG) High Level Plenary will be a crucial opportunity to reaffirm the global development agenda and global partnership, to agree on actions for all to achieve the MDGs by 2015, and to reaffirm our respective commitments to assist the poorest countries.

    §45. In this regard it is important to work with Least Developed Countries (LDCs) to make them active participants in and beneficiaries of the global economic system. Accordingly we thank Turkey for its decision to host the 4th United Nations Conference on the LDCs in June 2011.

    §46. We welcome the Global Pulse Initiative interim report and look forward to an update.

    §47. Narrowing the development gap and reducing poverty are integral to our broader objective of achieving strong, sustainable and balanced growth and ensuring a more robust and resilient global economy for all. In this regard, we agree to establish a Working Group on Development and mandate it to elaborate, consistent with the G-20’s focus on measures to promote economic growth and resilience, a development agenda and multi-year action plans to be adopted at the Seoul Summit.

    What next?

    There have been indications since Pittsburgh that Korea intends to capitalise on its host status to promote Korean economic development. That the government would do so is perfectly understandable, but such an approach should not confuse the notion that creating preferential climates for business interests is the same thing as promoting development, especially in addressing extreme poverty, infectious disease, etc.

    The outreach efforts announced thus far show a disturbing trend that is presently tilted towards promoting economic interests rather than issues associated with development. In Toronto, for example, there was a business summit but no other corresponding outreach to civil society or for that matter, trade unions that clearly have a more direct role in a business setting.

    By even voicing its intentions to focus on development issues, Korea has substantially raised expectations. The G20 intentions to create a working group on development should bring a strong sense of urgency for action. Korea needs to rapidly and transparently get the group up and working to bring key voices on development to the table beyond just other governments, business, and wealthy donors.

    Ilcheong - Jul 3, 2010 2:21 pm (#17 Total: 21)  


    Posts: 47
    Thank you for your post, RLovelace.

    One of the key figures for the preparation of the G20 Seoul Summit, Dr Il Sakong, (the Economic Advisor to the President (1983-1987) and Finance Minister (1987-1988)) revealed his thought about the development agenda of the G20 Seoul Summit in an interview with Yeonhap News, 1st of July, 2010.

    The following is an excerpt from the Yeonhap News. (the news is in Korean.
    It goes
    “On the approach to the development agenda, Mr Sakong remarked “With regard to economic development issue, Seoul G20 summit will deal with development with a focus on a growth-oriented development which enables developing countries to make economic development, which is different from UN or G7 which has been focusing on addressing poverty through aid” with an emphasis on the difference between Seoul G20 Summit and UN/G7.
    He said “the reason why dealing with development issue is persuasive is the fact that although Korea did receive foreign aid, Korea would not have been the one of today if it had been dependent foreign aid alone. Therefore we are going to focus on sharing the knowhow and knowledge of economically developed countries with developing countries, helping human resource development and facilitating the capacity of developing countries for economic development.”
    Mr Sakong added “human resource development is the most important for the development of developing countries. Therefore, for instance, we will focus on the increase of private sector capacity, which will deal with how to provide conditions for the investment of public or private investment and the activities of the private sector”.
    (the news ins in Korean http://www.yonhapnew...

    Given his role and influence in organising the Seoul Summit and setting the agenda for it, it would not be an exaggeration that this line of thinking is dominant in the circle preparing for the G20 Seoul Summit.

    Although this is a very short and personal thought on development for a journalist, the line of thinking seems to have been already in a broad consensus within the Committee given the remarks of the G20 Presidential Committee spokesperson on the development which is very much economic growth centred one with scant consideration on both normative goals and inevitable negative consequence of economic growth(See the previous post). Hardly visible is questioning why we need growth and what we should do about the inequality and poverty produced in the process of economic growth.

    Seeing him trying to differentiate the Seoul Summit from the efforts of UN/ G7 for the poverty reduction, I remember intensive academic and policy debate on the growth, poverty and inequality started with one of the most controversial articles in the early 2000s, “Growth is good for the poor” written by Dollar and Kraay of the World Bank. Will history really repeat itself, first as tragedy, and second as farce?

    I even starts worrying about how maternal and child health and hunger, one of the major development issues at the previous G8 and G20 Summits will be fed into this framework for the development.

    Although I hope the outcome of the Seoul Summit will turn out very much promising, people have already started looking at the G20 meetings with the mixture of expectations and suspicions. (Please see the following articles by IDS and Sir Richard Jolly, http://www.ids.ac.uk...
     http://www.ids.ac.uk... ).

    RLovelace - Jul 4, 2010 6:01 am (#18 Total: 21)  


    Posts: 25
    Ilcheong, many thanks for posting the excerpt from the Yeonhap News and providing links to the other articles.

    Though it comes as no surprise, it is just the sort of news that is useful for those of us non-Korean G8/G20 followers benefit from knowing. Try as we might through Korea.net and other sources, it is a challenge for non-Korean speaking followers of the G20 process to gain access to timely information. But it is a challenge that hopefully will result in building stronger ties with Korean civil society, scholars and others in the coming months so that informed discussions leading up to the G20 summit also takes place outside of exlusive territory of the governments, central banks and the IFIs. It would be extremely useful if readers of this site, could work to assemble a list of sources of news that are available in English, French, Spanish and other languages if possible.

    Mr. Sakong’s comments are a hint of what is likely to come unless the discussions include a broader range of actors than is currently the case. It is inconceivable that the G20 country delegations comprised of Heads of State, Finance Ministers, and Central Banks has suddenly sprouted the capacity to construct—in a few short months—a development agenda and a multi-year action plan without substantial outside assistance. This almost certainly means that the development agenda and multi-year plan of action will be strongly influenced by the IFIs. That all of this is to happen by November means that the degree to which civil society will be informed about what is being discussed, much less invited to share their development expertise, is very questionable.

    So what is to be done? In Forums like this one, we need to begin identifying sources of information and share what we know with each other. We also need to build linkages between development advocates, especially those within Korean civil society, scholars and others. It would be very useful if we could begin developing a list of organisations and interested parties in Korea so that we routinely share information and contact for analysis and advice.

    The language barrier will be a formidable problem, but I am sure that among the bright minds on this site, someone will have an idea how to overcome this challenge.

    sdforumpawar - Jul 5, 2010 2:23 am (#19 Total: 21)  

    via email  

    Posts: 15
    Dear Ilcheong and colleagues,
    Thank you for several postings. It is really disturbing that G20 in Korea is going focus on DEVELOPMENT in terms of finance and economic development. What can you expect from finance ministries, IMF and the WB?
    In addition to information sharing, I think Development Forum G20 should write a letter to the Chair of G20 in Korea to include social development as agenda item.
    Today development is not an issue. Many Asia-Pacific countries are projected to grow well economically. As the following report suggests:
    UNSCAP (2010). Economic Social Survey of Asia and the Pacific 2010: Sustaining recovery and dynamism for inclusive development. Bangkok: UNESCAP.
    North East Asian region is forecast to grow by 4 percent (though it would be significantly less if China’s growth is taken out from the equation), South East Asia by 5.1 percent and South Asia by 6.1 percent in 2010. China is forecast to grow by 9.5 percent and India by 8.3 percent, two major emerging economies in the region.
    But many western developed countries’ projected growth rates are low: about 1 and less than 2 %
    Thus the issue is not economic growth or development.
    But, how can we make development more sustainable and equitable universally?
    As a broad social policy measure, the UNESCAP (2010, p. 99) rightly notes that
    Looking beyond 2010, accelerating economic growth is crucial to bring down poverty levels. The challenge will be how to make growth more inclusive by spreading its benefits to larger segments of the population. More resources should be devoted to the provision of basic services such as education, health, sanitation and housing particularly for those belonging to lower income groups. Targeted programmes for the benefit of the poor in the broader framework of social protection should also be a priority.
    This policy measure is relevant and also equally challenging to the G20 forum and it should take this on the agenda and we should work towards it.
    Many countries (Mongolia, Cambodia, Lao PGR, the Philippines, Bangladesh, India, Nepal and Sri Lanka) in the region are making slow progress in regards to poverty eradication. Between 1990 and 2005, Asia and the Pacific reduced the number of people living on less than $1.25 a day from 1.5 billion to 979 million, but still nearly 70 percent of the world’s poor live in the region. Although there is some good news in regards to progress towards achieving millennium development goals (MDG), many countries in the region have lagged behind against the MDG indicators – underweight children, primary enrolment and completion, gender, infant mortality, CO2 emissions and water and sanitation (see UNESCAP, 2010a). Can the G20 contribute to inclusive and sustainable growth, particularly at the local level, or to enabling poor people to make use of opportunities created by such growth?
    In my previous posting, I briefly discussed the concept of social development. In continuation to that, we should pursue G20 to take on board a local level social development approach that has been hitherto neglected by the dominant economic development approach. The forthcoming G20 forum unfortunately appears to continue the same outdated and ineffective approach.
     The local level social development approach advocates a comprehensive development of grassroots level communities and villages, which are mostly bypassed by economic growth oriented policies.
    We make a case that comprehensive local level social development should focus on the development of nine dimensions of local level communities: These are:
    1. Cultural development
    2. Political development
    3. Economic development
    4. Ecological development
    5. Educational development
    6. Health development
    7. Housing development
    8. Development of equity groups and
    9. Development of citizens and their institutions
    For detail discussions of these dimensions and the local level social development, please refer to the following sources:
    Pawar, M. & Cox, D. (2010) ‘Social Development’, in Social Development: Critical
    Themes and perspectives, eds. Pawar. M. & Cox, D., Routledge, New York, pp. 13-36.
    Pawar, M. & Cox, D. (2010) ‘Local Level Social Development’, in Social Development:
    Critical themes and perspectives, eds. Pawar. M. & Cox, D., Routledge, New York, pp. 37-53.
    So, friends, let us work towards altering the agenda of G20 in Korea. This is the time to do it.
    There is no pint in critiquing the G20 later. Let us influence it now. Let us change the agenda from development to sustainable development, equitable development and local level social development.
    From
    Manohar Pawar
    Professor of Social Work
    Charles Sturt University, Australia.


    ________________________________________
    From: Eldis.Community.-.Development.Forum.for.G20@csunw.riv.csu.edu.au [Eldis.Community.-.Development.Forum.for.G20@csunw.riv.csu.edu.au]
    Sent: Sunday, 4 July 2010 4:01 PM
    To: Pawar, Manohar
    Subject: General Information on Development Forum for G20

    A new message was posted!
    Poster: RLovelace
    Posted To: Development Forum for G20, Seoul, 2010 Group at http://community.eld...

    Discussions--
         General Information on Development Forum for G20

    Ilcheong, many thanks for posting the excerpt from the Yeonhap News and providing links to the other articles.

    Though it comes as no surprise, it is just the sort of news that is useful for those of us non-Korean G8/G20 followers benefit from knowing. Try as we might through Korea.net and other sources, it is a challenge for non-Korean speaking followers of the G20 process to gain access to timely information. But it is a challenge that hopefully will result in building stronger ties with Korean civil society, scholars and others in the coming months so that informed discussions leading up to the G20 summit also takes place outside of exlusive territory of the governments, central banks and the IFIs. It would be extremely useful if readers of this site, could work to assemble a list of sources of news that are available in English, French, Spanish and other languages if possible.

    Mr. Sakong’s comments are a hint of what is likely to come unless the discussions include a broader range of actors than is currently the case. It is inconceivable that the G20 country delegations comprised of Heads of State, Finance Ministers, and Central Banks has suddenly sprouted the capacity to construct—in a few short months—a development agenda and a multi-year action plan without substantial outside assistance. This almost certainly means that the development agenda and multi-year plan of action will be strongly influenced by the IFIs. That all of this is to happen by November means that the degree to which civil society will be informed about what is being discussed, much less invited to share their development expertise, is very questionable.

    So what is to be done? In Forums like this one, we need to begin identifying sources of information and share what we know with each other. We also need to build linkages between development advocates, especially those within Korean civil society, scholars and others. It would be very useful if we could begin developing a list of organisations and interested parties in Korea so that we routinely share information and contact for analysis and advice.

    The language barrier will be a formidable problem, but I am sure that among the bright minds on this site, someone will have an idea how to overcome this challenge.

    Visit this thread at http://community.eld...

    You can turn off these email notifications and change notification settings in Edit description > Tools > Change my email subscriptions.


    If you have any problem in using this service please contact community@ids.ac.uk and we will try to help.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    This message is for the addressee only and may contain privileged or confidential information. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of IDS.

    Institute of Development Studies
    at the University of Sussex, Brighton BN1 9RE
    Tel: +44 (0)1273 606261; Fax: +44 (0)1273 621202
    IDS, a charitable company limited by guarantee:
    Registered Charity No. 306371; Registered in England 877338; VAT No. GB 350 899914

    Laura Bolton - Jul 5, 2010 11:24 am (#20 Total: 21)  


    Posts: 99
    I am posting this on two different threads where my thoughts have converged so hope it makes sense. The issues: (1) The G-20 in Korea focussing on development in terms of finance and economics. (2) Assisting South Africa and South Korea in devising a development agenda and a multi-year action plan in a short space of time.

    Taking a step back, I find the G-20 is formed of finance ministers and bank governors aiming for financial and economic stability. So it comes as no big surprise that they are talking about development in terms of finance and economics. Of course human/social development requires much more and a meeting of such powerful people should be addressing this as part of their mandate.

    Maybe human and social development specialists should be drafted in for this purpose? Maybe the UN should be helping South Africa and South Korea with a development agenda and multi-year action plan?

    Should we be advocating for change in the G-20 group so that finance ministers are meeting alongside welfare and development ministers?

    (Also posted on this discussion, http://community.eld... , The G-20 dodge: encouraging growth = helping the poorest)

    RLovelace - Jul 5, 2010 4:00 pm (#21 Total: 21)  


    Posts: 25


    Thanks, Laura [if I may],

     

    Sorting out short term needs from longer term goals would seem to be important.  

     

    A key immediate priority is to find out more about Korean plans for the development working group, including a confirmation that Korea and South Africa are in fact the Chairs and more about how they intend to go about their work.

     

    In the longer term refining the way in which the G20 creates processes to adequately consider development issues is important.  In the short term there is all that can be done for the pending summit.

     

    I say longer term only because it is unrealistic to assume that structural issues can be resolved in the short time left for us. The G20 is in an untenable position in attempting to justify any development discussion that only involves officials concerned with Finance Ministers and Bankers (who more often than not are the ones who say “no” on providing the resources for development solutions).

     

    In the long term, if the G20 is going to be serious about development it will have to ensure that the proper expertise is brought to the table (especially creating a means to hear from non-government development practitioners) and second, they should set in place a means of being accountable for monitoring and reporting on progress on the actions they have resolved to take.

     

    In the short term, taking another look at the Pittsburgh and Toronto communiqués to extract what are really quite a few pronouncements that are development-related is a valuable exercise.

     

    We should build up our ability to share information and improve our collection from new sources of information, particularly from within Korea, the region and in each of the G20 countries

     

    We should identify other allies so that time isn’t wasted doing work that has already been done. Many of these potential allies are currently immersed in preparations for the MDG review this September.  There are other references in the Toronto communiqué to the MDGs but this one makes clear the relevance to the G20:

     

    § 43. We recognize that 2010 marks an important year for development issues. The September

    2010 Millennium Development Goals (MDG) High Level Plenary will be a crucial opportunity to reaffirm the global development agenda and global partnership, to agree on actions for all to achieve the MDGs by 2015, and to reaffirm our respective commitments to assist the poorest countries.

     

    This website is an excellent source of information including the most recent UNDP report on MDGs 

    on the MDGs as well as a CSO letter to the Secretary-General.

     

    I think most of the questions raised in your post are answered by drawing the link between the MDGs and the work of a G20 development working group. But the longer term structural questions also have to be answered—and that means also doing work in the short term to insist that the proper expertise is brought to the table and the G20 gets used to the notion of being accountable. 

     



    Ending at 21 of 21 messages << First | < Previous | Outline
      Show all messages in thread  


    You can read here but not post messages.


    Copyright/disclaimer