As the G20 Working Groups on Sustainability, Energy and Climate are preparing to meet later this week, it is well worth reminding ourselves of the importance of the upcoming G20 summit in Hamburg for global energy governance. It is the first G20 summit since President Trump was elected on a pro-fossil fuels, climate-skeptic, and protectionist/nationalist agenda. It is also the first G20 summit since the Paris Agreement entered into force on 4 November 2016, a legally binding agreement to keep global warming ‘well below 2°C’, ratified by all G20 members except Russia and Turkey.
Welche Rolle soll künftig die technische Zusammenarbeit in der deutschen Entwicklungszusammenarbeit spielen?
Die Entwicklungszusammenarbeit (EZ) ist mit weitreichenden globalen Herausforderungen konfrontiert: Der Klimawandel, soziale Ungleichheit, die Krisenanfälligkeit der Weltwirtschaft sowie Krisen und gewaltsame Konflikte gefährden eine nachhaltige Entwicklung in einer zunehmend interdependenten Welt.
Unlike the statement made by the G20 Finance Ministers last year, which asked members to resist “all forms” of trade protectionism, the communique released at this weekend’s G20 meeting in Baden Baden contains no such statement, nor does it refer to a commitment to a multilateral trading system. While there is no need to rush to any judgement, as we wait to see the final communique from the G20 leader’s summit in July this year, it may be useful to reflect on some of the lessons learnt about the role of free trade.
We and millions of European and other ‘Western’ citizens are living in times of abundant pessimism and turbulence, dominated by social discontent, uncertainty over the future, and rising populism.
According to consistent press reports, drafts of the communiqué prepared for the G20 Finance Minister and Central Bank Governers at their forthcoming meeting at Baden-Baden on 17 and 18 March 2017 have dropped clear statements rejecting protectionism and competitive devaluation of currencies. Apparently, generic language about keeping “an open and fair international trading system” is to be substituted. Does this matter?