So how's policy coordination in the G-20 going?

Fri, 12/12/2008 - 4:32pm
One of the lesser tragedies of this fall's global recession is that the book I was going to write on the future of global governance is going to need some serious tweaking.  The argument I was making was predicated on the argument that global governance structure were badly outdated and in need of serious reform before the next crisis took place. Well, we're past that now.  And as this Financial Times story by Alan Beattie and Frances Williams makes clear, we're about to see what happens when shoddy governance structures are asked to do something important: 
The World Trade Organisation has dropped plans to convene ministers to push for an outline deal in the troubled global trade talks – a further blow to world leaders’ promises to combat protectionism. Pascal Lamy, WTO director-general, said a meeting, originally planned for next week, “would be running an unacceptably high risk of failure which could damage not only the round but also the WTO system”.... The outcome runs counter to promises made by leaders of the Group of 20 major economies in Washington last month, who were committed to reaching an outline deal this year and promised no new protectionist actions within 12 months. Since then at least five of the G20 – Russia, India, Indonesia, Brazil and Argentina – have announced their intention to raise import tariffs or otherwise restrict trade.... Trade experts said the episode underlined the weakness of rhetorical agreements such as the G20 statement to constrain governments faced with domestic political pressure. Douglas Irwin, trade economist at Dartmouth College in the US, said: “Such statements may sometimes act as a signal to local legislatures, but there is usually ample room for governments to renege or weasel out of their commitments.” Since the G20 meeting, Russia has announced it will increase import tariffs on cars, India has raised duties on iron, steel and soy and Indonesia has alarmed trading partners with measures to benefit local producers. Brazil and Argentina have argued for an increase in external tariffs for Mercosur, the Latin American trade bloc of which they are the two biggest members. The G20 was lauded by attendees as a landmark meeting that would put big developing countries at the heart of global policymaking. Following last month’s summit, Gordon Brown, the UK prime minister who will host the next G20 meeting, said there would definitely be a meeting of trade ministers this year. Downing Street did not return calls on Friday. The countries that have raised tariffs deny breaking the agreement. The US said on Friday that it could not be blamed for the stalemate in Doha.


Advertisement

 

I wonder if it will take yet

I wonder if it will take yet another protectionist-influenced economic downturn before protectionism loses its charm. This type of thing isn't surprising coming from Argentina (Argentina has been slowly falling back into disaster after the IMF reforms), but Brazil, which is dependent heavily on exports to the US and China?

It's looking increasingly

It's looking increasingly like it's going to be every country for itself. Ecuador is defaulting, the Euro banks are holding $3.7t of emerging mkt. debt, the oil is piling up so high there's hardly any ships left to store it in, which means even lower prices and pain for those economies, the rouble looks set to crash, and on and on.

It's getting real ugly...

I suppose we shouldn't be

I suppose we shouldn't be surprised. The G7 frequently had a hard-time agreeing on things, and these are countries which not only are industrialized with a stake in greater international trade, but which have a sense of joint history - all of them industrialized and came into their kingdoms in the late 19th century (except for Great Britain, which did so earlier, and Canada, which started industrializing and expanding a little later, around the end of the 19th century).

Is it so difficult to imagine that the G20 is that much harder to bring together?