G7 Germany: The Elmau Summit

Setting new standards

Sustainability is at the heart of everything we do at AkzoNobel. It’s vital for the future of our company, our society and our planet.

We have a passion for paint which drives our innovation and helps people to overcome the challenges they face every day.

Whether we’re developing paint that keeps buildings cooler or coatings that make the shipping industry more efficient, we’re always striving to embrace a more sustainable way of working.

That’s why we’ve been top of the Dow Jones Sustainability Index for five out of the last six years.

And we’ll continue to use our ambition and imagination to deal more efficiently with the world’s limited resources. Because sustainability is clearly good for business.

akzonobel.com

Published by GT Media Group Ltd.

The 2022 Elmau Summit GERMANY

Produced and distributed by The Global Governance Project, a joint initiative between GT Media Group Ltd, a publishing company based in London, UK, and the G7 Research Group based at the University of Toronto.

www.g7.utoronto.ca

The Global Governance Project provides a vital function for private- and public-sector organisations in support of their governance responsibilities. To carry out executive duties effectively, we must have access to unbiased, objective and independent opinion, based on actual policy set at and influenced by the G7 summits and their leadership.

Publisher: Khaled Algaay

Director: Tom Kennedy

Co-Editor: John Kirton

Co-Editor: Madeline Koch

Guest Editor: Dennis Snower

Managing Editor: Emily Eastman

Contact:

GT Media Group Ltd

White Collar Factory, 1 Old Street Yard, London EC1Y 8AF

United Kingdom

Tel: +44 207 6085137

Email:

Connect@globalgovernanceproject.org

@GloGovProj

www.globalgovernanceproject.org

G7 Research Group

Contributors:

Meagan Byrd

Sonja Dobson

Hiromitsu Higashi

Matthew Kieffer

Ella Kokotsis

Julia Kulik

Michael Motala

Duja Muhanna

Tristen Naylor

Jessica Rapson

Gabrielle Regimbal

Denisse Rudich

Alissa Wang

Brittaney Warren

© 2022. The entire contents of this publication are protected by copyright. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means: electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher. The views and opinions expressed by independent authors and contributors in this publication are provided in the writers’ personal capacities and are their sole responsibility.

Their publication does not imply that they represent the views or opinions of the G7 Research Group, University of Toronto or GT Media Group Ltd and must neither be regarded as constituting advice on any matter whatsoever, nor be interpreted as such. The reproduction of advertisements in this publication does not in any way imply endorsement by the G7 Research Group or GT Media Group Ltd of products or services referred to therein.

PREPARATIONS FOR TOMORROW’S REALITY Mario Draghi, prime

24 PROSPECTS FOR STRONG PERFORMANCE AT THE G7 ELMAU SUMMIT John Kirton, director, G7 Research Group

A MOMENT OF TRUTH, FOR EUROPE AND THE Charles Michel, president, European Council

26 THE CHALLENGE OF THE ZEITENWENDE Dennis J Snower, president, Global Solutions

STANDING SIDE BY SIDE Ursula von der Leyen, president, European

42

G7 PERFORMANCE ON CLIMATE CHANGE

Brittaney Warren, director of compliance studies and lead researcher on climate change, G7 Research Group

60

G7 PERFORMANCE ON HEALTH

Meagan Byrd, senior researcher, G7 Research Group

28

G7 PERFORMANCE ON REGIONAL SECURITY FOR UKRAINE

Duja Muhanna, senior researcher, G7 Research Group

30

STRONGER TOGETHER IN A NEW GLOBAL SECURITY ERA

Jens Stoltenberg, secretarygeneral, NATO 32

GLOBAL SECURITY AND THE G7’S GROWING CENTRALITY Mark Sobel, US chair, OMFIF 34

G7 PERFORMANCE ON GOVERNING ARMS CONTROL

Hiromitsu Higashi, researcher, G7 Research Group 36

FOLLOW THE MONEY Marcus Pleyer, president, Financial Action Task Force 38

COVID-19 AND CRIMINAL CONTAGION

Jürgen Stock, secretary-general, INTERPOL 40

CYBER SANCTIONS AND WAR: ILLICIT FINANCIAL FLOWS

Denisse Rudich, director, G7 and G20 Research Groups London

G7 GERMANY: THE ELMAU SUMMIT

64

RENEWING THE CYCLE

44

CLIMATE CHANGE: AN ENDURING ISSUE

Patricia Espinosa, executive secretary, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

46

THE ROAD TO KUNMING

Elizabeth Maruma Mrema, executive secretary, Convention on Biological Diversity

48

SOLVING THE PLASTIC PROBLEM

Inger Andersen, executive director, United Nations Environment Programme

50

A NEW SUSTAINABILITY BASELINE

Emmanuel Faber, chair, International Sustainability Standards Board

ENERGY

52

G7 PERFORMANCE ON ENERGY

Ella Kokotsis, director of accountability, G7 Research Group

56

POWER BEHIND THE ENERGY TRANSITION

Francesco La Camera, director-general, IRENA

Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, director-general, World Health Organization

68

EFFECTIVENESS THROUGH EQUITABILITY

Seth Berkley, CEO of Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance

70

HOW TO BETTER PREPARE FOR THE NEXT PANDEMIC Monique Eloit, director-general, World Organisation for Animal Health

72

A HEALTHY BALANCE

Joy St John, executive director, Caribbean Public Health Agency

74

SETTING THE STAGE

Ilona Kickbusch, founding director, Global Health Centre, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies

76

A PANDEMIC OF FAILING GLOBAL SYSTEMS

Professor Dame Sally Davies, UK Special Envoy on Anti-microbial Resistance

78

CRITICAL THINKING

Vladimir Hachinski, former president, World Federation of Neurology, and Detlev Ganten, founder and former president, World Health Summit

MACROECONOMIC POLICY

80

G7 PERFORMANCE ON MACROECONOMIC POLICY

Alissa Wang, senior researcher, G7 Research Group

TAXATION

98

G7 PERFORMANCE ON DEVELOPMENT

88

ADVANCES ON INTERNATIONAL TAXATION

Sonja Dobson, senior researcher, G7 Research Group

100

82 LEADERSHIP IN TROUBLED TIMES

Mathias Cormann, secretary-general, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

84

OUTLOOK ON THE GLOBAL ECONOMY

Interview with Larry Summers, Charles W Eliot University professor and president emeritus at Harvard University

TRADE AND INVESTMENT

Pascal Saint-Amans, director, Centre for Tax Policy and Administration, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

92

THE ROAD AHEAD FOR THE GLOBAL CORPORATE TAX

DEAL

Michael F Motala, Stanford University CONNECTIVITY

86

THE WHOLE IS MORE THAN THE SUM OF THE PARTS

Simon J Evenett, professor of international trade and economic development, University of St Gallen

110

IMPROVING G7 PERFORMANCE USING STATISTICAL MODELLING

Jessica Rapson, senior researcher, G7 Research Group

BUILD FORWARD BETTER

Interview with Achim Steiner, administrator, United Nations Development

94

DIGITALISATION: THE RECIPE FOR SUCCESS

Guy Ryder, directorgeneral, International Labour Organization

96 INTERNET GOVERNANCE IN THE GLOBAL DIGITAL ORDER

Göran Marby, president and chief executive officer, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)

THE SOURCE OF LIFE David Beasley, executive director, World Food Programme

104 HUMAN DISPLACEMENT: RATIONAL HANDLING

Interview with Filippo Grandi, United Nations high commissioner for refugees GENDER

106

G7 PERFORMANCE ON GENDER EQUALITY

Julia Kulik, director of research, G7 Research Group

108

END THE DISCONNECT Sima Bahous, UN under-secretarygeneral and executive director of UN Women

STRONGER G7 SYSTEM

114 COMPLIANCE WITH G7 CORNWALL COMMITMENTS

Gabrielle Regimbal and Matthew Kieffer, co-chairs, summit studies, G7 Research Group

116

A CHANCE TO LEAD Tristen Naylor, University of Cambridge

118

BUILDING SYNERGY FOR A BETTER FUTURE

Yulius P Hermawan, lecturer in international relations, Parahyangan Catholic University, Bandung Indonesia

Prosperity in unity

Strong togetherness – a priority of the German G7 presidency – is the backbone of economic stability and transformation, and Dubai’s forward-looking investments have international cooperation at their core

This year, the G7 has sharpened its focus on international cooperation. A fertile business environment is a key driver of global ties, and with this objective front and centre, Dubai Chamber of Commerce has been working on new initiatives, partnerships and structures that represent, support and protect the interests of the business community – and promise closer international cooperation that creates far-reaching economic benefits.

A NEW, INNOVATIVE FRAMEWORK

In line with Dubai’s new economic vision, last year at the 12th World Chambers

Congress we launched its Chamber Model Innovation framework. The first of its kind anywhere in the world, the CMI enables chambers of commerce to think like startups and adopt a smarter approach to providing better services – creating new value for members while becoming more innovative.

The framework reforms the traditional services of chambers of commerce, aligning them with modern business

needs and helping them to evolve alongside the emerging challenges and expectations of the global economic landscape. The model is based on the experience and expertise of various stakeholders, and provides comprehensive and flexible solutions to deal with future uncertainties. At its core, the model enables chambers to adapt to the evolving needs of member companies and provide better, more complete and more relevant support.

Through the CMI framework and the International Chamber of Commerce’s World Chambers Federation (ICC-WCF), we are mobilising the global chambers

Hamad Buamim

Dubai Chambers

Hamad Buamim, chair, ICC-World Chambers Federation, and president and CEO, Dubai Chambers

community to foster innovation. Dubai Chamber of Commerce was the first to pilot the CMI and share knowledge, and since its launch many other chambers of commerce from around the world have adopted it. In February, more than 100 representatives from chambers of commerce in Latin America and the United States attended a virtual workshop organised by the Chamber in cooperation with Bogota Chamber to learn more about the CMI. Canada’s Brampton Board of Trade and the Federation of Belgian Chambers have also adopted the framework, and all have achieved positive and tangible results in delivering a more customer-centric approach.

ENABLING TRADE

As the G7 leaders gather in Elmau, a key topic of discussion will be the role of international cooperation in driving global trade. Creating platforms and channels that foster international cooperation and cross-border business partnerships is a key function of Dubai Chamber of Commerce, with hosted events such as the Global Business Forum setting the stage for new connections. We also work to bring global events to Dubai, such as The Retail Summit and the World Chambers Congress, which respectively unite the retail world, and enable chamber leaders and professionals to share best practices, exchange insights, develop networks and tackle the latest business issues affecting their communities.

We took these efforts to the next level as the Official Business Integration Partner for Expo 2020 Dubai (which ran for six months from October 2021 through to March 2022) – a mega event that enabled us to drive business exchange. It was the first time a Middle Eastern destination had hosted a World Expo, marking a major milestone for the region. By training our focus on boosting business, propelling economic growth and recovery, and enabling cross-border partnerships, Dubai Chambers has become pivotal in facilitating evolution within the global business community. It has also been instrumental in expanding Dubai’s rapidly growing business ecosystem, with considerable work going into addressing relevant challenges, spearheading new solutions and, crucially, building the digital economy and accelerating innovation.

Finding dynamic, future-focused solutions that support trade and create

global connections is central to our work and removing trade barriers is another key element of what we do. By working closely with the ICC-WCF and its unique global network of 12,000 chambers of commerce from more than 125 countries, we promote and facilitate international trade.

A NEW THREE-CHAMBER MODEL

This year is another exciting one for Dubai Chambers, as it marks our official rebrand and the unveiling of our new and groundbreaking three-chamber model. Three chambers now operate under the Dubai Chambers umbrella: Dubai Chamber of Commerce, Dubai International Chamber and Dubai Chamber of Digital Economy – each of which has its own brand identity and strategies.

Dubai International Chamber is of particular prominence in terms of expanding Dubai’s trade ties with promising markets worldwide. Established to boost partnerships with international corporations, investors and entrepreneurs, and reinforce Dubai’s status as a major trade hub, it aligns closely with the G7’s priority of international cooperation. The chamber supports member companies with expanding their global presence while also attracting multinationals to Dubai.

Dubai International Chamber will expand its reach through new initiatives and plans with the aim of boosting Dubai’s foreign trade to AED 2 trillion ($545 billion) within five years.

Meanwhile, Dubai Chamber of Digital Economy will assume the important task of transforming Dubai into a global technology hub. Its work includes supporting and promoting the interests of

HAMAD BUAMIM

Chair, ICC-World Chambers Federation, and president and CEO, Dubai Chambers

Holding his current position since 2006, Hamad Buamim is the president and CEO of Dubai Chambers. He is also the chairman of the Paris-based World Chambers Federation – International Chamber of Commerce (ICC). Buamim serves as a board member of Dubai World, Dubai Islamic Bank PJSC and UAE Banks Federation, and acts as chairman of National General Insurance PJSC. Previously, Buamim served as chairman of Emirates Financial Services, Emirates NBD Capital as well as a board member of the UAE Central Bank, Dubai International Financial Center, Emirates NBD Bank and Network International.

technology companies and advancing the digital economy.

It is an incredibly exciting time for the global business community, and Dubai Chambers is proud of its work both at home and on the international stage. Our goal is to not only help realise the strategic vision for Dubai over the coming decade, but also to be the best chamber in the world for driving competitiveness and growth and ensuring shared benefits from our continued prosperity.

towards an

by tackling the dire humanitarian crisis within and around Ukraine, global food insecurity due to acute shortages, energy and other supply shocks, and the pervasive spread of disinformation, manipulation and interference by foreign actors disseminating

Despite new challenges and the disastrous war in Ukraine, our long-term ambitions will not be derailed: we will stay on track to overcome the setbacks we face, including from the COVID-19 pandemic, with the aim of achieving the globally agreed Sustainable Development Goals by 2030. Guided by our goal to achieve progress towards an equitable world, we will jointly address the greatest systemic challenges of our era. We need to live sustainably, implementing the Paris commitments on climate change across all domains, including mitigation, adaptation and climate financing, as well as our wider commitments to the environment, nature and biodiversity. In this regard, accelerating the decarbonisation of our industry sectors is crucial. We aim to build an alliance of ambitious countries – an open and collaborative Climate Club – to accelerate this epic transition. The idea is to align ambitious climate policies, while ensuring a level playing field to prevent competitive distortions and carbon leakage in the

Economic stability and transformation: Our economies face many uncertainties, with current geopolitical tensions, commodity shortages and price surges, elevated debt levels, ongoing and new supply chain disruptions as well as pandemic risks, highlighting the need to work together towards recovery. Our economies need both long-term growth and resilience at this time, and we seek agreement on concrete action on

how to achieve our green and digital transformation in a socially just and gender equitable way.

Healthy lives: The COVID-19 pandemic might feel like yesterday’s news, but it continues to harm our communities. This year, 2022, should be the year to truly overcome it. Prioritising global health has therefore not lost any of its relevance and is, indeed, one of the most pressing objectives of the German G7 presidency. With its

unprecedented social and economic impact, COVID-19 continues to set us back in our efforts to achieve the SDGs and compound wider issues. The G7 will continue to lead health efforts. Together, we commit to pandemic prevention, preparedness and response, including through the ACT-Accelerator, as well as by strengthening the global health architecture with a strong World Health Organization at its centre.

Investment in a better future: Building on G7 commitments from last year, we intend to narrow the infrastructure gap in emerging markets and developing countries. We will build future livelihoods by shaping and implementing the G7 Partnership for Infrastructure and Investment. In so doing, we will mobilise public and private capital and global expertise to build concrete partnerships that pursue our climate and health objectives.

Stronger together: In the face of rising authoritarian threats, democratic backsliding, and shrinking democratic and civic spaces, we stand for open, equitable and democratic values, side by side with those who also share and defend them. At this summit in Elmau, we will forge a cross-continental alliance of resilient democracies that are able to defend the international rules-based order. We share the conviction that we are stronger together and we stand united in our commitment to strengthen pluralistic democracies and equality, to defend human rights and the rule of law, to protect information spaces, to counter hybrid threats and disinformation, and to advance digital progress in an inclusive global order.

In this spirit, I am delighted to welcome our international partners to Elmau. As we stand stronger together, we will achieve progress towards an equitable world.

We stand together as the G7 with our international partners to defend right over might”

CREDIT: FOTO: BUNDESREGIERUNG / JESCO DENZEL

Biometrics and data: ensuring the safety of transnational borders

Securiport’s objective is to provide AI-based technologies and tools to governments, enabling them to have in-depth information about travellers crossing their borders

As the world was at a standstill for the past three years with an unpredictable global epidemic, Securiport remained steady to develop solutions that would address passenger experience and border management. And now, in 2022, we have settled in our new normal with the recovery of industries, especially for the airlines and airports, which made innovative biometric technologies at the forefront of making the passenger experience seamless and contactless. Many industries were impacted and the consequences for the aviation industry were even greater as borders were closed, airlines were unable to operate, and business travel as well as tourism were halted. Between 2020 and 2022, the International Air Transport Association estimated that the total losses for the aviation industry could surpass $200 billion, though despite a $51.8 billion loss in 2021, passenger numbers are expected to rise and reach 4 billion in 2022 (1.1 billion passengers fewer than pre-pandemic).

In a return to normalcy with open borders,

a stronger partnership was forged between the government and the private sector to implement preventive approaches for contactless travellers’ experience. Furthermore, to avoid another total aviation shutdown, it required three important elements – global cooperation, technology adaptation throughout the passenger’s

journey, and data analysis for an enhanced traveller’s profile.

Does contactless passenger experience accelerate travel processes?

For people to once again cross borders without any safety concerns, the industry shifted towards focusing on the “traveller’s experience” that has airports establishing smoother check-ins, shorter lines and greater contactless facilities.

When we founded Securiport, 20 years ago, we began our operations by using ultrasound fingerprint recognition – the most advanced biometric technology at the time – to accurately identify travellers and, gradually, we evolved to harness the cognitive power of data analytics and intelligent information management to provide cutting-edge threat detection tools to effectively address client’s growing security concerns. The challenges of the 2019 global epidemic accelerated the implementation of biometric technologies that changed the traditional data capturing methods such as touch-based fingerprinting to contactless fingerprinting, which is deployed through conducive mobile camera systems with high accuracy matching performance with legacy fingerprints and

Dr Enrique Segura, president and CEO, Securiport

Securiport

systems.

Another important advance in biometrics is facial recognition that captures a traveller’s face by measuring dozens of features to match with the traveller’s documents. Airports’ use of facial recognition gives travellers a low-touch and frictionless passenger experience. While safeguarding passengers and staff, the combination of facial recognition and contactless fingerprinting makes the biometric identification process more efficient and touchless.

We’re currently developing cutting-edge contactless cognitive technologies to identify deceptive behaviour including false or double identity cases.

Will biometric data suffice?

For the past few years, border security officials have been increasingly relying on data sets that are acquired through travel – predominantly air travel – to process travellers crossing border points. These advances in biometric technologies are pivotal to delivering seamless experiences as they enable passengers to safely walk through a series of touchpoints without any or limited human operators. The Advanced Passenger Information and Passenger Name Record are data sets that were approved for implementation and regularised by the International Civil Aviation Organization; and in addition to the biometric data, the additional collected data sets ensure that the rightly identified person is crossing the border. With AI technologies, the data can be analysed and readily available for authorities in time to apprehend any type of criminal such as human traffickers or money launderers.

Although unforeseen yet predictable threats and vulnerabilities have emerged, biometrics in addition to data can support all efforts by governments working to ensure the safety of travellers while maintaining secure borders.

How could biometric technology and data address the growing challenges of national security threats?

Advanced Passenger Information captures the biometrics and flight details that are then electronically sent to the port of arrival. The compiled data can detect anomalies of flight behaviours and other unusual patterns. Therefore, Biometric technologies and passenger data allow border officials to have extensive data sets to identify travellers

DR ENRIQUE SEGURA

Dr Enrique Segura has more than 30 years of experience managing large international companies providing services to governments including Inspectorate Trade Services, SWIPCO USA, ICS Inspection and Control Services Ltd., Pricesaroundtheworld.com, and the Inter-American Development Bank. Dr Segura holds a Ph.D. in economics from Autónoma University, Madrid, Spain.

Twitter @securiport‏

and crosscheck the traveller’s identification documents. Securiport’s fully tailorable system has the capacity to crosscheck biometrics and profile data against watch lists from local and international security agencies with which its clients maintain relations, such as Interpol, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime and the FBI. The data sets must be analysed and shared between stakeholders in the airport ecosystem, border control agencies, and airlines. For instance, based on the unique needs of the US government, Securiport has incorporated in its proprietary AI-powered tool five standard profiling categories: criminals, terrorists, human traffickers, drug traffickers and money launderers. In the case of Covid-19, as we understand the importance of border crossing and testing, we were able to develop technology tools for health credentials that enable the vaccinations certificate to be matched with the identity of the traveller. The whole analysis is performed in less than a minute while the traveller is processed at immigration control or prior to arrival.

Securiport continues to enhance its already comprehensive technology solutions and is actively implementing advanced data analytics tools to complement contactless kiosks as it continues to diligently work to make travel safer and more secure for all stakeholders. To optimise transnational border crossing, the combination of biometrics and extensive data analysis must provide authorities with a traveller’s threat risk while ensuring the passenger experience is contactless as well as seamless.

Bharat Masrani

Joe Biden President, United States

An inflection point in history

The United States is leading our Allies and partners around the world to make sure that courageous Ukrainians who are fighting for the future of their nation have the weapons and the capacity and ammunition and equipment to defend themselves against Putin’s brutal war …

We’re at an inflection point in history, for real – it comes along about every six or eight generations – where things are changing so rapidly that we have to be in control.

Folks, there’s an ongoing battle in the world between autocracy and democracy. Xi Jinping, the leader of China, is straightforward about it. He says that democracies cannot be sustained in the 21st century …

But that’s not going to be the case. If that happens, the whole world changes …

A big part of the reason [the Ukrainians have] been able to keep on fighting and to make this war a strategic failure for Russia is because the United States, together with our Allies and partners, have had their back. Remarks on security assistance to Ukraine, 3 May 2022

On Earth Day … we convened last year over 40 leaders from around the globe, reasserting America’s leadership on climate after four years of an administration denying that there was a climate crisis …

And the commitments galvanized … at that meeting, including our own goal of cutting emissions from 50 to 52% below [2005] levels by 2030 and reaching net-zero emissions by 2050, taking the steps the United States needs to limit the planet’s warming to no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius. And the rest of the world started to come along …

We slashed methane and brought over 100 nations together when I was at the big meeting we had in Europe … I got a pledge … that they would eliminate methane …

You know, our forests are our planet’s lungs. They literally are recycling and cycling CO2 out of the atmosphere …

More carbon is taken out of the air in the Amazon – that carbon sink – than every bit of carbon that is generated on a daily basis in the entire United States from every source … we should be paying the Brazilians not to cut down their forest.

Scientists estimate that the protection and restoration of our natural lands and waters can provide more than one third of the solution to climate change …

You know, the executive order I’m going to sign [today to strengthen our forest on federal lands] is going to make good on the international forest protection commitments from the proposal I made in Scotland, at Glasgow [Conference of the Parties] 26.

I got 140 countries to sign up and say that, together – and we represent 90% of the world’s forest.

In addition to that, I put in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill – that we’re going to plant 1.2 billion trees – 1.2 billion trees across this country to begin the vital work of reforesting America …

Remarks on Earth Day, 22 April 2022

Today, we’re again uniting countries around the world with leaders from the private sector, civil society and the philanthropic community to carry forward the vital work on fighting COVID-19 everywhere – not just at home, everywhere …

Today I’m announcing the United States will share critical COVID-19 technologies through the World Health Organization COVID-19 Technology Access Pool … We’re … working with the Global Fund, to expand access to rapid testing and antiviral treatments for people in harder-to-reach areas.

And we’re increasing our support for a new Pandemic Preparedness and Global Health Security fund that will be established at the World Bank this summer with $450 million in seed funding.

I particularly want to commend Indonesia and Italy for their leadership in helping make this fund a reality. And I’m encouraging other leaders to join me in – in upping their commitments …

Remarks at the Global COVID-19 Summit, 12 May 2022

TOP PRIORITIES

I want every American to know that I’m taking inflation very seriously and it’s my top domestic priority …

There are two leading causes of inflation we’re seeing today. The first cause of inflation is a once-in-a-century pandemic … [and] a second cause: Mr Putin’s war in Ukraine …

And those two major contributors to inflation are both global in nature. That’s why we’re seeing historic inflation in countries all over the world …

I led the world and other countries to join with us to coordinate the largest release of oil from our stockpiles of all the countries in history – 240 million barrels to boost global supply …

And to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and reckless autocrats like Putin, I’m working with Congress to pass landmark investments to help build a clean energy future as well …

You want to bring down inflation? Let’s make sure the wealthiest corporations pay their fair share.

Remarks on the Economy, 10 May 2022

Beyond the limits of straightforward insurability

Better mechanisms are required to build economic resilience and preparedness against epidemic and pandemic risk –and there’s a solution that combines insurance coverage and contingent lending in a new way

The frequency and severity of epidemic outbreaks are increasing. The economic consequences of COVID-19 have been dramatic and are still unfolding. Risk-modelling agencies quantify the probability of another event of the same or greater magnitude as COVID-19 within the next 10 years to be around 25%. These simple facts combined demonstrate the necessity for better mechanisms to increase economic resilience and preparedness. Insurance is one of the most established instruments of financial risk management. But as public discussions over the past two years have highlighted, the sheer size and accumulation risk potential of global pandemics push such exposures beyond the limits of straightforward insurability. Simultaneously, large-scale government support measures have taken place – with the evident disadvantages of ex-post risk management.

SHARED RISK

How can a prudent and resilient financial ecosystem be created in which risks are carried by many shoulders and remain affordable? The Epidemic Risk Markets Platform is a Public-Private Partnership approach that combines insurance coverage and contingent lending in a new way. Protection needs of corporates are better addressed and greater involvement of financial markets in pandemic risk financing is enabled. Compared to the status quo, strong advantages are evident: (1) supporting a PPP scheme sends a clear government signal to the markets and sets risk-adequate incentives to increase preparedness, (2) no subsidies are required, (3) existing infrastructure and distribution networks of the financial industry can be used, also to ensure quick access to liquidity when needed, and (4) the modular set-up allows for a start with different and feasible capacity commitments.

COMPLEMENTARY APPROACHES

The Epidemic Risk Markets Platform is intended to complement other approaches as government ex-post funding will certainly still play a dominant role in the next pandemic. But the underlying risk-transfer solutions have already been developed and implemented.

A recent example is the PPP framework for pandemic risk transfer, which has been endorsed as a priority for the Finance and Economics Working Group of the APEC Business Advisory Council. Specific recommendations around pandemic risk transfer to APEC leaders and finance ministers are being developed, whereby the

DR GUNTHER KRAUT

Gunther Kraut is an experienced reinsurance professional with detailed knowledge of insurance products and risk transformation. He has been with Munich Re for 14 years, structuring its first pandemic risk retrocession programme in 2013. Later, he initiated and co-led the Epidemic Risk Business innovation project, which was then transformed into a discrete business unit with a global mandate. Gunther is a regular speaker at conferences. He holds a diploma degree in financial mathematics from the Technical University of Munich and a business degree from LMU Munich. Subsequently, he obtained a PhD in risk and insurance with a research focus on extreme mortality risks such as pandemics.

goal is to simultaneously implement the full value chain of the Epidemic Risk Markets Platform via pilot transactions with member economies or specific sectors.

Multiple stakeholders benefit from an Epidemic Risk Markets Platform:

• Protected corporates: Purchase epidemic risk insurance and contingent lending solutions to increase preparedness

• Insurers: Actively promote risk-transfer insurance solutions with assistance from intermediaries and reinsurers

• Banks and lenders: Facilitate contingent lending solutions through accepting the lending on their own balance sheet and/or channelling central government support

• Investors: Invest into the capital market product and pledge capital for a periodic market rate of return

• Governments: Act as public-sector lender or as public-sector investor and incentivise preparedness within regulatory frameworks.

GREATER RESILIENCE

No sector can solve the challenge alone, but by combining available instruments in a smart way, a powerful and necessary tool can be created to increase overall resilience.

For more details on available risk-transfer products: https://www.munichre.com/epidemic-risk-solutions

For more details on the Epidemic Risk Markets Platform: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3888337

Dr Gunther Kraut, global head of epidemic risk solutions, Munich Re, Singapore

Boris Johnson

Prime Minister, United Kingdom

At the foundations of Europe’s security

It’s a pleasure to welcome you Olaf [Scholz] to Downing Street. The friendship between our two countries has become even more vital since [Vladimir] Putin launched his barbaric onslaught against Ukraine, bringing war to our continent … Germany and the UK also share exactly the same conviction that Putin must fail in Ukraine.

Which is why we are working together in the G7 to toughen our sanctions, and target every pillar of the Russian economy, in order to cut off the funds from his war machine.

The UK and the EU have announced new sanctions this week, and just today we in the UK have imposed new asset freezes and travel bans.

We will also agree on the importance of weaning ourselves off dependence on Russian gas and oil, and ensuring that our energy security cannot be threatened by a rogue state.

This is not easy for any of us, and I applaud the seismic decisions taken by Olaf’s government to move Germany away from Russian hydrocarbons.

Today we have agreed to maximise the potential of the North Sea and collaborate on energy security and on renewables, where Germany and the UK lead the way in new technology.

We cannot transform our respective energy systems overnight, but we also know that Putin’s war will not end overnight.

That’s why Britain and Germany have joined dozens of allies to supply Ukraine with defensive weapons.

Last week, the UK convened

a donor conference which raised weapons and equipment for Ukraine worth over £1.5 billion – or 2.5 million items of military kit …

But Olaf and I agree that our two countries and our allies must go further and provide more help to Ukraine. The Europe we knew just six weeks ago no longer exists: Putin’s invasion strikes at the very foundations of the security of our continent.

But his ambition to divide us has demonstrably failed; on the contrary, he has succeeded in uniting Europe and the whole trans-Atlantic alliance in support of Ukraine, and in strong solidarity with each other …

We will hold a joint Cabinet meeting between our two Governments within the next year, our defence ministers will meet before the NATO summit in June, and I look forward to joining you Olaf at Schloss Elmau for the next G7 summit.

Press conference with German chancellor Olaf Scholz, 8 April 2022

SAFER AND MORE PROSPEROUS TOGETHER

What I think we’ve seen here in New Delhi is one of the world’s oldest democracies, and the largest democracy, sticking together, and confronting our shared anxieties about autocracies and autocratic coercion around the world and acting together to make our countries safer and more prosperous.

Our new and expanded Defence and Security Partnership will enable India to strengthen its own domestic defence industry as well as protecting vital shared interests in the Indo-Pacific.

Our collaboration on energy security – including our new offer on offshore wind, the new UK-India Hydrogen Science and Innovation Hub and our joint work on solar power – will help to reduce our collective dependence on imported hydrocarbons in favour of cheaper, more sustainable home-grown renewables.

And our Global Innovation Partnership will help transfer climate and energy-smart innovations to developing countries across the wider Indo-Pacific …

And our partnership with India is particularly powerful in achieving these things because India is an incredible rising power in Asia, with one of the fastest growing economies in the world – already worth £2.25 trillion – and set to be the world’s third largest economy by 2050.

India is also our biggest partner in the Indo-Pacific, which is increasingly the geopolitical centre of the world, with two-thirds of humanity, and a third of the global economy – and that share

And perhaps most significantly of all, we’re using our Brexit freedoms to reach a bi-lateral Free Trade Agreement …

This could double our trade and investment by the end of the decade, driving down prices for consumers, and increasing wages across the UK by as much as £3 billion.

So what we have been getting on with here is getting on with the job of delivering on the priorities of the British people, deepening a friendship with a nation with whom we have profound ties of culture, language and kinship, while making both our countries safer and our economies stronger.

Statement in India, 22 April 2022

Jersey for Good A Sustainable Future

Our Purpose

Jersey is a forward-thinking international finance centre with a global reach.

Drawing on 60 years’ experience in delivering the highest regulatory standards and governance in areas such as alternative investments and private wealth structures, Jersey is now poised to play a vital role in the scaling up of sustainable finance to meet the world’s most pressing challenges.

We believe that international finance centres have a responsibility to leverage their expertise and capital to support the transition to an environmentally and socially sustainable global economy. /company/jersey-finance Scan

To achieve this, and to help build a more resilient and prosperous future for all, we are building genuine credentials through strong collaborations and partnerships, enhancing our capacity across all financial services in relation to sustainable finance and creating an enabling environment.

|

Emmanuel Macron President, France

Economies built on independence and progress

We need to move more quickly to implement commitments for 2030. A plan of action that is clear, measurable and verifiable. Basically, 2030 is the new 2050 …

Since President [Vladimir] Putin’s brutal attack on Ukraine on February 24, Russian forces have been shelling Kyiv and besieging major cities. Hundreds of Ukrainian civilians have been killed. Women and children were killed today …

This war is not a conflict between NATO and the West, on one hand, and Russia on the other …

Still less is this war a fight against “Nazism,” as a baseless propaganda campaign would have people believe. That is a lie. It is an insult to Russian and Ukrainian history and to the memory of our forefathers who fought side by side against Nazism …

This war is the result of a revenge mentality fueled by a revisionist interpretation of European history that would have us return to the darkest days of empires, invasions and exterminations.

France and Europe responded immediately, unanimously and firmly to this flagrant violation of a European nation’s territorial integrity and sovereignty. We did so in close coordination with … many other countries.

First, we supported the Ukrainian people by providing them with humanitarian convoys and shipments of defence equipment and material.

Then, we worked with other nations to ensure that Russian leaders understand that choosing war will result in their country being shunned by

other nations and condemned by history …

We swiftly adopted proportionate sanctions against Russia and its leaders …

Finally, we took part in the NATO effort to protect the security and sovereignty of our European allies by boosting our existing military presence in the Baltic states and in the region …

We will continue to step up our diplomatic initiatives, sanctions against Russia’s political and business leaders, and support for the Ukrainian people with the goal of ending the fighting.

And yet it must be said that we are not at war with Russia. We are mindful of our deep connections with the Russian people – one of the great peoples of Europe – who sacrificed so much during World War II to save Europe from the abyss …

This war has already upset the balance on our continent and in multiple aspects of our daily lives and this balance stands to undergo major changes in the coming months … We are making preparations and will take care of the men and women who come to our country seeking protection …

materials are impacting our purchasing power and this will continue to be the case … Faced with these economic and social consequences, there is just one thing that guides me and will guide me moving forward: protecting you …

War in Europe is no longer limited to our history books and our textbooks. It is here now, right before our eyes.

Democracy is no longer viewed as an undisputed system. It has been called into question right before our eyes.

Our freedom and the freedom of our children are no longer a given. Now more than ever, they require courage and the willingness to fight for them at all times.

We must meet history’s sudden return to tragedy with historic decisions …

Now Europe must agree to pay the price of peace, freedom and democracy. Europe must invest more in order to decrease its dependence on other continents and to be able to decide for itself. In other words, it must become a power that is both more independent and more sovereign.

First and foremost, it must become an economic power. We can no longer depend on others to feed us, take care of us, inform us or fund us. That is why, in keeping with the decisions made during the darkest days of the pandemic with the Recovery Plan for Europe, we must promote a new economic model founded on independence and progress.

Next, it must become an energy power. When it comes to our mobility, heating and the powering of our plants, we can no longer depend on others and, in particular, on Russian gas. That is why, after deciding to develop renewable energy and build new nuclear reactors for France, I will champion an independent European energy strategy.

Lastly, it must become a power for peace. We can no longer depend on others to defend us, be it on land, at sea, under the sea, in the air, in space or in cyberspace. To this end, our European defence must step up … I know that I can count on you and your commitment to freedom, equality, fraternity and France’s role in the world. I will never stop defending these values and holding them high, in your name.

Vive la République. Address to the nation, 2 March 2022

Justin Trudeau Prime Minister, Canada

Global resolve to tackle global challenges

In times of uncertainty, the G7 has proven what we can accomplish when we come together to address the world’s great challenges. Those are the very words I used to open last year’s article, and today, they are only more relevant.

Over the past few years, our strength and unity to fight for what is right have never been more apparent, and more necessary. Last year, we came together to protect our people from the COVID-19 pandemic and to support them through the resulting global recession. This year, we have come together to stand in solidarity with the people of Ukraine. We stand united against Vladimir Putin’s criminal invasion – a blatant disregard for international law and a direct threat to peace, justice and the stability of the world.

The very fabric of the rules-based international system is at risk. This fabric, woven together from the threads left hanging after the Second World War, has connected our countries and united us in the defence of our people, their dignity and their inalienable rights. For almost 80 years, this fabric has held strong, and we cannot let it unravel now.

The G7 has taken unprecedented action to hold Russia accountable for its war of choice. Our sweeping sanctions, alongside efforts to isolate Russia diplomatically, are squarely aimed at Putin and his accomplices. Since Russia’s invasion, Canada has sanctioned more than 1,000 individuals and

entities, including prohibiting transactions with the Central Bank of Russia, banning imports of Russian oil, blocking Russia’s access to Canadian airspace and ports, placing export controls on key sectors, and providing extensive financial support to military and humanitarian efforts. The collective G7 response has been, and will continue to be, unequivocal. Russia’s unthinkable actions have a tragic human cost. We have watched in horror as innocent lives have been taken and millions of Ukrainians have been forced to flee their homes and communities. The G7 and other partners are working closely together to help Ukrainians displaced by this war find safe haven, deliver urgently needed humanitarian aid including food and medicine, and quickly find solutions as the fear of famine in many parts of the world grows.

DEFENDING DEMOCRACY

The stakes of this conflict are a battle between democracy and dictatorship, and we cannot be silent in the face of Russia’s lies. Russia’s global disinformation campaign to try to demoralise Ukrainians, divide allies and garner support for this illegal invasion will fail. Canada is leading the international charge not only to counter Russian disinformation, but also to continue to defend democracy from all forms of authoritarianism.

At the same time, the G7 must continue to come together to tackle the many other pressing global challenges that threaten our health and well-being. We continue to help global vaccination efforts to end the pandemic everywhere. For the past two years, Canada has immediately funded our share of the Access to COVID-19 Tools Accelerator to provide – and also deliver – vaccines into the arms of those who need them most. We continue to encourage others to do the same.

Even amid the pandemic and an existential threat to democracy around the world, we have not lost sight of the fight to ensure our kids have a safe planet on which to live and grow.

The G7 continues to work closely together to cut pollution, including by recommitting to limiting warming to 1.5°C to avoid the most catastrophic effects of the climate crisis and working to provide $100 billion per year to help countries adapt to its impacts. Canada is also driving access to the critical minerals needed to power the clean energy economy and calling for a global price on carbon pollution, which is cutting pollution and making life more affordable here at

As we look ahead to the Elmau Summit, G7 leadership and unity have never been more evident. We will meet this moment. We will ensure that the decision to invade a sovereign, independent country is understood to be a strategic failure that carries with it ruinous costs. We will end the pandemic and ensure a strong economic recovery. We will ensure our kids have a safe place to live. We are up to the task.

We will ensure that the decision to invade a sovereign, independent country is understood to be a strategic failure that carries with it ruinous costs”

Fumio Kishida

Prime Minister,

Japan

Defending a peaceful world

To defend the peaceful world order, we will respond with resolute determination, working in close cooperation and good alignment as the G7, and reliably carry out the two planks of powerful sanctions against Russia and assistance for Ukraine.

… Japan, as the sole Asian member of the G7, has been working to urge Asian countries … to continue working to get Asian, and also African, countries more receptive to our position.

Russian aggression against Ukraine constitutes a blatant violation of international law and the killing of numerous innocent civilians is a grave violation of international humanitarian law and a war crime … As for further additional sanctions, I intend for us to continue to respond appropriately, acting in coordination with the G7 and the international community as a whole …

The Government of Japan is already strongly committed to reducing our degree of energy dependence on Russia … We have been working in close cooperation with the G7 as a whole regarding the content of sanctions on Russia and I intend for us to continue to respond in a way that is well-aligned with the G7 …

Working to shape the views of Asian countries is important, and also, because of European countries’ historically deep relations with Africa, working to persuade African countries is also critical … It is essential to work to urge along African and Asian countries, acting in collaboration as the G7…

The international community cannot have relations with Russia in the same way we have had until now. That being so, … there is still time until these various international meetings take place, such as the G20 summit. Consequently, our fundamental stance going forward is one of considering responses while enjoying good communication with the countries chairing each of the international meetings while also keeping a careful watch for future changes in the situation and other factors. I have met face to face with the highest-ranking leaders of Indonesia, which holds the presidency of the G20, Thailand, the chair country of APEC [Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum],

and Cambodia, chair of ASEAN [Association of South East Asian Nations] and therefore also the East Asia Summit. Japan has thoroughly reported on this and underlined the critical nature of considering in the future our relations with these countries.

Press conference during a visit to Italy, 4 May 2022

Japan is and will continue to be a trading and investment powerhouse open to the world. Japan will grow by being connected to the rest of the world through the free movement of people, goods, money and digital technologies across borders …

Climate change remains an urgent issue … Japan will achieve its international commitments to carbon neutrality by 2050 and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 46% by 2030, while ensuring a stable energy supply. To achieve these goals, 150 trillion yen in new investments will be raised over the next decade through public-private collaboration, including 17 trillion yen in fiscal 2030 …

The Ukrainian crisis, the rise of authoritarian states, climate change and inequality. In this world under [the] raging storm, I shall remain unperturbed against the heavy wind.

Next year, Japan assumes the presidency of the G7. As the flag-bearer of democracies, we will face this “storm” head-on, with the vision of a new form of capitalism.

Speech at the Guildhall, London, 5 May 2022

Japan’s assistance to developing countries in response to COVID-19 now reaches approximately 4.5 billion USD in total. Together with our … new commitment of up to 500 million USD to COVAX, Japan will steadfastly implement assistance totalling approximately 5 billion USD.

We will also actively contribute to strengthening the global health architecture to enhance prevention, preparedness and response to future pandemics in order to foster greater health security … We support the establishment of a new fund at the World Bank as a financial mechanism to promote further mobilisation of domestic funds and to complement the activities of existing institutions. We will also be actively engaged in working to reform the WHO [World Health Organization], develop a new international instrument on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response, and amend the International Health Regulations.

Japan is determined to continue to lead international efforts to achieve UHC [universal health coverage], bearing in mind relevant meetings to be hosted by Japan, notably the Japan-Australia-IndiaUS Leaders’ Summit, TICAD 8 and [the] G7 Summit 2023.

Second Global COVID-19 Summit, 10 May 2022

Mario Draghi Prime Minister, Italy

Preparations for tomorrow’s reality

Italy has come through some extremely difficult times in the last few years. We faced the pandemic before anyone else in the Western world.

We endured an economic shock that was much sharper than elsewhere in Europe.

We now experience the return of war on our continent, which threatens our safety, our prosperity, our energy security.

And this is happening for the first time since the Second World War.

Yet – as it has done time and again in its magnificent history – Italy has bounced back.

And we are ready to do our part, together with our European and Transatlantic allies, to overcome this tragic moment.

To restore peace where there is evil … Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has caused a paradigm shift in geopolitics.

It has strengthened the ties between the European Union and the United States, isolated Moscow, raised deep questions for China.

These changes are still ongoing – but one thing is certain:

They are bound to stay with us for a long, long time.

We must continue to support the bravery of the Ukrainians, as they fight for their freedom and for the security of us all.

We must continue to inflict costs on Russia, moving swiftly with our latest package of sanctions.

But we must also do all we can to reach a ceasefire and a long-lasting peace.

It will be up to the Ukrainians to decide the terms of this peace – and no-one else.

Meanwhile, we have to prepare ourselves for the world we’ll live in tomorrow.

We must be ready to continue to stand with Ukraine long after the war ends.

The destruction of its cities, its industrial plants, its fields will require enormous financial support.

Ukraine will need its own Marshall Plan

– much like the one that contributed to the special relationship between Europe and the United States.

And we’ll need to ensure its democratic institutions remain strong, stable and lively.

Ukraine is our friend.

Ukraine will remain our friend.

The difficult times started well before the war, but each of these crises carries major consequences for Europe: risks, but also opportunities.

Let me give you one example. The pandemic has brought the European Union together in ways that were unthinkable even a few months ago.

I am referring to our joint vaccination effort – a model for the world;

And to the NextGenerationEU – a first seed of that “Hamiltonian moment” which two centuries ago helped make the modern United States.

Speech at the Atlantic Council’s Distinguished Leadership Awards 2022, 11 May 2022

Italy has been very active in reducing dependency on Russian gas, especially looking ahead … In all this, we were keen to keep in mind that all initiatives and measures taken regarding gas, and in some other countries regarding oil and even coal, that help to overcome this period of transition, of crisis, must not be to the detriment of

investments in renewables. They must not be to the detriment of the ecological transition goals that we have all set ourselves; these goals must remain fixed …

Lastly, another point discussed with [US] President [Joe] Biden was the danger of a food crisis, the danger of a humanitarian crisis caused by food shortages; food shortages essentially caused by – perhaps the most important factor – exports of various grains from Ukraine, and also from Russia, being blocked. Exports from Ukraine are blocked because the export ports are blocked by Russian ships.

Press conference in Washington DC, 11 May 2022

The development of effective vaccines and the organisation of successful vaccination campaigns have marked a turning point in the fight against pandemia.

In many of our countries, we have removed restrictions, re-opened schools, restarted the economy.

We have saved lives – and we have returned to a normal life.

But – as we know all too well – the pandemic is not over.

Since the start of the year, we have had an average of 1.7 million Covid-19 cases a day worldwide.

We are still behind our shared objective of vaccinating 70% of the population in all countries by mid-2022.

The vaccination gap is closing, but the coverage rate in some countries remains below 10%.

Italy has already contributed to the multilateral response to the pandemic with 445 million euros and has already pledged 69.7 million doses via Covax.

Today, I can announce that Italy will donate an additional 31 million doses through Covax and we are also pledging 200 million euros via the ACT-Accelerator and in order to strengthen global preparedness.

Italy’s G20 Presidency launched a Joint Finance-Health Task Force to explore a new facility to fund pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.

It is essential to achieve a broad consensus on an inclusive Facility, with the WHO [World Health Organization] at its centre, in order to ensure its effective implementation and a broad-based financing.

Remarks at the Second COVID-19 Summit, 12 May 2022

Charles Michel President, European Council

A moment of truth, for Europe and the world

Since the Berlin Wall fell, more than 30 years ago, we have witnessed many remarkable political and socio-economic achievements on the global stage – from economic growth and improved education to people living longer, healthier lives. The European Union integration process has greatly contributed to achieving peace and stability, prosperity and multilateralism.

However, we still face an uphill battle when it comes to achieving an inclusive and sustainable multilateral world. The acceleration of climate change, the COVID-19 pandemic, and now Russia’s illegal and unprovoked war against Ukraine – these are just the latest challenges to building a world underpinned by international solidarity.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has been a shock, and its global impact cannot be underestimated. This war has unleashed a chain of political, security, economic and social destabilisation across the world. It is a direct attack on all that we hold dear – the rules-based international order, peace and stability, food security and sustainable global development.

Russia’s war against Ukraine has opened

a new chapter in European history, and we in Europe are on the frontlines of the international response. Since day one, we have reacted with steadfast unity within the 27 EU countries and with our G7 partners. And in unity with Ukraine. We have supported Ukraine with economic, financial, humanitarian, political and military support. This helped Ukraine resist and avoid immediate collapse.

And we will help Ukraine to rebuild. The 27 EU leaders agreed to launch a Ukraine Solidarity Trust Fund as a concrete expression of our commitment to Ukraine and its European path. The cornerstone of this Trust Fund is precisely the idea of ‘trust’. We trust in a modern, prosperous, forward-looking and democratic Ukraine. We will stand by all Ukrainians to help them rebuild their country, their economy, and their free and democratic institutions by combining reconstruction funding with the necessary reforms. To this end, we must coordinate international initiatives –from the G7, Organisation for Economic

Co-operation and Development, International Monetary Fund, World Bank, European Bank for Reconstruction, European Investment Bank and others.

STOPPING RUSSIA’S WAR MACHINE

But supporting Ukraine is not enough. We must also stop Russia’s war machine. We are therefore taking unprecedented and coordinated measures to severely curb Russia’s ability to finance its war. We will continue to put pressure on Russia to end the war as soon as possible.

This war has also spilled beyond the borders of Ukraine with devastating effects for the rest of the world – from food security and energy supply to global supply chains. Russia is using food as a silent weapon of war, blockading seaports and turning farmlands into battlefields. Disruption in food supplies comes as the world is already struggling with the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. The World Food Programme warns that more than 170 million people could experience acute food insecurity. The international community must urgently work together to protect the most vulnerable from hunger and famine. The EU will continue to work with our G7 and international partners to keep trade in agricultural commodities open and to ensure global market transparency. The G7 Global Alliance for Food Security will play an important role along with the Food and Agriculture Resilience Mission (FARM) initiative, especially for developing countries.

The gravity of recent events has focused minds on the essential: protecting our health, our planet, our freedoms and our human dignity. As G7 members, along with other leading multilateral institutions, we have a collective responsibility to respond to these events in a spirit of solidarity. Liberal democracies must engage more effectively with the rest of the world. We must engage with our partners in a way that shows the value of our cooperation by taking care of others.

Russia’s war against Ukraine is a moment of urgency – a moment of truth – for Europe and the world. Let’s unleash a tide of solidarity for the people of Ukraine and for the well-being of all citizens around the world.

More than 170 million people could experience acute food insecurity”

Ursula von der Leyen President, European Commission Standing side by side

The brutality of Russia’s aggression is shocking the world. And I have seen it, indeed, with my own eyes when I was visiting Kyiv … We cannot match the bravery and the sacrifice of the Ukrainian people, but we can back you; we can help you; we can stand by your side.

We can help you with our economic power. On one hand, with the sanctions … also with economic power to support you …

Concerning reconstruction, you have our full support. We need, indeed, a reconstruction, as you said, to build a competitive, prosperous, you said ‘country of dream’. You have us on your side. I think that, if we manage to have the investment – hundreds of billions of euros – and the reforms, this will not only build your country anew, but this will also pave your way to the European Union. Slava Ukraini.

Remarks to the High-Level International Donors’ Conference for Ukraine, 5 May 2022

This Conference has spoken clearly … you have weaved and crafted a vision of a Europe that delivers on what matters most, that helps to make everyday life better, that is not confined to one place but is at your side when you need it. On every day priorities –such as the air we breathe and the food we eat, the education that we give our children and the houses that we bring them up in.

It is a vision of a Europe that pools its strengths and capacities and diversity to tackle the biggest challenges –from climate change or nature loss, to pandemics or security in our region. A Europe that has a stronger capacity to activate and uphold its values and the rule of law. A Europe that is able to provide for itself in vital areas, from energy to food, from materials to medicines, from digital chips to green technologies. A Europe that delivers unique social protections and benefits all the way through these major transitions … Europe is a dream. A dream that always was. A dream born from tragedy.

But today, that dream

shines brightest not only here in this historic place. It shines brightest in the hearts and the minds of the people of Kyiv and Kharkiv, of Odessa and Mariupol … and in every Ukrainian village and town struck by war. And it shines brightest in the eyes of all those young Ukrainians who have found a refuge in Europe – a home away from home. Those people, my fellow Europeans – young and old – are willing to fight and to die for their future and for that dream of Europe. That dream that always was. That dream that must always be …

This morning, I had a videoconference with President Zelenskyy. And he wanted to virtually hand me over his answers to the questionnaire of the Commission for the accession process he has applied to … And therefore, I want to give a very special message to our Ukrainian friends and family. The future of Europe is also your future. The future of our democracy is also the future of your democracy. 72 years ago, war in Europe was replaced with something different, something new. First a Community, today a Union. It was the day when the future began. It is a future that we have been writing together ever since – as architects and builders of Europe. And the next page, dear Ukrainian friends, is now being written by you. By us. By all of us together.

Slava Ukraini. Long live Europe.

Speech to the Conference on the Future of Europe, 9 May 2022

SOLIDARITY AT THE HEART OF EUROPE

No issue is more important than people’s well-being. We cannot be complacent.

Because the pandemic is not over … New variants will continue to emerge. And there is no guarantee that the next one will be mild. In addition, we must prepare for future pandemics or other health threats –beyond COVID.

So, in the EU, we are working hard to step up surveillance, strengthen our healthcare systems and improve preparedness. None of us can do this alone. And this is why international cooperation and solidarity have been at the heart of our EU’s response from the very beginning …

Now we must take our commitment to the next level. The supply of vaccines has to go hand in hand with speedy delivery, especially in Africa …

In addition, we make sure that all regions have the capacity to produce their own medicines, locally. The recent agreement in the G20 to move ahead with a global pandemic preparedness fund is an opportunity for the global community. We will work together with the US and other partners to make it fit for purpose.

Speech at the Global COVID-19 Summit, 12 May 2022

Investing with new technologies

ICICB Group is a multinational holding company that provides investment solutions for businesses and strives to get into the fundamental key points of digital transformation through cumulative experience in the investment industry. We have a broad investment portfolio of businesses that specialise in financial and investment offerings, with a primary focus on funding groundbreaking projects that will shape the future, which is why the company has several investments in blockchains, cryptocurrency-related projects and the metaverse. We develop and manage diversified companies such as financial services, healthcare, medical equipment trading, luxury trading, commercial real estate, industrial enterprises, energy resources, retail trade, agriculture, education, tourism, motor vehicle trading, payment service providers, software technology, hospitality, information services, commercial brokers,

Airton Azevedo Arruda, chairman, ICICB Group

gaming and cryptocurrency, and many other industries. Industries such as gold and diamond trading, mining, medical equipment trading and real estate are among our primary investment activities. Our multi-talented team’s goal is to assist clients in comprehending and adapting to the massive changes that are occurring as a result of the world’s unending digital revolution.

OUR STRATEGY

We focus on pioneering the future that will inevitably be data-driven for financial solutions. We deploy technologies and integrate innovative processes to formulate sustainable solutions that will lay the groundwork for a bright future of digital banking and financial solutions. The investments are carried out directly or through our subsidiaries across a wide range of industries and asset classes. We envision creating value through the

The world is in an unending digital revolution. ICICB’s goal is to assist its clients in comprehending and adapting to the massive changes that are occurring due to the changes under way

development of top-notch businesses that harness the company’s expertise, ideas and services to enable sustainable growth. More than just specialising in financial and investment offerings, we have evolved into a global business with innovations and revolutionary new business opportunities, spanning the entire scope of potential, from initial strategy to technical development. Our investment strategy emphasises intelligent automation to provide long-term solutions for clients, as well as the availability of services to establish and meet global market demands.

OUR MISSION

Our mission is to raise investments and enable partners to attain their full potential and create a better financial future for them. We will constantly evolve to meet the needs of our clients in private banking, wealth management, real estate, digital finance and other areas. The goal of financing, supporting and promoting small and large businesses is to respond to global market demands and increase domestic and international investment. We aim to redefine the standards of market participants by bringing the next-generation workflow tools, market data and analytics.

Using practical content, real-time projects and valid insights from across the industry, we simplify the process and transition of digitisation and help accelerate our client’s efforts. We possess the ability to understand the investment market logically without any complications. Our process has resulted in a variety of portfolios designed to generate higher returns. Our people cultivate a technology-driven approach across all areas of the business as we realise how important it is to reflect the spectrum of sector experience in the investment industry.

We have a long-term outlook for business relationships and prefer organic growth through acquisitions in areas where management has significant experience allowing maximum delivery of services targeting the transformation of the digital world and investment decisions.

ICICB’S DIGITAL INITIATIVES

Over the past few years, there has been a worldwide acceleration in digitalisation. Blockchain, Web 3.0 and virtual reality technologies have enabled the population

AIRTON AZEVEDO ARRUDA

Airton Azevedo Arruda, chairman of ICICB Group’s board of directors, is a strategic leader with vast experience identifying and evaluating internal and external issues that threaten the company’s stability. He is responsible for running all facets of the group business, identifying business potential and maximising the group’s competitive advantage. With his wealth of experience as executive director, he provides innovative and energised leadership in managing risk-reward trade-offs in company services, ensuring business heads understand the risks that may affect their departments. Prior to joining ICICB Group, he served as CEO with Sunshine Import Export (USA) where he worked for nearly six years leading the trading strategies and development in the Middle East and Asia. Respected as a credible voice in decision-making, he held a CEO position with AR Canada Impex, where he successfully introduced Brazilian coffee into the Canadian market, thus creating a new benchmark in speciality coffee.

Twitter @icicbchain  icicb-group.com

to shift in the business landscape, where new ways of gaining competitive advantages have emerged. Operating at the epicentre of the digital industrial revolution, ICICB now provides a comprehensive suite of solutions and has quietly positioned itself at the forefront of global digital transformation. With licenses in Fintech, hedge funds and crypto exchange, we create vigorous technology-oriented models that clear the way for innovation. The combination of these cutting-edge technologies ensures the stability, availability and scalability required to support strategic initiatives while allowing for faster time-to-value

ICICB Blockchain enables advancements in artificial intelligence, metaverse, cryptocurrency and other fields. With lower transaction fees and faster transaction speeds, our all-inclusive blockchain solution is shaping the world with a constantly expanding crypto ecosystem. We have committed to numerous projects, including a crypto trading app, which will allow users to trade (buy and sell) crypto and utilise it in peer-to-peer payments and transfers, along with the breakthrough of a cryptocurrency-powered metaverse and gaming developed on our own blockchain. Our innovative blockchain project aims to reinvent the entire user engagement experience across various industry domains – from decentralised blockchain payments and engineering to the prosperous virtual gaming industry, metaverse and non-fungible token space. Investors and stakeholders’ attention has been drawn to the distinctive set of tools that are designed to enhance the ease of use, versatility, low transaction costs and speed of the blockchain platform.

We simplify the process and transition of digitalisation”

John Kirton, director, G7 Research Group

Prospects for strong performance at the G7 Elmau Summit

The 48th annual G7 summit, on 26–28 June 2022 in Elmau, Germany, is truly historic. It will confront three, unprecedentedly severe, simultaneous crises: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, climate change reaching critical thresholds, and COVID-19 soaring in China and beyond. It will also face the other urgent challenges of biodiversity loss, rising energy and food prices, inflation, economic and trade slowdowns, proliferating poverty, famine, migration, gender inequality, and regional instability and threats to democracy around the world.

Elmau will build on the successful G7 Cornwall Summit and G20 Rome Summit in 2021, as well as advances made at the United Nations’ biodiversity conference in October and Glasgow climate summit in November. It will set the stage for the NATO summit in Madrid immediately afterward, and the G20’s summit in Bali in November.

The Elmau Summit is chaired by Germany’s new chancellor, Olaf Scholz, leading a three-party coalition of his Social Democrats, the Greens and Free Democrats. He is joined by Canada’s Justin Trudeau and France’s recently re-elected Emmanuel Macron at their seventh annual G7 summit, Britain’s

Boris Johnson at his fourth, Ursula von der Leyen and Charles Michel of the European Union at their third, Joe Biden of the United States and Mario Draghi of Italy at their second, and Japan’s Fumio Kishida at his first. They will welcome as guests Indonesia’s Joko Widowi as G20 chair, India’s Narendra Modi, South Africa’s Cyril Ramaphosa, Senegal’s Macky Sall and Argentina’s Alberto Fernández.

AMBITIOUS ADVANCES

Together they will produce a strong performance, led by ambitious advances on the conflict in Ukraine, climate change and COVID-19.

On the war in Ukraine, G7 leaders will promise to give Ukraine more weapons to stop and reverse Russia’s invasion, protect Ukrainians against any Russian use of weapons of mass destruction, and end G7 members’ imports of the Russian coal, oil and natural gas that finance Russia’s war. They will provide Ukraine with economic and financial support and humanitarian and refugee relief, and will help rebuild Ukraine in clean, green, digital ways.

On the existential global threat of climate change, G7 leaders will launch new climate clubs of different countries willing to act on critical tasks. On climate finance, they will reinforce efforts to deliver the long promised annual $100 billion to developing countries, raise new resources through public and private sources, strengthen carbon pricing, consider cross-border carbon tax adjustments to level the playing field, and set standards for assessing and disclosing climate risk and issuing genuinely green, sustainable bonds.

On energy, G7 leaders will act to finally phase out fossil fuel subsidies and killer coal use, production and financing at home and elsewhere. They will approve stronger standards for energy efficiency in buildings, transportation and industry, and spark the transition to electric vehicles. They will expand solar and wind power, and add the reliable renewables of tidal, wave and geothermal power. They will reinforce energy security and affordability by expanding electricity grids and connectivity, sources and types of supply, and reducing excessive demand. G7 leaders will promote nature-based solutions for carbon sinks and sources, by globally growing over one trillion trees, preserving peatlands and protecting at least 30% of land and sea in their natural state by 2030.

On COVID-19, leaders will expand the manufacture, equitable distribution, accessibility and use of safe, effective vaccines and therapeutics. They will address the growing burden of ‘long COVID’, mental illness, cancer, heart and stroke, diabetes, respiratory disease, HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria, antimicrobial resistance, zoonotic diseases and more. They will try to better predict, prevent and cure diseases, through universal health coverage, primary health care, a cleaner climate, digital health and a more powerful, better resourced World Health Organization.

JOHN KIRTON

John Kirton is director of the G7 and G20 Research Groups, co-director of the BRICS Research Group, and co-director of the Global Health Diplomacy Program, all based at the University of Toronto. A visiting professor at the School for International Relations and Public Affairs at Shanghai International Studies University and a distinguished fellow of the Guangdong Institute for International Strategies at Guangdong University for Foreign Studies, he is co-author of Reconfiguring the Global Governance of Climate Change and author of G20 Governance for a Globalized World, among many other publications.

Twitter @jjkirton  www.g7.utoronto.ca

A BROAD VIEW

More broadly, they will offer clear, cooperative monetary policy to control inflation, targeted fiscal policy to spur economic growth, selective trade liberalisation, debt relief for very poor countries, and sanctions against nuclear proliferation in North Korea, China’s expansion and authoritarianism everywhere.

G7 leaders will be spurred to this strong performance by several forces: the unprecedentedly severe, simultaneous, self-reinforcing shocks from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, climate change and COVID-19 and the failure of the established multilateral organisations’ response; the global predominance and internal equality of G7 members in the critical capabilities required to fill the gap, their renewed common principles of open democracy and human rights, the substantial domestic political cohesion backing them, and their own trust in their personal G7 club at the hub of an expanding network of global summit governance.

G7 leaders will provide Ukraine with economic and financial support and humanitarian and refugee relief, and will help rebuild Ukraine in clean, green, digital ways”

Dennis Snower, president, Global Solutions Initiative

The challenge of the Zeitenwende

The 2022 G7 summit will take place during a ‘Zeitenwende’, the ending of one world order and the beginning of another. Understanding the nature of this Zeitenwende is a critical prerequisite for designing a collaborative strategy for the G7.

The Zeitenwende has been brought into focus through Russia’s recent invasion of Ukraine. In all likelihood the new world order will be characterised by a decoupling of global supply chains, an arms race fuelled by the current military conflict and the resulting economic sanctions, and a global economy plagued by distrust, both among and within political blocs.

This context will make it particularly difficult to deal with the major challenges the world currently faces, which may be summarised by ‘four Cs’: climate, COVID-19, connectivity and commerce. What all four have in common is that each rests on the global commons. None can be tackled by states acting in isolation. Global collaboration has become essential for the prosperous survival of humanity. However, it is precisely such collaboration that is undermined by the conflict-prone context of the new world order.

On climate, countries are making progress towards recognising the seriousness of the threat, but this progress is still inadequate. The commitments made at the 2021 Glasgow

Summit – even if they were all fulfilled – would still lead to an unconscionable 2.4°C to 2.7°C of global warming above pre-industrial levels. No enforcement mechanisms exist to ensure that the commitments will be met.

On COVID-19, rich countries have managed to produce far more vaccines than they have been able to deploy, while poor countries have been left woefully under-supplied. This vaccine-grab has taken place despite widespread recognition that, due to the threat of new variants, the pandemic is defeated nowhere unless it is defeated everywhere. On connectivity, the huge gains from digitalisation are being undermined through a massive failure of digital governance. Exploiting these gains does not require that most personal data be in the hands of digital service providers and data aggregators. It does not require digital barter, whereby digital users receive free digital services in return for free, untransparent disclosure of personal information, which is subsequently

commodified by advertisers and political influencers. The social value of the digital commons is devalued when it must serve the profit motives of the digital service providers and data aggregators. On commerce, there is a growing recognition that free economic markets do not automatically exploit all potential gains from trade. To do so, they require trust among the trading partners and this trust – this ‘social capital’ – constitutes an economic global commons on which much of global trade and capital flows rely. The conflict-prone context of the new world order saps this trust, making it difficult for trading partners to be confident that their supply chains are politically and economically reliable.

PRESERVING THE GLOBAL COMMONS

Against this backdrop, it is vital that the G7 make the preservation of the global commons its central concern. What is to be done if it is impossible currently to re-establish a rules-based world order that respects basic human rights, because some powerful parties are unwilling to support such an order? A potentially useful answer is that the preservation of the global commons may have to rely on voluntary alliances. This is the idea underlying German chancellor Olaf Scholz’s ‘climate club’, in which countries commit to the requisite climate action and rich countries provide resources to enable poor countries to join.

Maintaining the global commons in the context of the new world order – or the ‘Zeitenwende’ –presents an epic challenge

This approach rests on the recognition that the global commons cannot be preserved when each country acts in its own narrow-minded self-interest. Instead, countries must form coalitions in which they support one another in the pursuit of common purposes. These purposes are not defined solely by economic output, but must also include environmental and social gains. Amassing economic wealth at the expense of natural and social

DENNIS J SNOWER

Dennis J Snower is president of the Global Solutions Initiative, a professor of macroeconomics and sustainability at the Hertie School in Berlin, a programme director at The New Institute, a professorial fellow at the Institute for New Economic Thinking at Oxford University, a senior research fellow at the Blavatnik School of Governance at Oxford University, a non-resident fellow of the Brookings Institution and a visiting professor at University College, London.

Twitter @DJSnower  global-solutions-initiative.org

wealth does not necessarily improve well-being. A broader approach to well-being – requiring the measurement of economic, social and environmental performance across countries and through time – is required for true progress. On this account, an encompassing measurement of national performance in the G7 is essential for evaluating the overall performance of climate clubs.

This approach could also be applied to the rest of the four Cs. Climate clubs can be joined by ‘healthcare clubs’, in which countries commit to universal healthcare with regard to transmissible diseases and rich countries provide the resources to enable poor countries to participate.

With regard to commerce, the creation of further ‘economic clubs’ is to be expected, in which members commit to the maintenance of political, social and environmental principles as the basis for their trading relationships.

Finally, with regard to connectivity, the digital governance system needs to be reformed to give digital users control, individually and collectively, of the data about themselves. This will call for ‘digital empowerment clubs’, in which countries commit to requiring digital authentication for official personal data, protection of ‘data commons’, in which the trustees of the commons have a fiduciary responsibility to act only in the interests of the users, digital consumer protection and particularly the protection of vulnerable users, and upholding competition online along lines analogous to those offline.

Maintaining the global commons in these four domains is the epic challenge of the G7’s Zeitenwende.

Countries must form coalitions in which they support one another in the pursuit of common purposes”

G7 performance on

regional security for Ukraine

The world’s eyes will be on Elmau this June, as G7 leaders make further commitments to tackle the regional security crisis posed by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine

The war in Ukraine has posed an alarming challenge to the European security architecture, created a profound global crisis and raised the spectre of a high-risk Great Power conflict. The 2022 invasion has also rattled a world economy already battered by the COVID-19 pandemic,

DUJA MUHANNA

Duja Muhanna is a senior researcher with the G7 and G20 Research Groups. She joined the G7 Research Group in 2013 and has served as a compliance analyst and lead analyst. She was a member of the field team at the G7 Charlevoix Summit in 2018. She also served as a knowledge management adviser for the 2020 G20 Saudi Presidency. Duja graduated from the University of Toronto with an honours bachelor’s degree in political science and history with a specialisation in international relations.

Twitter @DujaMuhanna  www.g7.utoronto.ca

with particularly significant effects on developing countries. To tackle this regional security crisis, Germany’s G7 presidency is committed to providing coordinated political and financial support to Ukraine and to addressing the many other impacts of the war.

CONCLUSIONS

G7 summits have devoted 8,162 words to Ukraine in their communiqués since its first mention in 1986, averaging 163 words per summit. The lowest total of 18 words (0.2%) was in 2019 and the highest of 950 words (18%) was in 2014, when Russia annexed Crimea and was swiftly suspended from the G8. In terms of the portion of words, the German-hosted virtual summit in February 2022 had the most with 40%.

From 2014 to February 2022, the G7 emphasised Ukraine’s constitutional reform, sovereignty and territorial integrity, a diplomatic solution to the conflict in the framework of the Normandy format and implementation of the Minsk agreements.

COMMITMENTS

From 1975 to February 2022, the G7 made 55 commitments on Ukraine (excluding

Duja Muhanna, senior researcher, G7 Research Group

G7 performance on regional security for Ukraine, 1975–2022

16 made in the G7’s declaration at the Hague in March 2014). The first came in 1992, with 2%. Then highs came with 9% at the 1994 and 1999 summits. Lows, with no mention of Ukraine, came between 2001 and 2006, and again between 2011 and 2013.

Following Russia’s annexation of Crimea, the G7’s 2014 summit devoted 4% of its commitments to Ukraine, pledging to support its sovereignty and territorial integrity. Since then, the G7 has made very few Ukraine commitments, dropping in 2015 to 3%, in 2016 to 1% and in 2017 to 0.6%. In 2018, it rose again, with 4%. But it dipped in 2019 to 1% and disappeared in 2020. At all three summits in 2021, just 0.5% went to Ukraine. The virtual summit on 24 February 2022 produced an all-time high of 10%.

COMPLIANCE

The eight Ukraine commitments assessed by the G7 Research Group averaged 74% compliance, slightly lower than the 76% compliance across all subjects. The commitment assessed from 2014 had 100%. High compliance also came in 2015 with 88% and 2017 with 94%. Compliance dropped in 2016 to 62% and 2018 to 66%. Preliminary compliance with one commitment from 2019 was also low at 50%.

By member, the European Union led with 100%, followed by the United States with 93%, the United Kingdom with 86%, Germany with 81% and France with 81%. Canada with 64%, Italy with 57% and Japan with 43% were below average.

CAUSES AND CORRECTIONS

Compliance performance on Ukraine points to some preliminary possible causes of, and corrections for, G7 members’ compliance.

The three commitments with above average compliance – made in 2014, 2015 and 2017 – averaged a very high 94%; the five below-average compliance had a very low 61%. The three with above average compliance of 94% coincided with summits with a large number and portion of words on Ukraine in the communiqués. The 2014 summit had both the most words on Ukraine and the highest compliance of 100%. Conversely, the 2019 summit had the fewest words, with only 12 and the lowest compliance of only 50%. The 2014 summit also had more commitments on Ukraine, with four, and the 2019 summit only had one.

The three years with the highest

compliance came in the four years immediately following the Russian annexation of Crimea in the spring of 2014. This suggests that this unprecedented, severe, shock-activated vulnerability spurred compliance, and that the effect of that shock subsequently diminished. Moreover, the 100% compliance with the 2014 commitment came after the regular G7 summit was preceded by a special meeting on Ukraine (in the Hague). Conversely, the very low compliance of only 50% with the commitment made in 2019 suggests that the French presidency’s approach of abandoning the standard pre-negotiated comprehensive communiqué, for a short statement drafted by the host on the spot, inspired little compliance on Ukraine.

Based on these limited findings, Elmau’s commitments on Ukraine will likely secure high compliance, given the unprecedented shock of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the consequent unprecedented number of G7 summits focused on Ukraine, in the lead-up to G7 leaders’ scheduled meeting in June. To improve compliance further, G7 leaders can keep meeting on the road to Elmau, and produce many communiqué conclusions and commitments on Ukraine there.

February. (b) August.

As G7 leaders meet at their Elmau Summit, they have an opportunity to demonstrate enduring unity as we shape the future global security landscape – standing strong, together, in the face of any threat

Stronger together in a new global security era

More than ever, democracies around the world must come together to uphold the rules-based international order on which our peace and prosperity depend.

also supporting Ukraine, including with security assistance to defend its land and humanitarian assistance to help its people.

President Vladimir Putin’s war of aggression in Ukraine has shattered peace in Europe and ushered in a new security reality. Authoritarian states such as Russia and China are increasingly challenging our fundamental values of freedom, democracy and the rule of law. They are openly contesting the core principles of our security and seeking to rewrite the global rulebook. Other security challenges such as terrorism and nuclear proliferation persist and many more are on the rise, from cyberattacks and climate change. All these challenges are far greater than any country or continent can tackle alone.

In NATO, 30 democratic countries across Europe and North America stand united to protect our people and way of life. We have done so successfully for over seven decades. Today, we are as united as ever in a more dangerous world.

NATO allies were at the forefront of diplomatic efforts to prevent Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, including through engagement in the NATO-Russia Council. However, President Putin chose otherwise. He started an unjustified war, which we have unanimously condemned. We have repeatedly called on Moscow to end it and imposed tough sanctions to hinder Russia’s war machine. We are

BOOSTING DEFENCES

At the same time, we are strengthening our defences to prevent any escalation of the war beyond Ukraine. NATO allies have already contributed more troops, planes, ships and other capabilities, and will continue to do what is needed to protect every inch of NATO territory. Our commitment to defend one another against any threat, at any time, is steadfast.

The decision by Finland and Sweden to seek membership in NATO testifies to the strength of the alliance and the importance of standing together to defend

Jens Stoltenberg, secretary-general, NATO

our values. Joining NATO would make both countries safer and our alliance even stronger.

President Putin has been failing in his strategic objectives. He wanted Ukraine defeated, NATO down, and Europe and North America divided. Instead, Ukraine stands, NATO is growing stronger and transatlantic unity is rock solid.

The war in Ukraine is a game changer for European security, but its repercussions go well beyond Europe and the Euro-Atlantic area. They are global and long lasting. The war has created one of the biggest humanitarian crises in Europe in decades. Almost a third of Ukrainians have been internally displaced or have fled their country. It has also profoundly disrupted markets worldwide, driving up the cost of critical commodities,

including food and energy. Moreover, it has put China’s relations with Russia in the spotlight. Beijing has been unwilling to condemn Moscow’s aggression, it has joined Moscow in questioning the right of countries to join NATO, and it has provided Russia with political support, including by spreading its blatant lies and disinformation. These are serious challenges to us all. They require a global response from democracies.

KEY G7 COORDINATION

The leadership of the G7 is key to coordinate action and shape decisions among like-minded countries. Under the German presidency, and that of the United Kingdom beforehand, the G7 has been essential to ensuring a united response to the war in Ukraine. Indeed, the G7 effectively coordinated unprecedented economic sanctions on Russia, lent Ukraine strong political support and warned China not to threaten global security by supporting Russia. NATO has actively backed these efforts. For the first time ever, NATO served as the venue for two G7 meetings in 2022 – a powerful show of unity between the world’s greatest military alliance and the world’s most advanced economies.

We will continue to work in lockstep with the G7 and other like-minded partners around the world, from the European Union to countries in the Asia Pacific region, including Australia, Japan, New Zealand and Korea. Together, we must not only work through the current crisis – we must also better address the systemic challenges to our values and way of life in the longer term. One thing is certain: we are stronger together in this new global security era.

G7 leaders will meet at the Elmau Summit on 26–28 June and then NATO leaders at the Madrid Summit on 29–30 June. These will be opportunities to demonstrate our enduring unity as we continue to shape the future global security landscape, where democracy prevails over autocracy, freedom over oppression, and peace over war.

JENS STOLTENBERG

Jens Stoltenberg became secretary-general of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in 2014, with a mandate extended to September 2023. He served two terms as prime minister of Norway, from 2000 to 2001 and from 2005 to 2013, and also held various posts including finance minister and minister of industry and energy. In 2013–2014, he served as United Nations special envoy on climate change and chaired UN high-level panels on climate financing and the coherence between development, humanitarian assistance and environmental policies.

Twitter @jensstoltenberg @nato  nato.int

Our commitment to defend one another against any threat, at any time, is steadfast”

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has led to some countries reaffirming their shared agreement on the value of open societies, but centrifugal forces are still casting dark clouds over the future of global governance

Global security and the G7’s growing centrality

Russia’s heinous invasion of Ukraine is complicating and fragmenting global governance structures – and not for the better. While the G7’s role may take on added weight, the G20 will be crippled and the world’s ability to tackle global challenges undermined.

The G7 started meeting at a time of global upheaval with the collapse of the Bretton Woods system in the 1970s. It played a leading role in steering the global economy throughout the 1980s and ’90s.

But the first decades of the 2000s witnessed strong growth in many emerging markets. Overcoming the global financial crisis from 2008 to 2009 underscored the fact that the G7 alone no longer had the clout to manage the global

Mark Sobel US chair, Official Monetary and Financial Institutions

economy without China.

The G20 leaders’ process was born in late 2008. Non-G7 members of the G20, especially the so-called ‘BRIC’ group of Brazil, Russia, India and China, asked why its members should assume responsibility for managing the global economy with the G7 when they were excluded from global governance. Soon, non-G7 members of the G20 joined bodies such as the Financial Stability Forum (now the Financial Stability Board). By September 2009, the G20’s Pittsburgh Summit declared the G20 to be the premier forum for its leaders’ international cooperation. In this period, the G20 was instrumental in helping support the global recovery, mobilising substantial resources for emerging markets and low-income countries, and laying the basis

for significant shifts in the voting power of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank to dynamic emerging markets.

CHANGING CONDITIONS

By 2014, conditions changed, putting multilateralism increasingly on the back foot. Vladimir Putin’s Crimea and Donbas invasions made Russia a pariah. After the global financial crisis, many in China argued for freeing the country from a US-led western order. President Xi Jinping pursued a more statist approach at home and an increasingly aggressive posture vis-à-vis the West. The Trump presidency saw the United States turn unilateralist, inward, bellicose and protectionist. Among key emerging markets, Chinese growth remained strong, but Brazil and Russia stagnated. Progress in modernising international financial institutions stalled. China’s clout in the world economy is nowhere close to being properly reflected in its weight in international financial institutions. The World Trade Organization has been at a standstill. Regional organisations (such as the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, New Development Bank, Chiang Mai Initiative and European monetary arrangements) are developing and expanding, to some degree at the expense of those multilateral international financial institutions.

NEW PRIORITIES

The priorities of G7 members also changed. The G7 has increasingly been concerned about cyber issues, crypto-assets, anti-money laundering, counterterrorist financing and sanctions policies, areas where countries such as Russia and China are often seen as malign. Unsustainable Chinese lending practices have added to debt distress throughout low-income countries, but efforts to work with China to relieve unsustainable debt have largely hit a great wall.

MARK SOBEL

Mark Sobel is US chair at the Official Monetary and Financial Institutions Forum. He represented the United States on the International Monetary Fund executive board between 2015 and 2018, and was deputy assistant secretary for international monetary and financial policy at the US Treasury between 2000 and early 2015. He helped lead Treasury preparations for meetings of G7 and G20 finance ministers and central bank governors, formulated US positions at the IMF, and coordinated Treasury and regulatory agencies’ work in the Financial Stability Board. He played a key role in US foreign exchange policy including coordinating the Treasury’s semi-annual foreign exchange report on China and other countries.

Twitter @sobel_mark  omfif.org

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on 24 February this year is only reinforcing these centrifugal forces.

With Xi and Putin’s ‘no limits’ friendship, the G7 is gaining greater traction as an antiauthoritarian democracy club. Indeed, the G7 members were joined at the 2021 Cornwall Summit by Australia, Korea, India and South Africa, who reaffirmed with their G7 their shared agreement on the value of open societies. The war has revived the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. To the extent there is now an East–West split, the new East consists of Russia with half-hearted Chinese backing, while the East of the Cold War era has been ripped apart by German reunification and Central Europe gleefully bolting from Russian oppression for the West.

China will reflect long and hard about how to protect itself from actions launched by the West to freeze the Russian central bank’s assets, although it will not jeopardise its economic interests with the West for Russia.

On the economic and financial front, issues such as economic development, climate change and the fight against global poverty remain important for the G20. Overcoming them requires US and China cooperation.

Yet that is hardly a viable prospect at this moment. With fissures torn open between the West and the new East, the G20 will be split this year. Eyes in the West will instead focus on Germany’s G7 presidency.

Perhaps countries can come together on a case-by-case basis – so-called variable geometry – to tackle selected global challenges. But, on balance, the clouds over the future of global governance are quite dark and grey.

With Xi and Putin’s ‘no limits’ friendship, the G7 is gaining greater traction as an anti-authoritarian democracy club”

G7 performance on

armsgoverningcontrol

The G7 has long been committed to the cause of arms control and the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

Since its Cornwall Summit in June 2021, global WMD flashpoints continue to pose potentially catastrophic risks to regional and international security. In 2022, North Korea began conducting an unprecedented series of missile tests, including so-called hypersonic missiles and submarine-launched ballistic missiles. Following its invasion of Ukraine, the Russian Federation shelled the direct vicinity of a nuclear power plant and evoked the threat of its use of WMD. G7 actions and leadership on non-proliferation and nuclear security are needed now more than ever.

CONCLUSIONS

G7 attention to arms control can be divided into five phases. In the first phase, 1975–1990, arms control first appeared as a subject in the G7 communiqué at London in 1977, regarding the exclusively peaceful use of nuclear energy. Arms control conclusions averaged 6% of all communiqué content for this period. The second phase, 1991–2001, began with a spike in 1991 when the topic received 1,847 words (23%) and ended with a 10-year average of 8%. In the third phase, 2002–2012, with the launch of the Global

Partnership against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction in 2002, the G7 started a decade of high, consistent attention to arms control, which peaked at 4,240 words (38%) in 2012. The decade averaged 17% in its conclusions. In the fourth phase, 2013–2019, arms control conclusions plummeted to 447 words (3%) at Lough Erne in 2013 and averaged 4% in these seven years. In the fifth phase from 2020 to February 2022, arms control received little to no attention. Except at Cornwall in 2021, where the topic received

2% of the conclusions, G7 leaders did not address the issue in four of their five consecutive summits after 2020.

COMMITMENTS

Within these communiqué conclusions, the G7 Research Group identified 351 collective, future-oriented, politically binding commitments on arms control. This placed arms control in ninth place among all 34 subjects with commitments, just after trade and gender equality. The leaders made 22 arms control commitments in the first phase from 1975 to 1990, for an average of 5% of all commitments per summit. There were 64 in the second phase from 1991 to 2001, averaging 9%. The third phase, between 2002 and 2012, produced 250 commitments with an all-time-high of 44 commitments in 2011 (for 23%) and an average of 11%. Thirteen commitments, or 1% on average, were made from 2013 to 2019 and only two, or 1%, since 2020.

COMPLIANCE

The G7 Research Group has assessed 32 of the 351 arms control commitments for compliance by G7 members. Compliance averaged 82% – well above the average of 76% on all subjects. The summits in 2000, 2003, 2005, 2010, 2011 and 2012 had the highest compliance, for a combined average of 95%. The 2003 summit had full compliance with the leaders’ promise to

Hiromitsu Higashi, researcher, G7 Research Group

G7 action and leadership on non-proliferation and nuclear security are needed now more than ever, and at Elmau, the leaders should leverage this opportunity for international cooperation in combatting global threats

G7 performance on arms control, 1975–2022 0 25 50 75 100 1976 San Juan 1977London1978Bonn1979Tokyo1980Venice1981Ottawa 1982 Versailles 1983 Williamsburg1984London1985Bonn1986Tokyo1987Venice1988Toronto1989Paris1990Houston1991London1992Munich1993Tokyo1994Naples1995Halifax1996Lyon1997Denver 1998Birmingham1999Cologne 2000Okinawa2001Genoa 2002 Kananaskis 2003 Evian-les-Bains 2004 Sea Island 2005 Gleneagles 2006 St. Petersburg 2007 Heiligendamm 2008 Hokkaido-Toyako2009L'Aquila 2010 Muskoka 2011 Deauville 2012 Camp David 2013 Lough Erne 2014Brussels2015Elmau 2016 Ise-Shima 2017 Taormina 2018Charlevoix2019Biarritz 2020 US Virtual 2021 UK Virtual (a) 2021 Cornwall 2021 UK Virtual (b) 2022 German Virtual (a) Compliance (%) Conclusions (% words) Commitments (%) (a) February. (b) August.

351

strengthen the capacity of the International Atomic Energy Agency to carry out its monitoring tasks. In the fourth phase starting in 2014, the average compliance fell to 75%. From 2019 to February 2022 no compliance data are yet available.

CORRECTIONS

These findings suggest that G7 leaders can improve their compliance in three ways.

average compliance on commitments assessed on arms control

First, the leaders can pay more attention to arms control during their discussions. Assessed commitments suggest a moderate, positive correlation between compliance and the amount of public deliberation recorded in the communiqué conclusions related to the issue. Indeed, the average compliance of the three summits from 2010 to 2012, where at least 27% of each summit’s communiqué was related to arms control, was a strong 95%, compared to 80% for summits with lower public deliberation.

HIROMITSU HIGASHI

Hiromitsu Higashi is pursuing a master’s degree at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) in Washington DC and is also a researcher with the G7 Research Group based at the University of Toronto. In addition to his interest in arms control, his research focuses on the technological aspect of international affairs, namely cybersecurity, disinformation, digital currency and internet governance.

 www.g7.utoronto.ca

Third, leaders can set a multi-year timeline to achieve the objectives in the commitments. The three commitments assessed from 2000, 2005 and 2006 that included a five- or 10-year deadline for actions such as negotiation and provision of funds produced compliance of 91%, compared to 80% for commitments without a multi-year timetable.

commitments made on arms control since 1979 globalgovernanceproject.org 2022 — G7 GERMANY: THE ELMAU SUMMIT 35

Follow the money

The world faces unprecedented crises. Climate change, COVID-19, the war in Ukraine, rising inequality and many other issues demand and warrant the focus of world leaders. At the same time, financial crime continues to flourish in the shadows and cannot be ignored. Dirty money fuels criminal gangs, the drugs trade, corruption, environmental crime and much more. The Financial Action Task Force recognises the progress that countries have made, but G7 leaders need to ensure that the fight against financial crime is not overlooked or neglected.

One of the most crucial areas is improving transparency of beneficial ownership. Criminals, sanctions evaders and kleptocrats routinely use anonymous shell companies to help hide their dirty

Marcus Pleyer, president, Financial Action Task Force

money. Numerous politicians have promised to tackle the issue over the years. However, despite pledges made a decade ago, FATF evaluations show that only 9% of countries have effectively implemented laws dealing with shell companies and other secretive company structures.

This is not good enough. That is why the FATF strengthened its standard on beneficial ownership earlier this year to ensure national authorities can find out who ultimately controls a company. In the future, countries will need to have a register holding beneficial ownership information or have a mechanism that is also efficient. This is an important and positive step forward to end the anonymity of corporate beneficiaries. If countries effectively implement the new

The G7 needs to prioritise the fight against money laundering and terrorist financing by empowering national authorities to ‘follow the money’ and disrupt and deter criminals – and reduce the harmful effects of crime on society

rules they have signed up to, tracing assets will be considerably easier.

TANGIBLE RESULTS

However, to get tangible results we need more than 9% of countries to live up to their pledge. The G7 needs to lead the way and fully implement the new rules as fast as possible. This will act as a catalyst for other countries. I am pleased that at the FATF’s ministerial meeting in April, ministers – including all G7 ministers –committed to promptly implement the FATF’s global beneficial ownership rules. Some are already taking further steps to boost transparency, such as through the creation of interconnected registries. My personal vision is a world of global beneficial ownership transparency making it impossible for criminals to hide their dirty money behind opaque legal structures.

Other potential loopholes are also being closed. The FATF is focusing on legal arrangements such as trusts. It is also working to help tackle money laundering and terrorist financing risks in the real estate sector. The FATF is

MARCUS PLEYER

Dr Marcus Pleyer assumed the position of president of the Financial Action Task Force on 1 July 2020 for a two-year term. He serves as deputy director-general in Germany’s Ministry of Finance, and represents Germany on the boards of the Development Bank for Agribusiness and the Foundation for Financing the Disposal of Nuclear Waste. He was vice-president of the FATF from July 2019 to June 2020, and led the German delegation from 2016 to 2019.

Twitter @FATFNews @MarcusPleyer  www.fatf-gafi.org

publishing a report that makes several recommendations. The starting point is for those working in the real estate sector to understand and mitigate their risks, and to notify authorities if they have suspicions. The FATF urges countries, including all G7 members, to ensure that national authorities work with their real estate sectors to prevent them being used for laundering illicit funds. This means taking a risk-based approach to property transactions and doing basic due diligence. It will make a difference.

LOOTING OUR PLANET

Another area the G7 has prioritised is the fight against climate change. Criminals make billions from looting our planet. However, a recent FATF report showed how, at the moment, few countries prioritise the fight against money laundering from environmental crimes. For the criminal networks involved, it is a low-risk, high-reward crime. This needs to be reversed. The FATF asks all countries to include environmental crimes in their national money laundering risk assessments. By working together,

sharing insights and taking collective action, we can put a sizable dent in the illicit profits for environmental crimes and help save our planet.

The FATF is doing its part in other ways. As countries prepare for the next round of FATF evaluations that assess countries’ anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing systems, FATF members have agreed to make future evaluations more targeted, more frequent and more focused on major risks. These changes aim to lead to more effective action, including more prosecutions of complex money laundering cases and an increase in criminal asset seizures.

By prioritising and empowering national authorities to ‘follow the money’, G7 members can help disrupt and deter criminals, terrorists and the corrupt. In turn, this will reduce the harmful effects of crime on society. For over a decade, the G7 has led in setting the global agenda on fighting crime and corruption. The FATF urges all G7 members to prioritise the fight against money laundering and terrorist financing in the years ahead.

COVID-19 and criminal contagion

The global impact of COVID-19 provided a fertile environment for criminals to increase their illicit financial gains through cyberattacks, hacking, phishing, malware and fraudulent investment schemes. Organised crime groups adjusted their modus operandi to profit from the context of the health emergency created by the pandemic. In just two examples, INTERPOL provided assistance in cases of fraud from the non-delivery of surgical masks worth more than €15 million, and from business email compromise involving non-existent medical equipment worth €3 million.

The pandemic provided fertile ground for illicit financial activity. Now more than ever, concerted and coordinated action is needed to fight financial crime and terrorism financing

Jürgen Stock, secretarygeneral, INTERPOL

National lockdowns made people more vulnerable to online fraudulent schemes such as fake governmental websites targeting personal and financial information and fake e-commerce and COVID-19 donation websites.

Criminals also exploited the crisis-triggered financial vulnerabilities of legitimate businesses to launder their illicit profits. Economic sectors under pressure, such as tourism and hospitality, transportation and entertainment, were more exposed to infiltration by organised crime groups.

Factoring in the nexus between organised crime and terrorism, the migration of criminals to cyberspace

makes detecting and investigating terrorism financing more challenging. Terrorist financiers are expected to combine emerging and traditional means, such as the use of crypto-assets as part of obfuscation measures, coupled with other non-virtual financing methods such as hawala, a method of moving money without any physical money actually moving.

INTERCEPTING ILLICIT FUNDS

In the wake of the pandemic, INTERPOL launched the Global Financial Crime Task Force to provide on-the-ground operational and investigative support to its 195 member countries, with a focus on tackling cyber-enabled COVID-19–related fraud and money laundering schemes. This was followed in January 2022 by the creation of the INTERPOL Financial Crime and Anti-Corruption Centre to provide a global coordinated response to the exponential growth in transnational financial crime, with an emphasis on targeting fraud and payment crime, corruption, money laundering and asset recovery.

In addition to purple and orange notices to warn of new modus operandi and imminent threats, INTERPOL’s new Anti-Money Laundering Rapid Protocol has proved critical to successfully intercepting illicit funds.

Operation Unmasked coordinated a transnational case of a non-delivery scam and enabled authorities across Germany, Ireland and the Netherlands to arrest four suspects and intercept most of the €2.3 million in advance payments made by the victim company.

Throughout 2020 and 2021, Operations Maharlika III, Neptune III and HOTSPOT disrupted terrorist financial networks by identifying new trends of terrorist mobility and smuggling of cash and other terrorism financing commodities, such as works of art, jewellery and weapons.

However, the global law enforcement community remains confronted by multiple challenges that further complicate its fight against financial crime and terrorist financing.

The complexity of the global payment ecosystem, combined with the high speed of financial transactions, make tracing and intercepting illicit financial flows a constant challenge. Furthermore, many of INTERPOL’s members are in the developmental phase of their stop-payment and financial investigation capabilities. This is why INTERPOL works in close partnership with major relevant stakeholders beyond the law enforcement community, such as the Financial Action Task Force and the Egmont Group, as well as regulatory bodies, think tanks and the private sector.

G7 SUPPORT

G7 partners are a key supporter of INTERPOL and its global efforts in the fight against transnational organised crime and terrorism. In their 2021 commitments, G7 interior and security ministers reiterated their intention to further develop INTERPOL’s tools and services and ensure all member countries can access these.

Of particular relevance to the fight against financial crime and terrorism financing is supporting the

JÜRGEN STOCK

Jürgen Stock was appointed secretary-general of INTERPOL in 2014 and reappointed in 2019 to serve a second five-year term. Stock was vice-president of Germany’s Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA) from 2004 to 2014, before which he held several leadership positions within law enforcement development institutions. Twitter @INTERPOL_SG  interpol.int

195

members of INTERPOL

extension of access to INTERPOL’s databases on crime and criminals to members’ financial intelligence units. These units are at the forefront of the fight against financial crimes, acting as the national centre for the receipt and analysis of suspicious transaction reports and other information relevant to money laundering and terrorism financing. However, they face the constant challenge of receiving and processing an overwhelming volume of reports daily.

Granting FIUs access to INTERPOL’s databases will enhance their ability to focus and prioritise their investigations to target suspects and bank accounts linked to INTERPOL notices and databases.

With an estimated less than 1% of criminal funds flowing through the international financial system currently intercepted by law enforcement, concerted and coordinated action is needed more than ever.

<1% 39

The migration of criminals to cyberspace makes detecting and investigating terrorism financing more challenging”

Cyber sanctions and war: illicit financial flows

The G7 has been coordinating extensively in the face of war in Ukraine, but longer-term thinking and a global framework for prosecuting international atrocities will be key to increasing the group’s effectiveness

Illicit finance linked to cybercrimes, sanctions breaches and war crimes require focused attention from leaders at this year’s G7 summit in Elmau. Russia’s attack on Ukraine, the mass adoption of technology, changes to ways of living and working, and the recent market crashes in traditional and new financial markets have created more opportunities and incentives for corrupt actors and criminals who are not restricted by national borders. The global criminal landscape is undergoing massive changes as criminal organisations and kleptocrats rebuild from COVID-19 and exploit global tensions and policy responses, resulting in new threats that need to be addressed. At the same time, governments in many G7 members have launched the most far-reaching sanctions ever and initiated the biggest overhaul of anti-money laundering and counterterrorist financing legislation since 2001. These changes are generating opportunities for G7

DENISSE RUDICH

Denisse Rudich is director of the G7 and G20 Research Groups London and a financial crime prevention specialist in policy development, strategic advisory and risk management. She has experience in setting up global frameworks in the investment and wholesale banking sectors, advising regulators, government and fintech/regtech firms, and supporting forensic investigations in both the public and private sectors. Rudich is involved in several global initiatives aimed at building effectiveness and collaboration in the fight against financial crime and is the CEO of Rudich Advisory.

Twitter @g7_rg  www.g7.utoronto.ca

Denisse Rudich, director, G7 and G20 Research Groups London

collaboration to use data and technology innovatively to improve global frameworks to prevent, identify, disrupt and repatriate illicit finance.

CYBERCRIMES

G7 leaders should continue to endorse the work of their digital ministers and direct them to explore more closely the links between cybercrimes, cyberwarfare and illicit financial flows. Cybercrimes and related criminal proceeds are soaring, as fast-paced digital adoption continues. Internet of Things attacks have reached 9.5 million per day and ransomware attacks could cost $265 billion by 2031. The world is already seeing new types of threats such as cryptojacking and increasingly blurred lines between independent and state-sponsored cybercrime.

The G7 should seek to document the full scale of the threat of cybercrime and associated financial flows. It should encourage the use of privacy enhancing technologies to protect against the theft of data. G7 data protection authorities should work closely with the Financial Action Task Force to discuss how to balance data protection principles with national security concerns and the requirement to identify and report suspicious activities. This should include developing high-level principles to allow law enforcement authorities and oblige entities to fight financial crime without tipping off the subjects of suspicious activity reports. G7 members should also commit to bolstering cyber defences and to attract talent to repel cyberwarfare attacks or take criminal action against

them. Russia will likely remain a major hub for cybercrime.

SANCTIONS

The use of sanctions by G7 and partner countries is unprecedented, particularly as they are directed against a G20 member. A complex set of sanctions has been placed on over 7,500 Russian persons and entities and many industries, including aerospace, marine, electronics, technology and defence, and have been subjected to targeted export controls. G7 members recently committed to phase out their dependence on Russian oil and gas.

For sanctions to be effective, G7 members must continue to coordinate their targets but also target the enabler network of designated persons and entities. G7 members should commit to corporate transparency by having public registries with powers to validate beneficial ownership structures and to screen to identify criminal conduct, sanctions and disinformation. Producing legislation on transparency in trust structures is also key, as is the need to target the use of nominees, shadow directors and ghost companies, which are often used to circumvent sanctions. G7 members should also garner the support of offshore jurisdictions, Russian proxy states and secrecy havens that are currently used to move funds and other assets owned or controlled by sanctioned persons to circumvent sanctions.

An additional area for G7 focus is the use of professional enablers to set up trusts and companies, obtain bank accounts and advise on how to move funds. G7 members should explore the use of civil powers to seize and repatriate assets that have been associated with

m

criminal activity linked to corruption. The G7 Russian Elites, Proxies and Oligarchs (REPO) Task Force should develop criteria for removing sanctions in ways that mitigate against major

bn

macroeconomic shocks to global supply chains and markets.

Although the G7 has been coordinating extensively to manage the war in Ukraine, longer-term thinking is required for prosecuting war criminals and seizing and repatriating criminal assets. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has created a need for a mechanism to target the financiers and financial beneficiaries of war crimes and human right abuses. To that end, the G7 should explore existing mechanisms that look at the financial angle of war crimes and human rights abuses. G7 members could commit to making war crimes or gross human rights abuses a predicate offence for money laundering. They should also create a global framework for prosecuting international atrocities, particularly those carried out by legal entities, and consider how to increase the effectiveness of mechanisms already in place.

9.5

Internet of Things attacks daily $265

The cost of ransomware attacks by 2031

G7 performance on W

hat do climate scientists want us to know in 2022? That affordable solutions abound.

Although countries are on track to overshoot the allowable 1.5°C post-industrial temperature rise, the tools are available to put a wrench in the fossil-fuelled economy.

The G7 plays a major role. According to the International Institute for Sustainable Development, from January 2020 to March 2021, during the COVID-19 pandemic, G7 members spent $42 billion more on fossil fuels than clean energy. This – and all – money must be redirected to a clean, circular economy and a just transition.

Brittaney Warren, director of compliance studies and lead researcher on climate change, G7 Research Group

The G7’s rapid response to the pandemic and its united response to Russia’s war against Ukraine shows it can act quickly and ambitiously against a common threat. At Elmau, it needs to act just as fast and show united leadership to counter the climate crisis.

CONCLUSIONS

The G7 has paid increasing attention to climate change and its impacts in the portion of its communiqués on the subject. But, in its 48-year history, including the additional summits held in 2021 and 2022, the G7 dedicated just 6% of them to climate change, while development had 17% and economic growth 12%.

During the past two years, despite the diversionary shocks of the COVID-19 pandemic and Russia’s war against Ukraine, the G7 paid more attention to climate change than ever. At the G7’s February 2021 virtual meeting, under the UK presidency, 35% of the communiqué went to climate change, the most to date. At the 2021 Cornwall Summit, climate got 19%, the same as in 2015 with the pull of the UN’s Paris Agreement. At the February 2022 summit under the German presidency, a new high of 38% went to climate change.

COMMITMENTS

Between 1985, with their first climate commitment, and February 2022, G7 leaders made 381 climate commitments, with a slight rise over time. They made only five commitments in the second half of the 1980s; 42 commitments, averaging three per summit from 1990 to 2004; 221 commitments, averaging 22 per summit, from 2005 to 2014; and 51 commitments, averaging seven per summit, from 2015 to 2019. As a portion, 2008 had the most with 19%, while 2003, 2004, 2019, 2020 and the August 2021 virtual summit all had less than 1% to none.

From 2020 until February 2022, the G7 already made 65 commitments, averaging 13 per summit. The 2020 US Virtual Summit made none. The February 2021 virtual summit made three (for 11%), the in-person Cornwall Summit that June made 54 (for 13%) and the August virtual summit none. The February 2022 Virtual Summit, convened by the German presidency the day Russia’s war against Ukraine began, produced eight (for 15%).

COMPLIANCE

Average compliance with the 96 assessed climate commitments is 73%, slightly below the G7’s 76% average for all 641 assessed commitments. G7 members’ climate compliance by 1989 averaged only 54%, but rose to 73% by 2004, to 75% by 2014 and to 78% by 2020. By 1 February 2022, compliance with the one assessed commitment from the 2021 Cornwall Summit was 88%.

By member, the European Union led with 91% compliance, followed by the United Kingdom with 83%, Germany with 81%, Canada with 77%, Japan with 73%, France and the United States with 71% each, and Italy with 54%. Russia from 1998 to 2014 had 58%.

CAUSES AND CORRECTIONS

Several causes of this compliance are low-cost measures under G7 leaders’ direct control, which they have used before to good effect.

BRITTANEY WARREN

Brittaney Warren is director of compliance studies and lead researcher on climate change for the G7 Research Group, the G20 Research Group and the BRICS Research Group at the University of Toronto. She is co-author of Reconfiguring the Global Governance of Climate Change, with John Kirton and Ella Kokotsis. She has also published on links between climate and health, and on accountability measures to improve summit performance. She holds a master’s degree in environmental studies from York University.

Twitter @brittaneywarren  www.g7.utoronto.ca

Compliance above the 73% average comes from climate commitments that refer to a past summit at 78% or international climate law at 77%, or have a one-year timetable at 74%. Those with a specific numeric target or a reference to the private sector have 73%. In contrast, those with a multi-year timetable have 72%, those referring to a core international organisation 71% and those referring to a specific country or region 45%.

A more powerful push, suggesting a rise in compliance with climate commitments by 21%, is holding a G7 environment ministers meeting. Since 1985, in the 21 years with one such meeting, summit climate compliance averaged 89%, and the 14 years with none averaged only 68%. The years when G7 leaders created a G7 official-level body on the environment correlated with a 33% increased compliance with leaders’ climate commitments that year.

Surrounding summit support from the United Nations is correlated with 6% higher climate compliance. In the few years with a high-level UN climate summit, G7 climate compliance averaged 79%, and those with none averaged 73%.

Climate commitments with references to Indigenous peoples had the same compliance as those without. Yet as Indigenous peoples protect 80% of the world’s biodiversity, G7 leaders should work with them in sincere ways.

spent by G7 members more on fossil fuels than on clean energy from January 2020 to March 2021, during the COVID-19 pandemic

73%

$42bn average compliance with assessed climate commitments

CONCLUSION

Thus G7 leaders at Elmau should:

• strongly support the Paris Agreement and Glasgow Climate Pact, including by specifying short-term one-year timelines to ensure all G7 members meet their net zero goals by 2050;

• include similar short-term timelines to end all fossil fuel subsidies;

• create an official-level body on nature-based solutions for climate change, to support implementation of the G7’s commitments on mitigation and adaptation and to support environmental, economic and social goals, including protecting forests; and

• create a permanent space at the G7 outreach table for Indigenous leaders.

Climate change: an enduring issue

Patricia Espinosa, executive secretary, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

The forthcoming meeting of G7 leaders at Elmau comes at one of the most difficult times for the world in living memory. The threat to global health from the COVID-19 pandemic has started to decline, but it is not yet over. Spiralling inflation is hampering the incipient economic growth recorded during the previous year. The recent invasion of Ukraine – a blatant violation of Russia’s commitments under the United Nations Charter – has unleashed the cruelties of war on innocent people and, at the same time, destabilised global markets for food, energy and vital agricultural inputs such as fertilisers. This crisis in Ukraine is adding to inflationary pressures and increasing the risk of famine in some countries. In addition, a potential escalation of the conflict, with unpredictable consequences, is a major cause for concern. Those developments are, understandably, at the centre of the international agenda. They are deeply disturbing and they demand immediate action. They are even more vexing because

The future prosperity of G7 members, and that of the world, must be based on new practices and technologies that help all countries transition to a cleaner, greener, sustainable future –led by the G7

PATRICIA ESPINOSA CANTELLANO

Patricia Espinosa Cantellano took office as executive secretary of the secretariat to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in 2016. She served as Mexico’s ambassador to Germany from 2012 to 2016 and from 2001 to 2002, and minister of foreign affairs from 2006 to 2012. She chaired the 16th Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC leading to the adoption of the Cancún Agreements and was named by the UN secretary-general to the High-Level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda.

Twitter @PEspinosaC

 unfccc.int

they divert attention from climate change, which remains the most dangerous, long-term emergency the world currently faces. Responding to the current challenges, important though they certainly are, without due regard to the enduring issue of climate change would be a tragic error.

THE CURRENT OUTLOOK

Over the past few months, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has submitted different sections of its latest assessment on the outlook for the global climate. The scientific basis, which has always been sound, is more robust than ever. The reports

are conclusive: human-induced climate change is causing widespread adverse impacts on nature and people around the world, with increasing losses and damages. Unchecked, global warming will aggravate climate hazards, posing growing risks to ecosystems and people.

If the 1.5°C limit is exceeded, we can be certain that those risks will be severe, including the possibility of irreversible impacts. More to the point, we are not on track to limit warming to 1.5°C.

In the decade before the pandemic (2010–19), average annual greenhouse gas emissions reached their highest level in human history. Preliminary data on post-pandemic emissions appear to signal

a quick return to previous tendencies. We now fully understand the threat that climate change poses to our societies if we do not confront it promptly and decisively. We also know the actions that are needed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to help countries prepare for a less certain future. We have, furthermore, the essential tools to foster a global transition through environmentally sound policies, sustainable finance and innovative technology. What we lack are resolute leadership and transformative action.

REACHING CONSENSUS

Last year, in Glasgow, the international community achieved significant progress on key issues that had remained outstanding for several years. The elusive agreement on the basic rules governing carbon markets and transparency was finally reached. We also saw many new commitments in key areas –finance, forestry, the end to coal, and accelerated climate action from cities, regions and economic sectors. Those rules and commitments, however, will be meaningless unless accompanied by sweeping and urgent implementation. While deliberations must continue on a number of pending and emerging issues, this has to be a time for action.

The G7 summit brings together the leaders of countries that have a significant responsibility for the accumulation of greenhouse gas emissions in the atmosphere. Their current prosperity is largely the result of the extensive use of previous technologies, based on fossil fuels. Adopted throughout the world, those technologies ultimately have led to our current climate crisis. The future prosperity of G7 members – along with that of the world – must be based on new practices and technologies, on new ways of addressing human needs that minimise greenhouse gas emissions and helping all countries transition to a cleaner, greener, sustainable future.

The change that the world needs to see will not be possible without bold, decisive leadership. Few gatherings in the world command such attention as the G7. The decisions of this informal but influential body not only have a direct effect through their policies at home, but also motivate and inspire governments around the world. As the IPCC has conclusively shown, the window of opportunity to limit a temperature rise below 1.5°C is rapidly closing. The world legitimately looks to the G7 for leadership.

The road to Kunming

loss. A successor to the Aichi Biodiversity Targets, it sets out concrete actions to put biodiversity on a path to recovery before the end of this decade. The multilaterally agreed framework is expected to be adopted by governments at the second part of the 15th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity in Kunming, China, later this year.

Parties convened, in a hybrid format, for the first part of COP15 in Kunming in October 2021, fulfilling its vision to provide the necessary political momentum to the post-2020 global biodiversity framework process. They adopted the Kunming Declaration and made commitments and pledges to advance the objectives of the Convention. This included Chinese president Xi Jinping’s announcement of the Kunming Biodiversity Fund with an initial investment of approximately $230 million to help developing countries implement the new framework.

Governments and stakeholders met for three weeks in Geneva in March to advance their work and negotiate the mission, goals and targets of the first draft of the framework released last July. In addition, several important recommendations were adopted to support the implementation of the framework, including important elements such as monitoring and review, capacity building, resource mobilisation and gender.

Biodiversity and the benefits it provides are fundamental to human well-being and a healthy planet. Despite ongoing efforts and scientific evidence, biodiversity continues to deteriorate worldwide, a decline projected to worsen under business-as-usual scenarios, jeopardising achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals. This situation also threatens to undermine efforts to address climate change, land degradation and pollution – all primary drivers of the loss of biodiversity. Urgent action is needed to limit biodiversity loss and set the world on track to a future of living in harmony with nature by 2050.

According to a recent report, 77% of land (excluding Antarctica) and 87% of the ocean’s area have been modified by human activities. The Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services estimates that at least 1 million species risk extinction. The costs will affect everyone. The World Economic Forum says over half the world’s total gross domestic product – equivalent to $44 trillion of economic value generation – depends moderately or highly on nature. The cost of inaction is estimated to rise to at least $14 trillion – 7% of global GDP – by 2050. Furthermore, over 70% of people living in poverty rely at least partly on natural resources for their livelihoods.

URGENT NEED FOR ACTION

This is why the parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity have agreed to develop a new post-2020 global biodiversity framework, a blueprint for urgently halting and reversing biodiversity

The Geneva meetings marked the first in-person CBD meetings since the COVID-19 pandemic began two years ago. Negotiations benefited from a constructive, collegial and friendly atmosphere. Parties and stakeholders made substantial progress to advance the draft framework and now have ownership of the text, laying important groundwork for a successful outcome in Kunming.

Elizabeth Maruma Mrema was appointed executive secretary of the Secretariat to the Convention on Biological Diversity in 2020, having served as interim executive secretary since 2019. Previously with the United Nations Environment Programme, she was director of the Law Division, deputy director of the Ecosystems Division and executive secretary of the UNEP/Secretariat of the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals. Earlier she worked with Tanzania’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation and lectured in public international law and diplomacy.

Twitter @mremae @UNBiodiversity  cbd.int

ELIZABETH MARUMA MREMA

Biodiversity deterioration will worsen under business-as-usual scenarios, but there is promise for an ambitious, actionable and realistic global biodiversity framework to emerge from COP15 in Kunming

Elizabeth Maruma Mrema, executive secretary, Convention on Biological Diversity

However, many points remain to be resolved. Consequently, governments and stakeholders are meeting on 21–26 June in Nairobi. Intersessional work was agreed for key issues such as resource mobilisation and enhanced planning, reporting and a review mechanism.

STRIKING A CAREFUL BALANCE

The success of the post-2020 global biodiversity framework requires a careful balance of ambition and feasibility. Negotiators need to find consensus on three critical issues, including:

• Resource mobilisation: The level of ambition of the framework depends on the commensurate mobilisation of resources, including developed countries’ commitment to support developing countries’ implementation of the framework.

• Digital sequence information on genetic resources: Many developing countries want a strong regime on DSI, as they see their genetic resources under threat of exploitation from pharmaceutical companies, whereas many developed countries favour a ‘light’ regime.

• Ambition versus measurability: Agreement is pending on the proposed numerical elements that would allow for a collective stocktake of progress, and some risk being omitted from the final outcome. Without clearly defined numerical elements, transformative change may be difficult and unlikely – the lack of appropriate numerical elements in most targets was a shortcoming of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets.

77% of land (excluding Antarctica) and 87% of the ocean have been modified by human activity

species at risk of extinction

1m – more than half the world’s total GDP –depends moderately or highly on nature

$44trn

When the G7 leaders meet at Elmau on the day the CBD’s Nairobi meeting concludes, they will be in a unique position to assess progress and rally other countries for an ambitious post-2020 outcome at COP15. This is an opportunity to lead by example: a firm expression of support for specific targets being proposed; a strong goal on reducing species extinctions; support for a transparent and ambitious outcome on DSI; and concrete financial commitments to close the global biodiversity finance gap by 2050, including by redirecting subsidies harmful to biodiversity. Equally needed are concrete commitments on capacity building, technology transfer and scientific cooperation. More broadly, integrating the values of biodiversity across policies and economic sectors would send the right signal that the world’s countries stand ready to invest in an ambitious post-2020 global biodiversity framework that is fit for purpose. Therefore, we must work together to come out of COP15.2 in Kunming victorious, with an ambitious, actionable and realistic global biodiversity framework to take us beyond 2050 when the planet and people will live in harmony with nature.

[The G7 summit] is an opportunity to lead by example: a firm expression of support for specific targets being proposed”

Solving the plastic problem

An end to plastic pollution is on the horizon, but more action is needed to get over the finish line. The sooner we act, the sooner we will reap the benefits –and the G7 can help to get us there

When countries agreed to start working on a deal to end plastic pollution at the United Nations Environment Assembly in early March, there were scenes of jubilation. Exhausted negotiators hugged as applause thundered through the meeting room in Nairobi. They deserved their moment. But until the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee agrees a legally binding deal by the end of 2024, and we all start implementing it, plastic pollution will continue to cause immeasurable harm.

Approximately 7 billion of the estimated 9.2 billion tonnes of plastics produced between 1950 and 2017 are now waste, much of it in the oceans. We add to this waste every year to the tune of another 11 million tonnes. This waste is harming fragile species. It is damaging economies. It is very likely damaging our health.

Plastic debris has been found in the digestive systems of many marine species. Plastic pollution reduces marine ecosystem services by $500 billion to $2,500 billion each year. If nothing changes, by 2050 greenhouse gas emissions associated with plastic production, use and disposal could account for 15% of

allowed emissions under the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C. These impacts, and more besides, are why a deal is so important. They are also why we cannot afford to wait for a deal to get moving. The G7 has played an integral role so far. Germany spearheaded the G7 Action Plan to Combat Marine Litter during its 2015 presidency. Canada’s G7 presidency in 2018 saw a blueprint for healthy oceans as well as the G7 Ocean Plastics Charter. The Osaka Blue Ocean Vision, agreed under the Japanese G20 presidency in 2019, voluntarily commits G20 members to reduce additional pollution by marine plastic litter to zero by 2050. Japan, along with Rwanda and Peru,

INGER ANDERSEN

Inger Andersen is the executive director of the UN Environment Programme and an undersecretary-general of the United Nations. From 2015 to 2019, she was the director-general of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). Ms Andersen has more than 30 years of experience in international development economics, environmental sustainability and policy making and has held various leadership roles at the World Bank and United Nations.

Inger Andersen, executive director, United Nations Environment Programme

then put forward resolutions that became the final text for the resolution on plastic pollution at the fifth UNEA in Nairobi.

Now we are counting on the G7 to throw its full weight behind the negotiations – because top-level political commitment will be crucial. In addition, as multilateralism brings us towards a strong regulatory framework, we need to move quickly on industry innovation and waste management to ensure the agreement can succeed.

WHAT THE G7 CAN DO

With deep pockets and conducive business environments for research and development – and close to one third of the world’s plastic production – G7 members can be leaders in developing and championing the range of approaches, sustainable alternatives and technologies we need to address the full life cycle of plastics. There are many strands to this work.

It is imperative to scale up reuse schemes to shift economies away from disposable and wasteful products. Innovations and the uptake of recycled plastic are undermined by the low cost of subsidised virgin plastics. We need a level playing field for the sustainable design of products and materials. This means incentivising innovation

for products that can be reused, remanufactured or recycled.

Companies can support the implementation of G7 commitments and the upcoming global deal through stronger internal policies, innovative approaches and awareness efforts among their markets. As nine of the 10 companies whose plastic products cause the most plastic pollution in the world are based in G7 members, G7 governments wield significant influence with these firms. Some of them are already setting commitments. Unilever has set a reduction target of 50% of its virgin plastic consumption by 2025. The Coca-Cola Company aims to sell 25% of its portfolio in reusable packaging by 2030. G7 members can encourage more such commitments.

We need to recognise and support the contribution to recycling made by informal workers in many countries and facilitate access to knowledge and technology. We need to strengthen the science–policy interface at all levels: improve understanding of the global impact of plastic pollution, and promote effective and progressive actions at the local, regional and global level. The G7 can drive these changes.

NO TIME TO WASTE

Given the ongoing impacts of plastic pollution, we cannot afford to wait for a deal before acting. In parallel to negotiations, UNEP will work with any government, business and investor to shift towards a circular plastics economy, with actions across the full life cycle. Such actions include removing subsidies for the production of virgin plastics; reducing unnecessary, avoidable and problematic polymers and products; encouraging reuse models; increasing collection, sorting and recycling rates; and facilitating the establishment of the necessary infrastructure and related funding mechanisms.

The sooner we act, the sooner we start to reap the benefits. Getting it right could reduce the volume of plastics entering our oceans by over 80% by 2040. It could reduce virgin plastic production by 55%. It could save governments $70 billion by 2040. It could reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 25%. It could create 700,000 additional jobs, mainly in the Global South.

We stand to gain so much from acting rapidly on plastic pollution. By taking actions across the full life cycle of plastics, backing the deal and driving industry reform to get ahead of the game, the G7 can lead the way.

If nothing changes, by 2050 greenhouse gas emissions associated with plastic production, use and disposal could account for 15% of allowed emissions under the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C”

A new sustainability baseline

Future economic stability and shared prosperity rely on a common language – and a global baseline for financial sustainability reporting will help to build the trust and transparency at the heart of it

Emmanuel Faber, chair, International Sustainability Standards Board

The International Sustainability Standards Board was announced by the International Financial Reporting Standards Foundation at the 26th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in Glasgow in November 2021, in response to the demand from market participants and requests from the G7 and G20. Finance ministers and central bank governors from over 40 jurisdictions on six continents officially welcomed our goal to create a comprehensive global

baseline of sustainability disclosures focused on the capital markets.

In the past six months since COP26, a lot has been achieved. Following my appointment as chair and that of Sue Lloyd as vice-chair, we have established the board’s primary locations in Frankfurt and Montreal. We are nearing the completion of the consolidation of the Value Reporting Foundation (home of Standards and Integrated Reporting for the Sustainable Accounting Standards Board) and have already completed the consolidation of the Climate Disclosure Standards Board. We have also published our first two proposed standards – a draft climate standard and a general requirements standard, complete with industry-based requirements, fully embedding the TCFD framework.

We published our proposals for consultation at the end of March for a 120-day period, ending 29 July. I urge readers to review these and provide us with your thoughts.

I firmly believe that our proposed global baseline of sustainability disclosures will reduce the existing and further fragmentation of sustainability disclosure requirements. By the end of the year, our ambition is to have completed the necessary institutional and technical standard-setting work to establish the core elements of the global baseline, subject to feedback received from our ongoing consultation.

In the end, the success of the ISSB can only be the success of the global community of capital market regulators, companies and investors, in coming together to meet this challenge. It is this continued collaboration that will drive us forward, in the right direction.

REDUCED REPORTING BURDEN

As an additional step, the IFRS Foundation has entered into a cooperation agreement with the Global Reporting Initiative to reduce the reporting burden for jurisdictions and companies when combining our two standards. We will also look to cooperate with other initiatives, where our work can be made complementary, and where there is a clear market need.

It is clear, though, that cooperation to fully establish and implement the global baseline will require action from public authorities and market participants.

As countries around the world look to make the ambitious and rapid changes needed to transform their economies and the financial system that backs them, we intend to intensify our engagement with jurisdictional authorities and market participants. This engagement includes working with the International Organization of Securities Commissions as it evaluates whether to endorse standards issued by the ISSB for use by its members.

Furthermore, we are currently establishing the necessary advisory and consultative bodies that will serve as a platform for enhanced collaboration with other international organisations, jurisdictional authorities and representatives of other stakeholders. These arrangements provide an essential mechanism

EMMANUEL FABER

Emmanuel Faber was appointed chair of the International Sustainability Standards Board on 1 January 2022. He joined Danone in 1997 as chief financial officer, strategy, and became chief executive officer in 2014, and chaired the board from 2017 until 2021. He became a partner at Astanor Ventures in October 2021. He has founded and chaired several international initiatives, including the One Planet Business for Biodiversity coalition and the G7 Business for Inclusive Growth coalition. Prior to joining Danone, he held roles as chief financial officer and later managing director at Legris Industries. He also has experience from investment banking at Baring Brothers and as a consultant at Bain & Company.

to allow stakeholders to help shape IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards and to ensure compatibility with broader jurisdictional requirements.

Global capital markets have shaped a period of unprecedented change, widening supply chains, opening economies and integrating international cooperation into the fabric of the financial system. The alignment of financial information, achieved over decades in part through the work of the IFRS Foundation and the International Accounting Standards Board, helped to foster this change.

The global baseline of sustainability standards will play an equally vital role in building the trust and transparency needed to foster economic stability and contribute to the transformation of sustainable economic, social and environmental systems. It is an essential piece of language to restore a common narrative of shared prosperity, powered by truly global and resilient financial markets, resolving the tragedy of horizons.

Twitter @EmmanuelFaber  ifrs.org

Cooperation to fully establish and implement the global baseline will require action from public authorities and market participants”

G7 performance on energy

Before Germany assumed the G7’s presidency on 1 January 2022, Chancellor Olaf Scholz made it clear that the climate crisis, with energy issues at its core, was central as he prepared to host the G7 summit on 26–28 June at Schloss Elmau in the Bavarian Alps. At the core of Germany’s energy policy was the proposal for a ‘climate club’, aimed at driving an ambitious global energy transition grounded in climate neutrality and ensuring a just transition.

The climate–energy nexus has emerged as a dominant global theme over the past year, as the dramatic convergence of international events elevated energy issues to crisis proportions, generating the first ‘great shock’ of the global energy transition. Prices and demand soared due partly to a rapid economic recovery following the first full year of COVID-19 lockdowns and related supply chain issues causing outages and blackouts, compounded by severe weather events

Ella Kokotsis, director of accountability, G7 Research Group

The climate-energy nexus has emerged as a dominant global theme, with energy issues at crisis proportions – making G7 commitments in this area more essential than ever

around the globe. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine exacerbated these issues.

The resulting energy crisis is a stark reminder that modern life requires abundant energy – and that the world is unprepared for severe volatility in energy prices. What can the G7 leaders at Elmau do to respond?

CONCLUSIONS

From 1975 to February 2022, the G7 dedicated an average of 833 words (8%)

per summit of its communiqués to energy. During the summit’s first two hosting rotations, from 1975 to 1989, 13 summits referenced energy directly, with only the 1985 Bonn and 1988 Toronto summits failing to address energy policy substantively.

During the G7’s next two rotations, from 1990 to 2004, a high of 641 words (6%) came at the 1999 Cologne Summit and a low of 43 words (0.4%) came at Kananaskis in 2002.

Between 2005 and 2014, energy conclusions peaked, averaging 2,315 words (15%). The high came at 2009 L’Aquila with 6,333 words (38%) and the low at 2005 Gleneagles with 567 words (3%).

From 2015 to 2020 there were fewer energy conclusions. They peaked at 2015 Elmau with 1,688 words (13%) and plunged at 2018 Charlevoix to 409 words (4%). Energy policy was not mentioned at the G7’s first virtual summit on 16 March 2020, under the US presidency.

But in February 2021 they reached 231 words (29%), rising to 864 words at 2021 Cornwall (4%) and levelling off at 289 words (17%) at the February 2022 virtual summit under Germany’s presidency.

COMMITMENTS

Since 1975, G7 summits have made 479 energy commitments. Only development and health issues have had more. In 1975, 20% of the commitments were on energy.

From 1976 to 1983, leaders made 113 energy commitments, with 43 (78%) coming during the height of the second oil crisis in Tokyo 1979. Attention fell between 1984 and 1996, with only three (5%) energy commitments at London in 1991.

From 1997 to 2005 there was an uptick to 57 (26%) energy commitments at Gleneagles in 2005. When Russia hosted

Ella Kokotsis has attended most G7 summits since 1994, has written broadly on various aspects of summitry and global governance, has directed the research and publication of numerous analytical documents, and has spoken extensively at summit-related conferences worldwide. Her scholarly methodology for assessing summit compliance continues to serve as the basis for the annual accountability reports produced by the G7, G20 and BRICS Research Groups. She is the author of Keeping International Commitments: Compliance, Credibility and the G7 and co-author of Reconfiguring the Global Governance of Climate Change Twitter @g7_rg  www.g7.utoronto.ca

ELLA KOKOTSIS

The … energy crisis is a stark reminder that modern life requires abundant energy – and that the world is unprepared for severe volatility in energy prices”

G7 performance on energy commitments, 1975–2022

its first and only G8 summit in 2006, an all-time high of 78 (24%) was reached.

Since then, energy commitments have varied, with 41 (12%) from 2007 Heiligendamm and none from 2013 Lough Erne and 2019 Biarritz. In 2022, the February virtual summit made two (4%), the Brussels Summit in March made five (18%) and the May virtual summit made three (11%).

COMPLIANCE

Compliance with the 23 assessed commitments averaged 82%, surpassing the 76% average across all subjects. The highest compliance came in 2001 and 2018, each with 100%. Russia’s 2006 summit had 89%. By February 2022, compliance with the two energy commitments from Cornwall in June 2021 was very high at 91%.

Compliance was led by the European Union at 93%, the United States at 91% and the United Kingdom at 89%. Germany followed with 84%, then Canada at 82%. Below average were France at 80%, Japan at 78% and Italy at 72%.

CAUSES AND CORRECTIONS

Several corrections can improve

compliance with Elmau’s energy commitments.

energy commitments made from 1975 to 2019

82%

479 average compliance with energy commitments

Commitments that use highly binding language, refer to energy ministers meetings and mention official-level energy bodies generate 100% compliance. References to the private sector average 95%, a defined timetable 94% and regulatory frameworks 89%. Commitments related to energy systems aimed at driving sustainable economic growth also have among the highest scores.

Lower compliance comes from commitments using low-binding language at 61% and references to voluntary reporting mechanisms at 56%. Commitments on universal access to cleaner, safer and more affordable energy also generated low compliance.

As the war in Ukraine escalates, European – and particularly German – reliance on Russian gas means G7 leaders need to continue collectively agreeing on highly binding commitments that further engage their energy ministers and set defined timetables for action. This will facilitate preventing further disruptions that destabilise the world’s energy supply.

Power behind the energy transition

Transitioning to climate-safe, affordable energy requires farsighted policy choices and wise investments – and cooperation at the international level

Francesco La Camera, director-general, International Renewable Energy Agency

As we said in our World Energy Transitions Outlook 2022, anything short of radical and immediate energy transition action will diminish, and ultimately eliminate, our chances to reach a climate-safe 1.5°C. Now is the time to accelerate the transition to a renewable energy future. We do not have the luxury of time to deal with today’s multi-crises of energy security, energy prices and climate urgency separately.

Recent years have dramatically exposed the weaknesses and vulnerabilities of an economic system reliant on a centralised energy system based on fossil fuels. High fossil fuel prices inflict energy poverty and the loss of industrial competitiveness. They leave citizens worried about their energy bills. Therefore, we must carefully consider investing in new fossil fuels, as it will perpetuate existing risks and increase the threat of climate change. We must push for a rapid uptake of renewables.

Today, 80% of the global population lives in countries that are net importers of fossil fuels. By contrast, renewables are available in all countries, offering a way out of import dependency and allowing countries to decouple their economies from the costs of fossil fuels, while driving energy security, economic growth and new jobs.

It is true that our Outlook 2022 sees investment needs of $5.7 trillion per year until 2030. It also calls for a massive shift of money away from fossil fuels and into renewables to avoid stranded assets. But investing in this transition brings tangible socio-economic and welfare benefits to people. It grows the global economy and creates 85 million energy transitionrelated jobs worldwide by 2030, with more than 26 million additional jobs in renewable energy alone.

SURGING COMMITMENTS

The surge of net zero commitments and industrial policies such as green hydrogen clearly shows that policymakers understand the gravity and complexity of the situation. Indeed, ramping up renewables, together with an aggressive energy efficiency strategy, is the most realistic path towards halving emissions by 2030. But this means tripling the annual deployment of renewables’ power between now and 2030.

Most importantly, there is momentum. G7 members are already engaged in multi-stakeholder discussions about the achievement of net zero pledges at home and the end of coal finance abroad. They increasingly face calls to commit to phase out coal from power generation entirely by 2030.

IRENA has been clear that coal has no place in a Paris Agreement–compliant energy system. Coal can largely be replaced by renewables in ways that are cost effective. Already today, renewable

80%

FRANCESCO LA CAMERA

of the global population lives in countries that are net importers of fossil fuels

Francesco La Camera assumed the role of director-general of IRENA in 2019. He formerly served as director-general of sustainable development in Italy’s Ministry of Environment, Land and Sea. As the national coordinator for the circular economy, he led the Italian delegation at several Conferences of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. He served as co-chair of the Africa Centre for Climate and Sustainable Development and co-chaired the Financial Platform for Climate and Sustainable Development.

Twitter @flacamera  irena.org

power is the most competitive power option in the world.

Our latest data show that despite global uncertainties, renewables continued to expand, with renewable generation capacity growing by 260 GW last year. This is a trend that must not only continue but must strengthen. In recent months, gas scarcity and high prices have resulted in a slowdown of the global coal phase-out, making an even stronger business case for an aggressive deployment of renewables.

INCREASED AMBITION

At COP26 in the UK, countries agreed on the Glasgow Climate Pact. In the pact, countries are asked to increase their ambition further and return to the conference table with enhanced climate pledges by 2030. Although mitigation levels were raised, substantial additional efforts are required to bridge the gap to 1.5°C. The next COP27 in Egypt will have to ensure the ambition becomes a reality.

This first ever African Conference of the Parties will certainly shift perspectives to the Global South. With unsolved issues such as climate finance, adaptation and energy access, delivering on the promise of a just transition will play an even bigger role in unlocking growth and a green deal in Africa.

Truly, the need for a comprehensive policy framework has never been greater at the international level. The G7 must take the lead in enabling a just transition. We are in this together: finances, knowledge, capacities and technologies must be shared for an inclusive and more equitable world.

Getting the energy transition on a fast track requires farsighted policy choices and wise investments. But, most of all, it calls for radical action and extraordinary levels of international cooperation. Will we, the international community, be able to deliver? I believe so, and we at IRENA will do everything in our power to bring it about.

Investing in this transition … grows the global economy and creates 85 million energy transition-related jobs worldwide by 2030, with more than 26 million additional jobs in renewable energy alone”

World Future Energy Summit

The future is clean

Next January, the World Future Energy Summit will bring together international government and industry leaders at the Abu Dhabi National Exhibition Centre to attend the world’s leading business event for future energy and sustainability.

Taking place on 16–18 January 2023 and hosted by renewable energy leader Masdar, the World Future Energy Summit is part of Abu Dhabi Sustainability Week (ADSW) –notable as one of the largest sustainability gatherings in the world and a prominent global platform for accelerating sustainable development worldwide.

EVENTS BUILD BUSINESS

The World Future Energy Summit is a brand of RX Global, a specialist in building businesses through major events. The company organises and runs more than 400 events in 22 countries across 43 industry sectors, creating unparalleled opportunities for business connection and innovation. RX’s

expertise lies in elevating the power of face-to-face events by combining data and digital products to help customers learn about markets, source products and complete transactions. We are passionate about making a positive impact on society and committed to creating an inclusive work environment for our people.

RX is part of RELX, a global provider of information-based analytics and

decision tools for professional and business customers.

Our future energy and sustainability events are designed to provide opportunities for business, innovation and knowledge exchange aligned with the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals and COP26 agreements.

The World Future Energy Summit is not only vast in scope, but also vast in scale. It welcomes more than 30,000 attendees from 128 countries each year, bringing in more than 3,000 C-level executives as well as project management, operational, technical and financial experts driving clean energy and sustainability projects in the Middle East and North Africa region.

WHAT’S ON AT THE SUMMIT

With six exhibitions and five leading forums, the World Future Energy Summit is a major platform for business, innovation and knowledge exchange. They include the Energy Expo, which plays a pivotal role for global renewable energy development and innovation. As

The World Future Energy Summit 2023 promises to be a landmark event that reinforces the world’s commitment to and stewardship of clean energy and sustainable development

Vasyl Zhygalo, managing director, RX

Middle East

The World Future Energy Summit brings the global clean-tech and sustainability community together to network and do business

an annual meeting point for governments, energy companies, utilities and innovators, it puts new thinking, ideas and technologies centre stage to drive the transition to clean energy.

There’s also the Solar Expo, the largest solar event in the Middle East and North Africa, which keeps attendees in touch with the latest trends, deals, innovations and opportunities in solar PV, solar thermal and energy storage. The exhibition unites the world’s engineering companies, technology providers and pioneering financiers with the region’s utilities and governments.

Elsewhere, the Solar & Clean Energy Forum provides a vital knowledge-exchange platform, where industry leaders gather to discuss the challenges, technologies and initiatives driving renewable energy development in the region. The forum discusses strategies to meet energy expectations, particularly in urban areas, and the latest technologies that can help meet these aims.

The EcoWASTE Exhibition & Forum is the groundbreaking platform for the MENA region’s recycling, waste-management and waste-to-energy industries, dedicated to advancing new business opportunities and inspiring best practices for a more sustainable future.

Meanwhile, the Water Expo & Forum is focused on sustainable water production in arid regions. It spotlights the treatment, supply and reuse of water in arid regions,

with a focus on water security. The event facilitates partnerships between the public and private sectors to enable innovation and sustainability in water projects across the MENA region.

At the Smart Cities Expo & Forum, attendees will witness the city of the future come to life. The forum brings together forward-thinking governments and municipalities with pioneers in urban planning and mobility. Focus on digitisation, smart health and safe city technology promises more connected and more sustainable communities, with smart systems at their core.

There’s also the Climate & Environment Forum, which convenes thought leaders, technology providers, policymakers, organisations, researchers and innovators who are developing new frameworks, policies and approaches for climate adaptation. The event will give fresh perspectives on how businesses can adopt best practices, the opportunities that come from government targets, and the latest advancements that can accelerate local and global climate resilience.

MAJOR NETWORKING OPPORTUNITIES

To maximise networking opportunities, the Sustainability Business Connect programme provides digital matchmaking that brings together buyers, exhibitors and visitors and enables them to pre-schedule meetings, ensuring that everyone gets the most out of their visit.

World Future Energy Summit

VASYL ZHYGALO

Vasyl Zhygalo is a managing director at RX Global for the Middle East and portfolio director for the travel sector. He brings upwards of 5,000 exhibitors and 100,000 attendees to RX Global events annually, including the World Future Energy Summit, World Travel Market, Arabian Travel Market and IBTM. Qualified as an economist, Vasyl has worked in the events industry for more than two decades, during which time he has led key launches, initiatives and strategic partner relationships across Europe, the Americas, the Middle East, Africa and China.

Twitter@RXGlobal_  worldfutureenergysummit.com

The World Future Energy Summit 2023 will build on the success of this year’s event, which showcased innovations for a sustainable future with seven country pavilions representing Japan, Germany, China, Italy, Korea, France and Switzerland. It displayed 18 new sustainable development innovations as part of ‘Innovate,’ a global Masdar City initiative for knowledge exchange.

The most recent event was proudly hosted by Masdar during ADSW and successfully ran in partnership with the Abu Dhabi Department of Energy, NEOM Energy & Water and TAQA. It concluded with calls from governments, climate scientists and investors to accelerate adoption of the circular economy and increase renewables usage in resource generation and consumption.

A MILESTONE EVENT

The upcoming World Future Energy Summit promises to be a milestone event, held during a crucial period that will see Egypt and the United Arab Emirates host COP27 and COP28. Together, these events reinforce our region’s commitment to and stewardship of clean energy and sustainable development.

Delegates gathered for the Abu Dhabi Sustainability Week Opening Ceremony

G7 performance on health

The G7 has discussed health since 1979, long before the start of COVID-19. The pandemic has put health high on the G7 agenda, including for the 2022 Elmau Summit.

CONCLUSIONS

There have been 56,471 words on health in G7 communiqués since 1979, averaging 1,152 (11%) per summit. There have been 108 dedicated documents on health, for an average of 2.2 per summit. The number of dedicated documents peaked at the 2020 US Virtual Summit, early in the COVID-19 pandemic.

The G7 dedicated no more than 750 words to health until 1995. The focus on health increased after 1996 with 825 (5%) dedicated words and 1,400 dedicated words (11%) in 1997. Attention dipped in 1998 and 1999, but then rose after 2000.

MEAGAN BYRD

Meagan Byrd was the chair of summit studies for the G7 Research Group for the 2020 and 2021 summits and was a member of the field team at the Biarritz Summit in 2019. She was an analyst with the G20 Research Group and a member of the field team for the G20’s summit in Buenos Aires in 2018. Her research interests include health policy and Canada and the United States’ role in the G7. Meagan holds an honours bachelor of arts in political science from the University of Toronto and is completing a master of journalism degree at the University of King’s College, Halifax.

Twitter @MeaganKByrd  www.g7.utoronto.ca

Meagan Byrd, senior researcher, G7 Research Group

From 2000 to 2010, the G7 dedicated at least 1,500 words to health at each summit, ranging from 3% to 26%. The 2006 summit produced the most words on health at 7,072 (23%). From 2011 to 2014, the focus on health dipped below 800 words per summit.

The focus on health increased once again in 2015 with 2,190 words (17.3%) and 6,087 (26%) in 2016. It declined in 2017 to 885 (10%) and in 2018 to 713 (6%). It increased in 2019 to 1,145 words (16%). In 2020, the leaders dedicated 576 words (72%) to health. In 2021, the February virtual summit dedicated 550 words (84%) and the Cornwall Summit 4,909 words (24%). In 2022 the February virtual summit had 620 words (36%).

COMMITMENTS

The G7 has made 548 core collective, politically binding, future-oriented commitments on health, beginning with one in 1979 on malnutrition and hunger. The first core health commitment was made in 1996. The first time multiple health commitments were made was in 1991, with three (6%). Since 1996, there has been at least one health or health-related commitment made at each summit.

Health commitments did not make up more than 10% of the overall commitments until 2000, with 13%. This dropped to 5% in 2001. From 2001 to 2005, between 3% and 10% were on health. This increased substantially in 2006 where 18%

Compliance on health commitments is just below average, but there are measures the G7 leaders can take to improve their score and deliver the missing pieces that promise better outcomes for everyone

of the commitments were on core health or health-related topics.

In 2007, 13% of the commitments made were on health, dropping to 6% in 2008 and 4% in 2009. In 2010, the G7 had a notably strong year with 17% commitments on health. The years 2015 with 16% and 2016 with 24% were also strong.

The G7’s focus on health then dropped, before increasing in 2020 to 44%, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Attention decreased, but stayed high in 2021, with 30% made in February 2021 and with 21% at Cornwall. The virtual summit in February 2022 had 25%.

COMPLIANCE

Compliance with the 86 health commitments assessed by the G7 Research Group averages 75%, marginally lower than the 76% average across all subjects. The first assessed commitments in 1983 and 1997 had 100% each. Compliance lowered, then rose in 2000 to 91%, in 2001 to 94% and in 2003 to 90%.

It then decreased in 2004 to 75%, in 2005 to 72% and in 2006 to 69%. It was strong in 2007 with 86% compliance. It dipped from 2008 to 2011 before rising again in 2012 to 100%, followed in

G7 performance on health, 1975–2022

2013 with 95%, in 2014 with 92% and in 2015 with 86%. In 2016, it dipped to 68% and further in 2017 to only 25%. In 2020, it rose to 97%. By February 2022 compliance with the Cornwall Summit was 88%.

CAUSES AND CORRECTIONS

The G7 can increase compliance on health commitments by doing at least two things.

One, the G7 can host meetings of health ministers before the leaders’ summit. There have been five summits with

558

commitments on health made since 1979

75% average compliance on health commitments assessed

pre-summit health ministerial meetings or working groups (2006, 2015, 2016, 2020 and 2021). These averaged compliance of 85%, or 10% higher than the overall health compliance average of 75%.

Second, the G7 can increase references to multilateral organisations, such as the World Health Organization. The 10 highest-scoring summits averaged 91% compliance and made at least eight references to multilateral organisations. This compares to the lowest scoring 10 summits, which averaged 60% and made fewer than seven such references.

The G7’s focus on health dropped [from 2017], before increasing in 2020 to 44%, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic”

A NEW CHALLENGE

The COVID-19 pandemic has made clear how important it is to convene science, politics, the private sector and civil society along with international organisations to enhance cooperation and explore innovative solutions. It has always been the goal of the World Health Summit – held annually in Berlin, Germany – to be a unique open forum to bring these actors together, to position global health as a key political issue and to promote the global health debate in the spirit of the UN Sustainable Development Goals: SDG 17 “Partnership for the Goals”.

A NEW CONTEXT

However, the world is very different today compared to the global health context in 2009 when the WHS was founded on the occasion of the 300-year anniversary of Charité –

Global health: a key political issue

Universitätsmedizin Berlin. The present geopolitical situation, which has made cooperation in global health more difficult, renders global fora for exchange and debate even more essential. The political divide and the increased inequity that have become a defining feature of the pandemic and our responses to it must be addressed openly and the political choices needed to overcome them must be put on the table.

A VISIONARY LEADER: RUDOLF VIRCHOW

The WHS, housed on the campus where Rudolf Virchow, the founder of social medicine, made his historical mark, addresses these issues. There is probably no phrase in global health quoted more frequently than Virchow’s statement that “medicine is a social science, and politics is nothing more than medicine

In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, bringing together international bodies for investment in global health is more critical than ever before

Professor Dr Axel R Pries, president, World Health Summit

on a large scale”. The impact of the pandemic on the entire society and the political decisions made under great pressure to ensure population health and avoid economic breakdown are a testimony to Virchow’s farsightedness. The political aspect of global health is highlighted by the WHS patronage of the German chancellor, the French president, the president of the European Commission and the director-general of the World Health Organization.

A NEW PARTNERSHIP: THE FIRST WHS ORGANISED TOGETHER WITH THE WH O

The WHS has always worked in partnership with many organisations, but 2022 will be special. It will be the first WHS organised together with the WHO. This year, we are expecting heads of state and government, numerous ministers from all over the world, heads of international agencies, representatives of the G7 and the G20, the European Union and the African Union as well as the heads of major global health organisations, foundations and initiatives. The new venue in the centre of Berlin’s diplomatic quarter allows global health organisations and stakeholders to also organise their own events and bilaterals on-site. We also encourage our partners to consider launching programmes, reports or publications at the WHS 2022.

The WHS will focus on “Making the Choice for Health” by reflecting on some of the most pressing topics in global health, including:

• Investment for health and well-being

• Climate change and planetary health

• Architecture for pandemic preparedness

• Digital transformation for health

• Food systems and health

• Health systems resilience and equity

• Global health for peace

A STRATEGIC FOCUS

A new strategic focus of the WHS 2022 is investment in global health. Therefore, we will bring key financial institutions, investors, donors and foundations together to discuss the investment in global common goods.

PROFESSOR DR AXEL R PRIES

Axel Pries studied medicine in Cologne and became head of the Charité Institute for Physiology in 2001. He was president of the Biomedical Alliance in Europe and CEO of the Berlin Institute of Health. In 2015 he became dean of the Charité and in 2021 president of the World Health Summit.

 @WorldHealthSmt / #WHS2022

 worldhealthsummit.org

Multiple German ministries will be involved. Led by the German Federal Ministry of Health, the Ministries of Economic Cooperation and Development, Foreign Affairs, and Education and Research are involved in planning sessions and bringing partners to Berlin. We are proud to also host a special polio replenishment event together with the Global Polio Eradication Initiative.

A network of 30 leading health centres and research institutions in 20 countries, the M8 Alliance is the academic backbone of the WHS. The pandemic has shown the critical importance of a strong link between evidence and politics and of innovation and science to help find solutions for pressing global health problems.

AN INCLUSIVE EVENT

This year’s new venue will allow for more on-site attendance in Berlin with around 5,000 participants and 400 speakers. But as usual all sessions will also be available digitally, enabling people from around the world to participate. We are working closely with the WHO and other partners to significantly increase the participation from low- and middle-income countries and we will continue our commitment to gender parity.

Health for All is the goal – WHS 2022 is the event.

The political divide and the increased inequity that have become a defining feature of the pandemic and our responses to it must be addressed openly”

Renewing the cycle

The world risks failing to learn lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic, unless a global architecture for health emergency preparedness, response and resilience is agreed upon and a new cycle of investment in defences can begin

+300

$31bn

Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, director-general, World Health Organization

The COVID-19 pandemic has revealed deep flaws in the global health security architecture, which have exposed and exacerbated profound inequities within and between countries, and eroded trust among people, governments and institutions. It is imperative that we act on the lessons learned over the past two years.

The overarching lesson is clear: the world was, and remains, unprepared for pandemics. This lesson is not a new one. Just this century, epidemics of SARS, H5N1, H1N1, MERS, Ebola and Zika have emerged, only to be followed by a pattern of panic and neglect, as concern during emergencies gives way to apathy and under-investment in their aftermath.

It is time to end the cycle of panic and neglect. There will be future epidemics, pandemics and other global health emergencies. The time to strengthen the world’s defences is now.

There have been many reviews of the global response to COVID-19, with more than 300 recommendations for preventing, preparing for and responding more effectively to future epidemics and pandemics.

Building on those recommendations, and in consultation with our members, the World Health Organization has developed a proposal for a more equitable, inclusive and coherent global architecture for health emergency preparedness, response and resilience.

This new architecture consists of recommendations in three key areas.

First, we need governance that is coherent, inclusive and accountable. Here, the WHO recommends establishing a Global Health Emergency Council at the level of heads of state and government to ensure the sustained political commitment needed to break the cycle of pandemic and neglect; making targeted amendments to the International Health Regulations to increase capacities, information sharing and compliance; and enhancing accountability by scaling up the Universal Health and Preparedness Review, a new mechanism in which countries agree to a voluntary, regular and transparent peer review of their health emergency preparedness capacities, with independent monitoring.

The second area is the need for stronger systems and tools to prevent, detect and respond rapidly to health emergencies. Here, the WHO recommends developing a global health emergency workforce that is trained to common standards, rapidly deployable, scalable and properly equipped; strengthened emergency coordination, through standardised approaches to strategic planning, financing, operations and monitoring; and expanded partnerships for a whole-of-society approach to collaborative surveillance, community protection, clinical care and access to countermeasures.

Third is the need for adequate and efficient financing, domestically and internationally. The WHO and the World Bank estimate that $31 billion is needed each year to fund an effective global health emergency

health workers trained since the outbreak of COVID-19 people will lack access to essential health services by 2030

architecture. About $20 billion of this could come from existing and projected domestic and international resources, leaving a gap of $10 billion per year.

To address this gap, the WHO recommends establishing a coordinating platform to promote domestic investment and to direct international financing to where it is most needed; establishing a Financial Intermediary Fund with the World Bank to provide catalytic and gap-filling funding, supported by financial leadership from the World Bank and technical leadership from the WHO; and expanding the WHO Contingency Fund for Emergencies, to ensure rapidly scalable and sustainable financing for response.

Underpinning these recommendations, it is clear that the world needs a stronger, empowered and sustainably financed WHO at the centre of the global architecture for health emergency preparedness, response and resilience. With more than 150 offices around the world, the WHO has a unique global footprint, unique global expertise, unique global legitimacy, and a unique global mandate.

At the World Health Assembly in May 2022 the WHO’s members made a historic decision to increase assessed contributions – essentially the membership dues that countries pay – to 50% of the organisation’s budget over the next decade, from just 16% now. This will reduce our reliance on voluntary, earmarked contributions, enable us to attract and retain the best talent, and provide more predictable, long-term support to countries.

Finally, overarching this new architecture will be a new international pandemic accord, which WHO members are currently negotiating. There are treaties on tobacco, nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, climate change and many other threats to

TEDROS ADHANOM GHEBREYESUS

Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus was elected director-general of the World Health Organization in 2017 and re-elected for a second term in May 2022. He is the first person from the WHO African Region to serve as WHO’s chief technical and administrative officer. He served as Ethiopia’s minister of foreign affairs from 2012 to 2016 and minister of health from 2005 to 2012. He was elected chair of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria Board in 2009, and previously chaired the Roll Back Malaria Partnership Board, and co-chaired the Partnership for Maternal, Newborn and Child Health Board.

Twitter @DrTedros  who.int

our shared security and well-being. It is common sense for countries to now agree on a common approach to common threats, with common rules for a common response to health emergencies.

With restrictions lifted and COVID-19 cases and deaths receding in many high-income

countries, political attention is turning to other crises. We risk failing to learn the painful lessons this pandemic has taught us, and repeating the cycle of panic and neglect. We call on all countries to seize this moment to make the world safer for the generations that will follow us.

Epidemics have emerged, only to be followed by a pattern of panic and neglect, in which concern during emergencies gives way to apathy and under-investment in their aftermath”

G7 Research Group

In the rapidly crisis-afflicted world of the 21st century, the Group of Seven major market democracies serves as an effective centre of comprehensive global governance. G7 members – the United States, Japan, Germany, the United Kingdom, France, Italy, Canada and the European Union – contain many of the world’s critical capabilities and are committed to democratic values. At its annual summit and through a web of G7-centred institutions at the ministerial, official and multi-stakeholder levels, the G7 does much to meet global challenges, especially in the fields of security, sustainable development and economics.

The G7 Research Group is a global network of scholars, students and professionals in the academic, research, media, business, non-governmental, governmental and intergovernmental communities who follow the work of the G7 and related institutions. The group’s mission is to serve as the world’s leading independent source of information, analysis and research on the G7. Founded in 1987, it is managed from Trinity College and the Department of Political Science at the University of Toronto. Professional Advisory Council members, Special Advisors, international affiliates and participating researchers together span the world. Through the G7 Research Group, Trinity’s John W. Graham Library has become the global repository of G7/8 documents, transcripts, media coverage, interviews, studies, essays, memorabilia and artifacts.

BOOKS ON THE G7 AND RELATED ISSUES FROM ROUTLEDGE

The online G7 Information Centre (www. g7.utoronto.ca) contains the world’s most comprehensive and authoritative collection of information and analysis on the G7. The G7 Research Group assembles, verifies and posts documents from the meetings leading up to and at each summit, the available official documentation of all past summits and ministerial meetings (in several G7 languages), scholarly writings and policy analyses, research studies, scholarship information, links to related sites and the “background books” for each summit now published by GT Media and the Global Governance Project (globalgovernanceproject.org). The website contains the G7 Research Group’s regular reports on G7 members’ compliance with their summit commitments, as well as other research reports.

Reconfiguring

the Global Governance of Climate Change

by John Kirton, Ella

Kokotsis and Brittaney Warren

Institutionalised

Summits

in International Governance

by Daniel Odinius

Accountability for Effectiveness in Global Governance

edited by Marina

Larionova and John Kirton

The G7, Anti-Globalism and the Governance of Globalization

edited by Chiara Oldani and Jan Wouters

The New Economic Diplomacy

edited by Nicholas Bayne and Stephen Woolcock

Effectiveness through equitability

More than half a billion people have now been infected with COVID-19, putting it on a par with the 1918 influenza. Both pandemics have involved incredible suffering and hardship; however, far fewer people have probably died during this pandemic, largely thanks to vaccines. But to improve our response next time and stop future vaccine-preventable viruses, not only must vaccines be central to pandemic preparedness and response, but so too must equitable access to them. Two and a half years into this pandemic, with 2.7 billion people still not vaccinated, the virus continues to be a threat. Even now, the risk of resurgences and dangerous new variants still hangs over us. The lesson is clear: when it comes to vaccine equity, if we’re not prepared to protect people everywhere, we are not prepared at all.

Life is beginning to return to normal in most wealthy countries, where vaccine coverage is around 80% or above. Yet, although we have made huge progress with around 46% of people in low- and lower middle-income countries vaccinated with two doses, in many low-income countries – 18 at the last count – still under 10% of people have received two doses. Many countries are still struggling to get vaccines out to their citizens. That’s because these people are among the hardest to reach, often living in the most challenging and resource-poor

settings. Reaching them requires additional support. To be most effective, this must be built into pandemic preparedness from the start. We cannot afford vaccine equity to be an afterthought.

COVAX, which is leading the global vaccination effort, has shown that much of what we need to achieve for vaccine equity – the infrastructure, resources, expertise and global health networks –existed before this pandemic and was built on the existing Vaccine Alliance with the addition of the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations. The rest COVAX has created. By making sure all the necessary pieces were in place, from logistics, supply chain and cold storage to trained healthcare workers, data systems and the essential liability, indemnification and compensation safety nets, COVAX could roll out doses to lower-income countries just 39 days after they first became available in high-income countries.

VACCINES ON TRACK

Key to making this all possible was the fact that COVAX built on Gavi’s two decades of securing

The global supply of COVID-19 vaccinations finally exceeds demand, but the world can only be in a position of pandemic preparedness if it can guarantee timely access for all

Seth Berkley, CEO, Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance

SETH BERKLEY

Seth Berkley, a medical doctor and epidemiologist, joined Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, as CEO in 2011. Previously, he founded the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative in 1996 and served as president and CEO for 15 years. He was an officer of the Health Sciences Division at the Rockefeller Foundation and has worked for the Center for Infectious Diseases of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, and the Carter Center, where he was assigned as an epidemiologist at the Ministry of Health in Uganda. Twitter @GaviSeth  gavi.org

0.5bn

bn HEALTH

people have been infected with COVID-19 people still not vaccinated against the virus

1.5bn

COVID-19 vaccine doses delivered by COVAX to 145 countries

Now, with global supply finally exceeding demand, COVAX has continued to adapt, creating the Pandemic Vaccine Pool to protect its supply against future disruptions. This will ensure that it can continue to supply doses to lower-income countries even if global demand for vaccines suddenly increases, because of resurgences, new guidance or new variants. This kind of readiness is needed to help these countries achieve their national vaccination targets. It is what pandemic preparedness is all about: being prepared for any eventuality. The pool is an important model for preparedness more broadly.

To avoid a repeat of this crisis, pandemic preparedness needs, at its very core, the existing global health networks that make vaccine equity possible. These networks have already demonstrated their ability to respond rapidly and operate at risk during a crisis. Often, this will also avoid duplication. Gavi is already vital in pandemic preparedness, with more than 70% of its regular budget during inter-pandemic periods supporting creating resilient health systems and delivering vaccines to prevent epidemic diseases. Given the additional challenges of accessing the hardest to reach – challenges we have faced head on in the fight against COVID-19 and in our routine programmes – there is also a need for pandemic financing tools designed with the specific purpose of achieving vaccine equity and building the systems to end the pandemic.

So, as global leaders start mapping out future pandemic preparedness and response, and how to fund it, vaccine equity and a commitment to protecting the hardest to reach must be at its beating heart. Because the only effective response is an equitable response.

When it comes to vaccine equity, if we’re not prepared to protect people everywhere, we are not prepared at all”

resources and deals, backed by innovative financing, to get doses to people who otherwise would not have access. It was thus able to rapidly mobilise and orchestrate the world’s largest, most complex global deployment of vaccines. It has now delivered nearly 1.5 billion doses to 145 economies. Nearly 90% of these – over 1.3 billion doses – have gone to the 92 lower-income countries that would have otherwise struggled to get access.

However, it has not been smooth sailing. At the start of the pandemic, COVAX lacked the necessary liquidity to secure precious commodities and invest in vaccines at risk, on par with high-income countries. We lost valuable time getting support and raising financing, which delayed our ability to make deals with manufacturers. We often found ourselves at the back of the line and, facing vaccine hoarding, export restrictions and delays in manufacturing, suffered supply shortages that hindered equitable access and, ultimately, prolonged the pandemic.

Monique Eloit, director-general, World Organisation for Animal Health

How to better prepare for the next pandemic

Thankfully, it is now widely acknowledged that building a healthier, more equitable world requires improved coordination at the intersection between animal, human and environmental sectors, based on the One Health approach.

We know that increased contact and interaction between animals and humans play a critical role in driving disease emergence and spillover. However, sustaining the world’s growing population has led to high levels of intensive animal production, the expansion of crop lands and urban sprawl. These factors, combined with others such as climate change, have heightened the encroachment of humans into natural habitats, displacing animals that had previously lived in isolation and reducing biodiversity. These disruptions to natural ecosystems

A healthier world exists at the intersection of animal, human and environmental sectors – and requires greater investment in stronger veterinary services

increase the risk of disease spillover between animals and humans.

During the COVID-19 crisis, weaknesses in our health systems were magnified. How can using a One Health approach help to address such health issues when often it can be challenging to implement? Simply put, the multisectoral and multidisciplinary approach embedded in One Health is the single most efficient way to protect global health. Why? It focuses our actions and investments as much on prevention and preparedness as on response. Moreover, it is an approach that heads of state and government and their ministers have asked us to use in collaboration with all relevant stakeholders.

Investment in building resilient health systems must therefore not neglect the animal health sector and its role in preventing and controlling future pandemics. National veterinary services are central in the surveillance, early detection and control of diseases at the animal source, as are the pharmaceutical industry and the scientific institutes specialised in research and innovation in global health.

Enhanced cross-sectoral work on risk reduction and spillover prevention would enable us to transform our relationship with animals and the environment by seeing our own health through a One Health lens. In doing so, we would save lives and contribute to preserving economies and livelihoods. Thus, all efforts to create an international mechanism to address pandemics must empower decision makers to understand and assess One Health needs and required responses and the investment required for their operationalisation at the national level. Each country and community can play its part by prioritising the development of its veterinary workforce, and by engaging in a coordinated multisectoral approach to manage health threats.

ONE HEALTH: FROM THEORY TO PRACTICE

The World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH, founded as OIE) is a key player in helping to prevent animal disease spillover between wild and domestic species and into the human population. Since 1924, it has been at the forefront of collecting and validating disease-related data to inform sanitary decisions. WOAH has a longstanding partnership with human and

MONIQUE ELOIT

Monique Eloit is the director-general of the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH, founded as OIE). Prior to her election, she occupied the position of the organisation’s deputy director-general from 2009 to 2015. A doctor of veterinary medicine, she has also been the chief veterinary officer of France and served as national delegate to WOAH from 2005 to 2009.

environmental sector actors with the aim of achieving One Health outcomes.

A case in point is the H5N1 avian influenza crisis in the 2000s, which prompted WOAH and the Food and Agriculture Organization to establish OFFLU, a global network of experts on zoonotic influenza. OFFLU is the cornerstone of the pre-pandemic preparedness effort against human influenza. It identifies the public health risks arising from those influenza viruses circulating in animal populations and advises the World Health Organization on its selection of which virus strains to include in the annual update of human flu vaccines.

WOAH continues to provide animal health expertise on an array of public health challenges, including rabies and antimicrobial resistance. Its longstanding collaboration with FAO and WHO, the Tripartite Alliance, recently welcomed the United Nations Environment Programme to create the Quadripartite Alliance, which will further encourage implementing the One Health approach. It recently drafted a One Health Joint Plan of Action that provides a framework and activities that the four organisations can engage in to advance and sustainably scale up the implementation of coordinated actions.

Sustained high-level political commitment and long-term investment are needed to build resilient One Health systems. The Quadripartite is committed to supporting the deployment of the One Health approach at the national level. In line with the agenda defined by the German presidency, G7 members have the opportunity to use the platform of the Elmau Summit to emphasise the prominent role that veterinary services and animal health systems play in pandemic prevention and preparedness. The outcomes of the summit should in turn advocate for the continued implementation of One Health.

Only through a more inclusive approach to the health challenges we jointly face, as well as through strengthened intergovernmental and international cooperation, will we be able to break from the current paradigm and shape the foundation of a healthier, more equitable world.

Twitter @WOAH_Global, @WOAH_DG  woah.org

Interview with Joy St John, executive director, Caribbean Public Health Agency

A healthy balance

What are the health burdens facing poor countries that the COVID-19 pandemic has intensified?

The ultimate burden is non-communicable diseases. The burden of NCDs was already big in the Caribbean – many of our countries have the highest per capita levels of illness and death in the Americas, and very often those people were picked off by COVID-19.

Small island developing states are generally under-resourced with the specific skill set for clinical management. Severe cases need very specialised management, as does public health management. So we have a cadre of health workers who are quite extended, and that increases their mental health and clinical risk profile.

A third burden is the unfortunate brain drain of medical professionals,

especially specialists. This will become a greater burden, because everything was under-resourced and diverted towards COVID-19. We’re not seeing the correct management of preventive and health-promotive services including regular immunisations. So we’ve got people with uncontrolled NCDs turning up with issues apart from COVID-19, and COVID-19 also caused some NCD issues.

How have these health burdens from COVID-19 been intensified by the compounding threat of climate change?

We saw the impact of climate change on vector-borne diseases, specifically dengue. Because they’ve similar symptoms, there would have been some mixed-up diagnoses. We have not had any reports of any unlucky persons having both diseases at the same time, but there

Compounding threats are intensifying health burdens in the Caribbean region, but, as seen with COVID-19, a unified response is not just words – it works

are different treatments for them. Climate change and health impacts don’t go away. One of those impacts is the mental health fallout when people feel overburdened. There’s always a silver lining, though: there has been more focus on mental health, and understanding and acceptance that a mental health challenge is not a person’s fault.

What kind of a strain does slowing global economic growth put on people’s health and the healthcare system?

This was a pandemic where you had to learn the trick of balancing lives and livelihoods. First it was lives, and now the scales are tipping with member states opening up for tourism. The Caribbean Public Health Agency has provided support to the tourism sector for a safe return to work and also developed protocols and guidelines for special aspects of tourism and cruise tourism. So economies are the focus now.

But as things open up, as safely as they can, we’re seeing a return to equilibrium, rather than just focusing on lives or the economy. The equilibrium offers maximum benefit.

Why is regional cooperation such an important instrument in overcoming health challenges?

The COVID-19 response was for me a massive success because the heads of government mandated health in all policies, in all sectors, to get to a point where the pandemic was manageable and allowed for economic activity alongside this virus. So Caribbean unity is not just words. It works.

What are the signs that the tourismdependent Caribbean is safely open for international visitors?

More people are back in jobs. There is money flowing. It’s not perfect and it’s not where it was before. In terms of numbers of cases and deaths for the Americas, this region is doing very well. And it’s not by happenstance – the tourism and health programme developed specific regional public goods aimed at ensuring there are standards to which the hotels are working. And the Healthier Safer Tourism Award, developed by CARPHA, links to standards in seven areas, including COVID-19, vector control, food safety and water safety. So a tourist knows it’s not just that we have low

JOY ST JOHN

Joy St John was appointed executive director of CARPHA in July 2019. From 2017 to 2019, she was assistant director general of the World Health Organization, responsible for climate change and other determinants of health. She served as the chief medical officer of Barbados for more than 12 years, and was the first Caribbean person to chair the executive board of the World Health Organization, from 2012 to 2013.

Twitter @CARPHAExDir  carpha.org

COVID-19 numbers but also we make sure systems are working.

What challenges remain?

The challenge of making sure we catch the next thing, early, before it actually gets here, so we can prepare. Because of climate change, we’re going to have more and more diseases. So we are working to keep up, to make sure the weaknesses exposed by COVID-19 are addressed.

Another challenge is kick-starting the work that was put off, folding the COVID-19 systems into pre-existing health systems and strengthening health systems. Much good came with COVID-19: increased testing capacity, and the ability to work together in real time, strengthening the bonds of health and working with other sectors seamlessly.

Yet another challenge is how we stop that brain drain. How do we ensure enough people who can deal with infection prevention and control and intensive care are in the region? We have to keep those brains that can crunch the science of something new and prepare for it.

And we need access to medications, treatments and vaccines. We need to find a way to strengthen our health

diplomacy, to have a seat at the table so we are remembered when things start to go wrong.

How can G7 leaders at their Elmau Summit best help SIDS with their health and related challenges?

Let me start with climate change and health. I would like true attention to be paid to that, because when you link climate change and health effectively you’re going to help the member states more. That means money has to come to climate change and health initiatives.

Second, I would like the understanding that SIDS, even though collectively not a huge number, are here and part of your lives, because this is where you like your relaxation, and everyone needs to relax.

Third, I would like to see changes in how the world economy is structured, especially when it comes to debt, access to funding and access to commodities that may be hurt by supply chain issues.

Fourth, going back to COVID-19, we need to continue to have access to medicines and treatments that are affordable and available when we need them. We also need access to vaccines for special or more vulnerable groups.

Because of climate change, we’re going to have more and more diseases. So we are working to keep up, to make sure the weaknesses exposed by COVID-19 are addressed”

Setting the stage

COVID-19 has reinvigorated the debate on global health governance and multilateralism in health. Many suggestions have been made on how to ‘reform’ existing institutions and how decisions are taken in a pandemic. The concept paper on a Pact for Pandemic Readiness issued by the G7 health ministers in May 2022 draws attention to many initiatives and institutions created since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic and even before. This G7 approach is very aligned with the growing call for a networked and inclusive multilateralism including in global health.

The concept note identifies, among others, the ACT-Accelerator, the World Health Organization’s Hub for Pandemic and Epidemic Intelligence, the International Pathogen Surveillance Network, the Global Influenza Surveillance and Response System, the One Health High-Level Expert Panel, the One Health Intelligence Scoping Study, the Global Outbreak Alert and Response Network, the Global Research Collaboration for Infectious Disease Preparedness and the Global Health Security Initiative.

G7 health ministers did not propose establishing yet another institution but

enthusiastically favoured aligning effective initiatives to foster the network approach and “maximise synergies and outputs of initiatives, institutions and projects and conserve valuable resources through reducing fragmentation, duplication and redundancy”. Their strong support for the WHO, which the G7 underlined repeatedly, relates to its role in providing much of the required alignment and coordination –exactly as expressed in its constitutional mandate – to act as the directing and coordinating authority on international health work – but with a distinct 21st-century flavour.

DEAL WITH COMPLEXITY

Power is diffused today, including in global health. Many actors beyond states drive solutions to complex problems. The Sustainable Developments Goals lay out clearly that we can no longer achieve results if we approach large challenges issue by issue. This is even more true as we now have overlapping threats and crises.

One big breakthrough has been One

When they meet at Elmau, G7 leaders have a renewed opportunity to set the stage for networked, inclusive and rules-based multilateralism in global health

Ilona Kickbusch, founding director, Global Health Centre, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies

Health, a collaborative, multisectoral and transdisciplinary approach at the local, regional, national and global levels to achieve optimal health outcomes that recognise the interconnection between people, animals, plants and their shared environment. Others are planetary health or approaches based on the intersection of the structural determinants of health. Such complex problems demand accounting for all relevant links across sectors. But the relevant players must be mobilised more inclusively, including expertise and participation from around the world, not focused predominantly on problem definition and solutions from actors (however well meaning) from the Global North.

NEW ORGANISATIONAL MODELS

The WHO has proactively developed its work in pandemic preparedness and response using a hub-and-spoke model to connect actors in new ways. This is important in working together towards a common goal and ensuring a resilient cooperative system that can function even if one part is weakened or fails. WHO hubs are being set up in, and networks managed from, various parts of the world: the mRNA vaccine technology transfer hub in South Africa and the WHO Hub for Pandemic and Epidemic Intelligence in Germany.

The WHO has also developed new organisational models. The Berlin hub, embedded in the WHO’s Health Emergencies Programme, builds on consultations with hundreds of experts from different disciplines, sectors and regions, and leverages the WHO’s unique convening power across nearly 200 countries to foster global solutions.

Members should recognise that global health and the WHO are at the forefront of

developing a networked and inclusive multilateralism, as they issue their constant mantra of WHO reform. The WHO must also explain its deliberate strategy of networked and inclusive multilateralism much better. It must show how it is working more closely with political clubs such as the G7 and G20, international financial institutions such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, regional organisations such as the European Union and the African Union, and increasingly drawing on parliamentarians, civil society, businesses, local authorities and especially women and young people. Transparency is essential.

TWO SIDES OF THE SAME COIN

But some warnings are needed. First, the G7 warning about fragmentation, duplication and redundancy must be heard. Global health is already a highly competitive marketplace for funding. The WHO must be supported to play its key role. It is already more agile at its three levels – global, regional and country – than its members give it credit for.

Second, a networked and inclusive multilateralism must be based on common values, principles and rules of the game; and processes of accountability and transparency must be safeguarded. The WHO was established with a deep constitutional commitment to values and equity and the power to set normative frameworks. The revised International Health Regulations and proposed Pandemic Convention would be another essential backdrop for pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.

GOING FORWARD

G7 health ministers already expressed both G7 support for developing and negotiating a WHO convention, agreement or other international instrument and for advancing a global network approach to enhance pandemic surveillance and response capabilities and capacities. As the G7 pact is further developed during 2022, the complementarity between the two approaches will prove essential.

ILONA KICKBUSCH

Ilona Kickbusch is the founding director of the Global Health Centre at the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies in Geneva, Switzerland. She served on a panel of independent experts to assess the World Health Organization’s response to the Ebola outbreak and is a member of the Global Preparedness Monitoring Board. She previously had a distinguished career with the WHO and Yale University, and has published widely on global health governance and global health diplomacy. She is a member of the WHO Council on the Economics of Health for All.

Twitter @IlonaKickbusch  ilonakickbusch.com

Complex problems demand accounting for all relevant links across sectors, but the relevant players must be mobilised more inclusively”

The world now recognises the economic and social impacts of a severe pandemic and the harsh effects of the parallel pandemic of antimicrobial resistance: 1.27 million lives lost in 2019, while untreatable infections represent the third most important underlying cause of death across the globe. AMR causes more deaths now than each of tuberculosis, malaria and HIV. It hits the most vulnerable the hardest, with children under five accounting for one in five deaths caused by AMR. This suffering is driven by the overuse of antimicrobials and poor diagnostics – aggravated by an empty pipeline of new treatments, diagnostics and vaccines alongside insecure, often polluting, manufacture and supply chains.

EVERYONE’S BUSINESS

AMR is not new. But it is increasingly salient and fatal because our global systems are failing. Like COVID-19 and influenza, AMR is complicated and not limited to humans: animal health, the food chain and the environment are all at risk. As the global population increases, and with it the global demand for cheap protein, more antibiotics are squandered by unnecessary preventive use in food-producing animals, and in

A pandemic of failing global systems

turn transmitted into the environment. The marine environment even spreads resistant bacteria to biodiverse places, including the Arctic and the Galapagos Islands. Governments now understand that health and economic security go together. Infectious disease is now the domain of economists, finance ministries, bankers, investors and insurers, as well as medics. AMR is driven by economic factors. Market failure stops innovative research reaching patients who need it most, and pushes small companies with new products into bankruptcy. Concurrently, increasing global demand for animal protein drives intensive farming, which reduces costs across much of the globe by routinely using antibiotics to overcome preventable infections and promote growth.

SAVING LIVES AND ECONOMIES

AMR is predictable and preventable with global leadership. G7 attention on AMR was presciently started by Germany’s G7 presidency in 2015. The recognition that AMR is also a pandemic, albeit silent

With global leadership spearheaded by the G7, the worrying increase of antimicrobial resistance –which is driven by economic factors – can be predicted and prevented

Professor Dame Sally Davies, UK special envoy on Antimicrobial Resistance

and insidious, ensured renewed G7 work, initiated under the UK’s 2021 G7 presidency, to take forward multi-year, multi-stakeholder efforts, with particular emphasis on:

• finance ministers committing to address AMR for the first time ever – supporting incentives to pilot across health systems, designed to ensure a sustainable pipeline of new and equitably accessible antimicrobials;

• bolstering supply chain security, to strengthen antimicrobial supply chain resilience through a broader, more geographically diverse, quality-assured manufacturing base – reducing the risks posed by stockouts or shortages so economies and investments will be much better able to withstand shocks;

• building understanding of AMR in the environment and developing international standards on safe concentrations of antimicrobials released into the environment, including from manufacturing; and

• strengthening integrated One Health surveillance for AMR to ensure capture of food chain and environmental data, including building on wastewater surveillance systems used for COVID-19 detection.

AMR transcends generations, let alone G7 presidencies, and we look to Germany and then Japan to continue leading this work.

GLOBAL COLLABORATION

We must learn lessons from COVID-19 to be better prepared for and able to respond to any outbreak, including of AMR. Many actions needed to address pandemics overlap with those needed to address AMR. The G7 must ensure this is reflected in any pandemic treaty (or legal

instrument) that countries are currently negotiating to bolster global preparedness for the next pandemic.

G7 leaders must capture these synergies and work together to ensure that:

• any instrument is grounded in a multi-sectoral One Health approach that sees infection prevention and control and equitable access as underpinning principles;

• the private sector is included in global multilateral conversations – global health security, long-term sustainability and financial stability go hand in hand;

• institutional investors play active roles as antibiotic ‘stewards’ across

the biotechnology, pharmaceutical, food production, food retail, healthcare, veterinary and insurance sectors, supporting and challenging industry and companies to do more through environmental, social and governance standards;

• as recommended by the Pan-European Commission on Health and Sustainable Development, bring together G20 health and finance ministries to enhance cooperation and exchange, and ensure countries and international organisations support the Joint Finance and Health Task Force to address One Health financing gaps; and

• the United Nations secretary-general establishes an ‘Evidence Panel on AMR’ as a subgroup to his new Science Advisory Group, to independently assess evidence to inform global policymaking.

Transforming food, health and environment systems to be resilient, sustainable and equitable presents one of the strongest opportunities to realise the Sustainable Development Goals. This cannot be achieved without tackling and mitigating AMR as a One Health global problem. Compared with responding to COVID-19, preventing AMR will save money and, more importantly, lives and livelihoods. The G7 must lead this work to ensure our security of health, food, environment and economies of the future.

lives lost to antimicrobial resistance in 2019

1 in 5

1.27m deaths caused by AMR are children under five years old

PROFESSOR DAME SALLY DAVIES

Dame Sally Davies was appointed the UK’s special envoy on antimicrobial resistance in 2019. She is also the 40th master of Trinity College, Cambridge University. She was the chief medical officer for England and senior medical adviser to the UK government from 2011 to 2019. She was a member of the World Health Organization’s executive board from 2014 to 2016, and co-convener of the United Nations Inter-Agency Coordination Group on Antimicrobial Resistance, reporting in 2019. In 2020, Dame Sally was announced as a member of the new UN Global Leaders Group on AMR.

Twitter @UKAMREnvoy

The marine environment even spreads resistant bacteria to biodiverse places, including the Arctic and the Galapagos Islands”

Critical thinking

Fear is among the strongest human emotions. In the short term, fear protects us in danger. In the long term, continuous fear with no escape has serious physical and mental consequences. The invasion of Ukraine has made fear and anxiety the daily long-term reality for its inhabitants, the more than 14 million refugees and the many who host them.

Fear and anxiety are part of the evolutionary ‘fight or flight’ mechanism. However, being in a continuous state of readiness disrupts individuals’ circadian (24-hour) rhythm and makes them prone to peptic ulcers and memory loss. Chronic fear and anxiety also bring many other disorders, especially among children, who can be traumatised for life. As we witness the cold-blooded barbarism of one man’s crimes, committed by many, and atrocities perpetrated by a few, other human traits shine through: heroism, resilience and compassion in even greater measure. Among Ukrainians it is a response to the existential threat to their lives, homes and homeland. The empathy and compassion of those helping them arise from the monumental injustice of being attacked without provocation or justification, echoing 1941, when both Ukrainians and Russians were the victims. Ironically and tragically, Russia is doing to Ukraine what was done to them together by Germany. And the former aggressor now helps to find an end to the current tragedy.

The health, mental and social consequences of the invasion raise a larger

Vladimir Hachinski, former president, World Federation of Neurology, and Detlev Ganten, founder and former president, World Health Summit

issue. Safety concerns us all since it is an essential prerequisite for brain health, defined as “a state of optimal physical, mental and social wellbeing through the continuous, balanced, development and exercise of the brain's cognitive, emotional and social capacities”.

FACTS AND FICTION

In an authoritarian country, it is difficult to act because of repression and misinformation. However, ultimately even in a dictatorship, people can act successfully. Regretfully, in all types of regimes and countries some measure of unwarranted control and misinformation exist. So, the first step is to exercise the brain’s ability to think critically and learn to separate facts from spin or sheer lies. The pandemic has shown that our thinking cannot be optimal if we are fearful, anxious or depressed or when we are isolated. Many people experienced this during the pandemic. We were afraid to contract the virus and become sick and die; we were anxious about what would happen next, sometimes to the extent of depression, all compounded by the soul-searing effects of isolation.

Politics and health are closely intertwined. If you are insecure, you cannot think well and might not act optimally; if you are deprived of social interactions, your mental state will not allow you to do your best. In short, brain health – necessary for health, productivity and well-being – will be affected.

THE PRIVILEGE OF FREEDOM

Those of us living in G7 countries are fortunate, because of the quality of life, and the privilege of freedom. We have the power to choose leaders who champion our values. As citizens of the world,

Chronic fear and anxiety have profound effects on health, yet they’re a state of existence for millions of people fleeing from danger. A healthy environment is critical to a healthy brain – and safety is a prerequisite

VLADIMIR HACHINSKI

Vladimir Hachinski is a Distinguished University Professor at Canada’s Western University. When he was president of the World Federation of Neurology he changed its mission “to foster quality neurology and brain health world-wide”. He has made major contributions to the understanding, diagnosis, treatment and prevention of stroke and dementia, and leads a dementia prevention/brain health initiative. He introduced the concept of vascular cognitive impairment – the vascular treatable and preventable component of most dementias –and devised a method of identifying it.

DETLEV GANTEN

Detlev Ganten, a specialist in pharmacology and molecular medicine, is one of the world’s top scientists in the field of hypertension. He was the founding president of the World Health Summit, a former CEO of the Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin and founding director and CEO of the Max Delbrück Center for Molecular Medicine.

we have a duty to fight one of the great evils of history – ideology in all its malignant forms. Religious wars, presumptions about racial or ethnic superiority, and one-size-fits-all political systems leave much sorrow in their wake. Each time we fail to vote or raise our voices, we fail to promote security by allowing demagogues and opportunists to get into positions where they can do harm. We also need to tackle related problems, including weather instability and pollution, through agendas such as the Sustainable Development Goals. The primacy of our individual and our collective brain health is at the core of the solutions. As the site of all our experiences and the source of all our actions, we need to foster our brain health individually and collectively. Given that one cannot have a healthy brain in an unhealthy environment, we need to expand our definition of brain health to “a state of optimal cognitive, mental and social well-being in a healthy, safe, physical and societal environment and key to health, productivity and well-being.”

G7 leaders are acting in the spirit of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights: “everyone has a right to life, liberty and security of persons.” They can do even more by adopting brain health as the top priority, since it is a key to all solutions in our knowledge-based economies and the rapidly digitising and cognitively more demanding world.

This should be common sense.

As the site of all our experiences and the source of all our actions, we need to foster our brain health individually and collectively”

+14m refugees fleeing Ukraine

G7 performance on macroeconomic policy

G7 decision-making on macroeconomic policy has dropped in recent years, but compliance has held relatively steady at a high level. If performance in deliberation and decision-making is improved, the economic gains could be significant

Alissa Wang, senior researcher, G7 Research Group

Since its first summit in 1975, the G7 has placed macroeconomic policy at the core of its agenda. However, over time, there has been a gradual and steep decline in the G7’s deliberation and decision-making on this subject. At Elmau, G7 leaders must increase their attention and action on macroeconomic policy and reinvigorate the compliance of their governments with their macroeconomic policy commitments.

CONCLUSIONS

Since 1975, G7 leaders have devoted 27,288 words to macroeconomic policy in their communiqués. However, this deliberation has declined over time. The leaders started in 1975 by devoting 52% of the communiqué to this subject – the all-time peak. Afterwards, there was a gradual decline to 12% by 1981. Deliberation spiked to 48% in 1982, then declined in 1983 and 1984 to 19% each.

ALISSA WANG

Alissa Wang is a senior researcher with the G7 and G20 Research Groups and co-chair of summit studies for the BRICS Research Group, all based at the University of Toronto. She is pursuing a combined JD/PhD in political science with a focus on international relations and comparative politics.

Twitter @alissawang  www.g7.utoronto.ca

It spiked again to 33% in 1985, followed by a long decline from 1986 to 1992. The next spike came in 1993 with 21%, and another in 1998 with 18%. Then came a long decline to 2019 to 2%, followed by a spike in 2020 to 30%. It dropped to 16% and 6% at the two summits in 2021. The first summit in 2022 had 15%.

Four phases thus stand out. First, from 1975 to 1982, G7 leaders dedicated an average of 32% of their communiqués to macroeconomics. Second, from 1983 to 1993, they gave on average 15%. Third, from 1994 to 2019, they averaged a low 5%. Fourth, following this dramatic decline, since 2020, deliberation on macroeconomics rose to a medium level of 17%.

COMMITMENTS

Between 1975 and February 2022, G7 leaders made 305 public, collective, precise, future-oriented, politically binding commitments on macroeconomic policy, as identified by the G7 Research Group. This constitutes 5% of the 6,520 commitments made on all subjects. Compared to other subjects, macroeconomic policy ranks 11th, after development, health, energy, environment, terrorism, climate change, trade, gender, non-proliferation, and crime and corruption. It ranks higher than the other 23 subjects G7 leaders have made commitments on.

G7 decision-making on macroeconomic policy has passed through two phases. First, from 1975 to 1987, each summit averaged a high of 21% of its commitments on macroeconomics. Second, from 1987 to 2022, this dropped

to a low of 6%. However, within this second phase, the virtual summit on the COVID-19 crisis in March 2020 dedicated 32% of its commitments to macroeconomics, and this declined to 19% and 4% at the 2021 summits, and 6% at the summit on 24 February 2022, as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine began.

COMPLIANCE

G7 members have complied with the 22 macroeconomic policy commitments assessed by the G7 Research Group at a high level of 83%. This is higher than the G7’s all-time average compliance across all subjects of 76%.

Over the years, G7 compliance has been relatively stable at this high level. The first three assessed commitments, made between 1996 and 1999, had compliance of 100%. Subsequently only three dips came. For commitments made in 2003 and 2004, compliance was 63% and 61%, respectively. For 2016 compliance was 63%. For the 2020 virtual summit, during the COVID-19 crisis, compliance was 75%.

By member, the highest compliance on macroeconomics come from the United States, Canada and France, each at 87%. During the G8 from 1998 to 2013, Russia led with 95%.

5%

of all G7 commitments to date relate to macroeconomic policy

83% average compliance on macroeconomic policy commitments assessed

76% average compliance across all commitments

CAUSES AND CORRECTIONS

To improve compliance on their macroeconomic policy commitments, G7 leaders can use low-cost accountability measures that have coincided with higher compliance.

The inclusion of a reference to the private sector in a communiqué correlates with higher compliance. The two commitments that contained such references averaged compliance of 97%, much higher than the overall compliance rate on macroeconomic policy commitments.

Although there is no strong correlation between the number of finance ministers’ meetings and compliance, the top-performing summits had at least three pre-summit meetings of finance ministers. The highest performing summits, in 1996, 1999 and 2008, with average compliance of 100%, had four, seven and three finance ministerial meetings, respectively.

More broadly, beyond compliance performance, G7 leaders should also reverse the long-term trend of declining performance in deliberation and decision-making on macroeconomics, as they did in 2020.

The inclusion of a reference to the private sector in a communiqué correlates with higher compliance”

Leadership in troubled times

transfers providing a financial lifeline to vulnerable consumers. They still encourage energy savings and fuel switching by preserving price signals.

Price controls, in the form of price caps, energy tax cuts or general subsidies, dampen the incentives to shift to an energy system that is more diversified and depends less on fossil fuel. They blunt price signals and their general untargeted application makes them less equitable.

MORE AMBITIOUS EFFORTS

Achieving global net zero emissions by 2050 also requires more ambitious and more consistent efforts on the foundation of more and better global cooperation. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development will continue to support those efforts including through the German G7 Climate Club initiative combined with our own Inclusive Forum on Carbon Mitigation Approaches.

Second, we need to optimise the benefits of the accelerating digital transformation of our economies while better managing the challenges and disruptions associated with it.

Germany took over the G7 presidency at a time when the global economy was returning to normal.

The recovery from the pandemic was well established, although its pace was uneven and inflation was rising.

Then a new shock arrived. Russia’s unprovoked, unjustifiable and illegal aggression against the people of Ukraine is first and foremost a deeply distressing humanitarian disaster. However, it also presents a serious threat to our rules-based international order and adds significant instability to a recovering global economy, causing lower growth and adding to inflation.

The pandemic and the war both require bold immediate measures to mitigate some of their negative short-term impacts. Both exacerbate and complicate pre-existing, long-term policy challenges.

First, on climate change.

In the wake of the war, energy supply and security challenges have collided with our energy transition and climate change mitigation objectives.

We want to do it all: cushion the cost burden on vulnerable households and firms, shore up energy security and remain on track to reach carbon neutrality by 2050.

To achieve this, we should ensure that our short-term responses to current pressures do not make it unnecessarily harder to meet our longer-term climate and energy transition objectives.

The best way to shield vulnerable households from the negative impact of higher energy prices is temporary, well-targeted, means-tested, lump-sum

Affordable universal access, for households and businesses of all sizes, to high-quality digital infrastructure and a skilled workforce, while ensuring sound policy and regulatory approaches to competition, cross-border data flows, privacy, cyber security, tax and more, are important to provide a solid basis for securing long-term inclusive and sustainable growth.

The green and digital transitions will reshape economic activity and the labour market.

They risk creating new divides, including gender divides. New firms will emerge, some will adapt, others will close. This will involve significant labour market churn.

It is essential then that governments and other key stakeholders ensure that everyone has the best possible opportunity to participate in and benefit from those transitions.

UPSKILLING AND RESKILLING

We must upskill and reskill workers and provide early, well-targeted employment services.

The OECD is supporting G7 efforts to adapt employment and skills policies to ensure workers are able to fully grasp the benefits of the digital and green transitions and are equipped to sustain them.

Third, the war is adding to stresses in global value chains provoked by the pandemic.

Strengthening supply chains for strategic and key goods, such as energy, critical raw materials and food, is indeed essential.

However, we should avoid redividing the world into separate trading blocs. We should be mindful that shortening global value chains would lead to efficiency losses and may well add to inflationary pressures.

A well-functioning global market, based on a rules-based trading system in good working order, has helped improve living standards around the world in the past and can do so in the future.

The shock of Russia’s recent invasion of Ukraine adds instability to an already recovering global economy, but certain measures may help to cushion the blow

Mathias

Cormann, secretarygeneral, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

Rather than talk about de-globalisation, we should focus on making globalisation work better for people everywhere.

To address some of the supply logistics challenges that have become apparent in the wake of the pandemic and now Russia’s war, we also need to focus on the necessary improvements to our global trading infrastructure to facilitate efficient global trade flows in the future.

Fourth, our population is ageing.

Population ageing is a drag on growth. All other things being equal, it leads to lower tax revenues at a time when expenditures on health, long-term care and pensions are rising.

In response, we need to boost workforce participation, encourage people to work longer, do more to close the participation gender gap and improve the participation levels of people with a disability.

We also need to rebuild our fiscal buffers. We need to give ourselves the fiscal space to address all these structural challenges, while also making sure we are in the best, most resilient position possible to deal with the inevitable next external shock.

This is also why broadening tax bases is important, and why the full implementation of our agreement to reform international corporate tax arrangements will be essential.

We will continue to support the G7’s efforts on all these fronts.

MATHIAS CORMANN

Mathias Cormann was appointed secretary-general of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development in June 2021. Previously, he served as Australia’s finance minister, leader of the government in the Australian Senate and federal senator representing the State of Western Australia. He also served as chief of staff and senior adviser to various state and federal ministers in Australia and for the premier of Western Australia. Born in Belgium, he graduated in law at the Flemish Catholic University of Louvain (Leuven), following studies at the University of Namur and the University of East Anglia.

Twitter @MathiasCormann @oecd  oecd.org

A well-functioning global market, based on a rules-based trading system in good working order, has helped improve living standards around the world in the past and can do so in the future”

Outlook on the global economy

The world is headed for a difficult period in which significant economic slack will be required – and concrete commitments from the G7 leaders will be essential

What are the current conditions of the G7 economies and the world’s other major economies?

For the first time in decades, inflation is now a defining macroeconomic problem for the United States, Canada and the European members of the G7. Inflation and its ultimate resolution also carry quite substantial recession risks, and slowdowns in the main engines of the industrial world also raise important challenges for many emerging markets.

What are the prospects for the rest of 2022 and beyond?

I think we’re headed for a difficult period. We’re likely to need significant economic slack if we’re going to succeed in containing inflation, and slack is never pleasant and controlling the process is never easy.

What are the major risks that you see for the G7 economies in terms of probability and magnitude?

The major risks are stagflation and recession, as well as enormous internal political polarisation. The greatest risk coming out of the Elmau Summit is that the world,

preoccupied by Ukraine, will have lost its focus on the ongoing challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic and climate change.

What about the recent surge in COVID-19 infections in China and even to some extent in the United States and elsewhere?

We may be done with the virus, but the virus isn’t done with us. As long as there are substantial pockets of infection, there is a substantial systemic health risk that demands our attention. It’s tragic that the United States has been unable to vote in significant COVID-19 support in light of all the other things that are happening.

Another challenge is climate change with intensified extreme weather events and chronic conditions.

It’s clear that climate change is real. It’s clear that climate change has serious consequences. It’s clear that there are irreversibilities associated with climate change. It’s also clear that science and technology offer the prospects of

Interview with Larry Summers, Charles W Eliot University professor and president emeritus, Harvard University

LAWRENCE H SUMMERS

Lawrence H Summers is the Charles W Eliot University professor and president emeritus at Harvard University, and the Weil Director of the Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Business and Government at Harvard Kennedy School. Over the past two decades, he has served in various senior policy positions in Washington DC, including treasury secretary for President Bill Clinton, director of the National Economic Council for President Barack Obama and the World Bank’s vice president of development economics and chief economist.

Twitter @LHSummers  larrysummers.com

containing, not reversing, climate change, but that’s going to require bold action. Whether that action is going to be forthcoming is very much in doubt at this point.

Could shrinking equity assets and crypto currency prices generate serious financial instability?

I think the risks associated with crypto are important topics for financial regulators in individual countries and for those regulators to discuss. But on the scale of the stability problems posed by a rising China, by the war in Ukraine, by pandemic risk and by climate change, the risks associated with crypto are rather trivial.

How much stronger will inflation get in the United States and in other G7 members?

I think the outlook for inflation depends very much on the geopolitics, as they bear on commodities and supply chains. It’s quite possible that inflation in the United States will come down from its current 8.5% level, but I don’t think it’s likely to come down anywhere near the 2% we associate with price stability without some material increase in unemployment.

What should the proper mix of monetary policies and fiscal policies be for G7 members?

The primary response should be monetary policy. I think it’s very important that fiscal legislation be passed, particularly in the United States, that implements the very important agreements on corporate tax harmonisation, where US treasury secretary Janet Yellen has played a strong leading role. In addition to promoting more equitable taxation, such legislation would operate to restrain aggregate demand, which is desirable in moments of inflation.

How could those fiscal and monetary policies be coordinated to have the most beneficial impact?

I don’t think the primary issues at this point involve policy coordination. I think the primary issues involve each major region doing the right thing domestically.

Can G7 members better coordinate their more microeconomic Build Back Better programmes?

There is substantial scope for cooperation to reform the international development banks, which could do a great deal more in building back better all over the world. We need to renew the mandate of the World Bank much more around sustainability. We need to rethink its very traditional set of lending tools and we need to replenish its resources.

Looking beyond the G7, what do you see as the dominant prospects for the Chinese economy, its growth and potential financial problems in the real estate sector, and COVID-19 lockdowns?

I’ve got very substantial concerns about the future of the Chinese economy around the factors you just described. I suspect people will look back at China today in ways reminiscent of the way we look back on Japan, where we saw an enormous threat that ultimately didn’t materialise.

What should G7 leaders at Elmau do to support the desired safe, sustainable, fairer growth, and also address these other threats – Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, COVID-19 and climate change?

That’s too general a question! The key will not be the expression of laudable sentiments. The key will be concrete commitments. The areas for cooperation that are most important are with respect to the international problems. That means Ukraine. That means committing substantial funds for COVID-19. That means increasing the availability of finance for developing countries to meet climate commitments and also containing emissions at home.

The whole is more than the sum of the parts

The trade sanctions coalition may face hurdles, but despite that – and despite the fact that political institutions within the G7 move at different speeds – coordinated action determined at Elmau will go a long way in overcoming them

Short of a miracle, the conflict in Ukraine will be top of mind when G7 leaders assemble in Elmau in June. We are reminded daily of the appalling loss of life, the internal displacement of people and the cross-border settlement of refugees brought about by this conflict. The human toll extends further, with rising food prices putting at risk the social and political stability of some developing countries far from the theatre of conflict. The integrated nature of our global economy has ensured the fallout is not localised.

Simon J Evenett, professor of international trade and economic development, University of St Gallen, Switzerland

Moreover, as G7 governments quickly realised, the 2022 invasion of Ukraine represented a blatant transgression of the international order established after World War II. Including the European Union, G7 members quickly announced a raft of trade sanctions, among other measures. On 11 March, the G7 announced their intention to revoke Russia’s most favoured nation status, allowing high tariffs to be imposed on Russian imports. That same announcement anticipated the creation of a coalition of World Trade Organization members that would sanction Russia. This

was followed in May with a commitment “to phase out our dependency on Russian energy, including by phasing out or banning the import of Russian oil”, a big step given pre-conflict energy sourcing patterns and related infrastructure for certain European countries.

The Elmau Summit provides an excellent opportunity to assess the trade sanctions deployed against Russia. For sure, this could include reviewing how far along each G7 member is in imposing stiff tariffs on Russian exports, the timetable for ending its dependency on Russian oil and gas, what exceptions have been adopted and their rationale. Understandably, political institutions in the G7 move at different speeds. This does not justify raising trade barriers. Rather, it reflects the fact that the credibility of the G7 would be jeopardised if there was insufficient follow-up on vows made.

LIMITS OF UNCOORDINATED ACTION

G7 leaders could also identify further steps to isolate the Russian economy, should that be necessary. Taking a leaf out of the sanctions regime implemented against Apartheid-era South Africa, recently Marc-Andreas Muendler and I showed that higher international shipping costs brought about by Western shipping companies refusing to transport Russian goods would do more harm to Russian living standards over the medium term than the 35% tariffs recently levied by G7 governments on all Russian exports. Indeed, the Elmau Summit affords an opportunity to stiffen the resolve of the EU members present, in light of the EU’s recent decision not to ban its shipping lines from transporting Russian oil. The opposition of Greece and Malta appears enough to sink these plans. The lack of any G7 plan to ban shipping was, according to the Financial Times, “central to the proposal being dropped”. The limits of uncoordinated action should be apparent.

More fundamentally, the G7 should reflect on the size of the coalition of countries willing to impose trade sanctions on Russia. For every WTO member that has imposed conflict-related trade measures against Russia, three members have not. For sure, some countries have joined the G7 and the EU in sanctioning Russia: Australia, New Zealand, Norway, Singapore, Korea and Switzerland. But why have more not been convinced of the need to pay an economic price to defend the post-war international order?

THE QUESTION OF LEVERAGE

Some arguments cut no ice and should be set aside. That more than 40 countries voted to condemn the invasion of Ukraine at the United Nations is not convincing. Worse, it suggests that some are only willing to send costless signals to Moscow. Another uncompelling argument – recounted to me by certain diplomats in Geneva – is that Russia has successfully offered a mix of threats and inducements to other WTO members to refrain from joining the coalition of sanctioning countries. This raises the awkward question of why Russia has more leverage than the G7 members, acting individually or together.

The advantage of the G7 format is that candid

For every one WTO member that has imposed conflict-related trade measures against Russia, three members have not

conversations behind closed doors are an option typically not available in larger settings, such as the G20. G7 leaders could identify the factors stunting the expansion of the trade sanctions coalition and the steps they can take to overcome those hurdles. Given the mounting concerns over the availability and price of key foodstuffs and fertilisers, G7 leaders could put together a package of measures – both trade and finance related – that will reassure other governments that steps will be taken first to stabilise global food prices and then to reverse them, as World Bank president David Malpass recently recommended. Furthermore, G7 leaders should charge their officials with devising a coordinated trade and development aid response to Russian influence over other WTO members. The key word is coordinated: now is the time to demonstrate that the whole is more than the sum of the parts. This must supersede the current G7 approach of aligning disparate national responses to the invasion of Ukraine.

SIMON J EVENETT

Simon J Evenett is a professor of international trade and economic development at the University of St Gallen, Switzerland. He is also the founder of the St Gallen Endowment for Prosperity Through Trade, the institutional home of the independent Global Trade Alert and Digital Policy Alert.

Twitter @SimonEvenett

globaltradealert.org

The 2022 invasion of Ukraine represented a blatant transgression of the international order established after World War II”

The landmark agreement adopted in October 2021 by 137 countries and jurisdictions of the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS (Base Erosion and Profit Shifting) is the culmination of over a decade of work to fight against aggressive tax avoidance by multinational enterprises. Based on a two-pillar solution, one modifying the allocation of taxing rights between states and the other introducing a minimum tax rate on corporate profits, the Two Pillar agreement is the result of several years of negotiations towards better regulation of international taxation. The G7 has been instrumental in achieving this historic agreement. Its continued leadership remains integral to the implementation phase of the deal, as well as for other emerging priorities in the tax space.

TWO-PILLAR TAX REFORM

Since the deal on 8 October 2021, significant progress has been made to implement the landmark agreement.

With regard to Pillar One, and to facilitate a rapid and consistent implementation, negotiations have been underway to develop a multilateral convention since the beginning of 2022. Technical working groups are actively engaging to agree on the outstanding details, to ensure a fairer distribution of profits and taxing rights among countries with respect to the largest and most profitable multinational enterprises. Amount A of Pillar One, i.e. the residual profits to be allocated to market jurisdictions, has been distilled into building blocks, and public consultations are underway in stages, to allow the Inclusive Framework to continue to move forward at a rapid pace.

As regards Pillar Two, the model rules to implement the Pillar Two minimum tax –the Global Anti-Base Erosion (GloBE) rules – were agreed in December 2021, to provide

Advances on international taxation

Pascal Saint-Amans, director, Centre for Tax Policy and Administration, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

The tax landscape requires simple, collaborative common rules that can be administered digitally – and the world is heading in the right direction

governments with a precise template and the mechanism for implementation. The GloBE rules define the multinational enterprises in scope and provide for a coordinated system of taxation intended to ensure large MNE groups pay the agreed minimum level of tax on income arising in each of the jurisdictions in which they operate. The commentary to the GloBE rules was published in March and a public consultation event on Pillar Two was held in April 2022. Implementation is also progressing at the level of individual jurisdictions. The European

PASCAL SAINT-AMANS

Pascal Saint-Amans has been director of the Centre for Tax Policy and Administration at the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development since 2012. He joined the OECD in 2007 as head of the International Co-operation and Tax Competition Division in the CTPA. In 2009, he was appointed head of the Global Forum Secretariat, created to service the Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes. Before joining the OECD he was an official in the French Ministry for Finance and served as financial director of the French Energy Regulation Commission. Twitter @PSaintAmans  oecd.org

Union is close to adopting its directive, Canada announced earlier in April as part of its budget proposal that it would be implementing the minimum tax, and the United Kingdom, Switzerland and the United Arab Emirates have also taken important steps towards implementation. This swift implementation of Pillar Two is a welcome and ground-breaking change in the international tax regime.

CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE G7 PRESIDENCY

The reform of the international tax system has also had a significant impact on national tax administrations. At the request of the German G7 presidency, the secretariat of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development prepared a report for the G7 finance ministers’ meeting in May 2022, addressing this impact and how to further strengthen international tax cooperation in light of the Two Pillar solution. The report provides recommendations to reinforce cooperation at the tax administration level in the context of increasingly common and internationally coordinated rules. The corporate tax landscape needs simple, collaborative common rules, which can be administered digitally. In this regard, the report also covers the new global tax transparency framework that the OECD is developing, designed to ensure the collection and exchange of information on transactions in crypto-assets.

The OECD also continues to support international dialogue on explicit and implicit carbon pricing. The German government has put the formation of an ‘ambitious, bold and cooperative’ climate club at the top of its G7 presidency agenda, to provide both a forum and a mechanism for accelerating international collective action on climate change. The OECD is preparing a roadmap paper, together with the International Monetary Fund, that describes the path to building the evidence and the tools needed for improving comparability of climate policies, with a view towards supporting international dialogue on advancing climate mitigation. This work is undertaken in conjunction with, and should complement, ongoing work at the OECD to develop an inclusive initiative on carbon mitigation.

This reform brings the most significant changes to the international tax rules in over a century”

Kate Barton, global vice chair – tax, EY

This year is shaping up to be a year of extraordinary challenges and change that can unexpectedly interconnect and alter the global economic landscape. As a result of the pandemic, the world is experiencing a confluence of geopolitical, economic and social issues that are forcing governments and businesses to rethink the way they operate. Tax is at the centre of it all.

There are three trends that carry substantive tax implications affecting revenue, liabilities and behaviours that governments and businesses alike cannot overlook: global tax reform; sustainability; and Web3 and the metaverse.

GLOBAL TAX REFORM

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development project, known as BEPS 2.0, is well on its way to addressing the tax challenges of the global economy with a fundamental overhaul of the long-standing international architecture for taxing global businesses.

With continuing leadership from the G7, as well as exceptional coordination across jurisdictions, this initiative could have ramifications that reach well beyond the specific tax rules under development.

As it stands, the proposed tax reform has the backing of 137 jurisdictions, which represent about 90% of the global economy and reflect the spectrum of national economies and tax systems around the world. The new rules effectively divide taxing rights over global business income among jurisdictions.

The success of this reform hinges on unprecedented and ongoing cooperation among tax administrations – cooperation that is by no means a given.

There is substantial work to be done to provide certainty to tax administrations and businesses without protracted disputes or risk of double taxation. And the need for coordination and cooperation will not end with agreement on the details of the new rules. To achieve the intended results, there must be day-to-day coordination in how tax authorities apply these new rules to prevent overlapping claims of taxing rights over global business income from becoming a barrier to cross-border investment.

This kind of operational coordination needs deep and permanent commitments

A smaller, more connected world

from governments. A successful result could mean the beginning of a new era of multilateralism in tax, with the potential to pave the way for a more fully integrated global economy that benefits us all. However, government policymakers must work closely with business stakeholders to ensure simple and transparent rules that facilitate efficiency in both tax compliance and tax administration.

The G7 played a significant role in bringing the participating jurisdictions to agreement on key design parameters

for these new rules in 2021. Its continuing leadership in 2022 and beyond will be essential to fostering the necessary cooperation among tax authorities.

SUSTAINABILITY

The tax implications of sustainability might be less obvious than those relating to a changing global tax regime, but they are no less significant. And the OECD has hinted that an inclusive framework on carbon pricing could be next on the agenda after BEPS 2.0.

Three megatrends are reshaping the global tax landscape – here’s how

Leaders around the world are beginning to understand the costs of climate inaction – and the fact that doing nothing is not an option. At the same time, they are aiming to raise revenue and grow their economies in the tough aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Governments have at their disposal a whole range of tax levers – credits, incentives and carbon taxes – used to reward good behaviours while discouraging the bad. Simply put, taxes influence behaviours and serve as a tool for policymakers to achieve certain sustainability outcomes. These tax policies are being deployed alongside non-tax regulations, mandatory reporting and carbon markets to address critical climate issues.

They are still in flux, however, and vary widely across jurisdictions. There is much for governments to consider – not least the fact that a complex policy landscape could create unintended consequences for business.

In the search for revenue and growth, these policy shifts require agility but also offer significant opportunities for organisations that prioritise sustainability in their strategy, operations and supply chains around the world. With a business community driving towards net zero and addressing a range of social issues, it is crucial for governments to work hand in hand with the private sector when developing new proposals or accelerating existing policies to meet their own sustainability objectives.

WEB3 AND THE METAVERSE

Web3 is the next iteration of the internet, representing new technology with the potential to improve societies. This innovative tech extends today’s internet, but in a decentralised manner that relies on distributed ledger technology. Leveraging AI, Web3 has spawned blockchain platforms for both public and private sectors, along with new digital assets such as cryptocurrencies, non-fungible tokens and self-executing smart contracts. And new decentralised autonomous organisations are governing such change. Many governments have already adopted Web3 technology to better serve their citizens, protecting personal data rights and offering critical social services more efficiently.

Web3 is also powering the metaverse, an interconnected set of computer-generated virtual worlds where people can work, play and do business. This new technology will impact our lives in unexpected ways.

KATE BARTON

Kate Barton is the EY global vice chair – tax, a role she has been in since July 2018. She oversees all aspects of EY tax strategy and operations, representing more than 55,000 tax professionals around the world. She also leads the EY Tax Executive Committee, and is a member of the EY Global Executive and EY Global Diversity & Inclusiveness Committee. Kate joined EY as an intern in 1985.  @KateBartonEY  ey.com

Governments and multinationals alike are scrambling to build their presence in this new digital world, a space in which material commerce will take place. In addition to consumer brands with a metaverse presence, governments such as South Korea are investing in this new virtual space to promote economic growth with vast societal benefits.

The tax implications of these technological breakthroughs will be enormous.

There are questions about which jurisdictions are entitled to tax digital transactions, and how to handle the complex and evolving tax treatment of cryptocurrencies. The characterisation and taxing rights relating to NFTs are unsettled as well. Tax law created for the old economy is struggling to evolve at the pace of commercial and technology

developments, leaving taxpayers to apply old economy rules analogously to new digital assets and transactions.

Web3 and metaverse innovations will require broad policy regimes to protect citizens and organisations alike, underpinned with a commitment from government to strongly consider the tax implications. Many will benefit from a clear and globally aligned set of tax rules associated with this new digital economy. Until such clarity exists, however, individual countries will continue to take divergent tax positions. Governments should collaborate across borders and engage with the business community to ensure that the tax policies they develop are equitable without impeding innovation.

A LOOK AHEAD

We are seeing the global effects of the megatrends on economies and societies in the combined influence of collaborative tax reform, policies to endorse sustainability and new technologies that create new business models.

As these megatrends gain speed and traction this year and beyond, they will impact businesses across all sectors and geographies. We cannot afford to ignore them. Nor can we afford to look at each in a silo. Governments must use their collaborative momentum to strengthen tax certainty with a forward-thinking approach to future regulations; and the business community must look at these trends as an opportunity to weave resiliency and sustainability into their move towards the future. The time for us all to act is now. The views reflected in this article are the views of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the global EY organisation or its member firms.

The proposed tax reform has the backing of 137 jurisdictions, which represent about 90% of the global economy”

The road ahead for the global corporate tax deal

Michael F Motala, Stanford University

Over the past decade, G7 members have played a critical role in addressing aggressive corporate tax avoidance by supporting reform of the legal architecture for international business taxation under the auspices of the G20 and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. The G7’s recent endorsement of the Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Inclusive Framework’s two-pillar solution provided crucial political momentum for the project that culminated in the historic global corporate tax deal signed on 8 October 2021. That agreement has now been adopted by 137 tax jurisdictions worldwide. Given the rapid pace of developments since the landmark agreement and the OECD’s ambitious two-year implementation timeline, G7 and world leaders should reaffirm their commitments through international agreements and secure the political support for legislative implementation.

PROGRESS THIS YEAR

The global corporate tax deal signed in October addresses aggressive tax avoidance practices by the largest multinational corporations, by ensuring they pay more tax where they earn their profits. The OECD is taking a phased approach to rolling out the new rules

under both pillars and plans to finalise them in 2022 in consultation with the public and industry stakeholders. It also ambitiously aims to coordinate the simultaneous implementation of the necessary domestic laws by 2023.

Pillar One targets tax avoidance by digital services firms. It introduces significant changes to how taxation rights are allocated between states and thus departs substantially from historical tax norms such as the arm’s length standard and the concept of permanent establishment. In February 2022, the OECD launched a public consultation on the tax challenges of digitalisation and the first building block of Pillar One and received inputs in early March. Technical negotiations on a new multilateral convention to implement Pillar One are also underway. In April, the OECD received public input on draft domestic legislative rules for Amount A of Pillar One and solicited public comments on excluding the financial services and extractives industries. The OECD anticipates the new rules will reallocate over $100 billion of profits among tax jurisdictions when implemented.

The G7 has an opportunity to push the global corporate tax deal – which tackles aggressive tax avoidance practices –over the finish line, and secure political support for its timely legislative implementation

Pillar Two applies to multinational corporations with aggregate revenue above €750 million a year. It establishes a global minimum corporate tax rate of 15% and a top-up tax for large multinationals when their effective tax rate is below this threshold. The OECD completed the technical design of the second pillar on 20 December 2021, when it published detailed rules on the scope and mechanism underpinning the Global Anti-Base Erosion

MICHAEL

Michael F Motala is a lecturer in law and fellow for the LL.M. International Economic Law, Business and Policy and LL.M. Corporate Governance and Practice programmes at Stanford Law School. He is also a PhD candidate in the University of Toronto’s Department of Political Science studying global tax governance and a senior researcher with the G7 Research Group.

Twitter @MichaelMotala

intends to finish its work on Amount B by the end of the year. Furthermore, it has committed to developing a multilateral instrument for the Subject to Tax Rule to facilitate the coordinated implementation of the GloBE rules.

The German G7 presidency has lauded the G20-OECD project as a “major step towards greater tax fairness around the world”. The G7 has repeatedly affirmed its commitment to the swift and coordinated implementation of the two-pillar package. However, to successfully implement the deal, world leaders must take advantage of the political momentum and secure legislative support at the subnational and national levels. Much progress has indeed been made garnering support for the deal, as shown by the agreement of Ireland and Cyprus to raise their corporate tax rate from 12.5% to 15%, the launch of public consultations in the United Kingdom, and the European Union’s efforts to implement a directive on the GloBE rules this coming year.

(GloBE) regime. In March 2022, the OECD released further technical guidance and commentary elaborating the finalised rules.

KEY CHALLENGES ON THE ROAD AHEAD

If all goes according to plan, 2022 will likely be a critical year for finalising the rules envisioned under both pillars. By mid 2022, the OECD will have held a high-level signing ceremony for a multilateral convention implementing Pillar One, and

However, despite the unprecedented consensus behind the landmark tax deal since October, recent events demonstrate that international tax governance remains highly political and that the simultaneous and coordinated actions needed to implement it may encounter roadblocks. Poland opposed the tax directive at a meeting of EU finance ministers in April 2022, and thus it is an open question, given the EU’s unanimity requirement, whether a single state could undermine swift efforts. The French presidency of the EU ends in June 2022 and will diminish a committed France’s influence in the bloc. Similarly, in the United States, the deal’s implementation will require congressional approval. Due to the Biden administration’s difficulty negotiating its ambitious Build Back Better domestic spending plan, it is unclear whether provisions related to the global corporate tax deal will ultimately pass.

Before moving into further domains of reform including tax transparency, carbon pricing and the taxation of crypto-assets, the G7 should redouble its efforts to push the current deal over the finish line. The failure of a significant economy such as the US or EU to implement the agreement could be fatal to the G20-OECD project overall and risk a return to unilateralism in digital services taxation. Therefore, G7 leaders should seize the opportunity to implement the deal at the international level and form domestic political coalitions to ensure its timely legislative passage.

F MOTALA

The deal signed in October addresses aggressive tax avoidance practices by the largest multinational corporations, by ensuring they pay more tax where they earn their profits”

Digitalisation: the recipe for success

changed how we relate to work. The share of the employed population working from home increased exponentially and, in the future, rates of telework will remain significantly higher than they were before the onset of the pandemic. Post-pandemic teleworking will likely involve a hybrid or blended form of teleworking – working part of the time in the office and part of the time remotely. These new hybrid and work-from-home arrangements look to be permanent.

These transformations bring many opportunities.

Guy Ryder, director-general, International Labour Organization

When the incoming German G7 presidency announced its priorities in the area of employment policy late in 2021, one priority was the impact of digitalisation on the structural changes underway in the labour market.

Rapid digitalisation, reinforced by the COVID-19 pandemic, is deeply transforming the nature of work. The emergence of the gig economy is one of the most important new transformations. Digital labour platforms, which include web-based platforms, where work is outsourced through an open call to a geographically dispersed crowd, and location-based applications, which allocate work to individuals in a specific geographical area, typically to perform local, service-oriented tasks, are important components of this transformation.

The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the digital transformations already underway and profoundly

The rise of digital labour platforms has the potential to provide work to many people and offers increased flexibility for those who need it. Businesses are also benefiting, as they can use these platforms to access a workforce, improve efficiency, enhance productivity and enjoy wider market reach.

PROS AND CONS

Telework too brings some important advantages for workers. Teleworking can help workers avoid the daily commute and gives them the flexibility to work at the times and places that are most convenient for them, affording them ‘time sovereignty’. It typically also has positive overall effects on work-life balance and can be beneficial to society by reducing carbon emissions.

But these opportunities are accompanied by some challenges related to the regularity of work and income, working conditions, social protection, skills

The COVID-19 pandemic profoundly changed how we relate to work, but digitalisation of the workplace can only succeed if the work opportunities it provides are decent –benefitting both workers and employers

GUY RYDER

Guy Ryder has been director-general of the International Labour Organization since 2012, having held various senior positions in the ILO from 1999 to 2002 and again since 2010. Ryder leads the organisation’s action to promote job-rich growth and make decent work for all a keystone of strategies for sustainable development. He has a background in the trade union movement and is the former general secretary of the International Trade Union Confederation. Twitter @GuyRyder  ilo.org

utilisation, the right to freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining.

As the working conditions on digital labour platforms are regulated largely by terms of service agreements, platform workers cannot access many of the workplace protections and entitlements that apply to employees, and fundamental rights of freedom of association and collective bargaining are extensively denied. Particularly for workers engaged on location-based platforms, there are especially large gaps regarding health insurance and work-related injury provision, unemployment and disability insurance, and old-age pension or retirement benefits.

Telework also carries important disadvantages. Evidence from the pandemic teleworking experience confirms that the mandatory, full-time nature of teleworking exacerbates the risk of social isolation and detachment from colleagues and the organisation itself, as well as ergonomic issues. Existing gender inequalities and challenges for women also appear to be aggravated by mandatory, full-time teleworking.

The International Labour Organization has been working closely with governments that have taken regulatory steps to address these challenges, providing technical and legal assistance, as well as with employers’ and workers’ organisations that have also taken initiatives.

On digital labour platforms, however, variations in the national regulatory responses have created further challenges. The matter is made more complex because many digital labour platforms operate across multiple borders and jurisdictions. The result is regulatory uncertainty for workers, businesses and governments.

SEEKING REGULATORY CERTAINTY

International policy dialogue and coordination could help ensure regulatory certainty and the universal applicability of international labour standards. It is important that the ILO fundamental principles and rights at work are implemented for all platform workers, irrespective of their status. In addition, principles rooted in other ILO conventions, such as those related to fair payment systems, fair termination and access to dispute resolution, should also be extended to platform workers.

In addition, privacy protection should rise to the top of the policy agenda to strike the right regulatory balance between employer monitoring and worker privacy needs.

Digitalisation will only fulfil its positive potential if the work opportunities it provides are decent. G7 leaders therefore need to act to create the conditions to adapt to new ways of working requiring new behaviours and new norms. The social partners must be given a central role when revising existing laws, regulations and policies or developing new ones. This will ensure that digitalisation benefits both workers and employers. A strong political call to invest in digital infrastructure and skills would be an important lever to ensure no one is left behind in the digital transition.

All of these would help to deliver on the G7 leaders’ commitment for an inclusive and human-centred future of work.

The internet today connects more than 4.9 billion people and is a shared resource on which society depends. It was created on the premise that free and broad access to information supports the greater good. The complexity and scale of the internet, and its ever-increasing number of users, demand that it be governed democratically.

One example of its complexity and democratic management is the domain name system, which enables people to navigate the internet. Each device on the internet uses an internet protocol address that is almost impossible to remember because it is a long series of numbers, or numbers and letters. These unique identifiers are aligned with the protocol parameters that ensure networks can communicate with each other. The DNS helps users get around the internet by translating the numbers into memorable

Internet governance in the global digital order

We must reduce barriers to internet participation –not raise fences – and ensure the continuation of our single, stable, interoperable internet, which has been the basis for unparalleled innovation, economic growth and an engine for development since its inception

Göran Marby, president and chief executive officer, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)

names. The root zone, the highest level of the DNS, contains the names and IP addresses for all the top-level domain names and country code top-level domains.

One organisation – the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers – ensures the stable and secure operation of the internet’s unique identifier systems, and coordinates the allocation and assignment of names in the root zone of the DNS (through its Internet Assigned Numbers Authority functions). ICANN is a not-for-profit organisation that is accountable to stakeholders worldwide and works with technical partners in the internet ecosystem to evolve and enforce the rules that ensure one secure, stable, interoperable internet.

ICANN operates using a multi-stakeholder model, one of the most democratic forms of policymaking. In this model, individuals, non-commercial stakeholder groups, industry, civil society and governments all have an equal voice in consensus-driven policymaking. Through advisory committees and supporting organisations, ICANN creates and implements policy that guides the complex management of the global DNS.

No government has authority over ICANN; rather, it is accountable to a global multi-stakeholder community. ICANN’s Governmental Advisory Committee, with 179 members and 38 observers, is the voice of governments and intergovernmental organisations within ICANN’s processes.

A CRITICAL JUNCTURE

We find ourselves at a critical juncture for the future of digital global governance. It is our shared responsibility. There are billions of internet users of different cultures, languages, and economic and education levels. ICANN works to protect those users and to create an environment that is welcoming and linguistically accessible to the

4.9bn

people connected by the internet

GÖRAN MARBY

Göran Marby was appointed president and chief executive officer of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) in 2016. He was previously director-general of the Swedish Post and Telecom Authority. He chaired the European Regulators for Electronic Communications and the European Regulators Group for Postal Services and was a member of the Swedish Broadband Commission. He was previously CEO and founder of AppGate and also CEO for the Cygate Group, and served as country manager for Cisco in Sweden.

Twitter @icann_president  icann.org

next billion users. It is critical that we encourage participation, representation and engagement from people around the world, for whom access to one global internet has much to offer.

Our collective challenge is to ensure that the internet continues to be a secure, trusted and safe resource in the future.

The Declaration for the Future of the Internet, signed in April 2022, recommits all G7 members and 53 other countries to a single, global internet, and reinforces the call for democratic principles in its governance. The declaration in fact exhorts signatories to “protect and strengthen the multi-stakeholder model” –because it works.

THE BASIS FOR INNOVATION

The internet has functioned without fail for 35 years, even while experiencing significant growth in users. Changing to a multilateral governance model would break the partnerships between public and private actors in the multi-stakeholder model. Moving the management of the unique identifiers to an intergovernmental organisation would exclude the expert technical groups that maintain the internet and implement the standards for its management. Rather than using bottom-up, consensus-based decision making with participation from all stakeholders, decisions would be made solely by governments. Such a change would render the internet vulnerable to overinfluence or capture by one group of interests.

The single, stable, interoperable internet has been the basis for unparalleled innovation, economic growth and an engine for development because it is globally accessible and democratically governed. Our goal must be to reduce barriers to participation, not to raise fences. The multi-stakeholder body focused on bringing the next billion users online must remain as transparent, democratic and accountable as possible in order to ensure the stability and security of the internet for all for the future.

The internet has functioned without fail for 35 years, even while experiencing significant growth in users”

G7 performance on

development

Sonja Dobson, senior researcher, G7 Research Group

Germany hosts its seventh G7 summit, and its second in Elmau, on 26–28 June 2022. Germany’s priorities for the development agenda include infrastructure investments for sustainable development; climate, energy and development partnerships for climate neutrality; access to vaccines and robust health systems; and climate neutrality and social equity in the economic recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

Since 1975, G7 leaders have devoted 17% of their communiqués to development. At Rambouillet in 1975 15% was on development. Since then, lows came in 1984 with 3%, in 2003 with 4% and in 2004 with 1%. Highs came in 1994 with 22%, in 1996 with 20%, in 2002 with an all-time high of 56%, in 2005 with 27%, in 2009 with 23%, in 2013 with 39%, in 2014 with 36% and in 2019 with 38%. Since 2019, conclusions have fluctuated. There was a dip to 2% at the 2020 US virtual summit, followed by a rise in 2021 to 16% at the UK virtual summit in February, 17% at the Cornwall Summit and none at the virtual summit on Afghanistan in August, before jumping to 36% at the German-hosted virtual summit in February 2022.

COMMITMENTS

Since 1975, the G7 has made 770 commitments (12%) on development, in first place across all subjects. In 1975, development commitments took 27% (4) of the communiqué.

During the first rotation of G7 hosts, 1975–1981, development commitments

averaged 16%. From 1982 to 1988, they averaged 20%; from 1989 to 1995, 15%; from 1996 to 2002, 16%; from 2003 to 2010, 12%; and from 2011 to 2022, 8%.

Most summits hosted by Germany made development commitments equal to or higher than the overall average for development: 12% each at the 1978 and 1985 summits, 10% at 1992, 17% at 1999, 15% at 2007 (with 48, the second highest number of development commitments) and 11% at 2015 (with 43, the third highest).

Since the COVID-19 pandemic started, there has been a drop at most summits. The 2020 US virtual summit made no development commitments. The 2021 February summit made 15%, but only 4% at Cornwall and none at the August virtual summit, and then 4% at the 2022 February summit.

COMPLIANCE

Compliance with the 59 commitments assessed since 1996 averages 74%, just below the all-subject average of 76%.

Average development compliance started low, in the fourth hosting rotation, at 50% each for the 1996, 1997 and 1998 summits. It spiked to 93% with commitments made in 1999, dipped again to 50% for 2000, rose to 75% for 2001 and finally dipped again to 55% for 2002.

The fifth rotation started strong with 80% for 2003, then 75% for 2004. It rose to 85% for 2005 and further to 94% for 2006. It declined steeply to 65% for 2007, followed by a sharp increase to 89% for 2008, before dropping to 67% for 2009 and rising to 83% for 2010.

Compliance declined steadily in the first few years of the sixth rotation: 80% for 2011, 67% for 2012 and 64% for 2013. The following years were more consistently high: 88% for 2014, 75% for

Higher compliance on development commitments can be achieved via low-cost methods, but consensus – and mutual action –is required

2015, 81% for 2016 and 2017, 92% for 2018, and 84% for 2019. By 1 February 2022, the Cornwall Summit had 100% compliance with its commitment on sustainable growth in Africa.

CAUSES AND CORRECTIONS

High development compliance coincides with, and could be improved by, the G7 leaders’ use of several low-cost measures under their direct control.

The highest compliance, 92%, came from two development commitments that referenced the World Bank. The four with one-year timetables averaged 90%; the seven that referenced finance ministers averaged 87%; the 20 that specified a country averaged 77%; the 18 on debt relief averaged 76%; and the 31 on official development assistance averaged 74%.

Another cause of higher compliance is holding development ministers’ meetings before the summit. Of the 11 years with compliance data and development ministers’ meetings, nine meetings were held before the summit and averaged 81% compliance. The two held after the summit averaged only 65%. Overall, the years when development ministers met averaged 78%, higher than the 74%

average of development commitments and higher than the 70% average for years when development ministers did not meet.

Six summits created dedicated development working groups. The three summits with the highest compliance (averaging 82%) created working groups on financing and sustainable development. The three summits with the lowest compliance (averaging 72%) focused on Africa. Summits that did not create development-related working groups averaged 73% compliance, and those that did create such working groups averaged a higher compliance score of 747%. Thus, although the creation of working groups in itself does not increase compliance, the creation of working groups on financing and sustainable development can contribute.

At Elmau G7 leaders should focus commitments on the areas that contribute to increased compliance, namely financing and sustainable development. Additionally, regarding rebuilding Ukraine, they should base their commitments on the Build Back Better World Partnership launched at the G7’s Cornwall Summit in 2021.

G7 performance on development, 1975–2022

SONJA DOBSON

Sonja Dobson is a PhD student in peace and conflict studies at the National Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies at the University of Otago. She holds a master’s degree in conflict studies and human rights from Utrecht University and a bachelor of arts and science in African studies and political science from the University of Toronto. Sonja has worked with the G7, G20 and BRICS Research Groups since 2015, currently serving as co-chair of summit studies for the G20 Research Group. She is also the lead researcher on development for the G7 Research Group.

Twitter @SAT_Dobson

Build forward better

Interview with Achim Steiner, administrator, United Nations Development Programme

As this year began, what progress were we making on the Sustainable Development Goals?

The COVID-19 pandemic means that, in many countries, progress towards the 17 SDGs did not advance as envisaged –certainly not in line with the indicators and targets. Hard-won progress in key areas such as poverty eradication, hunger, healthcare, education and gender equality has suffered major setbacks. Yet the pandemic actually accelerated some efforts, including the extension of vital social safety nets. The challenge now is to ensure that such programmes become a lasting part of countries’ socio-economic fabric.

In many ways, now is the moment for countries and communities to embrace the SDGs even more fully as they offer a blueprint to build forward better from this pandemic with their clear vision of a greener, more inclusive and more sustainable future for all.

How has Russia’s invasion of Ukraine affected these partial advances?

The implications of the war, first of all on Ukraine,

are devastating and likely to reverse development gains by years if not decades. At the same time, the impacts are also reverberating across the world and will continue to do so for years to come. All countries – especially developing countries, which are already heavily stressed by the pandemic – are suddenly confronted by grain prices that have increased by 30% or 40% and fuel prices by 60%, along with rising interest rates. This is why the United Nations secretary-general, António Guterres, has established a Global Crisis Response Group on Food, Energy and Finance. Working side by side with both developed and developing countries, it will advance strategies and help to implement much-needed solutions to this three-dimensional crisis.

Do recent outbreaks of COVID-19 in Asia and Europe pose another challenge?

These outbreaks are a stark reminder of the intelligence of viruses, which evolve to survive. The numbers should be a constant reminder that from the health dimension to the social and economic dimensions, we are living

External influences are hindering progress on the Sustainable Development Goals, but perhaps now more than ever before, the SDGs offer a blueprint for a greener, more inclusive and more sustainable future for all

through a period of extreme uncertainty. This virus is still imposing incredible suffering and disruption to millions of people across the world. Regrettably, there is no reason to just assume that we are out of the worst of this crisis.

How is the relentless rise in climate change affecting progress towards the SDGs?

Remarkably, almost half the world’s population is now affected by the impacts of climate change, threatening progress across the SDGs. Yet, within a window of eight to 12 years, the world has the capacity to maintain an economic pathway to decarbonisation that will limit global warming to 1.5°C. The decisions we take – or do not take – over the next 12 to 36 months will determine whether our decarbonisation pathways are compatible with the scientific corridor through which the world must move. If we do not take this opportunity now, that choice will no longer be there.

The key to our success lies in the unambiguous decisions taken in the immediate future by the industrialised world and large emitters, which need to maintain a common purpose of decarbonisation on an accelerated trajectory.

We spent decades arguing that decarbonising our economies constrained development. Now development through decarbonisation could become humankind’s greatest story of growth and reawakening.

How is UNDP working to counter these new challenges while continuing to address the inherited ones?

In many countries, leaders have been struggling to anticipate some of the biggest opportunities and threats to their national development priorities. Therefore, over the past four years, the United Nations Development Programme has been putting increased focus on the future of development. Working with our partners, we are committed to assisting countries to interpret likely scenarios and get ahead of a rapidly changing developing context using the power of data, analytics and new digital tools. As we connect 170 countries together, our efforts are centred on bringing science, knowledge, technology and opportunity closer to those who can turn them into development choices and pathways that drive progress across the SDGs.

In particular, consider the incredible power of digitalisation, which has begun to revolutionise every aspect of development. If it is built using a digital ecosystem approach, rather than just measuring the number of people connected to the internet

ACHIM STEINER

Achim Steiner has been the administrator of the United Nations Development Programme since 2017. He is also the vice-chair of the United Nations Sustainable Development Group, which unites 40 entities of the United Nations system that work to support sustainable development. Prior to joining UNDP, he was director of the Oxford Martin School and professorial fellow of Balliol College, University of Oxford. Mr Steiner led the UN Environment Programme (2006–2016) and was also director-general of the UN Office at Nairobi. He previously held other notable positions including director-general of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and secretary-general of the World Commission on Dams.

Twitter @Asteiner  undp.org

or lengths of fibre-optic cable, technology can rapidly accelerate development –potentially opening up millions of new jobs and livelihoods, driving down poverty and inequalities.

We are also increasingly assisting countries to leverage and combine the power of public finance – domestic and international – with private sector investments. For instance, in coordination with partners including the European Union and the International Monetary Fund, UNDP has assisted approximately 70 countries to design and roll out Integrated National Financing Frameworks, which aim to align development finance with the SDGs and the Paris Agreement. The demand for this work is growing exponentially – the development promise of the United Nations is proving to be one of its greatest assets.

How can the G7 leaders at Elmau help?

The Elmau valley is one of the most beautiful spots in the world, so G7 leaders should take inspiration from nature to realise what exactly is at risk right now. We are a family of almost eight billion that is currently failing to do enough to secure the future of people and the planet.

At this global inflection point, we need wisdom, leadership, vision and, perhaps most importantly, courage. People across the world are looking to the G7 for precisely those qualities. Ultimately, this G7 summit will be analysed through the lenses of financial stability and climate action as well as its commitment to multilateralism and the rule of law. Indeed, all countries shoulder a responsibility that unless we look after the international architecture that we have spent 76 years building, we should not be surprised if it is not here tomorrow. This G7 will be remembered if it is able to frame an agenda that provides a way out of multiple, spiralling crises while helping the world to rediscover the importance of caring about the future.

Within a window of eight to 12 years, the world has the capacity to maintain an economic pathway to decarbonisation that will limit global warming to 1.5°C”

The source of life

The costs of providing humanitarian aid are soaring at a time when life-saving help is most needed. But political solutions exist – and they have the power to save millions from a desperate plight

David Beasley, executive director, World Food Programme

Today, 276 million people are marching towards starvation and, of this number, a staggering 49 million in 43 countries are just one step away from famine.

As 2022 began, it was difficult to believe things could get much worse for these people. But with the war in Ukraine, they have. Without urgent action from the world’s richest countries, coordinated and led by the G7 members, millions more of our planet’s poorest people will soon share this desperate plight.

The war has severely disrupted global food, fertiliser and fuel markets, sending prices soaring to record heights and putting these commodities beyond reach for those who rely on them for survival. The effects are spreading rapidly, with food shortages, price spikes and food insecurity rising across Africa and the Middle East, Central and South America, and Central Asia.

The World Food Programme’s own

analysis, based on our humanitarian operations worldwide, highlights the immense damage being inflicted upon global food security by the crisis in Ukraine. We expect a further 47 million people,

mainly in sub-Saharan Africa, to be plunged into severe hunger in the months ahead because of the war. As a result, 323 million people will soon be facing crisis levels of hunger or worse – a truly unprecedented level of humanitarian need that could result in multiple famines in dozens of countries around the world. And this is a conservative assessment of the impact. The real toll may be much, much higher.

A WELCOME RESPONSE

The Global Alliance for Food Security, launched in May by the G7 and the World Bank, is a welcome response to the growing worldwide hunger emergency. Now, as G7

leaders gather for their summit in Germany, the G7’s commitment to action must be matched by a comprehensive package of measures to stop this humanitarian crisis from spinning out of control.

THREATENED FOOD SUPPLIES

As well as addressing the soaring prices and availability constraints on staple foods that we are seeing today, we must also have a plan to tackle the threat to global food supplies that will start to bite in the coming months.

The war is wreaking havoc on the Ukrainian agriculture sector, which in normal times produces enough wheat and grain to feed 400 million people a year. Overnight, a substantial proportion of this production has been wiped from global food stocks.

But the damage to agricultural production is being felt far beyond Ukraine’s borders. The huge disruption to global supplies of essential inputs such as fertilisers and pesticides critically endangers upcoming planting seasons for smallholder farmers everywhere.

The African Development Bank has warned that the continent’s 33 million smallholders face a fertiliser shortage of 2 million metric tons this year. If these shortages are not addressed, African food production will decline by at least 20%.

In total, the overall value of lost food production will equal $11 billion – a figure the African Development Bank rightly describes as “horrific”. Moreover, if the upcoming planting seasons are missed, smallholder farmers will have no seeds to harvest and sow in future cycles.

This deeply concerning picture of falling food production and rising hunger will be repeated across Asia and the Americas. The world’s richest countries cannot simply stand by and watch it unfold.

THE CLEAR SOLUTION

We have a solution – it is called food.

But the costs of providing humanitarian aid are soaring just when our life-saving help is needed the most. Today, WFP’s operational costs are $71 million more per month than in 2019 – a rise of 44%. This is enough to feed 3.8 million people for one month. As a result, we are being forced to cut rations to the people we serve.

It is critical that when the G7 members meet in Germany they agree on a plan that fulfils five key priorities.

DAVID BEASLEY

In 2017 David Beasley was appointed executive director of the World Food Programme, which won the 2020 Nobel Peace Prize. In a public service career that spans four decades, he has worked across political, religious and ethnic lines to champion economic development, humanitarian assistance, education, and intercultural and interfaith cooperation for the most vulnerable people across the globe. He served as governor of the US state of South Carolina from 1995 to 1999.

Twitter @wfpchief 

people close to starvation

276m people close to famine

First, we need political solutions to reopen the Black Sea ports and get Ukraine’s food exports flowing into global markets again. Second, we need substantial new funding to meet the skyrocketing levels of humanitarian need – and this includes contributions from billionaires and corporations, many of which have profited from the pandemic.

Third, governments must resist protectionism and keep trade flowing across borders so aid agencies and poorer countries can support the most vulnerable populations. Fourth, we must invest in tackling the root causes of hunger and conflict and strengthen resilience as a pathway to peace.

44%

49m rise in WFP’s operational costs

And fifth, we must come together, and work together, to stave off the real and dangerous threat of multiple famines in the months ahead. The hungry people of the world are counting on us in this time of extraordinary need. We must not let them down.

The war is wreaking havoc on the Ukrainian agriculture sector, which in normal times produces enough wheat and grain to feed 400 million people a year”

Interview with Filippo Grandi, United Nations high commissioner for refugees

Human displacement: rational handling

How much has the global number of refugees and displaced people grown in recent years?

Exponentially. About 10 years ago UNHCR estimated the number at around 40 million. Last year it had doubled. This year, with Ukraine, we have passed the dreaded milestone of 100 million people in the world forced to leave their homes.

They are almost equally distributed. Europe now is on top with this colossal Ukrainian displacement. The displacement of Syrians is still – at the moment – the biggest refugee crisis. There’s the perennial problem of the Afghan diaspora and displacement, and now one million Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh. Africa has many conflicts that overlap with other phenomena – bad governance, human rights, climate change. Latin America is among the largest areas, with 6 million Venezuelans, and complex flows through Central America to Mexico and the United States. Every region has its own set of crises.

What are the major impacts on the countries of origin, transit and destination?

You have a mix of conflict, good or bad government, climate and other factors generating movements that have the most impact on the immediate neighbours to the crisis. The rhetoric that we hear in rich countries –everybody’s coming to take advantage of our wealth and prosperity – is actually not supported by the data. Most refugees are not in separate camps but in local communities, using the same services, using the same, often scarce, economic opportunities. UNHCR is trying to shift away from purely humanitarian responses to work with development actors in supporting, for example, national education systems affected by the presence of so many children.

Displacement can also impact climate. When you have huge movements of people in climate-fragile areas, you have deforestation, depleted water resources, and other impacts on land and natural resources.

The way Europe has responded to the crisis in Ukraine should be the baseline for humanitarian assistance – shaped by unity of intent, political will, and goodwill and common sense

Last year, Uganda’s President Yoweri Musaveni encouraged UNHCR to focus on the environmental impacts of its large population of refugees on the very fragile vegetation, which we are doing much more of in different parts of the world.

How has Russia’s invasion of Ukraine increased the flows?

I fear that the changing focus of this war is not going to reduce displacement. Fierce fighting in urban centres causes the most displacement in developed countries like Ukraine.

The size and speed of this displacement are unprecedented too. In my visits there, this was the message I constantly got from refugees: ‘We were leading absolutely regular lives: children going to school, we were going to work in the morning, taking weekends with the family. All of a sudden this disappeared.’

Many Ukrainians fled thinking they would go back soon. Now we hear more saying, ‘We need to see where our children can go to school and what health systems we can use’.

Two angles are important.

First, Europe was able to absorb almost six million people quickly. Some states have been telling us for years they couldn’t take an extra person. Now there is political will, a sense of solidarity and common action. It’s a good lesson that I hope will be learned.

But I hear some worrying signals. The UK, with its deal with Rwanda to export its asylum responsibility – in the middle of the Ukraine crisis, when everybody was talking about solidarity – went in the opposite direction. This is a bad signal for a G7 member to send to the rest of the world.

Second, in addition to the colossal ramifications of this crisis on food security and energy prices, it may syphon off resources normally devoted to other crises or

FILIPPO GRANDI

Filippo Grandi has been the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees since 2016. He served as commissioner general of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees from 2010 to 2014, having been the organisation’s deputy commissioner general since 2005. Previously, Grandi served as deputy special representative of the UN secretary-general in Afghanistan, following a long career with non-governmental organisations and later with UNHCR in Africa, Asia, the Middle East and Geneva.

Twitter @FilippoGrandi  unhcr.org

100m

even development. Where will the money for reconstruction come from?

What contributions has UNHCR made with these unprecedented flows?

6m

people forced to leave their homes in recent years people absorbed by Europe quickly in the wake of the Ukraine crisis

We had to really step up. Last year we declared emergencies 40 times as opposed to five or six in a normal year. That means stretching our limited resources. We have between 19,000 and 20,000 staff worldwide. Our Ukrainian operations alone will reach about 1,000 people very soon. That’s a lot in one situation alone, in Europe – where the programmes are not as staff intensive as in other parts of the world, where we need to do much more ourselves because the governments have less capacity.

emergencies declared by UNHCR last year, up from the usual five or six

UNHCR has responsibilities for protection, accommodation, non-food relief supplies and – this is very important in a G7 context – for integrating refugees and displaced people into national services for education and health. Recipient countries need more schools, more teachers, more capacity. They turn to UNHCR, and we turn to development organisations such as the World Bank. It is one thing in a developed country, but what about those with fewer resources? We can’t leave them to try to do this alone.

How can G7 leaders at Elmau best help? Two points. One, don’t let go of humanitarian and development assistance. Maintain the levels and, if possible, increase them. Two, the way Europe responded to the Ukrainian crisis, offering temporary protection, sharing data, allowing people to move around Europe, was exemplary. Let this be a model. I am a bit worried. In 2016, after the big exodus into Europe, the G7 was seized with matters related to forced migration. This issue is still here, as Ukraine has shown. We just need unity of intent, political will, and goodwill and common sense, and then we can handle the problem of forced global population movements rationally.

The rhetoric that we hear in rich countries – everybody’s coming to take advantage of our wealth and prosperity – is actually not supported by the data”

The 2022 G7 Elmau Summit takes place at a time of compounding crises, many of which disproportionately affect women. Of immediate and utmost concern is the rise of conflict-related sexual violence, now being carried out by Russian forces in Ukraine. The G7 prioritised this issue at the Lough Erne Summit in 2013 and must ensure that concerted action is taken to address it now.

CONCLUSIONS

G7 leaders first addressed gender equality in 1990, but not consistently until 2001. Their attention steadily increased from 2013 until 2019. It was entirely absent in 2020 but attention reappeared at all their summits from February 2021 to February 2022. G7 communiqués averaged 668 words on gender equality per summit, for almost 6% of the total words from 1975 to 2022. The greatest attention came at the virtual summit in August 2021 and at the summits in 2017 and 2018. The 2017 communiqué contained 3,888 words (for 45%) and increased in 2018 to 5,086 words (45%), the most extensively mainstreamed amount. In August 2021,

G7 performance on gender equality

G7 performance on gender equality, 1975–2022

The G7 summits with the highest compliance on gender equality commitments had a high degree of internal support, but there are more compliance catalysts that can be employed to keep things moving forward

Julia Kulik, director of research, G7 Research Group

the Virtual Summit on Afghanistan communiqué contained 411 words (67%) on gender equality. Most recently, the 2022 February summit had 480 words (28%).

The G7 began releasing a standalone document on gender equality in 2016, followed by two in 2018 and three in 2019. They included statements on improving education for women and girls in developing countries and ending gender-based violence in a digital context. They also announced the Biarritz Partnership on Gender Equality. This practice stopped in 2020.

COMMITMENTS

Since 1975, the G7 has made 343 public, collective, precise, future-oriented and politically binding commitments on gender equality, over 5% of the total identified by the G7 Research Group. Most were made between 2015 and 2018. Earlier, most were gender-related commitments with other issues at their core, including addressing HIV/AIDS, improving maternal and child health, and improving educational outcomes for girls in Africa. Gender equality itself became the focus in 2015, with 34 (9%) commitments, followed by 48 (14%) in 2016 and 71 in 2017 (39%). In 2018, the G7 made a record 82 (26%) commitments on gender equality. In 2019 this dropped significantly to 17 (24%) and then to zero in 2020. In 2021, there was one (4%) commitment at the virtual summit in February, 30 (7%) at Cornwall and no core ones in August. In 2022, there were four (8%) at the February virtual summit.

COMPLIANCE

G7 members have averaged 73% compliance with these gender commitments, based on 44 assessments by the G7 Research Group. This is slightly below the 76% average across all subjects. By February 2022, compliance with one gender commitment made at Cornwall in 2021 was 100%.

The gender commitments with the highest compliance focused on health, including improving maternal, newborn and child health, or invoked legal action or the protection of human rights. Commitments with the lowest compliance focused on supporting internally displaced and refugee women and girls affected by conflict and disaster and on gender-based violence.

The highest compliance came with commitments made in 2002 with 100%, in

JULIA KULIK

Julia Kulik is director of research for the G7 Research Group as well as for the G20 and BRICS Research Groups and the Global Health Diplomacy Program, all based at the University of Toronto. She has written on G7, G20 and BRICS performance, particularly on the issues of gender equality and regional security. Kulik leads the groups’ work on gender, women’s health, higher education and summit performance.

Twitter @juliafkulik  www.g7.utoronto.ca

commitments made on gender equality since the first G7 summit in 1975

2013 with 95%, in 1996 and 2018 with 92% each, in 2014 with 86% and in 2007 with 84%. The lowest compliance came with commitments made in 2011 with 45% and 2004 with 56%.

The highest complying G7 member is Canada at 88%, followed by the United Kingdom at 85% and the European Union at 77%. In the middle are Germany at 76%, the United States at 75% and France at 69%. The lowest compliers are Japan at 65% and Italy at 50%.

CAUSES AND CORRECTIONS

The highest complying summits, averaging 84%, had a high degree of internal G7 institutional support: they coincided with the only two ministerial meetings on gender equality ever held and with the creation of three of the five gender-related official and multi-stakeholder bodies. The lowest, averaging 60%, came on commitments made in years with no such ministerial meetings and with only two such bodies created.

The highest complying summits also

73% average compliance on gender equality commitments assessed

dedicated a larger percentage of their communiqués – on average 18% – to gender equality. This compares to the 6% average for the lowest complying summits.

Core gender commitments averaged 67% compliance and gender-related commitments averaged 77%. The gender-related commitments with the highest compliance linked gender equality to health, specifically to maternal and newborn health, AIDS, and reproductive health. Commitments with the lowest compliance lacked specificity, but committed to or supported gender equality and women’s empowerment broadly. The presence of compliance catalysts, such as text on how to implement a commitment, generally improved compliance. Gender commitments with embedded catalysts averaged 80% compliance; commitments with none averaged 64%. The catalysts that coincided with the highest compliance refer to a G7 body, invoked legal instruments, or referred to working with a particular country, region or agent.

End the disconnect

We live in a world with a startling disconnect between how women and girls are affected by current multiple crises, and their involvement in finding and implementing solutions. It’s time to recognise this, refocus and urgently coordinate our efforts to reverse it. I therefore urge G7 leaders to take the lead in fostering women’s equal rights, including women’s autonomous decision-making over their bodies and health, and support the achievement of their full political, social and economic participation.

Global conflicts, the climate and environment crisis, and the COVID-19 pandemic are stark reminders of the interconnectedness of the global challenges we face and their power to cross-multiply threats and impact. They have taken their highest toll on women and girls, especially affecting those who are already being left furthest behind. We see this pattern play out in crises across the globe. The horrifying war in Ukraine, and its cascading effects on security, livelihoods and health, is the latest to join the list.

In Afghanistan, with 23 million people identified as acutely food insecure, we see a humanitarian catastrophe marked by increasing gender-specific restrictions that directly impact the ability of women and girls to realise their rights and

contribute to their country. Yet we know that women’s inclusion yields enormous dividends for both peace and prosperity.

THREE PRIORITIES

I would highlight three priority aspects for G7 members to address: resilience against crises; the economy, including care; and violence against women and girls. Together, these interlocked and unresolved aspects underpin the

structural barriers that block progress for sustainable development.

The COVID-19 pandemic showed us how crises dramatically increase women’s and girls’ unpaid care and domestic work and the impact of that increased burden on their ability to engage in paid work. More than 100 million women between the ages of 25 to 54, with small children at home, are out of the workforce globally. Yet the right steps are still not being taken to address the problem. Of more than 3,000 social and economic measures taken by governments in response to the economic and social fallout of the pandemic, only 13% target women’s economic security and only 7% address rising unpaid care demands. It is vital to invest in expanded gender-responsive public services, universal social protection, and health and care systems.

The same limitations apply to measures being taken to address violence against women and girls, already the most pervasive of human rights abuses. Globally, we have seen the current crises exacerbate gender-based violence, all too often with impunity for the perpetrators and inadequate services for survivors.

Climate change seriously aggravates all types of violence against women and girls, especially in the absence of social protection schemes and where there is food insecurity, as women and girls attempt to get food for family members and themselves. Since the start of the

Only feminist solutions can bring about the full, equal and meaningful representation of women in all areas and at all levels, involving them in crisis response and ensuring a level playing field for both sexes

Sima Bahous executive director, UN Women

pandemic, 45% of women surveyed reported that they, or someone they knew, had experienced violence in one form or another. I urge G7 leaders to strengthen their response and increase accountability, to implement measures to prevent violence occurring in the first place, and expand service delivery, including essential services for women and girls experiencing all kinds of violence.

Effective responses to these identified gaps require significant political commitment as well as increased public and private financing. Delivering on long-standing commitments, such as on vaccine supply and climate finance to developing countries, is now more critical than ever. Financing is especially needed to support women’s organisations, enterprises and cooperatives, whose complementary roles in times of crises – and outside them – are invaluable. Increasing political will also means increasing women’s representation in government, using quotas and special measures to accelerate progress. Worldwide, women still only hold one in four parliamentary seats. We are missing critical openings to bring those with the most relevant, lived knowledge into decision-making roles. When we exclude the expertise and voices of women themselves from responses, there is an increasingly damaging opportunity cost to us all.

As Generation Equality recognised, we need now, collectively, to establish a new, feminist way of solving these issues and responding to crises, with action in partnership for the long term. At the heart of that approach is the recognition of what has been missing to date – the full, equal and meaningful representation of

SIMA BAHOUS

Sima Bahous became UN Women’s executive director and UN undersecretary-general in September 2021. She most recently served as Jordan’s permanent representative to the United Nations in New York. Previously, her career has included serving as assistant administrator and director of the Regional Bureau for Arab States at the United Nations Development Programme and assistant secretary-general and head of the Social Development Sector at the League of Arab States. She has also served in ministerial posts in Jordan and was director of communication for the Royal Hashemite Court.

Twitter @unwomenchief  unwomen.org

Out of

+3,000

pandemic-response social and economic measures taken by governments, only

13%

7% target women’s economic security and just address rising unpaid care demands

women in all their diversity at all levels in the decision-making, leadership and implementation of solutions, in full respect of their rights. I call on G7 leaders at the Elmau Summit to resolve to take this simple, deeply significant step, and reach for gender equality together – for the benefit of all.

We are missing critical openings to bring those with the most relevant, lived knowledge into decision-making roles”

Improving G7 performance using statistical modelling

How can the G7 improve its effectiveness by increasing its compliance rates? Data on commitment outcomes make it possible to quantitatively answer this question

During its almost 50-year existence, G7 members have collectively produced 5,584 commitments to address issues such as health infrastructure, global development, trade and financial regulation. However, on average, only 61% of these commitments are met in full. Data on commitment outcomes collected by the G7 Research Group make it possible to quantitatively answer the question of how the G7 can improve its effectiveness by increasing its compliance rates.

FINDINGS

Data on compliance with commitments made at G7 summits were analysed to determine any patterns that could be leveraged to improve commitment outcomes. Using each member’s commitment outcomes for 596 individual

Jessica Rapson, senior researcher, G7 Research Group

commitments (n = 5,237), the impacts of various summit and commitment characteristics were fitted to an ordinal logistic regression model. This showed that mentioning values of democracy and human rights in the commitment, holding a ministerial meeting on the relevant issue before a summit or forming an official-level body on the relevant issue

significantly increases the probability of compliance. Conversely, mentioning financial contributions significantly decreases the probability of compliance. There is also a small overall annual increase in the probability that a given commitment was met (see Figure 1). No effect was found for holding a ministerial meeting on the relevant

issue after a summit, holding multiple ministerial meetings on the issue or holding multiple ministerial meetings closer to the date of the summit, having more overall commitments, having more commitments on the same issue, using high-binding language in the commitment text, mentioning other G7 summits, mentioning major international organisations or mentioning specific timetables.

There was also variation in the probability of compliance across G7 members. The United Kingdom, European Union and Canada were more likely to meet commitments, and France, Japan, Italy and Russia were less likely to do so. No effects were found for the United States or Germany (see Figure 2).

The member that hosts the G7 summit also plays a role in the probability of commitment compliance. When the UK, US, Japan and Germany hosted the summit, compliance was more likely. Compliance was low the year Russia hosted the summit. No effects were found for other hosts (see Figure 3). (Note, the EU was the location of the 2014 summit but not the host as such, after Russia was suspended from the G8 after the annexation of Crimea.)

Likewise, probabilities of success varied by commitment issue. Commitments related to information and communications technologies and digitalisation were almost twice as likely to be met, the highest of any issue. Compliance was also more likely for commitments regarding labour and employment, macroeconomics and energy. Compliance was less likely for commitments on democracy, food and agriculture, regional security, climate change, conflict prevention, development, trade, crime and corruption, education and gender (see Figure 4).

Economic factors play a role in compliance. On average, each additional $1,000 per capita gross domestic product in a member is associated with a 12% higher probability of that member fulfilling its commitments (see Figure 5).

ANALYTICAL CHALLENGES

Despite the large amount of data, it is extremely difficult to determine whether the factors that increase the probability of G7 compliance do so through a causal process or are only correlated with other circumstances that induce compliance. For example, it is possible that

ministerial meetings are held specifically because G7 members are particularly invested in tackling a given issue. Such a focus could mean members would have a higher probability of complying with related commitments even without a ministerial meeting.

The low overall explanatory power of the model is also of concern. Even

JESSICA RAPSON

Jessica Rapson is a senior researcher at the G7 and G20 Research Groups and a Master of Statistics candidate at the University of Oxford. She is also a graduate of University of Toronto’s Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy. Her work focuses on the usage of statistics in policy analysis. Twitter @g7_rg  www.g7.utoronto.ca

when considering all the summit and commitment characteristics, member and commitment issues discussed in this study, only 5.9% of the overall variance in G7 compliance could be explained (McFadden’s pseudo R 2). This suggests that most compliance with commitments may be determined by factors outside the G7’s control or could even be highly random. Nonetheless, there is hope for increasing G7 effectiveness. Of the variables examined, the most plausible causal relationships – even though confounds remain – is through holding a ministerial meeting before the summit and creating official-level bodies on the relevant issue. These actions may allow

members to coordinate policy priorities and increase attentiveness to issues important to the G7.

CONCLUSION

Increasing G7 effectiveness by leveraging patterns associated with higher probabilities of compliance is extremely difficult, as most performance is likely determined by factors outside the control of the institution. However, the possibility remains that holding a ministerial meeting before the summit and creating official-level bodies on the relevant issues can increase the probability of compliance with G7 commitments.

Note: Full data and coding are available at https://github.com/rapsoj/

Figure 4: Effect on probability of compliance by issue

Figure 5: Effect on probability of compliance by member economic factors

G20 Research Group

G20 Research Group

The G20 Research Group is a global network of scholars, students and professionals in the academic, research, business, non-governmental and other communities who follow the work of the G20 leaders, finance ministers and central bank governors, and other G20 institutions. It is directed from Trinity College and the Department of Political Science at the University of Toronto, which also host the G7 Research Group and the BRICS Research Group.

Our mission is to serve as the world’s leading independent source of information and analysis on the G20. As scholars, we accurately describe, explain and interpret what the G20 and its members do. As teachers and public educators, we present to the global community and G20 governments the results of our research and information about the G20. As citizens, we foster transparency and accountability in G20 governance, through assessments of G20 members’ compliance with their summit commitments and the connection between civil society and G20 governors. And as professionals, we offer evidence-based policy advice about G20 governance, but do not engage in advocacy for or about the G20 or the issues it might address.

Background Books and eBooks

For each summit the G20 Research Group produces a “background book,” available free of charge in print and online, outlining the perspectives of the leaders and key stakeholders and offering analysis by leading global experts. It also works with GT Media on the Global Governance Project to produce related analysis and publications.

Compliance Assessments

For each summit the G20 Research Group, working with the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), assesses each G20 member’s compliance with the previous summit’s priority commitments. Cumulative compliance assessments are compiled on key issues.

Pre-summit Conferences

With local partners in the country hosting the summit along with a core group of international partners, the G20 Research Group produces or participates in conferences in the lead-up to each summit analyzing the institutional workings of the G20 and the issues, plans and prospects for the summit.

a

Field Team

The G20 Research Group sends a field team to each summit and some ministerial meetings to assist the world’s media, issue its own reports

and analyses, allow students to witness world politics at the highest level at close hand, and collect the documents and artifacts uniquely available at the summit, to build the G20 archives at Trinity College’s John Graham Library and online at the G20 Information Centre website.

G20 Information Centre @ www.g20.utoronto.ca

The G20 Information Centre is a comprehensive permanent collection of material available online at no charge. It complements the G7 Information Centre, which houses publicly available archives on the G20 as well as the G7 and G8, and the BRICS Information Centre, and the Global Governance Project at globalgovernanceproject.org

Speaker Series

The G20 Research Group hosts occasional speakers in its efforts to educate scholars and the public about the issues and workings of the G20. Past speakers have included senior officials of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank and scholars and policy makers from Mexico, Turkey, China, Australia, Brazil, Italy and elsewhere.

Research

The G20 Research Group conducts research on the causes of summit and system performance and the G20’s relationship with the G7, BRICS, United Nations and other formal multilateral institutions.

Publications include:

Reconfiguring the Global Governance of Climate Change, by John Kirton, Ella Kokotsis and Brittaney Warren

The Power of the G20: The Politics of Legitimacy in Global Governance, by Stephen Slaughter

G20 Governance for

Globalized World, by John Kirton

China’s G20 Leadership, by John Kirton

The G20: Evolution, Interrelationships, Documentation, by Peter I. Hajnal

Compliance with G7 Cornwall commitments

The G7’s Cornwall Summit on 11–13 June 2021 marked the first year back to in-person summitry with a full agenda following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. This summit addressed many high priority issues, with health and climate dominating the response to facilitating COVID-19 vaccinations globally and to a year of extreme climate shocks. It produced the most substantial communiqués ever, containing 429 commitments.

GABRIELLE REGIMBAL

Gabrielle Regimbal and Matthew Kieffer, co-chairs, summit studies, G7 Research Group

Gabrielle Regimbal is co-chair of summit studies for the G7 Research Group based at the University of Toronto. Her academic interests include international law, climate change and human rights. Gabrielle holds an honours bachelor of arts in international relations and European affairs from the University of Toronto, and will soon attend the University of Cambridge as a senior status law student.

MATTHEW KIEFFER

Matthew Kieffer is co-chair of summit studies for the G7 Research Group, entering his fourth year of studies at the University of Toronto, where he is pursuing a double major in international relations and economics and a minor in visual studies. His research focuses on East Asia, great power relations and global governance. Matthew is also a senior intern analyst in the Global Public Affairs team at the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board.

Twitter@g7_rg  www.g7.utoronto.ca

COMMITMENTS

Of these 429 collectively agreed, future-oriented, politically binding commitments, the G7 Research Group selected 22 priority commitments, reflecting the number of commitments Cornwall leaders made on specific subjects, to be analysed for members’ compliance with them during the following year. These priority commitments included four on health and six on climate (including commitments referring to climate change, environment and energy). The Cornwall Summit also had a full roster of commitments on the typical agenda items including trade, the economy, democracy, human rights, development, regional security, crime and corruption, digital economy and gender.

INTERIM COMPLIANCE

From the day after the Cornwall Summit, 14 June 2021, until 1 February 2022, G7 members as a group achieved a high 85% compliance with the 22 selected priority commitments. While this was lower than the 93% interim compliance with commitments analysed from the 2020 United States Virtual Summit, it was higher than interim scores for the 2019 Biarritz Summit at 79% and the 2018 Charlevoix Summit at 83%, signifying a strong return to effective G7 summitry following the onset of the pandemic. The most highly complying members were Germany, the European Union and the US, which all achieved an average interim compliance of 91%. The least compliant member was Italy, with 68%. Three commitments received 100% compliance: those on biodiversity loss, sustainable growth in Africa and education equality (gender). The two commitments with the lowest compliance, at 56%, were on democracy in China and marine health and litter. Of the 22 priority commitments tracked, 17 received

The year since the Cornwall Summit has been shaped by ongoing crises, which could draw attention to related issues at Elmau – but there may also be knock-on effects in other areas

Health: Vaccines

Health: Vaccine equity

Health: Disease prevention

Health: Indirect impacts of COVID-19

Climate change: Zero emission vehicles

Climate change: Protection of ecosystems

Crime and corruption: Environmental crime

Environment: Biodiversity loss

Environment: Marine health and litter

Energy: Renewables

Energy: Coal

Trade: Free trade

Gender: Education equality

Democracy: China

Regional security: Addressing instability

Development: Sustainable growth in Africa

Infrastructure: Build back better Human rights: Forced labour

Open internet

growth

a compliance score of 81% or higher. Compliance is expected to increase when the final assessments have been completed on the eve of the 2022 Elmau Summit.

PROSPECTS

Indeed, compliance has continued to improve in the months leading up to the Elmau Summit. By mid April 2022, overall compliance reached 89%, an increase of five percentage points since 1 February 2022. The United Kingdom made the most improvement to reach 95%, a nine percentage point increase from its interim score of 86%, and thus surpassing Germany, the European Union and the US. Four commitments improved to achieve 100% compliance: health (vaccines), marine

health and litter, regional security (addressing instability) and disease prevention.

The year since the Cornwall Summit has been shaped by ongoing crises. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has unsettled the international order and crippled the EU’s supply of oil and gas, and exacerbated already high inflation rates across G7 members. The invasion may distract the leaders’ attention from issues such as health or gender. Additionally, the resulting shock to international oil and gas supplies could have consequences for the transition to green energy sources, and thus also for compliance with climate-oriented commitments. In the long run, this shock may accelerate the green transition – especially in the EU. However, short-term demands for oil and gas could lead to an increase in fossil fuel production in G7 members.

Figure 1: Average compliance by subject

Figure 2: Average compliance by country

A chance to lead

Russia’s latest invasion of Ukraine has galvanised the West. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the European Union have taken centre stage in opposition; so too has the G7. Much like NATO, the G7’s relevance, purpose and power have been a matter of debate in recent years. Accusations that the G7 had descended into being a mere talk shop particularly proliferated – and were not entirely unwarranted – after its replacement by the G20 as the top table of global economic governance. However, in response to Russian president Vladimir Putin’s aggression, the club has been given a new lease on life, with an opportunity to demonstrate that it has an enduring role to play on the international stage.

The recent history of the G7 could be told as a story of Russia’s difficult relationship with the West after the Cold War’s end. Mikhail Gorbachev first made overtures by sending a letter to the club during its summit in Paris in 1989, beginning a

dialogue that culminated with welcoming Russia into the fold to form the G8 at the Denver Summit in 1997 and the Birmingham Summit in 1998. Russia’s membership was always tricky, with the seven original members preferring to discuss financial and economic matters on their own, until Russia held the presidency in 2006, despite its ostensible inclusion as an equal. Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea definitively brought the experiment of Russia’s incorporation into the club to an end, with the G7 suspending Russia mere months before Putin was meant to host his counterparts again in Sochi. The original G7 met in Brussels instead.

Eight years later, Brussels has again served as the G7’s symbolic home in opposing the Russian president’s hostility. G7 leaders have met in person there twice since the invasion began in February 2022, in addition to five other remote meetings. The G7 has sprung to life with a vigour unseen since the global financial crisis. In addition to declaring unwavering support

for the people of Ukraine – and, notably, the people of Russia too – G7 leaders have pulled every policy lever at their disposal. They have weaponised economic interdependence, using sanctions to starve the Kremlin’s coffers while also trying to drive a wedge between Putin and his oligarch class. Indeed, the wager in the 1990s was that by bringing Russia into the economic fold, the country would be so intrinsically tied to the West that the cost of war would be too high. Evidently, this bet has not borne out quite to plan, but such moves might prove sufficient to at least limit or curtail further aggression.

A CLEAR MESSAGE

The G7 has used this flurry of meetings politically and symbolically too, the two often being two sides of the same coin in international politics. Coming together performatively sends a clear message both to Russia and to the wider international community that the G7 and its allies consider Ukraine to be the top international priority while concurrently

With the G20 hobbled by Russia’s inclusion, the political conditions are ripe for the G7 to pick up the mantle of leadership once again and prove itself to be much more than a talking shop

Tristen Naylor, lecturer in international politics and history, University of Cambridge

signalling Russia’s increasing isolation. Such moves are especially significant for India, the world’s largest democracy and a guest at this year’s summit, which has so far adopted an ambiguous position with respect to Russia since the invasion.

There are sides to be taken. Acting as they have, the G7 leaders have clearly

TRISTEN NAYLOR

articulated who they are and what they stand for to an extent that they have otherwise found difficult to achieve in recent years, particularly during the Trump administration in the United States. Despite no longer being the top economic club, it is the protection of democracy domestically and a

Tristen Naylor is a lecturer in international politics and history at the University of Cambridge and deputy director of the G20 and G7 Research Groups London. An expert in international diplomacy, his most recent book provides a new history of the G7 and G20 summits. He was previously a fellow in international relations at the London School of Economics and the lecturer in diplomatic studies at the University of Oxford. He served as a foreign policy adviser to the Government of Canada. He is a recipient of the Canadian Public Service Award of Excellence Twitter @TristenNaylor‏

rules-based order internationally that resolutely define the G7’s raison d’être.

That the G7 has accomplished this so swiftly and coherently speaks to an advantage of this group that its institutional successor, the G20, lacks. As a small, tight-knit, like-minded club, consensus on Russia’s moral and legal violations can be reached in a way that is impossible for the larger, more diverse and certainly not like-minded G20. The G7 is a club of allies; the G20 is a club with rivals. This affords the G7’s German host with conditions ripe for a successful summit at Elmau, while the G20’s Indonesian host is in a much more difficult position, needing to stage manage what could well be the most tense G20 summit yet in Bali in November.

With the consensus-based G20 now hobbled in a way that the post-Trump G7 no longer is, the political conditions are set for the G7 to pick up the mantle of leadership once again in international politics and prove itself to be more than a listless talk shop.

Building synergy for a better future

This year, the G7 Elmau and G20 Bali agendas are very much aligned, but with factors at play that threaten to erode this synergy, further work on collaboration and consensus on commitments is required

Yulius P Hermawan, lecturer in international relations, Parahyangan Catholic University, Bandung Indonesia

The G7 and G20 have worked together to strengthen the success of each by maintaining the coherence of their agendas. They share the commitment to developing a united and ambitious approach to responding to the most pressing global problems and building synergy to find solutions to the problems they face. The decisions made at the G7 summits are used to energise the negotiations between the developed and emerging economies in the G20.

This year, the G7’s priority agenda under the German presidency is very much in line with the G20 agenda under the Indonesian presidency. The German presidency has set five main agenda priorities: the creation of a sustainable planet, economic stability and transformation, a healthy

life, investment in a better future and becoming stronger together. The Indonesian presidency has prioritised three agenda items: the global health architecture, digital transformation and energy transition. Core attention is paid particularly to the global health and economic crises caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and climate change and to the 2030 Agenda on the Sustainable Development Goals.

The two presidencies highly value the inclusiveness at the heart of the G20 process. Indonesia proudly presents “Recover Together, Recover Stronger” as the theme of the G20 presidency, and Germany makes “Stronger Together” the fifth priority agenda of the G7. Both share the conviction that their forums must deliver benefits for both members and non-members.

THE WAR CORRODES THE SYNERGY

The current crises of the COVID-19 pandemic, climate change and slowing growth apparently have brought the G7 and G20 together to find the best strategies to support economic recovery. Unfortunately, the Russian-Ukrainian war has seriously undermined the recovery and derailed the good progress already made by the G7 presidency and the G20 presidency during their first months.

The atmosphere of collaboration among the G20 members has been eroding since this geopolitical tension emerged in February 2022. While G7 members tend to be unified in responding to the war, G20 members have been sharply divided, particularly in response to the question of Russia’s participation in G20 meetings.

Some G7 leaders demand the suspension of Russia’s membership in the G20 and

Decisions made at the G7 summits are used to energise the negotiations between the developed and emerging economies in the G20”

A

STRONGER G7 SYSTEM

have repeatedly presented their plans to boycott the G20 Bali Summit in November 2022 if President Vladimir Putin attends. In contrast, China has reinforced its clear position that the G20 must focus on its priority agenda and allow Russia to continue its participation.

Indonesia does not want the G20 to become the G19 or to fall apart under its presidency. Nor does Indonesia wish the G20 to fail in adopting a leaders’ declaration at the Bali Summit.

Indonesia thus allows Russian representatives to join G20 meetings and has decided not to cancel its invitation to the Russian president, which had already been dispatched prior to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February.

Indonesia’s President Joko Widodo has also invited Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky to attend the Bali Summit, along with all leaders of G20 members and other invited countries.

To respond to G7 leaders’ reservations about Russian participation, the Indonesian presidency allows G20 members to express their harsh condemnation of the Russian invasion during their interventions at the G20 meetings or to walk out when the Russian representative makes an intervention.

THE BALI SUMMIT MATTERS

The G7 and G20 must work together to boost the success of both for the rest of this year. The G7 Elmau Summit and the G20 Bali Summit must lay a strong foundation for securing a better future. However, building a consensus in the G20 is obviously much more challenging than reaching agreement in the G7, due to the disunity among the G20 members.

The Bali Summit matters. It will conclude a series of negotiations between the developed and emerging economies throughout the year, hopefully with an agreed consensus on the collective efforts to strengthen the economic recovery as well as the renewal of the pledge for tackling climate change with more concrete measures.

The Bali Summit will also agree on workable solutions to address the deteriorating global economy caused by the war and to help the Ukrainian people rebuild their country better. In particular, the summit will provide room for negotiation among the G20 members to find the most strategic solution to the energy crisis, including by forcing Russia to accept a new consensus on energy trading. The consensus on energy is necessary to address

YULIUS P HERMAWAN

Yulius P Hermawan is a lecturer in the Department of International Relations of Parahyangan Catholic University in Bandung, Indonesia. His research interests include the G20 and global governance, the Sustainable Development Goals (particularly SDG 17) and Indonesia’s membership in international financial institutions. In addition to his teaching and research, he works with some ministries and international development agencies as a consultant on international development cooperation and foreign policy.

the dependence on Russian energy. G20 members can also exert their influence directly on the peace process, including by pushing Russia to help rebuild Ukraine.

The G7 summit at Schloss Elmau will acquire a high added value if G7 leaders can boost a similar advance at the G20 Bali Summit. The Elmau Summit will encourage G7 members to work together with other developed and emerging economies in building consensus on the commitments to be declared at the Bali Summit. In the context of geopolitical and geo-economic uncertainties, the attendance of G7 leaders at the Bali Summit will maintain the G20’s confidence as an advocate of multilateralism.

To respond to G7 leaders’ reservations about Russian participation, the Indonesian presidency allows G20 members to express their harsh condemnation of the Russian invasion”

Adventurer by the day, Poet by night.

Part of Sharjah Collection, by Sharjah Investment and Development Authority (Shurooq)