pg. 32: Employment and Social Protection. [The WEF] Council ... call[s] for G20 Leaders to direct their labour, finance and development ministers to develop a set of reforms to upgrade the mandates and resources of development finance institutions and the ILO for the purpose of providing much greater assistance to countries wishing to strengthen domestic institutions related to employment creation, private investment, labour standards assessment and implementation, and basic pension, unemployment and health insurance systems. They also propose a process of surveying and encouraging the replication of good practice in respect of raising the employment intensity of economic recovery and limiting the employment and social impacts of economic downturns. And they call for a broadening of macroeconomic policy cooperation exercises, such as the mutual assessment process that the G20 created in Pittsburgh last year, to include explicit analytical parameters and policy dialogue on progress in employment and living standards
Readers' Guide Comment on “[The WEF] Council ... call[s] for G20 Leaders to direct their labour, finance and development ministers to develop a set of reforms… unemployment and health insurance systems”
Enhancing employment, investment, labor standards, pension finances, unemployment regimes and workers’ health insurance systems is a very interesting proposal from the corporate-centric World Economic Forum.
From a governance point of view, what is interesting here is the proposed mechanism. WEF expects that G20 Leaders should instruct their appropriate ministers to take these actions at the development finance institutions and the ILO. WEF could have called for the MDBs to act and called directly for the ILO to act. Rather, the approach here is to help build the public perception of the G20 as the leader body who will carry the initiative for making these labor market changes.
The Readers' Guide welcomes comments with alternative examples or counter examples, supplemental assessments of the extracted GRI text or commentary – critical or otherwise – of the above interpretation of GRI’s perspective.