pg. 10: The key to achieving such a win-win-win-win package of breakthroughs in international macroeconomic, trade, climate and development cooperation lies less in finding new formulations in negotiating text and more in constructing and properly resourcing a number of crucial, related institutional building blocks that can build diplomatic confidence by showing additional progress on the ground. Many of these have been proposed as part of the Global Redesign process. If G20 leaders are able to deliver an early harvest of multidimensional progress along these lines, then they will have done much to justify their institutionalization and legitimization as the de facto steering committee of the world economy and its principal institutions.
Readers' Guide Comment on “de facto steering committee of the world economy and its principal institutions”
The redefinition of the international system is premised on recognizing a select group of 20 countries as facts-on-the-ground leaders of the global economy. In this sense, GRI is recommending that the leaders of the powerful states continue to manage the international system, albeit with a different configuration. In this sense, the G20 for GRI is a rebirth of the OECD system with just another combination of states. In spite of WEF's strong support for non-state actors, Everybody’s Business did not recommend that the G20 become a multi-stakeholder body with a balanced group of equal number of heads of government, CEOs of MNCs, and leaders of CSOs.
In 2010 the Canadian Chamber of Commerce and the International Chamber of Commerce created the B20 as a standing business advisory group to the G20. As of 2012, there is still not a standing CSO advisory body.
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.