Key Takeaways:

• Even as Covid-19 waves continue to wax and wane as well as impact lives and livelihoods around the world, G20 members are intent on paving the way to rebuilding differently in the aftermath of the crisis for sustained and shared prosperity. The Italian Presidency of the G20 in 2021 has decided to focus on three broad and interconnected pillars of action – ‘People, Planet, Prosperity’. In the run-up to the G20 Leaders’ Summit in Rome on 30-31 October 2021, the webinar discussed the specific contours and challenges related to the pillars of the G20 2021 Presidency and put forth several recommendations for the G20 not only in 2021, but in 2022 and 2023 as well for the Indonesian and Indian G20 Presidencies respectively.
• The unprecedented crisis is demanding more from G20 members both at home as well as abroad and they ought to do more because G20 members collectively constitute 80 percent of the global GDP, 75 percent of the global trade and 60 percent of the world population.
• The pandemic has made the importance of international cooperation obvious to overcome the ongoing crisis as well as the role that India can play in it. India has a consistent track record of commitment to work responsibly with the international community and in conformity with established rules, norms and principles of multilateralism. Therefore, the world at large is looking towards India as a compelling, credible and trustworthy major power to play a strategic role in the post COVID-19 global recovery process.
• The COVID-19 pandemic has laid bare the structural fragilities and failures in our societies as well as our global economic system and the frameworks that govern the international system. The results are clear – inequalities are growing, debt burdens are skyrocketing as are the number of families, communities and economies which require essential support.
• The unprecedented crisis has exacerbated the significance of the G20 as an international forum, which is best placed to play a leading role in enabling a global response to the COVID-19 pandemic and its economic, social and environmental consequences. Because of the G20’s global economic and political relevance, it has the potential to contribute to effective multilateral responses. The rapid development of vaccines has reminded us of the importance of multilateral cooperation between our nations.
• The G20 has previously proven its effectiveness in mitigating the severity of the global financial crisis of 2008, and has gained widespread reputation as an effective multilateral crisis management group.
• The G20 needs to scale up its ambitions to deliver bolder messages and measures and enable developing countries in particular to address the crisis effectively. Covid-19 is setting back decades of progress in many of these countries. Financing for Sustainable Development Goals is off-track so as to achieve them by 2030. To fill the gap, more public and private sustainable development finance is needed.
• The environmental-health nexus, or ‘One Health’, was not considered seriously earlier. The risk of shifting climate regions, zoonosis, newly emerging infectious diseases, etc., was not adequately appreciated by those initiating and leading the discussion processes in the G20 and other forums. The Covid-19 pandemic has highlighted the significance of One Health. Like the G20 Presidencies since Germany, Italy’s Presidency is rightly focusing on ‘People, Planet, Prosperity’. Risks to them are inter-related, and we need to see and deal with them as such.
• The One Health agenda should consider how we can build systems that enable societies to develop early warning systems on the one hand, and social security systems, including health systems, on the other. We need to have the right triggers and the right sensors in place to foresee the linking of different crises as well as the capacity to be well-prepared to prevent and tackle them collectively.
• We should consider the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research [T1] (CGIAR) model – of agriculture research institutes – for a network of pharmaceutically-oriented research institutes and applied research institutes that can co-develop and contribute to the production of vaccines and also invest in R&D.
• We also need to invest in the global monitoring of new variants of viruses and bacteria-based diseases, in early warning systems, capacity-building of national and regional disease control centers and health authorities.
• We need to move out of the discourse where we have those who demand intellectual property rights protection and those who oppose it for reasons of public health. We need to foster a voluntary pool, where companies can offer their intellectual capacities for not just vaccine development, but production itself as well as for diffusion of different parts of the value-chain.
• We need to challenge complacency and we need to tackle the tacit acceptance of inequalities, especially those that are less visible, and where voices of those who experience them remain largely unheard.
• There’s resistance from those who have vested interests and who do not want to take serious decisions even when the evidence is there. This has serious implications for the role of the G20.
• COVID-19 has highlighted the world's vulnerability to pandemics and limited capacities for preparedness and response. The pandemic as well as ensuing public health and socioeconomic measures to tackle it are having dramatic impacts on livelihoods, economies and societies. At the same time, the crisis is catalysing new local and global solidarities, and fresh approaches to science, evidence and research. These will be invaluable in responding to future health and other global challenges.
• We need a bold vision for fundamental, transformative sustainable change. We need to move beyond what is to what if. This is only possible within systems that embrace democracy, transparency, rule of law and fundamental equalities, including gender equality, because otherwise ‘building back better’ would just mean business as usual, and it will only perpetuate and potentially reinforce even more effectively, the problems that were already there and it’s going to inhibit our collective ability to address other global issues like climate change. We need to find ways to bring together those who are not at the table, those who are most at risk of being left behind and use agency and voice as push factors to address the political economy, which often inhibits change.
• We need to help people be better prepared for the future, for a different future, to be able to address new and different shocks, which are almost inevitable. We need to build slack into the systems and institutions, which can then be drawn upon in times of crisis. We can't do this alone or in isolation, we need to work together, we need to join up our efforts and we need to collaborate if we're going to transform development, economies, communities and people's lives. We need to break out of our bubbles, our echo chambers.
• We also need to look at ourselves. We need to be prepared to transform ourselves as individuals, to influence our organizations in positive ways, and to help transform the institutions that shape so much of our lives. We need to move from being observers to being players.
• Rebuilding differently is a long-term mission – it’s going to need commitment, energy, resources and a really collaborative effort, if all of these aspirations are to become a reality.
• There is no getting away from the fact that we live in a world that is globally ordered. We can't envisage any kind of progressive future that delegitimizes and tries to do away with globalization. We live in a world that is interconnected. We live in a world where people such as ourselves today enjoy speaking to each other across borders. We live in a world where people have relationships across borders. We live in a world where people migrate.
• Globalization, in some form or the other, is going to continue underpinning processes associated with economic integration, etc. We are so far advanced now that it's implausible to really envisage a wholesale winding back of the international order, and if that’s the case, then you need to reinvigorate multilateralism in such a way that it can be governed in the interests of people, planet and prosperity of all.
• G20’s comparative advantage is that it can bring together leaders of the most important countries, along with the IMF, etc., and bring them together in a space where they can make major decisions for coordinated international actions, or at least international economic relations in quite an effective way.
• G20 now needs to be properly institutionalized, it needs an executive, it needs a proper secretariat, it needs a secretary general, ideally somebody who is a former head of state or former head of government, who has the kind of level of respect from other heads of states to keep the show on the road, because the problem is, as it moves from country to country, different countries have their own agendas, and the discussion gets more diffused and sometimes even unactionable.
• The broad remit of the G20 should be widened dramatically, and it should be widened in the sense of moving beyond just international economic cooperation and the kind of handful of issue areas where the G20 has taken a specific interest since 2009, to encompass every area of globalization. G20 should effectively become, in this sense, the overarching kind of monitoring, coordinating organization for every single area of globalization, particularly because part of that role will be about finding out, discovering and resolving where there are conflicts and pressure points, pinch points between different international agencies that have specific remits.
• While widening, its broad remit for oversight should have an extremely narrow and highly focused view of what it can actually do better than any existing body and that is simply to steer and coordinate. The G20 shouldn't necessarily be a policy development organization; it shouldn't be an organization that takes initiative in terms of determining, apart from the broad direction of travel that the political leadership thinks should be adopted. Its job should be to resolve conflicts and tensions, and to make sure that the work that is going on in different issue areas is on course. At the same time, it should not be the organization charged with doing a lot of high level work the WTO or the IMF  as others can obviously do better because of the amount of research capacity they have. Generally, G20’s role should be to coordinate and to make sure that globalization works better essentially for people, planet and prosperity of all.
• The G20 has increasingly engaged with civil society organizations through the T20, Y20, W20 as well as with organizations like the Gates Foundation directly. Increasingly, non-state actors and transnational corporations are having a big impact on global governance, on economic as well as other outcomes. So, how do we mainstream them alongside governments within the global governance framework, is one of the issues that the Indian G20 Presidency could look at.
• As far as involvement of civil society is concerned, India has a very successful, what is referred to as a, ‘lungar model’, a crisis response mechanism which has already harboured considerable international goodwill, and can be leveraged to increase its soft power within the G20.
• India should also focus on intellectual property rights and vaccines during pandemics, considering that it is a global vaccine manufacturing hub.
• Traditional medicine is another area which India feels strongly about. However, there is the issue of standardized protocols which would need to be taken into consideration. India will have to figure out ways to address the challenges around traditional medicine if it wants to enhance its acceptability in the G20.
• India has known strengths in information technology, artificial intelligence, etc. and that is something it can also bring to the G20 table.
• India is the Co-chair with Canada of the G20 framework for strong, sustainable and balanced growth, which has, from the very beginning been one of its flagship working groups. That is again something India should emphasize during its G20 Presidency as a follow-up to the Italian focus on ‘people, planet, prosperity’.
• When India will lead the G20, it would have to delicately handle the US-China divide, differences between the EU and the US, and work on the relationship with China, especially since India is seen as overly hostile towards China and friendly towards the US. It could work closely with the EU and Russia, and it could leverage the BRICS, of which it’s member, on Bretton Woods issues.
• Ideally, the Indian G20 Sherpa should visit each G20 country for exchange of views on summit agenda priorities before finalizing the agenda to ensure that all G20 countries are sufficiently engaged on the agenda it brings to the table.