The G-20 Summit is this week!

The G20 conference is this week. What does it mean to you? This is not only an annual meeting of the industrial powers of the world. It's more so an ongoing institution that confers on a regular basis. Consisting of the U.S., UK & EU, china, Australia, France, Germany, Russia, Japan, South Africa, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Canada, Italy, Mexico, India, Korea, Brazil, Argentina and Turkey. Since it's inception in 1999 there has been many disputes over it's overall intentions of globalization, stealing the spotlight for the previously targeted G7.

The difference between the two is as follows, with this description coming directly from the G20 web-site: The G-7 was established in 1976 as an informal forum of seven major industrial economies: Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States of America. The G-7 conducts dialogue and seeks agreement on current economic issues on the basis of the comparable interests of those countries. The G-20 was established in 1999 and reflects the diverse interests of the systemically significant industrial and emerging-market economies. (see: About the G-20). It has a high degree of representativeness and legitimacy on account of its geographical composition (members are drawn from all continents) and its large share of global population (two-thirds) and world GNP (around 90 per cent). The G-20's broad representation of countries at different stages of development gives its consensus outcomes greater impact than those of the G-7.

In 1980 the G7 accounted for roughly 50% of the purchasing power parity valuation of the world's total GDP. With the rise in emerging market economies which are countries who once were insignificant in terms of global trade and total world output, the percentage of global GDP represented by the original g7 fell to 42% by 2005. As countries like China grew an outstanding 500% in that 25 year period from 3% to 15% of the global GDP. India rose from 3% to 6% with the remaining EME's (emerging market economies) growing 1% from 9% to 10%. Essentially saying that in a growing global economy growth these EME's have grown industrially to attain a larger share of the global market. In 25 years the total GDP had grown from $12.8 billion to a little over $61 billion annually between 1980-2005. So basically the inception of the G20 had been put in place to account for the rising representation of these EME's in the global market place and solidify a larger percentage of the total GDP by forging in depth marketing strategies with these emerging countries. Thus offsetting the 42% of the G7's GDP to represent over 85% of the globe's total GDP through this one group. Leaving it fairly obvious to see the advantage of them doing so, as larger market shares means a greater chance at changing or shaping International economic policies.

Groups such as these have always amounted a certain paranoia over concerned citizens fearful of globalization and bureaucratic policies. This past week has had an even greater effect as thousands poured into the streets throughout Western Europe in protest over the annual meeting of the G20. People are frustrated over a failing global economy in which the G20 represents almost 90% of its GDP, insufficient healthcare and environmental policies. With the global economy in such a bad state the turnout of protesters this past weekend has been unprecedented, expecting to rise in number throughout the week as world leaders converge to discuss these issues.

Rightfully so that these people protest. Upon researching the G20 web-site I had found that as group the G20 was fully aware of the harmful policies in the financial sector that has led to our recent economic downfall as early as 2006. The following excerpts have been taken directly from a PDF file on their web-site entitled, THE ROLE OF THE G-20 IN THE GLOBAL FINANCIAL ARCHITECTURE: "In response to the concern that international institutions have been insufficiently responsive to the changing structure of the global economy, the G-20 placed a priority on improving the legitimacy and credibility of the international financial institutions, especially the IMF."

The document further states , the growing economic weight of the EMEs is both a consequence and a driver of the globalisation of economic activity. As many people have noted, including the Lowy Institute, the world is becoming more integrated. There has been rapid expansion in cross-border economic activity in the past 25 years-including expanding trade, broad liberalisation and deregulation of domestic markets and institutions, growth of multinational enterprises and increasing mobility of people.

So right there they have basically just told us that they were aware of the effects of our recent growth and deregulation in advance, feeling the necessity to establish legitimacy of these practices. Naturally this document wasn't initially made readily available to the public, as most are not. However it is the aftermath of all this that seems to enrage people the most. Policy makers seem to always have the right answer until something goes wrong in our eyes and all of a sudden these same policy makers play ignorant to these happenings, claiming to have no knowledge of how these things came about.....funny!

Some major media outlets simply write the summit up as simply an annual meeting of world leaders to discuss economic issues and partnerships in an informal fashion. When in actuality as explained below that there is a lot more to it than that. None of it which do we need a college degree to understand either.

Each G-20 host year culminates in the meeting of Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors, usually toward the end of the year. But there are also a number of supporting meetings during the host year. The critical point about the meeting structure for the G-20 is that discussions are underpinned by a strong analytical framework, thus ensuring they are of high quality. The framework is advanced through workshops (up to three per year), where the best thinkers from around the world address issues of importance to the G-20 with officials, and two deputies' meetings, which refine the policy issues to be discussed by Ministers and Governors. This means that Ministers and Governors are provided with contemporary analysis and insights, which better informs their consideration of policy challenges and solutions.

The G-20 has processes which ensure a smooth transfer of functions between host countries. The management of the G-20 is shared by a ‘troika’ of current, past and future chairs (currently Australia, China and South Africa). While the current chair country is ultimately responsible for the policy agenda and logistical preparations for its host year, the troika ensures continuity across host years by overseeing policy development and logistical preparations.

In addition to the management continuity provided by the troika, there is continuity in the policy themes discussed in each host year. Typically, a policy theme might be discussed over several years, providing many opportunities to get to grips with the various implications of that theme at a detailed level. An example is demographic change, which has been on the G-20 agenda since 2004. This issue has been considered from several angles, including the implications of ageing populations for domestic economic policy, the role of migration and migrant remittances from both a demographic and development perspective and, this year, the financial market implications of demographic change.

The meetings are relatively informal, with only small delegations allowed in the meeting room; deputies’ meetings are limited to a finance ministry and central bank representative and one senior official from each organisation; the G-20 meeting is limited to the minister, the governor and one senior official from each member country.

Through early engagement, we can influence the direction and progress of economic development and build closer linkages with important emerging market countries. This is where the G-20 can play a major role by giving a voice to these emerging economic powers and exposing them to the types of policies pursued by successful market economies.

I have argued that the G-20's structure and institutional features give it a unique degree of legitimacy and influence over the management of the global economy. In fact, the G-20 has already established a track record as an effective forum which promotes open and constructive dialogue that secures practical outcomes. To sum up, I believe the G-20 has a key role in shaping global economic policy.

In contrast to many of the more mature international forums, the G-20 brings together the key global economic players of the 21st century and is structured to encourage open and effective policy dialogue. The fact that its agenda can be shaped by, and the group chaired by, China, Australia, South Africa and a (yet to be determined) South American4 economy in a given four-year period is testament to the changing global and economic power distribution.

With all that said it would seem there is sufficient reason to believe there may be more to these informal meetings that meet the eye. All of which accumulated with the recent economy woes has prompted over 35,000 to protest in the streets of London, with Scotland Yard is expecting a greater challenge on Wednesday 1 April, dubbed "Financial Fools Day", with a series of protests aiming to cause disruption in the Square Mile and elsewhere. Milton McKenzie, 73, from Essex, had said: "How the hell can we have a situation here in Britain where we have people out of work and the bankers just cream it off and are helped by the government."

The director of the the Adam Smith Institute, Dr Eamonn Butler, said governments have caused the economic crisis. This nearly universal sentiment has taken root in other places as well. In Berlin, thousands of protesters have also taken to the streets with a message to the G20 leaders: "We won't pay for your crisis". Another march took place in the city of Frankfurt. The demonstrations attracted as many as 20,000 people. Banners accused the Germany government of being too willing to spend billions bailing out financial institutions and too slow to protect ordinary workers, the BBC's Steve Rosenberg said from Berlin. In Rome, protesters threw red paint, egg and smoke bombs at banks, insurance companies and estate agencies in their protest. Students and left-wing activists were among those who took part in the march, which organizers said had drawn around 6,000 people. In Vienna, at least 6,500 people, according to the police, marched to protest about the effects of globalisation.

Several hundred demonstrators turned out in Paris, where they erected and demolished a model of an island symbolizing a tax haven. Hundreds also attended an anti-globalization protest in Madrid. U.S. Vice President Joe Biden, meanwhile, called for protesters to give governments a chance to tackle the economic crisis at a conference of center-left politicians in Chile. "I would hope that the protesters give us a chance, listen to what we have to say and hopefully we can make it clear to them that we're going to walk away from this G20 meeting with some concrete proposals," he said.

A group of fewer than 200 anarchists joined the march and were kept isolated and surrounded by police. Chants of "Burn the bankers!" were the closest anyone came to any show of aggression despite a heavy police presence and a few buildings along the route, including the Ritz Hotel, boarding up their windows. As protesters passed the gates of Downing Street, there were chants and shouts of "Enjoy the overtime".

Chris Knight, the anthropology professor suspended from the University of East London last week for suggesting that bankers might be lynched, was wandering the march alone. "I just met a copper and I said to him, 'Is this the revolution?' He said: 'No, this is the dry run, the revolution starts on Wednesday. Midweek is when we will really start to dance'."

There have been fears that banks and other financial institutions could be the focus for violent protests. A huge security operation is under way in the run-up to the G20 summit, at which world leaders will discuss the glooming global financial crisis and other issues.
A protester told the Observer he believed the protest marked "the start of a grassroots movement". He added: "This is a moment. This is the first time people have had a chance to come out on to the streets in a big way." Commander Simon O'Brien, one of the senior command team in charge of policing security, said: "It's fair to say that this [the march] is one of the largest, one of the most challenging and one of the most complicated operations we have delivered.

"G20 is attracting a significant amount of interest from protest groups. There is an almost unprecedented level of activity going on."

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who will host the G20 summit in East London, said over the weekend: "The action that is happening in London today I understand and will respond to it at the G20."

Claire Melamed of ActionAid said the organizers of the protests were delighted with the turnout. "We're really pleased. We are hearing every day about people losing jobs and not being able to feed their children as this economic crisis deepens. We want the G20 to listen to us - this began as a financial crisis and it's turning into a humanitarian one."

The previous march will be followed by a series of protests on Wednesday and Thursday by a variety of coalitions and groups campaigning on a range of subjects, from poverty, inequality and jobs to war, climate change and capitalism.

for more info on the role of the G20: http://www.g20.org/Documents/role_g20_global_fin_arch_091006.pdf

or http://www.g20.org