by Alex Evans | Mar 25, 2009 | Economics and development, Global system, London Summit
Just before the Washington G20 summit in November last year, David and I co-wrote a paper entitled A Bretton Woods 2 Worth of the Name. As the title implied, we were politely sceptical of some of the political rhetoric then flying around, comparing the G20’s discussions about bank capitalisation with the rather more far-reaching discussions held at the Mount Washington Hotel in 1944.
Now, though, things are getting more interesting. Two days ago, Zhou Xiaochuan – the governor of China’s central bank – quietly published a paper on the People’s Bank of China website, entitled Reform the International Monetary System. It opened like this:
The outbreak of the current crisis and its spillover in the world have confronted us with a long-existing but still unanswered question, i.e., what kind of international reserve currency do we need to secure global financial stability and facilitate world economic growth, which was one of the purposes for establishing the IMF?
Later, Zhou continues that:
The desirable goal of reforming the international monetary system, therefore, is to create an international reserve currency that is disconnected from individual nations and is able to remain stable in the long run, thus removing the inherent deficiencies caused by using credit-based national currencies.
Now this line of thinking really does take us straight back to Bretton Woods – and in particular to Keynes’s proposal for a new global currency called the bancor, and a new global institution called the International Clearing Union (ICU). (more…)
by Alex Evans | Mar 19, 2009 | Global system, London Summit
A couple of weeks ago I posted news of a competition for 20 places for bloggers at the G20 London Summit on 2nd April, which would be allocated on the basis of nominations from readers, and unabashedly asked everyone to put us forward.
Well, apparently you did, as yesterday we got a call from the summit team saying that Global Dashboard was now accredited press for the G20 – so I’ll be live blogging the summit as things progress (and who knows, perhaps asking Gordon why such a modest proportion of our fiscal recovery is green).
Many thanks to all our readers who wrote in!
by Alex Evans | Mar 19, 2009 | Climate and resource scarcity, Economics and development, London Summit
Nick Robins at HSBC has just sent over a copy of their excellent report A Climate for Recovery, which compares the green element of economic recovery plans around the world: must read stuff.
Among the headline findings: governments around the world have so far allocated $430bn to climate-related themes, with the US and China in the lead; and that the key benefiting sectors include rail, water infrastructure, power grids and building energy efficiency, but renewables less so (apart from in the US).
Especially interesting is the table breaking down recovery plans by countries. A whopping 37.8% of China’s stimulus package is counted as green, but the real laurel wreath here goes to South Korea, at 80.5%. The US is at 18.2%. (Britain? Down at 2.1%. Not that that stopped our Gordon from handing down a lengthy disquisition on the importance of climate change when he made his speech to Congress…)
HSBC profess themselves hopeful that what we’ve seen so far is just the first installment, with more to come. Let’s hope so – but given the trouble Tim Geithner’s been having trying to get Europe to cough up more for fiscal stimulus, I’m not holding my breath for the London Summit…
by Alex Evans | Mar 6, 2009 | Influence and networks, London Summit
White Band Action, the website of the Global Call to Action against Poverty, has some goodies to dish out: it’s got 50 places for bloggers at the G20 London Summit, and 20 of them are going to be handed out on the basis of readers’ nominations.
Now, I’m prepared to admit that recent posts of ours may not have been entirely aligned with Britain’s NGO community: David’s been cruelly taunting climate NGOs for being missing in action as Copenhagen beckons, Richard is running a recruitment drive for Nepal’s Maoist rebels, and I’ve been trashing 0.7 and suggesting that the pre-G20 Put People First march is an exercise in utter pointlessness (no, they still don’t have a policy platform).
But on the plus side, as regular readers will know, we’re all incorrigible summit nerds here at Global Dashboard – so we can promise you reams of top notch coverage if you nominate us for a place at the summit. And if you’re a fellow blogger: sure we’re open to a bit of vote-trading! This is the EU, after all; there are certain standards to observe…
by Alex Evans | Feb 12, 2009 | Influence and networks, London Summit
Yes, it’s only February, but it seems pretty unlikely that anything will top this for sheer pointlessness and banality. Here’s the pitch from the “Put People First” march that will be taking place in London on 28th March:
On 2 April the leaders of 20 of the world’s biggest economies meet in London to tackle the recession and global financial crisis..
But even before the banking collapse caused recession, the world suffered vast poverty and inequality and faced the looming threat of climate chaos.
Governments, business and international institutions have followed a model of financial deregulation that has encouraged short-term profits, instability and an economy fuelled by ever-increasing debt, both financial and environmental.
There can be no going back to business as usual. The only sustainable way to rebuild the global economy is to create a fair distribution of wealth that provides decent jobs and public services for all, ends global inequality and builds a low carbon future.
Wow. That’ll tell the politicians.
But, er, what is it telling them, exactly?
Sure, it’s not exactly a newsflash that the last few years have seen a pronounced move among NGOs away from having actual policy, and towards big campaign platforms that are much more about maximising participation (and hence donations and membership).
But even so, this is a new low. Make Poverty History may not have had the most sophisticated of policy platforms, but it looks like a doctoral thesis in comparison to this. The coalition of participating organisations haven’t even bothered to put together a position paper to explain what they want. Instead, there is simply this one liner:
Our message is clear. We must put people first.
The only clear message I can make out is the one that says “NGOs are hellbent on political irrelevance”.
(See also: Where next for NGOs?)
