The G20 Chair and the Case of the Global Economic Steering Committee
The G20 Chair and the Case of the Global Economic Steering Committee
复制标题
G20主席和全球经济指导委员会案例
DOI：
10.1080/13600826.2017.1394818
复制
发表时间：
2018
期刊：
影响因子：
1.6
通讯作者：
C. Downie
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Larry Crump;C. Downie
全球和区域首脑会议定期举行，但我们对支持有效首脑会议的因素知之甚少。本文在一个制度化的框架内回顾了有关轮值主席国、议程建设和创业谈判准备的知识，然后转向我们的会议地点--G20，以及我们的具体案例--2014年G20澳大利亚轮值主席国。通过案例分析，我们制定了一个企业家谈判框架，确定了在峰会筹备期间有用的任务和关键问题。此外，我们确定了主席、他们对创业谈判规划的管理、通过的议程以及该议程决定公众对特定国际组织的根本性质或“身份”的看法之间的联系。因此，创业谈判进程可能会对我们对参与全球治理的机构的理解产生重大影响。我们的结论是，数据不再支持将G20描述为全球危机委员会，因为对G20峰会议程的分析表明，G20已演变为全球指导委员会。随着其身份的确立，G20作为全球指导委员会的有效性是关键问题，而改革的连续性和变革构成了G20真正的长期挑战。
Global and regional summits occur regularly, yet we know little about the factors supporting an effective summit. This article reviews knowledge about the chair, agenda building and prenegotiation preparation within an institutionalised régime, and then turns to our venue, the G20, and our specific case, the 2014 G20 Australian presidency. Through case analysis, we develop a Prenegotiation Framework, identifying tasks and key issues that are usefully addressed during summit preparation. Furthermore, we identify a linked relationship between the chair, their management of prenegotiation planning, the agenda that is adopted and the way in which that agenda determines public perception of the fundamental nature or “identity” of a particular international organisation. Thus, the prenegotiation process can have significant consequences for our understanding of those institutions engaged in global governance. We conclude that data no longer support a characterisation of the G20 as a global crisis committee, as an analysis of G20 Summit agendas demonstrates that it has evolved into a global steering committee. With its identity established, the effectiveness of the G20 as a global steering committee is the key question, while régime continuity and change constitute the real long-term G20 challenge.