Abstract
The strengthening of its relationship with emerging countries has been the central development of the G8 in 2007 and 2008. While the debate on how to better represent and integrate non-members into the Group of Eight is hardly new, it has gained new political momentum in the period under review: The 2007 summit in Heiligendamm established a topic-centred dialogue with the “Outreach 5” (O5) countries China, India, Brazil, South Africa and Mexico. The “Heiligendamm Process” was a response to the Group's perceived lack of representativeness and effectiveness; at the same time, it avoided a change in the G8’s central structure through formal enlargement. In the context of the current debate of how global economic institutions and fora adapt to systemic change, the analysis touches on important issues of global governance that go beyond the G8’s new initiative. Before examining the G8’s recent adjustment, the chapter briefly summarises the Group's main characteristics and provides an outline of the thematic developments in the review period.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
For an overview of G7/G8 participation see Bini Smaghi, Powerless Europe: Why is the Euro Area Still a Political Dwarf? International Finance 9 (2006) 2, p. 261 (265).
- 2.
Pentillä, The Role of the G8 in International Peace and Security, Adelphi Paper (2003) 355, The International Institute for Strategic Studies, p. 5.
- 3.
The G8’s aims and defining characteristics are contested in the literature. The account above follows the “network school”, see, e.g. Lesage, Globalisation, Multipolarity and the L20 as an Alternative to the G8, Global Society 21 (2007) 3, pp. 343 (347); Gstöhl, Governance through government networks: The G8 and international organization, The Review of International Organizations 2 (2007) 1, p. 1 (3); Slaughter, Government networks, World order, and the L20, in: English et al. (eds.), Reforming from the Top. A Leaders’ 20 Summit, 2005, p. 280 (286).
- 4.
Gstöhl, Global Governance und die G8: Antwort auf globale Probleme [Global Governance and the G8: Answer to global problems], in: Gstöhl (ed.), Global Governance und die G8. Gipfelimpulse für Weltwirtschaft und Weltpolitik [Global Governance and the G8. Summit impulses for the world economy and world politics], 2003, p. 9 (16). German quotes are translated by the author. On the procedural character of the G8 see also Baker, The Group of Seven. Finance ministries, central banks and global financial governance, 2006.
- 5.
In addition to the set agenda, the G8 also deals with urgent international matters like security or humanitarian crises on a flexible basis. For an excellent overview of G8’s past agendas see University of Toronto, G8 Information Centre, http://www.g7.utoronto.ca/ (last accessed 25/1/2009).
- 6.
All G8 members but the United States and Russia committed in fact to cut emissions. On the rift between the German presidency and the US-administration over climate change in the run-up to the summit see, e.g. Benoit/Williamson, Merkel to push Bush on climate change, Financial Times, 4/6/2007, p. 2.
- 7.
G8, Chair’s Summary, 9/7/2008, http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/economy/summit/2008/doc/doc080709_09_en.html (last accessed 14/1/2009).
- 8.
The paper focuses on Outreach as intensified dialogue with non-member countries. The term can also refer to increased participation of international organisations and civil society actors in the G8’s proceedings. On the G8’s relationship with international organisations see Gstöhl, Governance through government networks: The G8 and international organizations, The Review of International Organizations 2 (2007) 1, p. 1; on the engagement with civil society see Hajnal, The role of civil society, in: Hajnal (ed.), The G8 System and the G20. Evolution, Role and Documentation, 2007, p. 103.
- 9.
For a chronology of Outreach initiatives until 2005 see G8 Research Group, G8 Reform: Expanding the Dialogue. An Overview of the G8’s Ongoing Relationship with the Emerging Economic Countries and Prospects for G8 Reform, University of Toronto, 2005, p. 14, http://www.g8.utoronto.ca/evaluations/csed/ed_050707.pdf (last accessed 25/1/2009).
- 10.
For a concise review of reform proposals see Hajnal, Summitry from G5 to L20: A Review of Reform Initiatives, Working Paper (2007) 20, The Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI), http://www.igloo.org/community.igloo?r0=community&r0_script=/scripts/folder/view.script&r0_pathinfo=%2F%7B7caf3d23-023d-494b-865b-4d143de9968%7D%2FPublications%2Fworkingp%2Fsummitry&r0_output=xml (last accessed 15/1/2009).
- 11.
G8 Summit, Growth and Responsibility in the World Economy, Summit Declaration, 7/6/2007, p. 37, http://www.g-8.de/Content/EN/Artikel/__g8-summit/anlagen/2007-06-07-gipfeldokument-wirtschaft-eng,templateId=raw,property=publicationFile.pdf/2007-06-07-gipfeldokument-wirtschaft-eng (last accessed 24/1/2009); see also Joint Statement by the German G8 Presidency and the Heads of State and/or Government of Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa on the occasion of the G8 Summit, 8/6/2007, http://www.g-8.de/nsc_true/Content/EN/Artikel/__g8-summit/anlagen/o5-erklaerung-en,templateId=raw,property=publicationFile.pdf/o5-erklaerung-en (last accessed 13/1/2009).
- 12.
In fact, the declaration launching the Heiligendamm Process was issued by the O5 and the German presidency – and not by all G8 members. See also Fues/Leininger, Germany and the Heiligendamm Process, in: Cooper/Antkiewicz (eds.), Emerging Powers in Global Governance: Lessons from the Heiligendamm Process, 2008, p. 235 (245 and 252).
- 13.
The G8 had published the statement to launch the Heiligendamm Process before the O5 had joined the Heiligendamm summit. See, e.g. Singh, PM’s on board interaction with media on flight from Berlin to New Delhi, 9/6/2008, http://meaindia.nic.in/mediainteraction/2007/06/09mi01.htm (last accessed 13/1/2009); Lourdes Aranda, deputy foreign minister of Mexico, quoted in Williamson, Rich nations stall dialogue with emerging powers, Financial Times, 3/7/2009, p. 6.
- 14.
See, e.g. Cooper, The Heiligendamm Process, in: Cooper/Antkiewicz (eds.), Emerging Powers in Global Governance: Lessons from the Heiligendamm Process, 2008, p. 1. Steering Committee of the Heiligendamm Process, Interim Report on the Heiligendamm Process at the G8 Summit in Hokkaido Toyako, 7-9/7/2008, http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/economy/summit/2008/doc/pdf/0709_01_en.pdf (last accessed 26/1/2009).
- 15.
E.g. G5, Statement Issued by Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa on the occasion of the 2008 Hokkaido Toyako Summit, 8/7/2008, http://www.g8.utoronto.ca/summit/2008hokkaido/2008-g5.html (last accessed 14/1/2008); Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores [Mexican Ministry of Foreign Affairs], Se Reúnen los Cancilleres del Grupo de los Cinco en Nueva York [The Chancellors of the G5 meet in New York], 27/9/2007, http://www.sre.gob.mx/csocial/contenido/comunicados/2007/sep/cp_253.html (last accessed 14/1/2009).
- 16.
G8, The Agenda of the Heiligendamm-L'Aquila Process, http://www.g8.italia2009.it/static/G8_Allegato/O6_Annex_2_concept_Note_on_HAP.pdf (last accessed 5/10/2009).
- 17.
Cooper/Jackson, Regaining Legitimacy: The G8 and the “Heiligendamm Process”, International Insights 4 (2007) 10, p. 1; on comparable reasons for establishing the G20 see Kirton, The G20: Representativeness, Effectiveness, and Leadership in Global governance, in: Kirton et al. (eds.), Guiding Global Order: G8 Governance in the twenty-first Century, 2001, p. 143.
- 18.
For a summary of the shift of global economic weight see, e.g. Gnath, Beyond Heiligendamm: The G8 and its dialogue with emerging countries, Internationale Politik Global Edition (2007) 3, p. 36 (37).
- 19.
Due to the informality, the G8 does not have formal membership criteria. On the choice of participating non-member countries see Cooper, The Logic of the B(R)ICSAM Model for G8 Reform, Policy Brief in International Governance (2007) 1, The Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI), http://www.cigionline.org/community.igloo?r0=community&r0_script=/scripts/folder/view.script&r0_pathinfo=/%7B7caf3d23-023d-494b-865b-84d143de9968%7D/Publications/policybr/thelogic&r0_output=xml (last accessed 15/1/2009).
- 20.
See, e.g. Fratianni et al., Introduction, in: Fratianni et al. (eds.), New Perspectives on Global Governance: Why America Needs the G8, 2005, p. 3 (4).
- 21.
“We came together because of shared beliefs and shared responsibility. We are each responsible for the government of an open, democratic society, dedicated to individual liberty and social advancement”. G6, Communiqué Declaration of Rambouillet, 17/11/1975, http://www.g8.utoronto.ca/summit/1975rambouillet/communique.html (last accessed 13/1/2009).
- 22.
On the changing relationship between the G8 and China see, e.g. Kirton, The G7/8 and China: Toward a Closer Association, in: Kirton et al. (eds.), Guiding Global Order: G8 Governance in the Twenty-First Century, 2001, p. 189; see also Chin, China’s Evolving G8 Engagement: Complex Interests and Multiple Identity in Global Governance Reform, in: Cooper/Antkiewicz (eds.), Emerging Powers in Global Governance: Lessons from the Heiligendamm Process, 2008, p. 83 (104).
- 23.
Rode, Weltregieren durch internationale Wirtschaftsorganisationen [Global Governance through international economic organisations], 2001, p. 26.
- 24.
Lesage, Globalisation, Multipolarity and the L20 as an Alternative to the G8, Global Society 21 (2007) 3, p. 343 (345).
- 25.
Prantl, Informal Groups of States and the UN Security Council, International Organization 59 (2005) 3, p. 559 (pp. 561–568). Although Prantl developed the theoretical framework within the context of the UN-system, it provides a useful analytical starting point to the G8’s recent Outreach initiative and its distinction between the core summit structure and the external set-up of the dialogue.
- 26.
In addition to the joint statement with the G8 that established the Heiligendamm Process, the O5 issued a separate position paper stressing their common allegiance to the global South. Joint Position Paper of Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa participating in the G8 Summit, 8/7/2007, http://pmindia.nic.in/GermanyG-8_visit.htm (last accessed 26/1/2009).
- 27.
For an account of the increase in official-level working groups and task forces see, e.g. Stephens, G8 Institutionalization as a Cause of Compliance: The DOT Force Case, 47th Annual Convention of the International Studies Association, 2006, http://www.allacademic.com//meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/0/9/8/7/9/pages98791/p98791-1.php (last accessed 23/1/2009).
- 28.
For a proposal to enlarge the G7 of finance ministers by China see Desai, Expanding the G8: should China join? The Foreign Policy Centre, 2006, http://fpc.org.uk/fsblob/749.pdf (last accessed 15/1/2009).
- 29.
Brown quoted in Pilling, Club under pressure to expand, Financial Times, 10/7/2008, p. 2, http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c7454f2a-4dde-11dd-820e-000077b07658,dwp_uuid=af522be6-4c8c-11da-89df-0000779e2340.html (last accessed 28/1/2009).
- 30.
Neidhart, Der exklusive Club öffnet sich [The exclusive club opens up], Süddeutsche Zeitung, 10/7/2009, p. 8; BBC Monitoring European, Italy to bring “flexible format” to G8, 2/1/2009, http://g8live.org/2009/01/02/italy-to-bring-flexible-format-to-g8/ (last accessed 15/1/2009); see also Lesage, Globalisation, Multipolarity and the L20 as an Alternative to the G8, Global Society 21 (2007) 3, p. 343 (359).
- 31.
G8 Presidency 2009, Details: The Dialogue Process with Emerging Countries, http://www.g8italia2009.it/G8/Home/IlContesto/G8-G8_Layout_locale-1199882116809_VersoAllargamento.htm (last accessed 21/1/2009).
- 32.
Quoted in Wendtland, France’s Sarkozy says “not reasonable” to meet as G8, Reuters.com, 5/7/2008, http://www.reuters.com/article/newsMaps/idUSPAC00963220080705 (last accessed 23/1/2008).
- 33.
The Italian and the French government have called for the participation of an Arab or Muslim country such as Egypt beyond the O5. E.g. Reuters, Italy aims to expand G8 in include China, India, Brazil, 28/9/2008, http://in.reuters.com/article/topNews/idINIndia-35695220080928 (last accessed 4/1/2009).
- 34.
The original G20 is a forum for discussion among finance ministers and central banks that includes the G8, the O5, as well as Argentina, Australia, Saudi Arabia, South Korea and Turkey. The new form has been labelled G20 or “Leaders' 20” in the literature to distinguish it from the lower-ranking G20 of finance ministers.
On the L20 see, e.g. Cooper/English, Introduction: Reforming the international system from the top – a Leaders’ 20 Summit, in: English et al. (eds.), Reforming From the Top. A Leaders’ 20 Summit, 2005, p. 1; Linn/Bradford, Pragmatic Reform of Global Governance: Creating an L20 Summit Forum, Policy Brief (2006) 152, The Brookings Institution, http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2006/04globalgovernance_linn.aspx (last accessed 22/1/2009).
- 35.
See Fues, Global Governance Beyond the G8: Reform Prospect for the Summit Architecture, Internationale Politik und Gesellschaft (2007) 2, p. 11 (17). For an overview of different G8 reform paths and their estimated likeliness see Bradford, The United States and Summit Reform, in: Cooper/Antkiewicz (eds.), Emerging Powers in Global Governance: Lessons from the Heiligendamm Process, 2008, p. 307 (323 et seq.).
- 36.
Payne, The G8 in a changing global economic order, International Affairs 84 (2008) 3, p. 519 (529); for the recent revival of the L20 approach see Bradford/Linn/Martin, Global Governance Breakthrough: The G20 Summit and the Future Agenda, Policy Brief (2008) 168, The Brookings Institution, http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2008/12_g20_summit_bradford_linn.aspx (last accessed 15/1/2009).
- 37.
See leaders' statement: The Pittsburgh Summit, 24-25/9/09, http://www.pittsburghsummit.gov/mediacenter/129639.htm (last accessed 6/10/09).
- 38.
Crook, Expectations come down to earth, FT.com, 16/11/2008, http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c4f4539c-b3ff-11dd-8e35-0000779fd18c.html (last accessed 15/1/2009); for a similar assessment see also The Economist, Global Governance. Goodbye G7, hello G20, 20/11/2008, http://www.economist.com/finance/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12652239 (last accessed 1/12/2008).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gnath, K. (2010). The G8 and the Heiligendamm Process: A Group’s Architecture in Flux. In: Herrmann, C., Terhechte, J.P. (eds) European Yearbook of International Economic Law 2010. European Yearbook of International Economic Law, vol 1. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-78883-6_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-78883-6_18
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-78882-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-78883-6
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)