Kirton: The OECD's Contribution to G20 Summit Implementation

	G20 Information Centre provided by the G20 Research Group
	G20 Summits \| G20 Ministerials \| G20 Analysis \| Search \| About the G20 Research Group [English] [Français] [Deutsch] [Italiano] [Portuguesa] [Japanese] [Chinese] [Korean] [Indonesian]

Analysis

The OECD's Contribution to G20 Summit Implementation, 2008–2023

John Kirton, director, G20 Research Group
September 22, 2025

How much, when and on what subjects does the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) contribute to G20 members’ implementation of the G20 summit commitments their leaders make?

An initial assessment comes from reviewing the 436 summit priority commitments assessed for implementation by the G20 Research Group, or 12% of the 3,656, commitment G20 leaders made on all subjects since their start in 2008 up to and including commitments made in 2023, to see if those that explicitly reference the OECD have higher, the same or lower compliance than those which do not.

This analysis shows that the 11 assessed commitments that reference the OECD average short-term implementation of 76% (i.e., in the time between when they were made and the next summit arrives). This compares with the G20’s overall, all-subject average of 71%. Referencing the OECD in the commitment thus coincides with raising its implementation by 5%.

This beneficial OECD effect does not appear on the subject of international taxation. Here the seven assessed commitments that reference the OECD average implementation of 75%, compared to the 75% for the 27 commitments that do not.

However, on financial regulation, the three assessed commitments that invoked the OECD average 81% implementation, while the 21 without the OECD noted average less than 76%.

On crime and corruption, the one assessed commitment with the OECD averages 70% implementation, compared with less than 60% for the 15 without.

These are the only three of the 18 subjects with commitments assessed for implementation that reference the OECD. There are no such references in the 39 assessed commitments on macroeconomic policy, the 30 on trade, the 59 on development, the 10 on reform of international financial institutions, the 53 on climate change, the 27 on energy, the 30 on labour and employment, the 31 on health, the 18 on digitalization or the others ones.

The OECD-support effect appears to have declined over time. On taxation, the two latest assessments, for OECD-noted commitments in 2021 and 2022, average only 50% and 38% respectively.

The specific subject also matters. The three on financial regulation, all from 2016, had 73% for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), 100% for corporate governance and 70% for SME financing.

These results require much further research before confident conclusions can be made. The first task is to conduct many more implementation assessments of the 3,656 G20 summit commitment, especially those where the OECD is noted in other years and on other subjects. The second is to explore whether this OECD effect arises in the implementation of the commitments that G20 ministers make at their meetings alone. And the third is to trace the process of how the OECD contributes to G20 governance in so many other ways.

[back to top]

This Information System is provided by the University of Toronto Library
and the G20 Research Group at the University of Toronto.

Please send comments to: g20@utoronto.ca
This page was last updated September 22, 2025