Opinion: The G20 must follow civil society’s and social movements’ lead

Antonio Freitas, the deputy coordinator of the Group of 20’s finance track, recently opened a gathering of G20 officials and civil society representatives with an astonishing observation: “If the five richest [people] on Earth spent $1 million per day,” he began, “it would take them 476 years to waste their wealth.” He shared other statistics demonstrating the width and depth of global inequality, and then, for nearly 40 minutes, representatives from civil society engagement groups had the floor. Speakers offered perspectives from around the world, sharing the opportunities they saw for change, and the solutions they hoped the major economies of the G20 would deliver. It was a remarkable moment for many reasons. Chief among them: The simple fact that a conversation like this had never happened before. The G20 is exclusive by design. And historically, voices from civil society have had no place in it, least of all in the finance track, which wields great influence and tends toward more technical discussions. But in recent years, and particularly under Brazil’s presidency, civil society and social movements have made significant inroads into rooms where important decisions — and often decisions about their own lives — are rendered. And yet, while this is necessary progress, it also is insufficient progress — because representation in these spaces matters not for its own sake but for what it can accomplish. As leaders prepare for South Africa to host the G20 summit next year — the fourth global south nation in as many years — they must be disciplined and deliberate in their work to reform unjust international financial architecture and center global south perspectives in conversations that impact our collective future. Fundamentally, the success of the G20’s agenda will be defined by the how of it just as much as the what. Successful models of multilateralism Brazil, India, and Indonesia’s recent presidencies offer models for what inclusive, effective, and principled G20 leadership looks like — a way forward for multilateralism in this period of uncertainty for global governance. Indonesia’s G20 presidency saw the nation championing financial reform by pushing for a reassessment of multilateral development bank lending limits, demonstrating its commitment to global equity. Indonesia highlighted the crucial role of Indigenous communities in conservation, showcasing their leadership as a model for sustainable and inclusive environmental stewardship. India’s G20 presidency was defined by a focus on securing climate financing for nations in the global south, as well as its unprecedented inclusion of the African Union as a permanent member. Brazil’s presidency prioritized the fight against inequality, poverty, and hunger, addressing the climate crisis, and pursuing good global governance. These priorities, and civil society’s stewardship of them, yielded meaningful results. The G20 Rio de Janeiro Leaders’ Declaration succeeded in bringing the issue of inequality to the center of the agenda. Stark and growing wealth and income inequality guided the launch of the Alliance Against Hunger and Poverty, as well as recommendations to tax the ultrarich. Inequalities in global decision-making guided recommendations to reform global governance, and the reaffirming of commitments with the UNFCCC Paris Agreement. The G20 Rio declaration achieved consensus, a victory in itself. However, meaningful progress under the South African presidency hinges on world leaders' continued inclusion and engagement of civil society. As South Africa prepares for its term, it has announced its theme — “Solidarity, Equality, and Sustainable Development” — which builds on this groundwork. What both Brazil and South Africa’s agendas reflect is that civil society and social movements are not enemies of governmental and institutional change but drivers of it, and that individual country priorities must be part and parcel of wider global goals. Take, for example, the Brazilian government’s focus on hunger and food insecurity. These priorities emerged not from the top-down but from the bottom-up — from decades of mobilization led by people and grassroots organizations, such as the pioneering “Ação da Cidadania Contra a Fome” (Citizen Action Against Hunger), a Ford Foundation grantee. Now, beyond the G20, they are core priorities for the Brazilian government and its partners. In October, President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva announced a robust package of measures to eliminate hunger throughout Brazil, building on the work that lifted 24.4 million people out of food insecurity in 2023. In this way, members of the G20 would do well to listen to the people most impacted by the problems they seek to solve — particularly as they seek to reform global financial infrastructure and develop solutions to the sovereign debt crisis and illicit financial flows. Tackling untenable levels of debt A reformed international financial architecture is the key that will unlock progress across issue areas, including sustainable development and securing stable global governance. At a basic level, debt impedes development. Nations across the global south are saddled with insurmountable debt loads that prevent them from taking meaningful climate action, improving public health infrastructure, or investing in education. As representatives of the African Union remind the G20, this is especially true across the African continent, where countries’ debt levels have increased by 240% between 2008 and 2022, and half of African nations spend more on interest than they do on their public health budgets. In 2023, African countries’ external debt payments were almost triple what they received in climate finance. Thus far, solutions to the crisis have proved wildly insufficient, but the progress made under the Brazilian presidency and promised under South Africa’s presidency give reason for optimism. Both nations have been intentional in articulating the debt crisis as one that will dictate outcomes on every other issue, and both have centered inequality and global south representation in their approaches. Civil society groups have elevated the limitations of current solutions, such as the G20 Common Framework and Sovereign Debt Roundtable, which have proven inadequate due to the limited participation of all creditors and insufficient relief mechanisms. Research and calls for establishing a United Nations-backed legal framework for comprehensive debt resolution, including substantial debt cancellation, are underway. It is meaningful that South Africa, a champion for debt reform, sustainable development, and African representation, will soon assume the presidency — the first African nation to do so. The momentum built under Brazil’s term must not be squandered, and South Africa — and all G20 presidents that follow, including the United States in 2026 — must continue to find ways to not only directly include but also prioritize community leaders, activists, and civil society organizations in G20 decision-making.