ABSTRACT
Most of the 206 reports assessed G20 compliance: 27 assessed the G8 and 179 assessed the G20. This disparity is due to at least three reasons. First, the G20's role as the anti-crisis manager necessitated monitoring of its actions. Second, as the G20 initially had no self-accountability mechanisms, other institutions were tasked with assessing its performance, or took the initiative to do so. Third, the expansion of the G20's agenda raised questions of the institution's effectiveness and legitimacy, spurring monitoring activities among other actors. This chapter examines how these reports addressed the four accountability aspects of transparency, consultation, evaluation, and correction. Some of the reports included countries beyond the G20's membership but focus on the G20 commitments, such as the reports on trade and environment protection produced by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the World Trade Organization (WTO), and the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), and by Global Trade Alert.
