G7 Information Centre
Summits |  Meetings |  Publications |  Research |  Search |  Home |  About the G7 and G8 Research Group
Follow @g7_rg

2010 Muskoka G8 Summit
Final Compliance Report

26 June 2010 to 14 May 2011
Prepared by Melanie Clarke, Amadeus Domaradzki, Adam McCauley and Netila Demneri
G8 Research Group, Trinity College, Munk School of Global Affairs, University of Toronto
Toronto
and Mark Rakhmangulov
National Research University Higher School of Economics
International Organisations Research Institute
Moscow

24 May 2011

The 2010 Muskoka G8 Summit Final Compliance Report reviews progress made on selected commitments set out at the 2010 Muskoka Summit for the period of 26 June 2010 to 14 May 2011. The preface and summary of the findings are listed below. This report follows the G8 Research Group's Interim Compliance Report, which was published in February 2011.

Download the full 2010 Muskoka G8 Summit Final Compliance Report. (PDF, 341 pages).

[top]


Preface

Each year since 1996, the G8 Research Group has produced a compliance report on the progress made by the G8 member countries in meeting the priority commitments issued at each summit. Since 2002, the group has published both an interim report, timed to assess progress at the moment of the transition between one country’s year as host and the next, and a final report issued just before the leaders’ annual summit. These reports monitor each country’s efforts on a carefully chosen selection of the many commitments announced at the end of each summit. They are offered to the general public and to policy makers, academics, civil society, the media and interested citizens around the world in an effort to make the work of the G8 more transparent, accessible and effective, and to provide scientific data to enable the meaningful analysis of the impact of this unique informal institution. Previous compliance reports are available at the G8 Information Centre at www.g8.utoronto.ca/compliance.

For the 2010 Final Compliance report, 18 priority commitments were selected from the 73 commitments made at the Muskoka Summit, hosted by Canada from 25 to 26 June 2010. This report assesses the results of compliance with those commitments up to 14 May 2011. The G8 Research Group in Toronto has worked with a team at the National Research University Higher School of Economics (HSE) in Moscow, as it has since 2006, led by Mark Rakhmangulov, especially on the reports for Russia.

To make its assessments, the G8 Research Group relies on publicly available information, documentation and media reports. To help ensure the accuracy, comprehensiveness and integrity of these reports, we encourage comments and suggestions. Indeed, this is a living document, and the scores can be recalibrated if new material becomes available. All feedback remains anonymous. Intellectual responsibility for this report’s contents lies exclusively with the authors and analysts of the G8 Research Group.

The work of the G8 Research Group would not be possible without the steadfast dedication of many people around the world. This report is the product of a team of energetic and hard-working analysts overseen by Netila Demneri, chair of the student executive, and led by the co-chairs of the Compliance Unit: Melanie Clarke, Amadeus Domaradzki and Adam McCauley. It would also not be possible without the support of Dr. Ella Kokotsis, director of accountability, Jenilee Guebert, director of research, and Caroline Bracht and Zaria Shaw, researchers, as well as Madeline Koch, managing director of the G8 Research Group. We are also indebted to the many individuals who provided feedback on our interim report released in February 2011, whose comments have been carefully considered in this revised report.

This G8 compliance assessment remains fully the responsibility and intellectual property of the G8 Research Group and is being produced in accord with the relevant regulations and ethical standards of the University of Toronto.

Professor John Kirton
Director
G8 Research Group

[top]

Summary

The University of Toronto G8 Research Group Final Compliance Report on the 2010 Muskoka Summit analyzes compliance by G8 member states and the European Union. It is based on a selection of 18 priority commitments made at the Muskoka Summit on 25-26 June 2010. It covers the period from 26 June 2010 to 14 May 2011, approximately from the time of the 2010 Muskoka Summit to the 2011 Deauville Summit, hosted by France on 26-27 May 2011.

The Overall Final Compliance Score

This assessment indicates that, for the period June 2010 to May 2011, the G8 member states and the European Union received an average compliance score of +0.46 (73%). Individual scores are assigned on a scale where +1 indicates full compliance with the stated commitment, 0 is awarded for partial compliance or a work in progress, and -1 is reserved for those countries that fail to comply or that take action that is directly opposite to the stated goal of the commitment. This Final Compliance Score is an increase of +0.05 point + (0.53%) from the Interim Compliance Score published in February 2011. It is also a lower score than the 2009 final compliance score of +0.53; however, it is very close to the 2008 final score of +0.48.

The Final Compliance Scores are contained in Table A.

Compliance by Member

G8 members’ rankings have changed since the interim report issued in February 2011. Canada, with an average of +0.61 (+81%), remains in first place but it has been joined by Russia, which also achieved the same final average. The United States is in second place with a score of +0.56 (a difference of +0.05). The United Kingdom, historically ranked first for compliance, and Germany share third place. The European Union, which had tied with Canada in first place in the interim report, is in fourth place alongside France. Japan climbed to fifth place from its sixth-place score the interim report, leaving Italy in sixth and last place to round out the G8 member rankings.

The Compliance Gap Between Members

The compliance gap between members is also different compared to the interim report. The difference between the highest and lowest G8 member compliance scores is +0.44, similar to the 2009 final compliance gap of +0.50. However, it is a much smaller difference than the 2008 final gap of +0.70.

Compliance by Commitment

Overall compliance by commitment has not changed significantly compared to the G8 Research Group’s interim report. Compliance is almost uniformly distributed from 0 to +1, with the exception of the commitment on Health Care Funding, with a score of -0.56, and the commitment on the Copenhagen Accord with a score of -0.22. These are the only two commitments with a score below zero, compared to four from 2009 and five from 2008. One commitment scored an average of 0. Seven commitments scored between 0 and +0.50; eight commitments scored above +0.50, which is a drop from ten in 2009. One commitment received the same score as last year (+1).

Compliance was generally strong on the terrorism-related commitments: Enhancing Security at +0.89, International Cooperation at +0.67 and Capacity Building at +0.78. Enhancing Security and Capacity Building scored +0.11 and +0.22 higher than their interim scores.

Compliance with the Climate Change commitments was generally low, with Mid-Term Emissions Reductions and Implementation of the Copenhagen Accord scoring averages of +0.22 and -0.22 respectively. The average score for the two commitments is +0.17, well below the 2009 +0.53 average for compliance on Climate Change commitments and the +0.39 average score of the 2008 Climate Change commitments.

Natural Disasters received a high score of +0.78.

Trade received a score of +0.22, a significant increase from 2008’s score of -0.78.

Security commitments received the highest average. Civilian Security Systems scored +0.89 (0.11 higher than the interim report), tied with Non-proliferation. Afghanistan, a regional security commitment, scored the only +1 average. Nuclear Safety achieved a comparable average score of +0.67.

Scores varied for the commitments dealing with the international framework for development assistance. Official Development Assistance received an average score of +0.67 and Good Governance received a score of +0.56. Regarding health-specific commitments, Health Care Funding scored -0.56, the only negative score among the commitment averages, and HIV/AIDS scored +0.22 and Neglected Tropical Diseases reached a score of +0.11. Similarly low averages were scored on the Food and Agriculture commitments, with the L’Aquila Food Security Initiative and the Principles for Investment receiving scores of 0 and +0.44, respectively.

Future Research and Reports

The information contained within this report provides G8 member countries and other stakeholders with an indication of their compliance results in the post-Muskoka period. As with previous compliance reports, this report has been produced as an invitation for others to provide additional or more complete information on country compliance. As always, comments are welcomed and would be considered as part of an analytical reassessment. Please send feedback to g8@utoronto.ca.

[top]

Table A: 2010 Muskoka Final Compliance Scores

Commitment Name
Canada
France
Germany
Italy
Japan
Russia
United Kingdom
United States
European Union
Average
Official Development Assistance [4]
1
1
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
0.67
Health: Health Care Funding [11]
1
-1
1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-0.56
Health: HIV/AIDS [14]
1
0
0
-1
1
0
-1
1
1
0.22
Neglected Tropical Diseases [18]
1
0
1
-1
-1
0
1
1
-1
0.11
Food and Agriculture: L’Aquila Food Security Initiative [19]
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00
Food and Agriculture: Principles for Investment [20]
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
1
0
0.44
Good Governance: Kimberley Process [22]
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
0.56
Climate Change: Mid-Term Emissions Reductions [26]
-1
1
1
0
-1
1
1
-1
1
0.22
Climate Change: Implementation of Copenhagen Accord [27]
0
0
0
-1
-1
0
0
0
0
-0.22
Trade [38]
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0.22
Non-Proliferation [39]
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
0.89
Nuclear Safety [43]
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
1
1
0.67
Regional Security: Afghanistan [51]
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1.00
Regional Security: Civilian Security Systems [59]
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
0.89
Terrorism: International Cooperation [65]
1
0
1
1
0
1
0
1
1
0.67
Terrorism: Enhancing Security [68]
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0.89
Terrorism: Capacity Building [70]
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0.78
Natural Disasters [55]
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
1
1
0.78
                     
Country Average
0.61
0.44
0.50
0.17
0.28
0.61
0.50
0.56
0.44
0.46
2010 Interim Compliance Average
0.56
0.33
0.44
0.17
0.22
0.50
0.44
0.44
0.56
0.41
2009 Final Compliance Average
0.67
0.42
0.42
0.04
0.75
0.33
0.83
0.63
0.67
0.53
2009 Interim Compliance Average
0.50
0.25
0.29
-0.25
0.54
0.21
0.63
0.42
0.42
0.33
2008 Final Compliance Average
0.75
0.20
0.60
0.10
0.35
0.25
0.80
0.80
0.44
0.48

[top]

Table B: G8 Compliance by Country, 1996–2009

 

 

Lyon
1996

Denver
1997

Birmingham
1998

Cologne
1999

Okinawa
2000

Genoa
200

Kananaskis
2002

Evian
2003

Sea Island
2004

Final

Final

Final

Final

Final

Final

Interim

Final

Interim

Final

Interim

Final

Canada

0.47

0.17

0.50

0.67

0.83

0.82

0.77

0.82

0.58

0.83

0.50

0.72

France

0.28

0.00

0.25

0.34

0.92

0.69

0.38

0.64

0.50

0.75

0.39

0.50

Germany

0.58

0.17

0.25

0.17

1.00

0.59

0.08

0.18

0.42

0.50

0.50

0.67

Italy

0.43

0.50

0.67

0.34

0.89

0.57

0.00

-0.11

0.38

0.25

0.39

0.44

Japan

0.22

0.50

0.20

0.67

0.82

0.44

0.10

0.18

0.42

0.42

0.33

0.39

Russia

N/A

0.00

0.34

0.17

0.14

0.11

0.14

0.00

0.42

0.33

0.00

0.06

UK

0.42

0.50

0.75

0.50

1.00

0.69

0.42

0.55

0.58

0.50

0.50

0.67

US

0.42

0.34

0.60

0.50

0.67

0.35

0.25

0.36

0.50

0.50

0.44

0.72

EU

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

0.50

0.72

G8 + EU

0.40

0.27

0.45

0.39

0.78

0.53

0.27

0.33

0.48

0.51

0.39

0.54

Number of commitments

19

6

7

6

12

9

13

11

12

12

18

18

 

 

Gleneagles
2005

St. Petersburg
2006

Heiligendamm
2007

Hokkaido-Toyako
2008

L'Aquila
2009

Interim

Final

Interim

Final

Interim

Final

Interim

Final

Interim

Final

Canada

0.52

0.81

0.45

0.60

0.22

0.65

0.20

0.75

0.5

0.67

France

0.48

0.57

0.30

0.40

0.17

0.52

-0.05

0.2

0.25

0.42

Germany

0.33

0.88

0.45

0.55

0.48

0.57

0.40

0.6

0.29

0.42

Italy

0.43

0.29

-0.10

0.05

0.13

0.17

-0.20

0.1

-0.25

0.04

Japan

0.52

0.52

0.30

0.40

0.04

0.30

-0.10

0.35

0.54

0.75

Russia

-0.14

0.14

0.25

0.45

0.17

0.30

0.05

0.25

0.21

0.33

UK

0.67

0.95

0.55

0.60

0.61

0.70

0.45

0.80

0.63

0.83

US

0.71

0.81

0.35

0.60

0.78

0.91

0.45

0.80

0.42

0.63

EU

0.75

0.89

0.58

0.58

0.39

0.48

0.20

0.55

0.42

0.67

G8 + EU

0.47

0.65

0.35

0.47

0.33

0.51

0.16

0.48

0.33

0.53

Number of commitments

21

21

20

20

23

23

20

20

24

24

[top]

Research Team

Professor John Kirton, Director, G8 Research Group
Professor Marina Larionova, Head, HSE International Organisations Research Institute
Dr. Ella Kokotsis, Director of Compliance, G8 Research Group
Jenilee Guebert, Director of Research, G8 Research Group
Netila Demneri, Chair, G8 Research Group
Melanie Clarke, Co-Chair, Compliance Unit
Amadeus Domaradzki, Co-Chair, Compliance Unit
Adam McCauley, Co-Chair, Compliance Unit
Mark Rakhmangulov, HSE Research Team Leader

Lead Analysts

Natalie Antonowicz
Rebecca Blanchard
Kevin Draper
Taryn McKenzie-Mohr
Ashley Pereira
Ava-Dayna Sefa
Selena Lucien Shaboian
Hamish van der Ven
Vivian Wei

Analysts at the University of Toronto

Mina Akrami
Nerin Ali
Katie Andrews
Natalie Antonowicz
Amy Barlow
Sarah Beard
Julie Beckstead
Eleanor Berenson
James Marcus Bridger
Nadia Bucciarelli
Catherine Cantral
Tina Chang
Kelvin Chen
Vanessa Cheng
Dave Cordingley
Laura Correa Ochoa
Salvator Cusimano
Jessie Date-Ampofo
Anjela Deyanska
Natalie Dytyniak
Tine Elgsaether
Emily Evangelista
Vera Gavrilova
Allison Gibbons

Igor Gontcharov
Alisa Gorokhova
Sammy Halabi
Jasmine Hamade
Michael Hanrahan
Nayma Hasan
Angelo Hsu
Ren Hui Yoong
Amanda Iadipaolo
Mehreen Imtiaz
Nikola Jankovic
Jemy Joseph
Chi Chung Kenson Tong
Nessa Kenny
Kelsey Komorowski
Sara Lee
Mimi Liu
Yiping Luo
Andrew Lynes
Mauran Manogaran
Vincent Manzenberger
Taryn McKenzie-Mohr
Nick McLean
Tobias McVey

Leah Nosal
Harris Quach
Aoife Quinn
Patrick Quinton-Brown
Asma Rafiquddin
Robert Schuster
Ioana Sendroiu
Saim Siddiqui
Samir Siddiqui
Tara Stankovic
Jessie Sun
Debbie Talukdar
Nabeel Thomas
Nehal Tolia
Albina Tyker
Alexander Vindua
Sabina Voicu
Nastasja Vojvodic
Joelle Westlund
Angela Wiggins
Hermonie Xie
Tina Xu
Serene Yeung

Analysts at the State University Higher School of Economics (Moscow)

Irina Grechukhina
Vitaly Nagornov
Mark Rakhmangulov
Yuriy Zaytsev

[top]


G7 Information Centre

Top of Page
This Information System is provided by the University of Toronto Library and the G7 and G8 Research Group at the University of Toronto.
Please send comments to: g8@utoronto.ca
This page was last updated May 25, 2011.

All contents copyright © 2017. University of Toronto unless otherwise stated. All rights reserved.