Newsroom

Introducing the G20 Peer Reviews

7th July 2025

On 25 September 2009, the Leaders of the G20, at their annual Summit (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA), issued a joint statement committing themselves to “Rationalize and phase out over the medium term inefficient fossil fuel subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption”.

Over the next several years, the G20 members themselves conducted an exercise in self reporting of their fossil fuel subsidies and reform commitments. Those efforts achieved limited success, with variable degrees of transparency and levels of ambition. (See the two reports by Doug Koplow from November 2010 and June 2012.) By early 2012, however, the OECD had launched its Inventory of Estimated Budgetary Support and Tax Expenditures for Fossil Fuels, which provided far more details than were available in the G20 Members’ self reports.

That the G20 should conduct voluntary peer reviews of their reform efforts was proposed by the OECD during Russia’s presidency of the G20, in 2013. The OECD had long and generally positive experiences with peer reviews, so it was a logical tool to recommend. The proposal was accepted and formally established in paragraph 94 of the G20 Leaders’ Declaration issued during their 2013 Summit (6 September 2013, St Petersburg, Russia):

“We reaffirm our commitment to rationalise and phase out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption over the medium term while being conscious of [the] necessity to provide targeted support for the poorest. We welcome the efforts underway in some G20 countries as described in the country progress reports. We welcome the development of a methodology for a voluntary peer review process and the initiation of country-owned peer reviews and we encourage broad voluntary participation in reviews as a valuable means of enhanced transparency and accountability. We ask Finance Ministers to report back by the next Summit on outcomes from the first rounds of voluntary peer reviews.”

Almost two and a half years would pass, however, before the first in-person peer review — that of China — took place, in April 2016 (Beijing), followed by that for the United States (Washington, D.C.) a month later. Subsequent peer reviews were also done in pairs: Germany and Mexico (Berlin, January 2017), and Indonesia (Jakarta, December 2017) and Italy (Rome, October 2018). During the years in which these G20 members underwent peer reviews, two of them held the rotating presidency of the G20: China (2016) and Germany (2017). 

The process of the reviews

The review process involved several steps. The first step required that two of the G20 members agree to both undergo peer reviews during the same year. Each member would then lead the review of the other. The reviewed countries would typically invite experts from G20 member economies that were also due to be reviewed in a subsequent round, as well as those who had been reviewed in a previous round. The reviewed member would then also typically invite one or more intergovernmental organisations (in addition to the OECD) to form part of the team. China, for its review, invited an expert from the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Indonesia invited experts from the World Bank, and both Indonesia and Italy invited experts from one or more experts from the International Energy Agency (IEA) as well as non-governmental organisations. The full list of participants is included in each published peer review.

The next step was for each reviewed G20 member to prepare a “self review” or “self report” setting out what support measures it provided to fossil fuel producers or consumers (usually both), identifying which of those measures it deemed to be “inefficient” according to its own interpretation of the term, and what plans it had, if any, to eliminate or reform those support measures. The OECD Secretariat, in consultation with the review team members, would then do an initial reading of those self reports and prepare a list of questions to ask during the in-person stage of the review and circulate it to the review team. Once agreement on those questions was reached among the review team, they would be sent on to the G20 member under review.

During the in-person phase of the review, which typically took place over the course of one to three days, the reviewed G20 member would bring in experts on each aspect of government support, usually from the ministry or state-owned enterprise responsible, to give brief remarks and then answer the team’s questions. Generally a more impromptu dialogue would then take place.

Following the in-person phase, the OECD Secretariat would prepare the first draft of the peer review report and then circulate it to other members of the team. After incorporating comments and revisions suggested by the team members, the Secretariat would submit the draft report to the reviewed G20 member for comments, which were usually of a technical nature. Once all parties agreed on the text, the report would be made public.

The once and future G20 peer reviews

No G20 peer reviews of fossil fuel subsidies have taken place since those for Indonesia and Italy. Argentina and Canada did announce in 2018 (during Argentina’s presidency of the G20) that they would undergo peer reviews, and France and India then shortly thereafter announced their commitment to follow suit. The reviews of Argentina and Canada were originally intended to take place in 2019, but delays pushed back the schedule. Then the Covid-19 pandemic put paid to those plans, at least for 2020 and 2021. But the review process appears to have since been abandoned, including for France and India.

The Netherlands, which is not a member of the G20 (but has been an “Invited Guest Country” under several G20 presidencies), in 2018 also volunteered to undergo a peer review similar to that of the G20 economies. That review took place in 2019, facilitated by the OECD and the IEA, and its report was published in September 2020 under the title The Netherlands’ Effort to Phase Out and Rationalise its Fossil-Fuel Subsidies.

Whether the peer reviews will be revived at some date in the future remains to be seen.

Areas of work: G20 Peer Reviews

Explore more

Applications are Now Open: Quaker United Nations Summer School 2026

Applications are Now Open: Quaker United Nations Summer School 2026

We are excited to announce that the applications for the Quaker United Nations Office Summer School (QUNSS) 2026 are now open!  QUNSS is a two-week programme where young changemakers are introduced to the United Nations and the vibrant international community in Geneva to deepen their understanding of multilateralism, strengthen their policy, negotiation, and advocacy skills, and connect with a supportive international youth network rooted in Quaker values to promote peace, justice, and the protection of Earth.  This year’s themed edition will explore today’s debates on the value and challenges of multilateralism, supporting participants to accurately understand, critically question, and humanize the United Nations.  Over the course of the programme, participants will:  We welcome applications from young people aged 20–26 from all regions and backgrounds who are globally minded, locally rooted, and involved in areas such as social justice, community engagement, climate action, advocacy, or policy, among others.  The deadline for applications is January 25th, 2026 at 23:59 Central European Time (CET).  For the full description of QUNSS 2026, please see the document below. To apply, please access this application form.

At a critical moment, Security Council Resolution on Gaza falls short

At a critical moment, Security Council Resolution on Gaza falls short

On Monday, November 17, the UN Security Council adopted resolution 2803 (2025) authorizing the creation of an “International Stabilization Force” and a “Board of Peace” aimed at addressing the critical security, humanitarian, and reconstruction needs in Gaza. The resolution affirms the importance of enabling humanitarian aid, maintaining a ceasefire, and the goal of working towards “a horizon for peaceful and prosperous coexistence.” However, QUNO notes with concern the resolution’s disregard for the consent or agency of Palestinians within the mechanisms proposed by the resolution. Furthermore, the resolution fails to establish clear mechanisms for transparency, accountability, and effective humanitarian aid and reconstruction. Both observers and UN member states have pointed out that the resolution’s unilateral approach could sideline the United Nations and risk repeating colonial actions and ideologies that lie at the heart of the conflict.   At its core, the Security Council resolution gives UN backing to the “Comprehensive Peace Plan,” also known as the “20-point plan,” proposed by US President Donald Trump earlier this year. The United States proposed the resolution and lobbied strenuously to push it through the Security Council on an expedited timeline. The resolution gives a green light to main tenets of the President’s plan, principally, […]

Drawing Hope: Children Reimagining Peace Across Borders

Drawing Hope: Children Reimagining Peace Across Borders

In a world often divided, Drawing Hope is a trans-local peace project that uses children’s art to remind us of our shared humanity. Through artwork created by children, the exhibit sends messages of hope, peace, and reconciliation. After being displayed in venues around the world, Drawing Hope arrived at the United Nations in New York City in early November. QUNO worked closely with the American Friends Service Committee, Okedongmu Children, and the Permanent Mission of Ireland to ensure the exhibit could be displayed inside the UN. From 10 to 21 November, diplomats, UN officials, and guests were able to view drawings created by children in eight countries: North Korea, South Korea, Japan, South Africa, Colombia, Cambodia, Ireland, and the United States. Visitors were inspired by the simple example of children working to connect, transcend barriers, and use creativity to build understanding and empathy across divides. Drawing Hope began on the Korean Peninsula, which in 2025 marks 80 years of division between North and South Korea. Over the past eight decades, cross-border interactions have been strictly prohibited, with both sides dehumanizing the other through propaganda, influencing adults and children alike. As a result, many children grew up surrounded by narratives of […]

QUNO attends COP30 in Brazil: Report 1 of 2

QUNO attends COP30 in Brazil: Report 1 of 2

QUNO’s Human Impacts of Climate Change (HICC) staff, Lindsey Fielder Cook and Daniela Campos, were present at the Conference of Parties (COP30) from 9–23 November in Belém, Brazil. This first report focuses on QUNO’s activities and will be followed by a second report offering an analysis of both concerns and positive outcomes.  While knowing that more than 56,000 people from all over the world came together to share and negotiate global climate action, some might still wonder what happens inside COPs. To offer a clearer glimpse of this experience, we are sharing a narrated report of the major events, negotiations, and interactions where QUNO brought a Quaker voice—advocating peaceful, just, and equitable transformations of activities driving existential levels of climate change and related planetary crises.  Amplifying our Voice and Values at COP30 – Interfaith events : With our Interfaith Liaison Committee colleagues, we helped host an interfaith Talanoa Dialogue at the Lutheran Church Igreja Evangelica de Confissão Luterana, bringing together over 120 people in person from all over the world, with translation between English and Portuguese, and more than 30 participants online.  During the COP, we supported faith-based colleagues in their efforts, including newcomers navigating the space, and engaged with […]

QUNO at the IPCC’s session in Lima

QUNO at the IPCC’s session in Lima

From 27–30 October, QUNO participated in the 63rd Session of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in Lima, Peru. The IPCC collates the best available climate science worldwide, and its reports help advise governments and policymakers on what is happening, why, and the available options for climate policy and action. During this meeting, country delegates, scientists, and observers prioritized three difficult key issues: the timeline for the publication of the 7th Assessment Report (AR7); the inclusion of high-risk marine geo-engineering in a Methodology Report; and gaps in the IPCC budget. On the first issue, and for the fourth consecutive attempt, country delegates were unable to agree on a timeline for delivery. On the second issue, QUNO worked effectively with a range of concerned countries and observers to prevent the inclusion of marine geo-engineering as a carbon dioxide removal technology. On the third issue, the budget was passed for 2026 but remains significantly underfunded for the assessment cycle. For more information about QUNO’s work at the IPCC and our Plenary interventions, as well as the Earth Negotiations Bulletin, which references our (FWCC) interventions, please download the reports below.

QUNO Representative brings Quaker Perspective to Disaster Resiliency

QUNO Representative brings Quaker Perspective to Disaster Resiliency

QUNO NY Representative Kavita Desai had the rare opportunity to moderate a panel at the United Nations entitled “Investing in Resilience to Safeguard the Sustainable Development Goals” during a special event held on October 16, 2025, hosted by the UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) and the UN Economic and Financial Committee.  The UNDRR event, “Towards a Risk-informed approach to Development: Financing Resilient Development Today for a Sustainable Tomorrow,” highlighted the need to increase investment in disaster protection measures such as early warning systems, community protection plans, and resilient infrastructure to safeguard progress made towards achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), a series of 17 globally agreed-upon goals that form a blueprint for sustainable peace and prosperity. As Desai noted in her opening remarks, “It is well known that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure…investing in DRR saves resources in the long-term and futureproofs development gains.”   Desai’s panel provided valuable insight on the necessity of financing resilient development, warning that progress towards the SDGs has been limited and that current investments in disaster risk and resilience account for only about 25% of actual needs in many countries. The panel noted that this funding gap emerges […]