The current sequence of chairmanships across the main international forums is not synchronized across regional, trans-regional and global blocs/organizations
The current sequence of chairmanships across the main international forums is not synchronized across regional, trans-regional and global blocs/organizations. The optimal mode of synchronization could involve the advancement of economic initiatives first at the regional level (RTAs) before moving further to the trans-regional level (BRICS, G7) and then to the level of global forums (G20, COP)
One of the gaps in current global economic governance is the ad hoc and at times disorderly pattern of country chairmanships and presidencies across the main regional, sub-regional and global forums. The sequence of presidencies in global forums such as the G20 is not aligned or duly considered with respect to the sequence of presidencies in the regional/trans-regional forums and blocs. Some of the recent examples include Brazil chairing the COP conference and BRICS in 2025 as well as serving as the pro tempore presidency in the Mercosur in the second half of 2025, with its G20 presidency in 2024 preceding the country’s chairmanship in all these forums. Rather than the sequencing of country chairmanships evolving in an ad hoc manner, there could be a more pre-mediated and forward-looking arrangement (agreed and synchronized across all the main regional and global forums), whereby the global economic system allows for the regional and trans-regional chairmanships to be more aligned with the sequence of presidencies at the global level.
The way to improve the sequencing of chairmanships of countries across the main international forums would be to allow for the regional chairmanship to precede the country’s presidency in global forums. Ideally, the country’s presidency in the regional integration arrangement (such as ASEAN or Mercosur) generates the policy impulse and a set of initiatives that are agreed upon at the regional level and then advanced to the higher levels of global governance in forums such as BRICS+ (comprising the Global South) and G20 (global level). In this way, a continuous sequence of several years of a given country’s presidency in the regional and global forums and organizations allows the policy initiatives to be more inclusive (in terms of their coordination with regional partners) and more sustained.
This continuity of policy initiatives could be further reinforced via the Troika (current, past year and next year presidencies) mechanism operating in a coordinated and pre-meditated way across regional, trans-regional and global international forums. In case such Troikas were to operate across all the main international forums and organizations, this would greatly improve policy continuity and the connectivity across blocs and organizations. In particular, Troikas could cooperate across blocs and forums such as COP, G20 and BRICS in ensuring that the key initiatives on the policy agenda are duly advanced across all the main levels of global governance. Furthermore, if platforms of regional integration arrangements were to be created at various levels of global governance (BRICS, G20), this could create scope for “Regional Troikas” to operate in tandem with the country-level Troikas in international forums.
Admittedly, the vagaries of setting the sequence of chairmanships on the basis of ad hoc factors, including alphabetical order, have resulted not only in congested chairmanships (of one country chairing several forums in 1 year), but also in a fortuitous sequence of presidencies as was the case with four consecutive G20 chairs (Indonesia, India, Brazil and South Africa in 2022-2025) coming from the Global South, all four of them now being members of the BRICS bloc. This sequence provided a unique opportunity to take coordinated decisions from the country level to the regional and then global levels in a sustained way that could have imparted a palpable impact on the direction of global economic development. In case BRICS had a Troika mechanism connected to the respective G20 Troikas, there would have been a sequence of several years in which the same composition of a BRICS Troika would be followed by the same G20 Troika in the following year (for example the BRICS IBSA Troika in 2023 being replicated in 2024 in the form of a G20 IBSA Troika), providing scope for greater policy continuity and sustained implementation of initiatives. Alas, due to the lack of coordination within BRICS (including due to the absence of the BRICS Troika mechanism) this opportunity appears to have been lost.
The benefits of a synchronized system of presidencies include greater scope to conclude plurilateral accords ex-ante across global forums and organizations as well as a more continuous mode of the implementation of economic policy initiatives compared to the more discrete and short-term policy impulses that are characteristic of the current system. Policy impulses launched by one country become more sustained via further presidencies and the Troika mechanism compared to most of such initiatives being limited to 1 year and being disconnected across the various levels of global governance in the current system. The drawbacks of the proposed sequencing framework include significant requirements for coordination across a wide array of actors and forums/platforms – this may prove to be a tall order in the current international setting.
Given that the practical feasibility of the proposed arrangement of synchronized presidencies may face challenges due to the need for greater coordination across blocs and regions, it may be more expedient then to approach this greater synchronicity via test cases of certain key initiatives and themes being coordinated by countries with their regional and global partners through successive presidencies. One example of such test cases in the past several years could have been the idea of creating a platform for regional integration arrangements being discussed by South Africa with its regional partners from the AU in 2020-2021 (when South Africa chaired the regional bloc), taken to the BRICS level through the (not yet existent) BRICS Troika mechanism in 2022-2023 (South Africa would become part of the Troika in 2022 as it hosted the BRICS summit in 2023) to discuss the creation of such a platform for RTAs within the BRICS+ framework. This could have been then advanced to the global level of the G20 in 2024-2025 with both South Africa (a member of the G20 Troika since 2024 and the Chair in 2025) and the African Union (that became a member of the G20 in 2023-2024) presenting the case for the creation of a regional 20/platform for regional integration arrangements at the global level.
And of course the challenge of greater synchronicity in the operation of the global economy relates not only to the sequencing of chairmanships and the continuity/inclusivity of policy initiatives, but also to coordinated economic stimuli (that within the G20 framework are still largely ad hoc and in the context of BRICS+ non-existent). Another such area is trade liberalization that may complement and amplify WTO global trade rounds with a coordinated process of ex-ante discussion of the modalities of trade liberalization at the regional and global levels. Perhaps the same could be said of the build-up of policy initiatives in the run-up to global COP conferences. In all these areas, a realization of the sequence of consecutively building up policy impulses and initiatives from the national to regional and then to global level would significantly raise the effectiveness of economic policy measures at the global level.
Technical note: The mechanics of realigning the sequencing of presidencies/chairmanships across the main international platforms would be to start with the time-frames of country presidencies at the global level (for example set the year 2030 as the period of a given country’s presidency in the G20) and to then proceed to set the presidencies in trans-regional blocs one year earlier than the G20 chairmanship (BRICS chairmanship set for 2029) and for the regional blocs presidency to be set one year earlier than the trans-regional chairmanship (ASEAN or Mercosur presidency of that country set for 2028). With most international organizations and forums experiencing changes in chairmanship sequencing due to expansion/changes in membership there may be a need for re-synchronizing and adjusting the sequencing of presidencies every 10-15 years. At the same time, global forums may come and go and if the importance of the G20 platform were to decline the framework of synchronized presidencies could be re-adjusted to focus on global forums such as COP or other new emerging global platforms.
Yaroslav Lissovolik is a Founder of BRICS+ Analytics.
