CIVICUS discusses the recent G20 summit with Yanga Malotana, project manager of the Emerging Scholars Initiative at the University of Pretoria and South Africa’s network coordinator for the Indian Ocean Rim Association Academic Group. At the G20, Yanga represented South Africa as an early career ocean professional.

The G20 summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil highlighted geopolitical divisions but made progress on some areas. Host President Lula da Silva launched a global alliance against poverty and hunger, bringing together 82 countries and aiming to reach 500 million people by 2030. A Brazilian proposal to tax the super-rich to tackle inequality also gained traction. But the outcomes on climate change were disappointing, with leaders stressing the need to increase funding but failing to specify contributions or commit to a transition away from fossil fuels. The summit also called for ceasefires and increased humanitarian aid in Gaza and Ukraine, but there was no consensus on condemning Russian aggression.

Did the summit address pressing global issues in ways that reflect African and young people’s concerns?

The G20 summit has traditionally addressed global challenges such as climate change, economic justice and financial systems, with the agenda set by the host state. Like many other hosts before, Brazil stated the need to build a just world and a sustainable planet – but its focus on social inclusion and sustainability was stronger. Civil society welcomed this, despite the limitations that come with the fact that the G20 is fundamentally an economic forum.

The inclusion of the African Union (AU) in the energy transition discussion was a significant step forward. However, the discussion on financing and energy infrastructure, which are critical to Africa’s future, remained at a high level. The outcomes document endorsed climate action and financial solidarity, but the depth of the conversation, particularly on African and youth-specific issues, varied significantly depending on the session. The AU’s inclusion in the discussions didn’t guarantee that solutions discussed were tailored to the needs of Africa, and much less Africa’s young people.

As is often the case in large international forums, Africa’s specific struggles – such as climate finance, energy infrastructure and ocean conservation – were given less priority. The Oceans 20 engagement group, for instance, highlighted the need to tackle climate change through ocean conservation, but its concerns were overshadowed by other global discussions and did not receive the attention they deserved within the broader G20 framework.

While the summit acknowledged issues of social inclusion that are crucial for young people in global south countries, it only superficially addressed pressing concerns such as youth unemployment. The outcome documents noted the issue, but didn’t include actionable measures to create real opportunities for Africa and its young people.

Ultimately, the outcomes of the summit were largely in line with the expectations of African nations and young people, but there were few breakthroughs. While African leaders were given a seat at the table, the real impact of their participation is still uncertain.

How much space was there for civil society to engage?

The increased recognition of the role of civil society was a positive development. Brazil’s facilitation of informal discussions between civil society and G20 leaders was a step forward. While not transformative, this approach opened the door for civil society and youth representatives to push to be included in the discussions.

But it was far from enough. The Youth Summit in August, for example, brought together young people to discuss digital inclusion, artificial intelligence and sustainable technology. It produced a set of recommendations to inform the G20 discussions, but the extent to which these were taken into account is uncertain.

The physical presence of young people at the main summit was also limited, and even when they were present, their concerns were not given the same priority as other issues. The timing of the youth-led discussions, scheduled towards the end of the programme, meant that by the time youth representatives were able to speak, many leaders had already left.

What steps should G20 leaders take to translate the summit’s commitments into tangible results?

G20 leaders need to move from a top-down approach to a bottom-up approach. South Africa, as the incoming G20 chair, has a crucial opportunity to reshape the G20’s engagement with African countries and young people by focusing on implementation. We also need clearer language. To us, solidarity, equality and sustainability aren’t buzzwords. They are ambitious ideas, and as such, they must be linked to actionable measures with a direct impact on vulnerable communities.

While the G20 addresses climate change and economic inequality, its discussions often fail to translate into practical solutions for those most affected, particularly young people. This means there’s need for global governance reform. Financial mechanisms must be refocused to serve communities on the ground. South Africa must advocate for the meaningful participation of young people and civil society not only in summit discussions, but also in the design and implementation of policies that shape their future.

Ultimately, the G20 must adopt a more inclusive and pragmatic approach, recognising that real change happens from the ground up. Without this shift, the cycle of empty promises and limited impact will continue.