Think Tanks as Anchors of Continuity

As the world enters a period of unprecedented geopolitical flux—marked by fragmented multilateralism, escalating climate pressures, technological disruptions, and an erosion of institutional trust—the possibility of U.S. withdrawal or ambivalence toward the 2026 G20 process raises urgent questions about the future of global governance. In the absence of consistent leadership from the world’s most powerful economy, it falls to other actors—states, institutions, and civil society—to ensure that multilateral cooperation not only survives, but adapts to meet the needs of a new era.

Within this evolving landscape, the Think20 (T20)—the research and policy advisory network associated with the G20—can play a central role in supporting coalitions of the willing among the remaining G20 members. These coalitions must be able to preserve and advance the G20’s global agenda while offering powerful incentives for the United States to remain engaged. The T20, by virtue of its diversity, independence, and analytical capacity, is well-positioned to provide the intellectual architecture and convening power needed to help the G19 coordinate around inclusive, forward-looking solutions that place societal well-being and environmental sustainability at the heart of global cooperation.

To keep the G20 agenda alive in the face of U.S. retreat, T20 institutions can offer continuity by developing actionable, technically sound, and normatively compelling proposals across core policy areas. In digital governance, for instance, think tanks can collaboratively design frameworks for AI safety, algorithmic accountability, and cybersecurity resilience that reflect international best practices such as the OECD AI Principles and the G7 Hiroshima AI Process. These frameworks can be structured as voluntary alliances, enabling a subset of G20 members to implement them collectively—thereby establishing baseline standards for global tech regulation that align with social and ethical values, and setting a precedent for others, including the United States, to follow.

In the domain of energy security and transition finance, T20 researchers can model and advocate for the scaling of Just Energy Transition Partnerships (JETPs) into a broader Just Energy Investment Compact. This compact would combine public and private capital to support decarbonization in developing countries while ensuring community participation, energy access, and social equity. Drawing on the IEA’s Financing Clean Energy Transitions, think tanks can provide the policy design, risk-mitigation structures, and governance models necessary to operationalize such coalitions.

On carbon pricing and climate action, T20 institutions can support the formation of a G19 Carbon Pricing Club. This would involve developing shared carbon floor prices, monitoring systems, and equitable transition mechanisms. With reference to the IMF’s Fiscal Monitor, T20 experts can advise on linking carbon pricing with border adjustments and green industrial policy in ways that incentivize compliance while safeguarding development. These efforts can establish regulatory frameworks that U.S. exporters and firms will be compelled to engage with, creating bottom-up pressure for U.S. re-entry into formal multilateral alignment.

In supporting a just energy transition, think tanks can translate normative frameworks such as the UNDP Just Transition Guidance and ILO guidelines into measurable indicators and finance-eligibility criteria for infrastructure projects. This allows countries to assess social inclusion in climate transitions, creating a replicable model that links justice with investment—a critical step in making global finance more equitable.

Regarding multilateral lending reform, T20 experts can build upon the 2022 G20 MDB Capital Adequacy Framework and the World Bank Evolution Roadmap to propose governance and capitalization reforms that enable MDBs to deliver climate-aligned and pro-equity finance at scale. Through scenario modeling, policy simulations, and stakeholder dialogues, think tanks can equip reformist governments with the evidence and narratives needed to shift global financial norms, even in the absence of U.S. endorsement.

In trade, T20 networks can develop modular “Sustainable Trade Partnerships” that build on WTO Joint Statement Initiatives, integrating environmental, labor, and digital norms into a new generation of plurilateral agreements. Drawing from UNCTAD’s work on trade and industrial policy, think tanks can demonstrate how trade can be used to advance global public goods, not just market access.

In global health, T20 institutions can support G19 health coalitions to implement the WHO Pandemic Accord through policy guidance on pooled procurement, IP sharing, and public-health R&D. Think tanks can ensure that preparedness frameworks reflect equity and resilience, while also aligning with domestic political considerations that shape global health governance.

On biodiversity, T20 researchers can work to operationalize the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework through innovative financing instruments, such as biodiversity performance bonds and debt-for-nature swaps, rooted in the findings of the Dasgupta Review. These instruments not only protect natural capital but provide mechanisms for aligning financial markets with environmental stewardship.

To reinforce incentives for continued U.S. engagement, T20 think tanks can amplify the reputational, economic, and regulatory consequences of non-participation. They can model the impact of exclusion from green finance standards, digital compliance frameworks, and climate-linked trade arrangements. Just as GDPR and CBAM have reshaped global practices through their gravitational pull, G19-led coalitions can create regulatory environments that firms and subnational actors in the U.S. find too costly to ignore—thus creating internal momentum for federal re-engagement.

Most critically, the T20 – with the support of multistakeholder networks such as that of the Global Solutions Initiative – can serve as the platform for inclusive multistakeholder problem-solving. By convening researchers, policymakers, business leaders, civil society representatives, Indigenous groups, and youth activists, think tanks can build deliberative processes that feed directly into G20 working groups and engagement tracks. This ensures that coalitions of the willing are not merely government-to-government pacts, but broad-based governance experiments rooted in lived experience and diverse expertise. The T20 can coordinate stakeholder dialogues, synthesize cross-sectoral knowledge, and co-design tools for implementation and evaluation—thus acting as a hub for legitimacy and innovation.

For G20 policymakers, the recommendation is clear: treat the T20 not as a passive observer, but as a strategic instrument of global governance. Fund and empower its collaborations. Integrate its outputs into ministerial-level policy streams. Use its convening power to drive stakeholder legitimacy. And above all, allow it to support coalitions of the willing in demonstrating that multilateralism can still work—whether or not the United States shows up.

The future of global governance does not depend on the dominance of any single actor. It depends on the collective will to solve shared problems, and the institutional imagination to do so inclusively. The T20 is ready to help lead that transformation.

Featured image: G20 logo lit up hill over the G20 Sherpa Meetings in June 2025 | Credit: DIRCO G20 Flickr