WASHINGTON, April 15 (Reuters) - The world's developed and emerging economic powers agreed on a procedure for identifying countries whose policies pose a threat to global stability.
All Group of 20 countries would face tests, based on previously agreed parameters, of their economies' health. But seven that each account for 5 percent or more of total G20 output would get special scrutiny.
The seven are China, the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Japan and India. The seven are most likely to be kicked into a second of analysis, though that level of review could be applied to any G20 member whose policies are found to be troubling.
The new system is not binding, relying instead on peer pressure to persuade countries to voluntarily alter policies seen as putting the world economy at risk.
In February, the G20 wrangled over which indicators to monitor, with China opposed to inclusion of foreign exchange issues, but agreed on three broad parameters:
1) Public debt and fiscal deficits
2) Private savings and private debt
3) Trade interactions, including the merchandise trade balance and net investment flows.
The step forward in Washington was to agree on "indicative guidelines" for assessing economies on each of the three parameters.
Following are some questions and answers on how the G20 arrived at this point and where it hopes to go from here.
WHERE DID THE IDEA OF INDICATIVE GUIDELINES COME FROM?
After the 2007-2009 financial crisis, policymakers began searching for ways to make the world economy more stable.
They quickly identified mounting trade deficits in countries like the United States and corresponding surpluses in others like China as one key source of instability.
The United States' claim that China's undervalued currency was a reason for out-of-kilter trade, and China's retort that the United States was to blame for overconsumption, produced argument and little action.
So G20 political leaders agreed in November to launch an effort to find a set of indicators that could be used to assess each economy without necessarily singling out one or two.
WHY IS IT TAKING SO LONG TO GET THIS PROCESS IN PLACE?
Because each nation faces unique circumstances, it's easy for countries to argue that certain criteria do not apply to them.
At the February meeting of the G20 in Paris, China refused to agree that currency exchange rates were an acceptable gauge because Beijing felt it would lead to more pressure to let the yuan rise in value.
China, now the world's No. 2 economy, says it is still a developing country and will allow more currency flexibility but only at a controlled pace that does not cause disruption.
Similarly, there was disagreement over a proposal to use current account balances, which include capital flows as well as merchandise trade flows, as a gauge of imbalances.
China, as the largest holder of foreign currency thanks its surging exports, was sensitive about being assessed on its huge current account surplus that includes interest earnings on nearly $3 trillion of accumulated foreign exchange reserves.
SO WHAT ACTUALLY CHANGED AT THIS MEETING?
The G20 agreed on how to apply four methods for measuring members' performance -- three of them statistical approaches that weigh past and projected growth estimates or that benchmark a country's economy against others, and one a structural approach that uses computer modeling to adjust for special circumstances such as whether a country is primarily a commodity producer.
All four methods will be applied against each country's economy. That was a compromise since there was argument whether any single method could reliably be used to measure such a diverse set of economies.
WHAT HAPPENS IF ECONOMY SHOWS IMBALANCES?
If at least two of the four approaches identify a country as having persistently large imbalances, that would trigger stage two of the process: an in-depth assessment with the help of the International Monetary Fund to examine the nature and causes of the imbalances and to devise policy prescriptions.
This stage is expected to occur over the summer and to be largely completed by fall, ready for full implementation ahead of a meeting of G20 political leaders in Cannes on Nov. 3-4, capping France's year as G20 president.
WHEN WILL WE KNOW WHICH COUNTRIES HAVE IMBALANCES?
That's unclear at this point, although U.S. officials said it should happen fairly soon. It is not entirely clear that the G20 will publish a list of countries sent to a second stage of review although it would likely soon become known.
The seven big economies that would almost automatically go to the second stage are considered "systemic economies" -- so big that they could hurt the global financial system if they failed to change policy course.
WON'T NATIONAL INTERESTS SUPERSEDE ANY VOLUNTARY PACT?
It remains to be seen whether parties will bow to peer pressure if altering a policy, such as reducing a trade surplus or deficit, would hurt some sectors of its economy. But there were at least some promising indications.
China had warned before the G20 meeting that it wouldn't agree to anything that looked like a "political tool" to rein in its trade surpluses, which would mean allowing the yuan to rise more rapidly.
But China's vice finance minister, Zhu Guangyao, said after the meeting that everyones' views had been accommodated and that China was satisfied. The United States said it was committed to cutting its budget deficits -- the parameter likely to cause it to be labeled as needing a policy change -- so there was some reason for optimism that key countries could accept policy prescriptions as long as they were broadly in line with sovereign aspirations. (Reporting by Glenn Somerville; Editing by Leslie Adler)