G7 Research Group

Summits | Meetings | Publications | Research | Search | Home | About the G7 Research Group

University of Toronto

|

|

Compliance with G8 Commitments:
Ascertaining the Degree of Compliance with Summit Debt and International trade Commitments for Canada and the United States, 1996-1999

Diana Juricevic, G8 Research Group, 2000

APPENDIX (continued)

Table 3: Ambition and Significance Summary Comparisons

Table 3.1: Summary: Comparison of Ambition and Significance Scores by Summit

Summit*	Number of Commitments (n)	Total Ambition Score (x)	Total Significance Score (z)	Weighted Average (x/n)	Weighted Average (z/n)
*Lyon 1996*
1. International trade	9	14.5	47	1.611	5.222
2. Debt Relief	4	7	17	1.750	4.250
*Denver 1997*
1. International trade	6	1.5	17.5	0.250	2.917
2. Debt Relief	8	5.5	22.5	0.688	2.813
*Birmingham 1998*
1. International trade	10	11.5	44.5	1.150	4.450
2. Debt Relief	3	4	14	1.333	4.667
*Cologne 1999*
1. International trade	11	15	56	1.364	5.091
2. Debt Relief	5	10	26	2.000	5.200

Table 3.2: Summary: Comparison of Ambition and Significance Scores by Issue

Issue*	Number of Commitments (n)	Weighted Average (x/n)	Weighted Average (z/n)
International trade
1. Lyon 1996	9	1.611	5.222
2. Denver 1997	6	0.250	2.917
3. Birmingham 1998	10	1.150	4.450
4. Cologne 1999	11	1.364	5.091
Total	36	1.089	4.520
*Debt Relief*
1. Lyon 1996	4	1.750	4.250
2. Denver 1997	8	0.688	2.813
3. Birmingham 1998	3	1.333	4.667
4. Cologne 1999	5	2.000	5.200
Total	20	1.443	4.233

|

|

—	This Information System is provided by the University of Toronto Libraries and the G7 Research Group at the University of Toronto.
	Please send comments to: g7@utoronto.ca This page was last updated March 18, 2026.

Instagram

All contents copyright © 2026. University of Toronto unless otherwise stated. All rights reserved.