Understandably, the G20 meeting in Canada has been dominated by discussions on ways in which to get the world’s economies back on track.

While this is true, in reality, the discussion went a bit deeper and was more targeted towards ways in which national and continental economies can work with more synergy to reach an even loftier goal – getting the world economy back on track. While the two may sound similar, there is a subtle difference.

This meeting is not one that can be compared to, for example, a Eurozone Finance Ministers meeting where concrete decisions are taken which must be implemented and followed up.

This G20 forum is more of a platform for world leaders to, first and foremost, work on their personal relationships with each other. Alliances are strengthened, newcomers are sounded out, and national agendas are explained and even lobbied.

But, ‘pleasantries’ aside, the G20 leaders use the meeting as a forum of theoretical exchange. It is very difficult for the heads of state of such a bloc of nations to actually decide on something which has any chance of being implemented across the board. If an approach is accepted as being one of consensus – the idea or decision then has to be passed on from world leaders to their government. In some cases, the matter has to be debated in parliament. Other nations such as China must take the issues to their assemblies while European nations are also subject to what is decided on at a European Union or eurozone level.

Many believe the whole exercise to be a waste of money due to what has been explained above, especially when millions are spent on white elephants which will never be utilised. Others believe that it goes worse than that and that the whole exercise is nothing more than a ‘holiday of peers’ for world leaders.

The truth is that these counter-assessments are not far from the truth. But there is value to such gatherings. While it is rare for anything concrete to be implemented as a result of the G-20 assemblies, one cannot deny that they are essential as one forum where the general direction of things is decided. A case in point is the exchange rate of the Chinese rembinbi currency. The world believes that China needs to come up with a solution to the ‘flexible’ exchange rate which governs the currency. Put more simply, most Western countries are not happy that China ‘manipulates’ its currency exchange rate to keep it more competitive. On the other hand, China has a stake in European debt and can use that as leverage in discussions. This particular issue is being spearheaded by the US and when one looks at what has been happening in that sphere, Obama has been ‘buttering up’ UK leader David Cameron and Russian President Dimitri Medvedev. Whether or not it is all linked is a matter of conjecture and speculation. But one can rest assured that this is where the lobbying takes place. In a world where it has become a rat race of competition, a forum where leaders can sit down and discuss things at a table is sorely needed. While many argue that the success of such meetings is measured in tangible results, we should never under-estimate the many intangibles which leaders take home with them and ruminate on.