Impact of Brics on Global Governance

A study on integration among stock markets from different countries having an enormous importance in a globalised economic world. Being an awful economic force BRICS group of nations can change the economic climate of the world, if they are highly financially integrated. The primary objective of this paper is to investigate the integration among BRICS nations during the past 10 years (2005 to 2015) by considering daily price histories of IBrX 50, RTSI, Nifty Index, Shanghai Composite Index, and FTSI-Africa Index for Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa respectively. It has been applied Johansen Co-integration Test (1988) and Pairwise Granger Causality test to remark interdependencies and dynamic linkages among selected markets. Surprisingly, Even though it is an Hulking economic force in the world, It have no long run relationship between them and some unidirectional cause and effect relationship only existed. Finally this paper allege better candidacy of the stock exchanges in multinationally diversified portfolios.

The BRICS-Lawyers Guide to BRICS Texts and Materials presents a first systematic compendium of the most important texts and materials that have emerged from the cooperation among the BRICS member states. This compilation has been brought together with an intention to make these materials accessible for the convenient use by government officials, practicing lawyers and arbitrators, scholars and students of inter¬national relations, business, economics and law. The texts are comprised of treaties, summit declarations by heads of state, ministerial declarations, declarations adopted by the BRICS Legal Forum and other official documents. The book also includes a chronological presentation of the first decade of BRICS cooperation. It is followed by a discussion on the concept of the sources of (international) law in order to aid in the attempts to classify the various BRICS documents in terms of “sources of BRICS law”.

Abstract (English)

This paper analyzes the multilateral Brazilian foreign policy, making the country a regional pivot in Latin America, a leading nation among developing countries, and an emerging world power. Without the status of nuclear power, Brazil establishes asymmetrical alliances to earn a place in a reformed UN Security Council, but must contend the seat with accredited competitors, such as India, as well a strategic partner, and counteract some riotous neighbors, as Mexico and Argentina. Meanwhile, through the establishment and the membership in several international organizations and multilateral mechanisms, Brasília developes a worldwide policy, maneuvering between new and old alliances, and playing a 'winning and losing carambole game'. Will the chrysalis turn into a butterfly?

Resumo (Português)

Este trabalho analisa a política estrangeira multilateral do Brasil, fazendo o país um pivô regional na América Latina, una nação liderante entre os países em desenvolvimento e uma potência mundial emergente. Sem o estado de potência nuclear, o Brasil estabelece alianças estratégicas para ganhar um lugar num Conselho de Segurança das Nações Unidas reformado, mas tem que competir por este lugar com concorrentes acreditados, tal como a Índia, assim como um parceiro estratégico, e para contrapor-se à alguns vizinhos tumultuosos, tal como o México e a Argentina. Enquanto isso, através do estabelecimento e da afiliação a muitas organizações internacionais e mecanismos multilaterais, Brasília desenvolve uma política mundial, manobrando entre alianças novas e antigas, e jogando carambola com possibilidade de conseguir o perder. A crisálida vai virar borboleta?

This working paper surveys various debate around the emergence of the BRICS as economic and political players on the global stage in the last 15 years. In economic terms the paper traverses accounts of the future dominance of the BRICS of the global economy in GDP and growth terms;  including the question whether there is more to the BRICS than the rise of China; whether other conceptions of emerging markets might be more useful; and what kind of shifts in the spatial patterns of extraction, production and consumption of global capitalism are signalled by the rise of the BRICS. In political terms the BRICS have breathed life into their conception by Goldman Sachs as an investment meme, meeting regularly since 2009 to construct an alternative form of global economic governance to the traditional centres of the west. Most profoundly manifest in new economic institutions that rival the IMF and World Bank, the BRICS also share a conception of development that is more partnership-orientated than donor-recipient focused in process, and more infrastructure and energy orientated than the social and governance focused in substance. Lastly, the rise of the BRICS as economic and political players on the global stage raises questions about the extent to which they advance neo-liberal capitalism by serving as sub-imperialists in the regions, or offer more state-centric models of capitalist growth that open up the possibility of more inclusive development paths. A related debate is whether the rise of the BRICS is good for their regions or just the leading states of those regions. Lastly, the emerging shifts in global capitalism and economic governance signalled by the rise of the BRICS suggests we are the beginning of the end of the utility of the North-South distinction as differences with countries come to be as important as differences across countries.

This article comparatively analyzes the rising and diversifying economic, industrial and political roles of the five key growing economy giants called BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) that have been glorified with their remarkable economic growth, industrial development and political gravity in international relations for the last two decades. They are increasingly becoming the symbol of fast economic growth despite the 2008/09 financial crises, however, they are politically sharing less common identity and interest than more collective economic aspects. This article, from this perspective, examines the question of whether the BRICS or jointly BRICS countries have a common identity, interest and goal or not in international politics. To better figure out the reasoning of this topic, the article also finds out the correspondence of the following two subsidiary questions: First, in what aspects do the BRICS countries differ in terms of upholding their comparative political and industrial interests in world politics? Second, does the BRICS commit for a common economic identity and goal to mastermind the global economy for the future?

The BRICS is characterised as an extremely heterogeneous international cooperation model which demonstrates a high level of complexity as it is composed of countries having different cultural backgrounds which adapt their differences into a factor that sustains the existence of the grouping and achieves its common goals. In a specific way, the comparative investigation of the distinct perceptions of State and Constitution appear to be a useful research approach better to understand the international institutional complexities. Therefore, to explain the BRICS phenomenon I explore the perception of State and Constitution for each BRICS member using a comparative approach which enables a better understanding of internal differences and how these influence the construction of the collective identity of the grouping and its forms of cooperation. This article aims to analyse, from a comparative perspective, the different perceptions of State and Constitution in BRICS members so as to identify the constituent elements of their diversities and heterogeneity in addressing one of the principal topics of the current international political agenda – global governance.

The BRICS is a label for a group of five large developing countries, including South Africa, China, India, Russia, and Brazil. They are distinguished from other promising economies by their economic and demographic potentials that rank them among the largest and most influential economies in the world in the 21st century (Elder and Leahy 25). These countries are also considered as the nations with reasonable chances of realizing their economic potentials. When combined, the BRICS countries have a population of more than 2.8 billion, which is 40% of the world’s population. In 2011, the BRICS countries accounted for 25% of the global GDP, which was an increase from 17% in 2007. With their current growth trend, the BRICS will be the top five economic giants in the world in 2050 ahead of the current G8 nations (Singh par. 2). However, with increasing urbanization, industrialization, expansion of the middle class, and development of infrastructures, energy security is the key obstacle to future sustainability and growth. There is a stark difference in the way in which the BRICS are endowed with natural resources, as well as existing energy structures. As a result, each country has a unique challenge in addressing its energy needs, which is vital for the economy. Given that energy is the driver to the realization of the BRICS’ economic potential, it is vital that the energy situation is addressed in time, as well as cooperation in energy realignment made among them.

Chinese and Russian universities are increasingly drawn into center-periphery repositioning, as they compete for symbolic, financial, and intellectual resources locally and globally. However, their strategies on national and institutional linkages differ with regards to the individual scientist’s powers in knowledge production. As global hierarchies of knowledge productivity benchmark prestigious publications, and national industries seek access to innovative products in global research and development labs, globally connected talents become essential for elevating local research performance. This article examines the undercurrents of center-periphery repositioning in Russia and China by comparing their research and development funding and performance data, as well as contrasting their global standing with Brazil, India, South Africa, and G7 members. A method of comparative multilayered patterning of mixed data sets is used to reflect on center-periphery dilemmas facing the Chinese and Russian scientists.

Over the past two decades, China, Russia, and India have hammered out four types of reactions to problems posed by developed nations of the West in the fields of technology, international doctrine, and security strategy. Some of those reactions - such as undertaking asymmetrical measures, imposing international legal or ethical constraints on Western initiatives, and mirroring Western innovation - were confrontational. Yet, oftentimes a conciliatory or even cooperative approach prevailed so that conflict among the "aspiring powers" and the West was avoided. Beijing, Moscow, and New Delhi usually sought to strike a balance between confrontation and cooperation with the challengers. However, the Ukraine crisis of 2014 heralded Russia's move towards a showdown with the United States and its allies. While Moscow has been trying to change the status quo forcefully by precipitating an anti-Western coalition, Beijing and New Delhi have refrained from endorsing a direct assault against the interests of the United States and its allies, deflecting Moscow's demands for a collective counterbalancing strategy.

O artigo examina a confirmação multipolar da distribuição global do poder econômico, onde importantes
países de segunda ordem são objeto de interesse dentro da cambiante sociedade internacional. Neste
sentido, o texto estuda algumas das principais questões sobre o agrupamento dos BRICS, bem como sua
influência nas transformações institucionais no sistema internacional. Observa-se sinais indubitáveis de
uma crescente multipolaridade de poder no mundo, onde Brasil, Rússia, Índia, China e África do Sul,
utilizam de recursos políticos, militares e econômicos para contribuir para a gestão equitativa e democrática
da ordem internacional, com notável influência regional e global.

In a moment of great global uncertainty, the BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) are increasing their standing worldwide. Despite several areas that still undermine their credibility on the world stage and which make them appear to seem irrelevant as a group in the view of some scholars, we try to analyze and evaluate if they are really accountable as a group and what impact they could have on global governance and, in general, on the global order. We depart from previous research accomplishments and, following certain classical theories of International Relations such as those of Critical and Dependence, we consider three aspects of the BRICS growth that could influence the current international framework: 1) the emergence of institutions outside the Bretton Woods system; 2) an interest in improving their “soft power” (for example, climate change may play a decisive role here); 3) the growth of their presence in different parts of the world which have so far experienced a subordinated or marginal role. The paper considers both the limitations of and the potential for BRICS countries in the reshaping of the international framework. Moreover, we provide some interpretations to the current situation, especially in light of the prospective impact that COVID-19 may have on these three fields.

BRAZIL, RUSSIA, INDIA CHINA AND SOUTH
AFRICA WITH LARGE DOMESTIC MARKETS
AND GROWING ECONOMIES PLAY A VERY
IMPORTANT ROLE IN THE GLOBAL ECONOMY.
THE MOST IMPORTANT FORUM IN THE
MULTILATERAL TRADE SYSTEM, WHICH
SHOWS THE ROLE OF THE BRICS MEMBERS
AS AN INTERNATIONAL PLAYERS, IS THE
WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION (WTO).
THE PURPOSE OF THIS ARTICLE IS ANALYSIS
BRICS COUNTRIES PARTICIPATION IN THE
MULTILATERAL TRADE REGIME INCLUDING
THE DOHA ROUND NEGOTIATIONS.
ANOTHER AIM IS TO DESCRIBE THE GOALS
OF BRICS COUNTRIES IN WTO AND ANSWER
THE QUESTION IF BRICS COUNTRIES SHARE
THE COMMON INTERESTS AND VALUES IN
WTO?

At seventy, the United Nations (UN) is facing wider array of concerns and the responsibility to protect mankind against man-made and natural disasters. The UN System and Agencies are today characterized by the fluidity of Western cultural globalization while the phenomenon has created wider forms of global inequalities, as States and Regional Organizations are unequal in the inter-state space relations. In this paper, the convergence of different civilizations is fundamentally considered as justice and a requirement for guaranteeing security to all inhabitants. Therefore, the invocation of Open World Order has emerged at the intersection of security and justice in global governance. On one hand, the borders of States have collapsed beyond the ecological interconnections of land, sea and air space. On the second hand, nations and people of different civilizations are digitally interconnected and its impact on people, culture, markets, and diplomacy are the reasons for UN transformation. Finally, a Bakarean world view is applied for realizing the open Multilateralism 2.0 and formed, as the built Intercontinental System where survival is adjudged by value matrix across geo-political routes via the fluidity of Open globalization

This essay is included in a book that provides the readers with a balanced narrative from different perceptions of the recent evolution of international relations affecting global governance. Overall, these essays represent more than an effort to understand the world. They constitute an interesting testimony of the different views on current geopolitical changes, the need to better define terminology and concepts to characterize the last decade, to further investigate the nature of the changes and the motives of policy makers in different countries. What their real goals are, how to conciliate a range of different perspectives on interests and values, or at least close the gap on knowledge, extricate ambiguities in search of their motivations and clarity of judgement to compensate for lack of transparency in international relations. In a world of such complexity, the best we can do is to try to understand and explain it in terms of trends and to make predictions in terms of probabilities.

Soğuk savaşın hâkim olduğu 20. yüzyıl, 21. yüzyıla önemli etkiler yapmıştır. Büyük Buhran, İkinci Dünya Savaşı, petrol krizleri ve ekonomik bunalımlara sahne olan 20. yüzyıl Sovyetlerin dağılmasının ardından tek kutuplu dünya düzenin tartışıldığı bir döneme evrilmiştir. ABD hegemonyası altında ekonomiden yönetişime kadar birçok alanda liberal düşüncelerin yerleştiği bu dönem bölgesel çatışmaları da beraberinde getirmiştir. Irak, Somali, Sudan ve Suriye gibi ülkelerin bölgesel çatışmalardan yıkıcı bir şekilde etkilendiği ve yaptırımlar aracılıyla ekonomik alanda halkların zorluklar yaşadığı kaotik dönem yeni bölgesel güçlerin yükselişini de beraberinde getirmiştir. Özellikle Çin, Rusya, Brezilya, Hindistan ve Türkiye gibi ülkelerin başını çektiği bölgesel yeni güç merkezleri ABD ve müttefiklerinin domino ettiği sisteme yeni eleştiriler getirmiştir. Eleştirilerin başında ekonomik nedenler yer alsa da Dünya Bankası ve IMF'de başlayan reform girişimleri Birleşmiş Milletler gibi kurumlara sirayet etmeye başlamıştır. Yeni bölgesel güç merkezlerin hacim olarak dünya ekonomisinden aldıkları pay arttıkça eleştirilerin niteliği genişlerken, Küresel Finans Krizi yeni reform hareketlerini beraberinde getirmiştir. Küresel krizin kökenlerinin dayandığı gelir adaletsizliği, aşırı finansallaşma ve denetimsizlik ise yeni dönemin ana tartışılan konuları haline gelmiştir. Batılı finans kuruluşlarının ortaya koyduğu aşırı liberal şartların oluşturduğu hoşnutsuzluğu G20 gibi kurumlarda dile getiren yükselmekte olan ekonomiler farklı oluşumlarda bir araya gelerek daha güçlü bir şekilde eleştiriler getirmiştir. Mevcut konjonktürün getirdiği aktivizmle birlikte 2006 yılında ilk toplantılarını gerçekleştiren BRIC[1] ülkeleri, 2011 yılında Güney Afrika'nın katılımıyla BRICS oluşumunu kurmuştur. Bu oluşum günümüzde ekonomiden siyasete kadar birçok alanda aktif bir şekilde yer almaktadır. Kuruluşun doldurduğu batı dışı alternatif çekim merkezlerinden biri olma imajı ise kalkınmakta olan ülkeler için yeni işbirliği olanaklarını ortaya çıkarmıştır. BRICS: KURULUŞ, GELİŞİM VE AKTİVİZM Finans, tarım, ekonomi ve ticaret, bilim ve teknoloji, sağlık, eğitim, akademi ve güvenlik gibi alanlarda üye ülkelerle işbirliğini geliştirmeyi amaç edinen BRICS oluşumu değişen dünya düzeninin yeni kurumsallaşan bir oluşumudur. Dünya ekonomisinin yüzde 23,5[2]'ini oluşturan BRICS ülkeleri uluslararası finans kuruluşlarında aktif olarak rol almalarına rağmen ekonomik büyüklüklerine göre oy oranlarına sahip değildir.[3] Örneğin 2018 yılı rakamlarına göre dünya ekonomisinin yüzde 23,5'ini oluşturan BRICS ülkelerinin IMF'deki oy verme oranı yüzde 14,18'e eşittir. ABD ve batılı ülkelerin finansal anlamda kontrol ettiği Dünya Bankası ve IMF gibi kuruluşlar başta olmak üzere birçok uluslararası kuruluşta BRICS ülkelerinin eleştirdiği adaletsiz durum kronik bir şekilde devam etmektedir. Geri kalmış ve gelişmekte olan ülkelerin gerekli finansal imkânlardan yoksun olmasının getirdiği kısıtlı kalkınma imkânları BRICS ülkelerin ana gündem maddeleri arasında yer almaktadır. Mevcut küresel ekonomik sisteme alternatif oluşturması için BRICS ülkeleri öncülüğünde kurulan Yeni Kalkınma Bankası ve IMF benzeri fon kalkınmakta olan ülkeler için alternatif sunması bakımından kritik bir konumdadır.

This chapter analyses the implementation of the BRICS mandate in the spheres of global security and reshaping the world order as well as ongoing institutionalisation of BRICS. First of all, the term “institutionalisation” itself appears to be applicable to BRICS from both scholarly and political points of view. That is, BRIC started off as an acronym used by Jim O’Neill, an American economist and former Goldman Sachs analyst, in one of his publications back in 2001. It was predominantly similar pattern of economic development that made it possible for the expert to single out these four economies and subsequently introduce this abbreviation. Since then, BRIC, which expanded to BRICS in 2010 with the accession of South Africa, has evolved into one of the largest and most prospective platforms for uniting efforts of rapidly developing countries in many spheres.

Recent developments on the global arena heavily influenced the perception of BRICS both from within the member countries and from the outside. The debate as to whether to expand BRICS mandate to the sphere of global security represents an urgent issue for the BRICS policymakers and scholars. It is quite closely connected with the problem of institutionalisation, as BRICS was initially perceived (and, to some extent, still is perceived) as a less formalised international grouping: even the term "organisation" is usually avoided in the analytical pieces and official documents. Nevertheless, the question of BRICS institutionalisation remains on the agenda.

The article suggests a thorough analysis of the evolution of the BRICS idea and concept in the context of international power game and sources of its current role and place on the world arena. It further considers Russia’s approaches to the BRICS club. While it was the first to suggest idea of high level meetings between the four BRIC countries, its initial attitude was rather reserved with very limited role seen for the grouping. Nevertheless over time being Russia came to seeing BRICS (with addition of South Africa in 2011) as the primary forum for political and economic coordination and essential mechanism for its foreign policy realization.
Another aspect considered within the article is the argument often presented by outside observers trying to suggest that BRICS is a ‘deadborn child’ or that divergences are prevailing with no commonalities found. Thus positions of each of the BRICS countries in the global economic, financial, trade and political aspects are analysed with the initial approaches to the claimed ‘compatibility of BRICS economies’. Also the author reviews some of the examples of the successful coordination of the five countries within the other international institutions and results achieved, but also looks at the cases where BRICS demonstrated differing approaches to the problem. Nevertheless offered analysis suggests that the BRICS, while not having identical positions and interests, found each other to be able to promote a better, fairer, more inclusive world order.

In their 75 years of existence, the twin institutions born at the Bretton Woods Conference have undergone adaptation and transformation in response to the evolution of the world economy and the challenges it has posed to them. More recently, three changes in the international order have imposed a new round of challenges to those institutions: the emergence of new geo-economic poles; the prominence of nationalist policies in relation to multilateralism; and fragmentation in the system of plurinational institutions.

Brasil ganó un lugar destacado en el escenario mundial, no por ser el quinto país del mundo en población y extensión territorial, sino también por su progresiva expansión económica, que registra, por ejemplo, el crecimiento de su PIB a un promedio de 4% al año en la primera década de este siglo.

Ese progresivo éxito económico confiere a Brasil la posición de 7ª economía mundial, conforme ranking del Banco Mundial (2014), con empresas que están situadas entre las más grandes del mundo, como Petrobras, exploración de petróleo, y Embraer, que actúa en el sector aeronáutico. Asimismo, Brasil consolida gradualmente su papel de líder regional, encontrándose a frente del MERCOSUR y trabajando activamente en el fortalecimiento de los BRICS (grupo formado por potencias emergentes –Brasil, Rusia, India, China y Sudáfrica– que buscan una reconfiguración del nuevo orden mundial, para compartir el poder en ámbito internacional con EEUU y los países ricos de Europa occidental).

Las encuestas para la segunda vuelta de las elecciones presidenciales en Brasil señalaban un empate técnico entre la actual presidenta y candidata del Partido de los Trabajadores, Dilma Rousseff y el candidato Aécio Neves de la Social Democracia Brasileña. Como decían muchos especialistas, un verdadero enfrentamiento clásico en el actual escenario de la política brasileña, en el cual se polarizó la disputa que venía desde las cuatro últimas elecciones, colocando, de un lado, a la izquierda moderada del líder carismático y ex-presidente Lula da Silva y, del otro, a la centro derecha conservadora del ex- presidente Fernando Henrique Cardoso, aunque nunca en un cuadro de disputa tan feroz.

The essay represents an analysis of the political component and its importance for the BRICS grouping. The author scrutinizes various approaches to security and global governance within BRICS, points of view expressed by both leaders of BRICS countries and the community of scholars.

This article analyses the evolution of Chinese political foreign policy and its strategy in approaching developing and less developed nations. In this context, the relationship between China and Latin America appears to reveal the practice of the Beijing Consensus when considering their interests: China needs natural resources and new markets for its products, and Latin America needs financial aid and loans to develop its infrastructure and provide social programmes. The absence of the US in the region and the rise of political movements denouncing the American imperialism of the Washington Consensus are all factors that contribute to the expansion of Chinese influence. All these considerations allow a discussion concerning the new role of China in developing countries as an expression of a new emerging order in which China is assuming an important role.

In the international trade and development arena, new and developing economies have created a block that is known as BRICS - Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. Initially conceived to drive global change through economic growth, the financial crisis and reversal of fortunes of the BRICS nations have raised questions about their ability to have an impact on the governance of global affairs. This book explores the role of law in various areas of BRICS cooperation including: trade, investment, competition, intellectual property, energy, consumer protection, financial services, space exploration and legal education. It not only covers the specifics of each of the BRICS nations in the selected areas, but also offers innovative and forward-looking perspectives on the BRICS cooperation and their contribution to the reform of the global governance networks. This is a unique reference book suitable for academics, government officials, legal practitioners, business executives, rese...

and South Africa signalled the maturing of the financial relationships among the partners of the "club." These relationships have acquired a heightened profile through the Cape Town Declaration whereby the BRICS Ministers of Science and Technology committed to cooperation. The declaration raises interesting questions, inter alia the status of intra-BRICS cooperation on science, technology and innovation (STI), the rationale for the choice of the specific fields of cooperation, and the countries' strengths in these fields. How do these fields align with each country's domestic strategy for STI? Which bilateral STI agreements are already in place, and what have they delivered? How does the Cape Town Declaration align or compromise the India-Brazil-South Africa (IBSA) process? Will the rising geopolitical tensions (Black Sea, China Sea) limit the scope of STI cooperation? The secondary objective of this article is to demonstrate why South Africa is important to the club. Addressing these questions requires a study of geopolitics, finance, trade and other modes of engagement, STI included. A convenient framework is a macro-level political, economic, social, technological, environmental and legal (PESTEL) analysis, with a more detailed look given to the "T," for which can be read STI. The analysis of other documents and economic, social and STI indicators, together with bibliometric data provide the empirical basis for the arguments. Together with the identification of national imperatives, this analysis allows the potential of the Cape Town Declaration to be assessed. Not only is South Africa the "Gateway to Africa," but the country also displays the highest level of intra-BRICS scientific cooperation.

The BRICS is characterised as an extremely heterogeneous international cooperation model which demonstrates a high level of complexity as it is composed of countries having different cultural backgrounds which adapt their differences into a factor that sustains the existence of the grouping and achieves its common goals. In a specific way, the comparative investigation of the distinct perceptions of State and Constitution appear to be a useful research approach better to understand the international institutional complexities. Therefore, to explain the BRICS phenomenon I explore the perception of State and Constitution for each BRICS member using a comparative approach which enables a better understanding of internal differences and how these influence the construction of the collective identity of the grouping and its forms of cooperation. This article aims to analyse, from a comparative perspective, the different perceptions of State and Constitution in BRICS members so as to iden...

International relations system in contemporary conditions does not presuppose the existence of a universal, generally accepted world order model. Concepts of the modern global order can stand in marked contrast to each other: the idea of a unipolar world led by the United States and the North Atlantic community is opposed to the notion of a multipolar world with several equitable force poles. One of the phenomena illustrating the polycentric world narrative is the emergence of BRICS group of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa in the 2008.
This article considers major tracks of political cooperation within BRICS. The author analyses final documents issued at the BRICS summits in Fortaleza in 2014, Ufa in 2015 and Goa in 2016 to assess the extension of the political agenda and define its reasons. The analysis includes the views of leading Russian and foreign experts, civic leaders and
policymakers. It touches upon the issue of potential enlargement of BRICS, the group’s functioning in the outreach format, as well as possibilities for institutionalization. It also considers BRICS members’ approaches toward including political issues on their agenda.
The author uses a holistic approach. Various fields of BRICS activities are scrutinized for inextricable connections, as they determine one another. The results of the content analysis identified the correlation between the attitude of the summit host to political cooperation and the reflection of the political agenda in the final summit declaration.
The author concludes that common ideologies and principles define BRICS performance (such as supremacy of international law, pursuance of multipolar world, adherence to equal and mutually beneficial cooperation) and serve as a prerequisite for the group’s work: creating financial institutions, holding multiple meetings at different levels, and expanding bilateral and multilateral exchanges. Not only is the economic vector compatible with the political track, but it also catalyzes
the expansion of the agenda. This conclusion is confirmed by the consistent increase in the number of political aspects of
interaction among the BRICS countries in recent years.

A confiança no sucesso da integração europeia e a expectativa de que o euro rivalizaria - senão superaria - com o dólar como moeda internacional de fato era inversamente proporcional à crise de confiança nos mercados emergentes de um sistema financeiro global crescentemente integrado.