Search

This paper examines the consequences of the hugely successful expansion of South-South Cooperation since the new millennium. For all the achievements, variations and change over the 1950s-late 1990s, 'SSC 1.0' was characterised by relative neglect within the 'international' development community, and by many orthodox and critical scholars. In the chronological schema of the paper, 'SSC 2.0' refers to the period of remarkable expansion from the early 2000s to the present. The emergence of 'SSC 3.0', I suggest, is currently revealed by a discernible set of shifts driven in large part by the expansionary successes of SSC 2.0, as well as other turns in the global political economy. Three contemporary trends are identified: cooperation narratives that are increasingly 'muscular', nationalistic and pragmatic; difficulties sustaining claims to 'non-interference' in partner countries; and the further erosion of ideational and operational distinctiveness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper assesses the role of the BASIC countries — Brazil, South Africa, India, and China — in UN climate change negotiations. The paper explores the formation and evolution of the group, and focuses on how the four major developing countries of China, India, Brazil, and South Africa have coordinated their positions and acted jointly to achieve an agreed outcome with other players in the recent UN Climate Change Conferences in Copenhagen and Cancun, based on an analysis of their country profiles and negotiation positions on a wide range of climate issues. The paper argues that the emergence of the BASIC Group is a reflection of the ongoing power shift from EU–US agreement to BASIC–US compromise in UN climate negotiations since the early 1990s. The rise of BASIC also has its roots in recent global market dynamics and further reflects the power transformation in the economic dimension of the international system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper compares the status of social science research in India, China and Brazil using various indicators. It particularly focuses on the analyses of annual average publication rate vis-a-vis global publication share; similarity in research profile of different countries; research priorities of countries as measured in terms of national publications output by sub-fields; relative share of international collaborative papers in the national output; distribution of research output by geographical regions within each country; and characteristics of high productivity institutions and highly cited papers computed on select measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Current article assesses emerging trends in global trade in the case of Brazil-India-China (BIC) Alliance. Although the globalized world is still recovering from the global 2008 crisis, it may be perceived that Brazil, India and China showed considerable growth during the crisis, continuing with the trend even after the crisis period. So that the growth observed in these three countries could be demonstrated, current paper is divided into three sections. The first section will deal with the emerging trends in global trade. Section two will examine emerging trends in Brazil, India, and China's foreign trade. The third section will examine the characteristics of the concept of 'new regionalism' and the role of WTO in accelerating the rate of growth in world trade for the coming years. Revised bibliography and descriptive statistics will be the methodology employed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The main purpose of this paper is to examine the National Defense Strategies of the BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) in order to verify how the four countries evaluate the strategic landscape of this century, especially regarding the balance of power between the Great Powers, their immediate geographical surroundings and their relationship with the US. This work addresses specifically the similarities and differences among them and how these differences reflect in their respective defense policies. Among the four cases, the Brazilian one will be in especial focus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Our paper provides a comparative perspective on the development of public primary education in four of the largest developing economies circa 1910: Brazil, Russia, India and China (BRIC). These four countries encompassed more than 50% of the world's population in 1910, but remarkably few of their citizens attended any school by the early 20th century. We present new, comparable data on school inputs and outputs for BRIC drawn from contemporary surveys and government documents. Recent studies emphasize the importance of political decentralization, and relatively broad political voice for the early spread of public primary education in developed economies. We identify the former and the lack of the latter to be important in the context of BRIC, but we also outline how other factors such as factor endowments, colonialism, serfdom, and, especially, the characteristics of the political and economic elite help explain the low achievement levels of these four countries and the incredible amount of heterogeneity within each of them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper studies regional (spatial) inequality in the five most populous countries in the world: China, India, the United States of America, Indonesia and Brazil in the period 1980-2000. They are all federations or quasi-federations composed of entities with substantial economic autonomy. Two types of regional inequalities are considered: Concept 1 inequality, which is inequality between mean incomes (GDPs per capita) of states/provinces, and Concept 2 inequality, which is inequality between population-weighted regional mean incomes. The first inequality speaks to the issue of regional convergence, the second, to the issue of overall inequality as perceived by citizens within a nation. All three Asian countries, show rising inequality in terms of both concepts in the decade of the 1990s. Divergence in income outcomes is particularly noticeable for the most populous states/provinces in India and China. The United States, where regional inequality is the least, shows further convergence. Brazil, with the highest level of regional inequality, displays no trend. A regression analysis fails to establish robust association between the usual macro variables and the two types of regional inequality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]