The BRICS – a paradigm shift in global health?

To what extent does the Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (BRICS) bloc constitute a paradigm shift in global health and development? This paper interrogates the concept of paradigm shift with the help of a framework familiar to scholars working in the field of International Relations. It distinguishes between the BRICS' material capabilities, institutions and ideas, and assesses the extent to which the BRICS contribution represents ‘a potentially transformative’ source of new resources and innovation for global health and development. It has been argued that the BRICS bloc champions a qualitatively different development discourse from industrialised countries that has made possible a progressive set of development practices. The BRICS discourse and praxis gives weight to the claim that a paradigm shift in global health is underway. However, the extent to which such discourse will be effective in improving global health will depend on the bloc making greater use of institutions and further deploying its material capabilities.     

How stalled global reform is fueling regionalism: China’s engagement with the G20

In the Chinese view, the architecture of contemporary global governance – especially that of the Bretton Woods institutions – is flawed and in need of reform. Developing nations (like China), the argument runs, need to be given a role proportionate to their global economic influence. Since the Group of Twenty (G20) became a leaders’ summit in 2008, China has used the forum to push for such reform. But today, despite some supposed progress, reform has stalled. Recognising this fact, China is increasingly emphasising regional integration in its strategy for overcoming the middle-income trap. Global reform has not been abandoned, but – given its infeasibility – is no longer a short-term priority.     

The BRICS and global governance: China’s contradictory role

The impact of rising powers generally and the BRICS - Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa - in particular on the existing global order has become controversial and contested. Donald Trump’s nationalist foreign policy agenda has raised questions about the BRICS willingness and capacity to provide leadership in place on an American administration that is increasingly inward looking. As a result, the rise of BRICS poses potential normative and structural challenges to the existing liberal international order. Given its geoeconomic significance, China also poses a potential problem for the other BRICS, as well as the governance of the existing order more generally. Consequently, we argue that it will be difficult for the BRICS to maintain a unified position amongst themselves, let alone play a constructive role in preserving the foundations of ‘global governance’.     

One in 20: the G20, middle powers and global governance reform

There is a growing consensus that the international system needs to be reformed to reflect the changing distribution of power with the rise of the Brazil, Russia, India and China (BRICs). The Group of Twenty (G20) has been at the centre of these discussions. Within the G20, emphasis has been on great powers or rising powers and their capacity to drive reform. Less attention has been given to the preferences and strategies of middle powers in the G20 and their capacity to shape global governance reform. Drawing on interviews with G20 officials, this paper considers the role of Australia as president of the G20 in 2014. Australia’s presidency presents a unique opportunity to examine the behaviour of a middle power as it balances the competing global governance claims of the USA and the BRICs.     

Reforming the World Health Organization: what influence do the BRICS wield?

The World Health Organization (WHO) is currently undergoing fundamental reform that is intended to impact its programmes and priority setting and its financial and governing structures. Within the reform debates, new relations of powers are emerging among traditional donors and emerging economies such as the ‘BRICS’: Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. These five emerging economies have formally committed ‘to strengthen and legitimise the WHO as the coordinating authority in global health’ through the principle of multilateralism. In this paper, the results of a qualitative study – based on 21 key informant interviews – that seeks to better understand BRICS’ engagement in this organisation and the extent to which their action enables these countries to influence the reform process were presented. The results show that individual BRICS countries found natural pairings with each other on both particular elements of the reform, notably governance and WHO financing, and specific health issues. While numerous examples of individual BRICS countries seeking to raise the profile of specific health issues were found, some evidence of a coordinated effort to influence reform as a bloc was also found. Although this was largely limited to rhetorical announcements of support in formal Declarations and Communiqués, it nevertheless articulates a vision of the WHO as an organisation with a broad mandate delivered with sufficient, predictable funding.     

Turkey’s global governance strategies at the UN compared to the BRICS (2008–2014): clarifying the motivation–contribution nexus

This study attempts to analyse Turkey’s contribution to the United Nations (UN) system in comparison with those of the Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS) countries between 2008 and 2014 on three levels: personnel, financial, ideational. Employing an integrated methodology of a global governance contribution index (GGCI) and statistical analysis of complementary raw data, this study empirically reveals the degree to which Turkey was able to transfer its capabilities into an effective contribution to the UN system on the three levels. Drawing on the findings of its quantitative analysis, this paper further qualitatively assesses the reasons behind the gap between Turkey’s global governance motivations and its contribution to the UN system. In doing so, this study, first, deals with the main motivational drivers of its activism in global governance in the 2000s. After unpacking its integrated methodology, the second part of this study quantitatively compares Turkey’s contribution to the UN system to that of the BRICS. The third part of this study delves into the main trends and deficiencies in Turkey’s contribution to the UN system. Finally, this study concludes that Turkey, despite its high motivations for activism in global governance, has not performed well in transferring its capacities into contributions to the UN system, particularly on financial and personnel levels.     

中国在全球治理中的改革倡议:基于WTO多哈回合谈判和G20进程的分析

随着中国国家权力和影响力的上升,中国对国际制度的主动塑造已成为中国参与全球治理的重要内容。本文以WTO多哈回合谈判和G20进程为案例,考察了中国在全球治理中的改革倡议及其特点。中国利用全球治理改革的"重要时机",积极致力于全球经济治理机制的改革,提出了一系列的改革倡议。在倡议行动中,中国主张全球治理机制应在不改变基本原则的前提下作出适当调整,不谋求对联合倡议的主导,秉持促进发展的理念。     

The G20, the Crisis,and the Rise of Global Developmental Liberalism

The emergence of the G20 leaders' meeting during the recent global financial crisis as the ‘premier forum for international economic cooperation’ reflects a significant shift of hegemony over global governance towards the emerging economies but does not challenge the authority or objectives of the international financial institutions. On the contrary, successive G20 initiatives, culminating in the adoption of the Seoul Development Consensus for Shared Growth in November 2010, reveal both a further strengthening of the already close institutional relationship between the G20 and the Bretton Woods institutions and a strong shared commitment to a developmental form of global liberalism. This article charts the ascendancy of emerging economy perspectives through the lens of the G20, maps their ties to the imf and other international organisations, sets out the content of the new global developmental liberalism, and assesses the implications of emerging economy hegemony for the advanced and the emerging economies, respectively.     

Sponsorship behaviour of the BRICS in the United Nations General Assembly

The formation of informal groupings of states is a manifestation of the global shift in economic power. One such a grouping is the BRICS, consisting of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, which stands out for its importance due to its economic weight, its coverage across continents and the numerous internal differences. The BRICS have collectively flexed their muscle and expressed their intentions to extend their cooperation at the United Nations (UN). Proposals in the United Nations General Assembly (UN GA) take the form of resolutions, which can be written and co-written by the UN member states. This so-called sponsoring of resolutions is a way to push agenda items forward. Using a large-N network analysis, we examine the patterns of co-sponsorship of the BRICS of resolutions adopted in the UN GA plenary sessions. We find that the BRICS cooperate on fields such as economic issues, however, they do not form a coherent bloc when it comes to resolution sponsorship. These results raise the question in what way the BRICS actually cooperate at the UN level.     

G7／G8参与全球能源治理：功能演变和制度缺陷

全球能源治理在G7／G8的历史进程中占有重要地位。本文回顾了过去三十五年能源问题在G7／G8议程设置中的地位和发展变化规律，重点分析了2005年以来能源问题发展的新趋势和G8参与全球能源治理的新动向。尽管G8的确呈现了全球能源治理的价值，但由于其固有的缺陷与不足，G8的全球能源治理行动难以收到预期成效。G8缺乏引导全球能源治理的影响力。     

Chinese views of global economic governance

China’s rise and America’s global retreat have made China’s role in global governance more important than ever before. By analysing Chinese (mainly academic) literature, this article studies contemporary Chinese views of global economic governance. It finds that the 2008 financial crisis is a notable point of the Chinese discourse. In addition, dialogue platforms – the G20 in particular – rather than key institutions of global economic governance such as International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank and Word Trade Organization (WTO) win overwhelming attention in the Chinese discourse. Chinese views of global economic governance also highly value the role of the state, while paying less attention to Non Governmental Organisations (NGO) and civil society. Overall, this article highlights a diverse, shifting and sometimes contradictory Chinese discourse on global economic governance, which helps to develop a more accurate understanding of China’s ambition in global economic governance.     

Democratic BRICS as role models in a shifting global order: inherent dilemmas and the challenges ahead

India, Brazil and South Africa constitute an important subset of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (BRICS) and emerging powers at large in a shifting global order. The article examines the capacity of these democratic BRICS to serve as a role model to the rest of the developing world, at a time when liberal democracy seems to be experiencing serious challenges and dislocations in the Global North. The article considers the important achievements of democratic BRICS, in terms of their individual performances as well as through active cooperation strategies through organisations such as the India, Brazil and South Africa (IBSA) Dialogue Forum. Attention is drawn to the inherent structural dilemmas confronted by democratic BRICS to serve as genuine role models, given their domestic weaknesses as well as inherent constraints on their collective action strategies. Our central argument is that these countries, individually and collectively, are likely to have a crucial bearing on the future of liberal democracy on a global scale.     

China's Environmental Governance: the domestic – international nexus

This paper examines the connection between China's domestic governance and its involvement in global governance in environmental protection by studying the major actors and issues involved in the interaction between the domestic and international spheres of activities. These actors include international institutions, national and local governments, nongovernmental organisations, and others. The paper demonstrates that China has made some substantive progress in protecting its environment, but much more needs to be done. Internationally it seems to lack the will or the capability to make much contribution towards global environmental governance. However, because of its huge aggregate size, what it does or does not do to avert environmental degradation at home could have a significant impact on collective efforts to protect the environment at the global level.     

Citizen Participation in Governance Through Representation: Issue of Gender in East Asia

Abstract

In the modern age, although East Asia represents some of the most successful economies such as Japan, Taiwan, Hong Kong, South Korea, and (now) China, the level of political and administrative development in the region remains controversial. One of the major indicators of such politico‐administrative development is the extent of citizen participation in governance through various democratic means, including the formation and expression of public opinion, people's involvement in government decisions and deliberations, and direct representation of citizens in governing institutions. However, the direct representation of citizens is considered one of the most effective modes of participation in institutions such as legislature, cabinet, and bureaucracy. In this regard, although the representation of women in these governing institutions has gained global significance, it still remains relatively weak in most East Asian cases. This article evaluates the extent of such women's participation in governance through representation in East Asia, examines the major factors constraining this representation, and suggests remedial alternatives to improve the situation.     

The Commonwealth(s)--inter- and non-state--at the start of the twenty-first century: Contributions to global development and governance

The official and unofficial Commonwealths have rarely been treated as inter- or non-state organisations, partnerships or epistemic communities contributing to global development and governance. This article seeks to rectify this oversight, especially in an emerging world 'order' characterised by unilateralism rather than multilateralism. After more than a half-century, both types of (interrelated) Commonwealth communities have emerged as invaluable, albeit second-order, adjuncts to global institutions, civil societies and private corporations. Their undramatic yet helpful characteristics as established, empathetic networks may be more needed to advance global development and governance in the new century than in recent decades, with implications for both analysis and practice, approaches and policies.     

Universalising Financial Inclusion and the Securitisation of Development

In the wake of the 2008 financial crisis the G20 leaders have attempted to universalise financial inclusion as a key development strategy Financial inclusion, which has long been championed by official development institutions as a sound and effective market-based solution to combat poverty, is also now promoted by the G20, not only as a way out of the ongoing global recessionary environment but also as an important scheme to stabilise the world economy. To this end the G20 Financial Inclusion Experts Group forged the G20 Principles for Innovative Financial Inclusion in 2010 (the G20 Principles). Drawing on a historical materialist lens, I argue that the G20 Principles— which represent extensions of, as opposed to a departure from, the neoliberal development project—serve to legitimate, normalise, and consolidate the claims of powerful, transnational capital interests that benefit from finance-led capitalism. The primary way this is achieved is through obscuring and concealing the exploitative relations and speculative tendencies involved in financial inclusion strategies.     

Germany: a good model for Labour Party renewal?

The policy debate within the British Labour Party after its traumatic electoral defeat in 2010 has been marked by a concern with Germany's system of economic governance as a potential model for renewal. The desirability of emulating key aspects of its institutions of economic democracy (codetermination) has been a particular subject of debate. This article analyses the source of Germany's attraction for many would-be reformers in the Labour movement. It then examines whether emulating German codetermination is either a feasible or appropriate strategy for Labour reformers whose goal is to rebalance power between capital and labour. Codetermination is deeply embedded in a wider set of governance institutions that have been subject to substantial reform in recent years. It concludes that effective institutional borrowing from Germany would require a far broader and more radical set of economic governance reforms than Labour reformers appear to recognise.     

Varieties of capitalism and the Estonian economy: Institutions,growth and crisis in a liberal market economy

This article examines Estonia's economic institutions, performance and vulnerability to the global economic crisis in the context of the varieties of capitalism framework. It shows that Estonia shares many characteristics of a liberal market economy, but that there are also some features which do not fit the classical model, notably its corporate governance institutions. It also suggests that the varieties of capitalism framework can account for key features of Estonia's economic performance, including its growth trajectory and adjustment to the global financial crisis. The article also reflects on the broader significance of these findings for understanding post-communist capitalism.     

The Great Convergence and the Logic of One World

A great historical transition is underway from American‐led Globalization 1.0 to Globalization 2.0—the interdependence of plural identities where no one power or alliance of powers dominates. The G‐20 is floundering as the immediate global financial crisis has receded. The United Nations and the old Bretton Woods institutions—the IMF, the World Bank and the WTO—have lost their vigor and are struggling to adjust to the global powershift with the rise of the emerging economies. While Europe is paralyzed as the historic project of integration stalls, the world's two largest economies—the United States and China—are as yet unable to figure out how to share power. The danger now is that the geopolitical vacuum will invite assertions of national self‐interest that will unravel the rules‐based order that enabled stability and prosperity over recent decades. America's leading geopolitical strategist, China's most outspoken strategic thinker and one of Asia's leading global thinkers from Singapore offer their reflections on this state of affairs.     

China and America in a Post‐Hegemonic Age

A great historical transition is underway from American‐led Globalization 1.0 to Globalization 2.0—the interdependence of plural identities where no one power or alliance of powers dominates. The G‐20 is floundering as the immediate global financial crisis has receded. The United Nations and the old Bretton Woods institutions—the IMF, the World Bank and the WTO—have lost their vigor and are struggling to adjust to the global powershift with the rise of the emerging economies. While Europe is paralyzed as the historic project of integration stalls, the world's two largest economies—the United States and China—are as yet unable to figure out how to share power. The danger now is that the geopolitical vacuum will invite assertions of national self‐interest that will unravel the rules‐based order that enabled stability and prosperity over recent decades. America's leading geopolitical strategist, China's most outspoken strategic thinker and one of Asia's leading global thinkers from Singapore offer their reflections on this state of affairs.