Rising powers: the evolving role of BASIC countries

Abstract

The exponential growth in global populations, economic activity and resource utilization means it is becoming increasingly difficult to satisfy global demand for a number of fundamental resources, while some key ecosystems services are under stress. The likelihood of future resource scarcities have begun to influence the positions taken within international climate change negotiations by fast-growing developing countries. When Brazil, South Africa, India, and China formed the BASIC group it took many by surprise. The coordination needed to align this heterogeneous group of countries cannot simply be understood in terms of a set of shared interests around climate policy. How the BASIC group emerged and the nature of its cooperation on climate change are examined within the broader context in which these increasingly powerful countries came to join forces. Although traditionally aligned with the G77 group of developing countries, recent strategising as a group of emerging economies reflects their realization that there are insufficient global resources available to follow the same development pathway as industrialized countries. Hence, they must seek alternative growth pathways, which requires establishing common ground while also keeping track of each others' positions on important global issues like climate change.

Rising Powers and Multilateral Institutions

“…In addition, it has been widely recognized as a negotiating group by external actors. Likewise, Hallding et al (2013) conclude that "BASIC has cemented its role as a group." This finding, however, entails no conclusive judgment on the future of the G77/China coalition or the breakaway of the BASIC countries from that larger bloc.…”

“…Even the commonly defended BASIC positions are a consensus of individually divergent ambitions. China and India appear to have the heaviest weight within BASIC (De Man, 2012;Hallding et al, 2013). Brazil has the most ambitious climate policies, arguably even among all non-Annex I countries, and consistently looks for a middle course between those ambitions and the often more conservative BASIC position (Malerba, 2011;Langens, 2012).…”

“…Therefore it did not surpass the status of a discussion forum (Wintmolders, 2013). issues, and for instance have a different interpretation on how a future burden-sharing agreement should be crafted (Hallding et al, 2013). Even the commonly defended BASIC positions are a consensus of individually divergent ambitions.…”

“…Brazil has the most ambitious climate policies, arguably even among all non-Annex I countries, and consistently looks for a middle course between those ambitions and the often more conservative BASIC position (Malerba, 2011;Langens, 2012). As a consequence of those divergences, the four countries do not pursue all their interests at the COPs through the BASIC bloc (Hallding et al, 2013).…”

http://www.ecsdev.org/ojs/index.php/ejsd/article/view/309/301

“…Furthermore, all these countries are dealing individually with large socio-economic challenges and political and institutional weaknesses which make leadership aspirations difficult to pursue for now. Finally, China, India, Brazil -to focus just on the heavy weights -have different interests relating to climate negotiations and sustainable development goals (Hallding et al, 2013, Clémençon, 2016.…”