BRICS Development Strategies: Exploring the Meaning of BRICS ‘Community’ and ‘Collective Action’ in the Context of BRICS State Led Cooperation in South Africa

Thompson, Lisa; Wet, Pamela Tsolekile de

doi:10.1007/s41111-017-0056-0

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As discussed, two of the main reasons SEZs flourished in China and in Southeast Asia were due to restrictions on labour unionisation and on basic minimum wage legislation, combined with state control. Global systemic power relations also played their part in creating a specific contingent configuration of economic and political conditions that falcate Chinese and Southeast Asian growth at the time (Brautigam & Tang, , , ; Thompson & Tsolekile de Wet, ; Zhang, ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alternative South–South development collaboration? The role of China in the Coega Special Economic Zone in South Africa

Thompson

2019

Public Admin & Development

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Aid, in the form of financial aid and investment, has become increasingly prevalent in both bilateral and multilateral partnerships in the BRICS. In Africa, the Forum on China–Africa Cooperation provides the official framings for forms of development assistance to the continent, with financial forms of aid available through the New Development Bank and the China–Africa Development Bank (CADFund). This article explores how Chinese international development assistance has influenced South Africa's economic growth and development strategies and is reshaping South Africa as “gateway” to Africa and continental leader. Special economic zones (SEZs) have become a prioritised form of BRICS development collaboration particularly in terms of Chinese trade and investment expansionism into Africa through South Africa. Chinese international development assistance and foreign direct investment in South Africa in particular are very notable and have been strengthened during the Chinese official state visit prior to the Johannesburg BRICS Summit in 2018. The article critically analyses the development policy discourse on BRICS spearheading an alternative model of South–South international cooperation by examining the Coega SEZ in South Africa, hailed as the most SEZ in Africa. The article critically examines the development alternative potential of the Coega SEZ.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alternative South–South development collaboration? The role of China in the Coega Special Economic Zone in South Africa

Thompson

2019

Public Admin & Development

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…22 South Africa Leading Africa through BRICS BRIC, which initially comprised China, India, Russia and Brazil (without South Africa), was formed in June 2009. 23 The process leading to its formation started in 2006 when foreign ministers of these nations held an informal meeting and by 2009, the dream crystallised as BRIC with its first summit held that year. South Africa received an invitation from China to join the union in December 2010.…”

Section: Discussion Comparing Africa's Trading Relationship With Chin...mentioning

confidence: 99%

An Enemy from the East or Friends with Benefits: An Evaluation of Africa’s Trade Relations with China under BRICS

Masumbe

2024

EHASS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past decade, Africa’s trading relationship with China has been growing exponentially. Most African countries have welcomed the trading policies and opportunities offered by China over other Western superpowers. With the emergence of the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) bloc, and South Africa leading other African countries to join this grouping, Africa’s trading relationship will be greatly influenced by China and BRICS. Consequently, the key issue now is whether China and BRICS are re-scrambling for Africa’s untapped resources or whether the relationship will create mutual benefits for both sides. Using a qualitative research approach, this article examined China’s interest in Africa and engages the critical question of whether such a relationship will benefit the people of Africa, or it is just another form of neo-colonisation. The study used a desk research approach with data collected from secondary sources such as articles, literature surveys, the internet and other electronic sources dealing with Africa’s trade relations with China. The article concludes that the future of African trade will be dominated by China and BRICS given their continuously growing influence and participation in development projects in the continent, despite accusations of exploitation and abuse by Chinese companies in some parts of Africa. This paper adds to existing literature on enhancing Africa’s trading relationship with China and BRICS. Keywords: African trading with China, Africa and BRICS, South Africa leading Africa into BRICS, Colonisation, Re-scramble for Africa

show abstract

“…Concerns about the US global economic leadership and the need for a more resilient international reserve system drove joint agenda creation and institution building. The lack of normative and ideational identity amongst the five countries, however, led critics to believe that the idea of a BRICS community would be difficult to attain and that the grouping would be more about state‐centric alliance building rather than offering development alternatives for the Global South (Thompson and de Wet, 2017).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Brazil and BRICS Multilateralism à la Carte: From Bilateralism to Community Interest

Vazquez

2021

Global Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As BRICS advances into its second decade of existence, it transitions from a multilateral alignment to bilateral arrangements among the five members. This ‘bi‐lateralization’ of BRICS expands the ‘menu’ of the BRICS ‘multilateralism à la carte’ by allowing members to limit cooperation when their interests diverge and to benefit from collective action through BRICS when their interests converge. This paper argues that, from the standpoint of countries like Brazil, the India–China border dispute and broader competition in the Indo‐Pacific demonstrate the ‘bi‐lateralization’ of intra‐BRICS relations as they thwart the development of a common narrative on issues like global health, security and trade. Contrarily, the bi‐lateralization of BRICS also gives members more flexibility as they manage various domestic and international challenges, which is crucial for the grouping’s survival. The experience of the BRICS‐led New Development Bank (NDB) illustrates how the five countries can still cooperate as a coalition in pursuit of common objectives such as sustainable development and infrastructure. The lack of robust mechanisms to realize these objectives, however, raises questions about NDB’s capacity to help BRICS to cooperate more like a community.

show abstract

BRICS Development Strategies: Exploring the Meaning of BRICS ‘Community’ and ‘Collective Action’ in the Context of BRICS State Led Cooperation in South Africa

Cited by 7 publications

References 6 publications

Alternative South–South development collaboration? The role of China in the Coega Special Economic Zone in South Africa

Alternative South–South development collaboration? The role of China in the Coega Special Economic Zone in South Africa

An Enemy from the East or Friends with Benefits: An Evaluation of Africa’s Trade Relations with China under BRICS

Brazil and BRICS Multilateralism à la Carte: From Bilateralism to Community Interest

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About