Russia
Source: www.mid.ru

On June 20, 2018, the fourth BRICS consultative meeting on the Middle East and North Africa took place in the capital of South Africa, Pretoria. The meeting was attended by Russia's Deputy Foreign Minister and Special Presidential Representative for the Middle East and Africa Mikhail Bogdanov, Deputy Minister of International Relations and Cooperation of the Republic of South Africa Luwellyn Landers, Undersecretary General for Africa and the Middle East of Brazil Fernando Jose Marroni de Abreu, Special Envoy of the Chinese Government on the Middle East Issue Gong Xiaosheng, and Additional Secretary of the Indian Ministry of External Affairs Gitesh Sarma.

Following the meeting, the participants adopted a joint statement for the media.

1. The BRICS Deputy Ministers/Special Envoys on the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) met on 20 June 2018 in Pretoria, South Africa to exchange views on the current situation in the Middle East and North African regions.
2. Underlying their deliberations was the commitment to the basic principle that international peace and security should be achieved and sustained solely in accordance with, and in full respect of international law, including the UN Charter. No effort to undermine the multilateral system, however imperfect and unreformed it might be, should deter international cooperation at all levels to prevent and resolve conflict, to create the conditions for peace, development and prosperity.
3. The Deputy Ministers/Special Envoys restated their conviction that there is no place for unlawful resorting to force or external interference in any conflict and that, ultimately, lasting peace could only be established through broad-based, inclusive national dialogue with due respect for the independence, territorial integrity and sovereignty of each of the countries of the region. They emphasized the importance of the UN Charter and the role of the UN Security Council as bearing the primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security.
4. The Deputy Ministers/Special Envoys agreed that in each of the countries in the region, citizens have legitimate aspirations to fully enjoy civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights and fundamental freedoms.
5. The Deputy Ministers/Special Envoys strongly condemned terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, from all quarters and in the name of any cause. They reiterated their countries' commitment to supporting inter-BRICS and other multilateral efforts in countering the global threat of terrorism under the UN auspices. They stressed that the fight against terrorism, including counter-terrorism measures, must be conducted in accordance with international law, including the Charter of the United Nations and relevant UNSC Resolutions. The Deputy Ministers/Special Envoys highly valued the 3rd BRICS Counter-Terrorism Working Group Meeting held in Nelspruit on 19 and 20 April 2018. They called for an expedited adoption of the Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism in the UN General Assembly.
6. The BRICS Deputy Ministers/Special Envoys remained concerned about the situation in the Syrian Arab Republic. They reaffirmed their commitment for an inclusive "Syrian-led, Syrian-owned" political process which safeguards the state sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Syria, in pursuance of United Nations Security Council Resolution 2254 (2015). In this regard they highlighted their support for the continuation of the important work done in the context of the Geneva Peace Talks and welcomed key contributions of the Astana Process, which showed signs of positive developments on the ground in the last months,in particular the creation of de-escalation zones and holding of the Congress of the Syrian National Dialogue in Sochi on 30 January 2018. They reiterated their strong condemnation of the use of chemical weapons by any party, for any purpose and under any circumstances and renewed calls for comprehensive, objective, independent, and transparent investigations of all alleged incidents.
7. With regard to the State of Libya, the Deputy Ministers/Special Envoys expressed their serious concern about the political and security situation in that country, highlighting its extremely negative consequences for the Middle East, North Africa and Sahel region. It was noted that the military intervention in the country in 2011, led to instability, dire humanitarian consequences and the spread of terrorism, extremism and other criminal activities in the region. The Deputy Ministers/Special Envoys expressed their support for the continued efforts of the UN Special Representative for Libya, Ghassan Salame, as well as of regional actors to engage all Libyan stakeholders in a constructive dialogue in pursuance of the UN Action Plan for Libya announced in September 2017. They welcomed the 4th meeting of the African Union (AU) High Level Panel on Libya at the level of Heads of State and Government, chaired by President Denis Sassou-N'Guesso. They noted the steps taken by Libyan authorities in combating the terrorist threats and encouraged the need to build consensus among the Libyan political forces with regard to an inclusive political solution in pursuance of the Libyan Political Agreement (LPA).
8. The BRICS Deputy Ministers/Special Envoys welcomed the Iraqi parliamentary elections held in May 2018, the first since the announcement in December 2017, and the complete liberation of the territories previously occupied by ISIS in Iraq. They expressed the hope that the elections contribute to strengthen Iraq's democratic institutions and widen the dialogue, negotiation and promote political co-existence. They condemned in the strongest possible terms the heinous and inhumane acts of violence perpetrated by terrorist and extremist groups, such as the self-styled ISIS, in the territory of the Republic of Iraq and reiterated the need for strong international support to the Government and people of Iraq in their relentless efforts to fight against terrorism.
9. With respect to the Republic of Yemen, the Deputy Ministers/Special Envoys expressed their grave concern about the conflict, which is having a disastrous impact on human security as well as regional security and stability. They recognised that the conflict has already led to unspeakable suffering among the civilian population, including women, children and the elderly, as well as to the destruction of a significant part of vital essential services infrastructure, bringing the situation in Yemen to what amounts to a major humanitarian crisis. They called for unhindered access for the provision of humanitarian assistance to all parts of Yemen and urged the international community expeditiously to make use of such access to relieve the health, social and economic situation in this country. The Deputy Ministers/Special Envoys urged all parties to fully respect international law to cease hostilities and to return to the UN brokered peace talks. They further underscored their support for UN Special Representative Martin Griffiths' efforts to restart talks among all Yemeni parties and agreed that the way forward to achieve peace, prosperity and security in Yemen is through an inclusive Yemeni-led dialogue towards the achievement of a political solution to the conflict.
10. The Deputy Ministers/Special Envoys were unanimous in their resolve that the conflicts elsewhere in the Middle East and North Africa should not be used as pretext to delay resolution of long-standing conflicts, in particular the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. The Deputy Ministers/Special Envoys reiterated the need for renewed diplomatic efforts to achieving a just, lasting and comprehensive settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in order to achieve peace and stability in the Middle East on the basis of relevant United Nations resolutions, the Madrid Principles, the Arab Peace Initiative and previous agreements between the parties through negotiations with a view to create an independent, viable, territorially contiguous Palestinian State living side by side in peace and security with Israel. The Deputy Ministers/Special Envoys reiterated that the status of Jerusalem is one of the final status issues to be resolved in the context of negotiations between Israel and Palestine.
11. The Deputy Ministers/Special Envoys expressed concern regarding the escalation of violence in Gaza and called for restraint and full respect for international law in line with the UN General Assembly Resolution (A/RES/ES-10/20) on the protection of the Palestinian population.
12. The Deputy Ministers/Special Envoys reiterated their countries' support to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA). They commend the vital role it plays in providing health, education and other basic services for almost 5.3 million Palestinian refugees and underscored its relevance to bringing stability to the region and the need for ensuring a more adequate, sufficient, predictable and sustained funding for the Agency.
13. The Deputy Ministers/Special Envoys expressed their concern about the ongoing diplomatic crisis in the Gulf region. They welcomed efforts by Kuwait to resolve the existing disagreements through negotiations and diplomatic engagement.
14. The Deputy Ministers/Special Envoys committed themselves to convene again at the level of Deputy Foreign Ministers of BRICS countries in Brazil in 2019. The participants of the meeting also agreed on the advisability of holding regular consultations on the Middle East and North Africa at various venues, including the UN. They confirmed their support for hosting informal meetings of their representatives when required.

Russia
Source: www.mid.ru

On June 20, Special Presidential Representative for the Middle East and Africa and Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov had a meeting with Deputy Minister of International Relations and Cooperation of South Africa Luwellyn Landers on the sidelines of a BRICS consultation meeting on the Middle East and North Africa, in Pretoria.

Mr Bogdanov and Mr Landers had a trust-based exchange of opinions on the current issues on the Middle Eastern and African agenda. They also reaffirmed their mutual determination to further expand the Russia-South Africa political dialogue and increase practical cooperation on the matters under discussion both in the bilateral format and within BRICS, where South Africa is currently president.

Russia
Source: www.mid.ru

On June 20, Special Presidential Representative for the Middle East and Africa and Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov met with China's Special Envoy for the Middle East Gong Xiaosheng on the sidelines of the BRICS consultative meeting on the Middle East and North Africa in Pretoria.

The officials held a trust-based exchange of views on the political settlement process in Syria with an emphasis on the need to respect the country's sovereignty, territorial integrity and unity. They also stressed the importance of consolidating international efforts to implement Security Council Resolution 2254, as well as the decisions approved within the framework of the Astana process and following the Syrian National Dialogue Congress in Sochi.

Moscow and Beijing confirmed their shared intention to continue closely coordinating their approaches and practical steps in a national capacity and within BRICS to contribute to the peace, security and development of the Middle East and North Africa.

Russia
Source: www.mid.ru

On June 19, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov met in Moscow with Ambassador of the Republic of India to Russia Pankaj Saran.

The officials reaffirmed the mutual commitment to further promote cooperation in the framework of BRICS, including during the preparations for the 10th BRICS Summit in Johannesburg, South Africa, on July 25-27, 2018. They also discussed several topical issues of mutual interest on the international agenda.

Russia
Source: www.mid.ru

During his trip to take part in the consultative conference of BRICS on the Middle East and North Africa in Pretoria on June 21, Special Presidential Representative for the Middle East and Africa and Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov met with South African Minister of Human Settlements Nomaindia Mfeketo.

During the meeting the officials discussed the main areas of bilateral cooperation that is consistently developing in line with the joint declaration on comprehensive strategic partnership between South Africa and Russia. They stressed the special importance of an active political dialogue and the importance of upgrading the contractual foundation of traditionally friendly Russia-South Africa relations, and expanding mutually beneficial ties in trade and investment, as well as exchanges in the scientific, technological, social and humanitarian areas.

Russia
Source: www.nkibrics.ru

Paolo Motta, Architect is member of the Expert Working Group of BRICS, as head of EURISPES for Latin America. Expert in urbanism and integrated planning, both in Italy and internationally. Gained extensive capabilities in project finance, including in the economic and financial viability of projects, acquired through experiences of negotiated programming of development programs. Multiple field experiences have added a capacity in the global assessment of the socio-economic and territorial resources necessary for sustainable development. In the last period focused on the preservation and enhancement of heritage and environmental patrimony, as a member of CIVVIH and ICOMOS-Italy, and committees of UNESCO CTIC.

1-The Frame of Reference

From the ninth BRICS Summit held in Xianmen(China), September 2017, several elements of the world scenario definitely have changed, which are influencing the role originally envisaged by the coordination of BRICS five member countries and what was stated in the final declaration.

From a framework of a gradual economic development of the partners, also if with different speed, since the early years of the constitution of the grouping, the global crisis of 2008 and the increasing difficulties in recent years of Brazil, which in struggling with political turbulence and the devaluation of its currency, and those of South Africa, which is facing with a progressive decline in economy, increased the imbalance between the partners, with an increasing weight gained of China inside the team, even on India and Russia.

The ambitious initial objectives set to create a new global economic asset, more responsive to the times and renewed institutions than the existing ones, dating back over 70 years ago, and created by the victorious powers of World War II, are fading, even for the lack of widening the group to other emerging countries, as initially expected.

Almost a year after the last summit 2017 to which were invited as observers six countries, with strategic relevance in the actual world context, such as: Turkey, Egypt, Kenya, Mexico, Tajikistan, and Burma, to date there are no signs of greater involvement of such countries; neither of a gradual opening to new actors in this initiative aimed to renew the global scenario, to other fast growing emerging countries as, for instance Indonesia and Nigeria, none of which is till now represented inside the coordination.

In additionwe are facing with the new US political orientation which aims, on one hand to privilege the direct relationships with the major "players" in the world, first including China, through bilateral agreements and on the other to confirm the hegemonic role of existing agencies such as the IMF, WB, WTO and similar. To this new course it does not seem there is so far a common response by the BRICS; instead China progresses more and more independently in reinforcing its driving role. Furthermorethe initial hypothesis. if not of opposition but of renewal of traditional financial institutions, are increasingly replaced by the new BRICS bodies such as the Contingency Reserve Arrangement (CRA)-and the -New Development Bank (NDBwith agreements of enhanced cooperation).

The NDB, established in 2014 as an innovative financial instrument of the BRICS, in fact was not provided by the members in the following years of the adequate financial resources necessary to play a significant role on the world scene. So far away now after several years has never funded a project outside of the few (10) projects developed only within the five member countries. This seems at odds with the initials statutory declarations of desire to intervene in other developing and emerging countries (EMDC). Nor the total amount of these projects (2,529 mill. U $) is of great importance, it represents a sum lower than the spending in a single year by other international agencies or even national agencies .

The NDB, has till now only signed collaboration agreements both with the main international agencies and local development banks, through which it declares will operate, by funding them to develop and implement strategic projects identified by the same subjects. So far, however, there have been no examples of concrete operational actions, despite the presence of "portfolios" with immediately actionable initiatives and projects.

The BRICS Business Council (BBC), the technical and consultative body which outlines the policy approaches of the initiatives and identifies projects on which the NDB intervene, until now mostly reduced its role to organize regular meetings between the entrepreneurial and productive sectors of the member countries, and provide general indications on strategies and guidelines with a little operational impact.

To that we have to add the creation by China of the -Asian International Infrastructure Bank (AIIB) in October 2014, with much greater budgets, in support of the project initiative "One Belt One Road" that is assuming a global strategic value and which have already joined over 50 countries of several continents, including some from Europe. In last years China has invited to participate several others states, including those belonging to the Latin American and Caribbean Community(CELAC), during a meeting held last November 2017 in Santiago, Chile. This of course outlines a growing autonomous action of China, not working in team with the BRICS, as foreseen until recently, taking into account the relevant regional role of Brazil

This new strategy, although not explicitly stated, is confirmed by the numerous programmes and projects which the AIIB is carrying out in several countries, including in the Mediterranean area and Eastern Europe. That allows AIIB acquiring a significant role within the framework of the bilateral political agreements China has signed with various Governments. The other BRICS main partners as India and Russia are lately developing autonomously bilateral trading agreements and financing large infrastructure and energy projects, especially in Africa.

All these processes are carried out with a low profile in different territorial contexts, but advance rapidly, even with the organization of new partnerships and the acquisition of strategic concessions in various sectors, seen as acquired positions in a larger scenario of penetration in the global economy.

2-BRICS inCELAC countries

With regard to this geographical area, the influence of the BRICS, with an expected natural leading role of the state memberBrazll, is not adequately developed, despite the presence since years in various neighboring countries of the mighty Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento(BNDES), which has important financial participation in various development projects and programs.

The NDB, which should be the instrument delegated by BRICS, actually only signed agreements with major regional agencies such as: the same BNDES, Banco de Desarollo de Latin America-former CAF, FONPLATA, UNASUR/COSIPLAN. The latter was created in 2009 by incorporating the previous-IniciativaIntegracion Regional Sudamericana--IIRSA (1), has a broad portfolio of strategic projects already prepared, developed in recent years through Plan de AcciònEstratègico, P.A.E. 2012-2022, extended to the whole continent, but has so far largely remained on paper and just produced statements of intentions, being in fact failed the political premises of the UNASUR, in obvious crisis.

After a long absence, the United States are recovering a growing presence in the region, reviewing the multilateral agreements like NAFTA, the Alliance for the Pacific, replacing them with bilateral agreements involving a realignment at traditional economic policies. The recent request for help to the IMF's by Argentina is a clear example, and demonstrates the substantial lack of access to other support financial options.

The CRA –Contingency Reserve Agreement, safeguard fund constituted by BRICS to deal with financial turmoils is limited to the relief of member countries and their currencies. So in fact to date the financial instruments created by the BRICS cannot provide viable alternatives to existing ones, which remain in the hands of the hegemonic international organizations.

Besides the political framework of the entire Latin American continent has changed dramatically since the creation of the BRICS in 2006-2009:the left politically oriented Governments and the economic and social integration policies, have been progressively substituted by center-right Governments that carry out traditional development programmes and less similar to the founding principles of the BRICS for enhanced South-South cooperation.

3-Perspectives

The BRICS initiative is, in our view, in a stand-by stage, if it should continue without doing steps forwards aimed at the progressive enlargement of the group or at least at a greater involvement by other emerging economies, and without having yet of financial instruments as well as the necessary capacity to intervene in EMDC economies.The necessary resources can be proceed from China, given the difficulties to rise the quotas of the other members, and therefore is to be seen whether China will give more weight to "One Belt One Road" and the AIIB as tool of the presence on the global scenario, or if it will continue to support and strengthen the BRICS group, as seems be appropriate to achieve at least a renewal of the current world financial and economic order.

Progressively widen participation to other emerging countries with growing economies, and, at the same time, provide funding for strategic projects, outside of the five member countries, seem to be the necessary elements for an effective BRICS revival. Without these strategic choices, BRICS coordination risks to remain a club restricted to few countries with growing disparities and weights, which inevitably would lead in some years to a depletion of the ambitious initial objectives.

It is hoped that some signals coming from the Presidency of South Africa, which has always sought dialogue and involvement of other African countries, will be strengthened both by the invitation to participate in the next BRICS Summit of July 2018, addressed to some countries , each of them representing a driving force within other international groupings, and by follow up of concrete initiatives.

The BRICS, in spite of the difficulties mentioned, are today the only credible proposal for a revision of the world order, echoing the longtime instances raised since 1955 by the Non-Aligned Movement, and expressed in the Bandung Conference.Therefore their confirmation would certainly be beneficial to all, and possible, considering the potential adhesion by many other emerging economies.

The next X Johannesburg Summit 2018 is therefore marked by the following alternative: perpetuating the stand-by or proceed with a vigorous and essential revival of the BRICS initiative?

(1)The IIRSA Initiative a lo largo de susdiezaños de trabajo, se constituyócomo un foro esencial de losdocepaíses para la planificación de la infraestructura del territorio suramericano con una visiónregional y compartida de lasoportunidades y Obstáculos of the subcontinent. En el marco de IIRSA, por primeravez, América del Suractuócomo una unidadsingular e integrada para crear una Cartera de Proyectos de infraestructura en lossectores de transporte, energía y comunicaciones.

South Africa
Source: www.brics2018.org.za

The Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO) in partnership with the South African Institute of International Affairs (SAIIA) held a media briefing on Monday evening to talk about BRICS in Africa. The event was themed 'Working towards the Realisation of the African Aspirations."

Key speakers for the meeting were DIRCO's deputy Minister Luwellyn Landers and India's Former Commerce Minister Anand Sharma.

Deputy Minister Landers stated that South Africa's membership of BRICS will further demonstrate tangible achievements and benefits for the country and the African continent.

Landers noted that 2018 is a very important year for South Africa, being the host nation of the 10th BRICS Summit in July, while simultaneously commemorating Nelson Mandela's birth centenary.

"This is an opportune time to again reflect on the important pillars of our foreign policy that Nelson Mandela identified in 1993 when he penned an article title South Africa's Future Foreign Policy: New Pillars for a New World. He added that "economic development depends on growing regional and international economic cooperation in an interdependent world."

The deputy Minister believes that South Africa's foreign policy outlook is predicated on African history and identity.

"We are Africans by birth and therefore our country belongs to this continent and not as a result of geographical composition. In the same vein you will appreciate that Africans are part of the Global South comprising in the main by countries which were colonised and citizens who we subjugated for a long time." Landers said.

He added that these shifts and changes on the global sphere is in line with the African Agenda.

"The unity and renewal of our African continent must be pursued together with efforts to transform the global system. Humanity can thrive when their collective and individual interests and aspirations are responded to and the BRICS formation is titling the balance of forces to ensure exactly that."

Landers also mentioned that the country's most grave and pressing challenge is youth unemployment.

During his State of the Nation address, President Cyril Ramaphosa pointed out that young South Africans will be moved to the centre of the country's economic agenda.

"I am certain that this can be achieved within the ambit of the intra-BRICS cooperation work programme, as contained in the BRICS Action Plan. Similarly, we want to see deepened engagements with the South African BRICS Business Council, the BRICS Civil society, and Academic community." Landers added.

South Africa
Source: www.brics2018.org.za

Information exchange, aimed at curbing illicit financial flows and tax evasion, dominated the BRICS Tax and Customs meeting which concluded in Johannesburg on Thursday.

The meeting, by heads of revenue collection from Brazil, Russia, China and South Africa, took place before the BRICS Summit, which will be held in Johannesburg later next month.

According to SARS Acting Commissioner, Mark Kingon, the BRICS tax authorities had agreed to forge beneficial cooperation to improve tax bases in their respective countries and improve collection compliance in the era of digital economy.

He said dealing with the scourge of illicit currency flows and tax avoidance was one of the common challenges faced by member countries.

The measures supported by the group to improve capacity included support for international initiatives aimed at creating a globally fair and universally transparent tax system.

"We reaffirm our commitment to keep exchanging valuable experience, sharing best practices and, where appropriate, conducting joint research and training, as well as the exchange of staff to promote learning," said Kingon.

This year South Africa assumed the position of heading the BRICS custom and tax unit.

Kingon said the member states had committed to identifying loopholes in tax compliance and adopting best practices from other member states.

Cooperation would include the design of new tax policies, tax administration strategies and practices, as well as privacy and cyber security concerns and new avenues for fraud, which they say require international cooperation and coordination, as information flows increase.

China's Deputy Commissioner of the State Administration of Taxation, Sun Ruibiao, said his country had adopted a simplified tax collection system that is digitally based, in a bid to improve compliance and boost collection.

"These initiatives have shown results, and I can say we have noticed an improvement in tax collection," he said.

South Africa
Source: www.iol.co.za

JOHANNESBURG - Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Minister Senzeni Zokwana said BRICS countries had a common goal of ensuring increased trade, food security, research, technology and climate sensitive agricultural practices.

He said the threat of food insecurity was a common factor for all the emerging countries' economies.

Zokwana said his ministry had prioritised job creation, food security and shared economic growth.

He was speaking during a gala dinner in Skukuza, Mpumalanga last night (June21), hosted for BRICS agriculture ministers attending a seminar on how to deal with climate change in the back-breaking sector

Zokwana said they were cognisant of the fact that climate change dictated new production methods and new routines.

"The recent drought spells in South Africa, for example, have brought up concerns regarding production of staples. The country is still experiencing drought in about three of our nine provinces," he said.

He thanked the BRICS nations for their concerted efforts in addressing issues bedevilling the industry.

"Without doubt, this meeting will offer us an opportunity as member countries to learn from each other and exchange valuable experiences with regards to new ways of addressing sector challenges."

He quoted from the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, saying if done right, agriculture, forestry and fisheries could provide nutritious food for all and generate decent incomes, while supporting people-centred rural development and protecting the environment.

The seminar ends today (June22). "I am very optimistic about the engagements and outcomes that will arise out of this ministers meeting," said Zokwana.

The National Development Plan, a blueprint to address the country's socio-economic challenges, has identified agriculture as having the potential to create one million jobs by 2030.

South Africa
Source: www.sanews.gov.za

The Fourth Meeting of the BRICS Deputy Ministers on the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region kicked off in Pretoria on Tuesday morning.

The meeting, which is chaired by International Relations and Cooperation Deputy Minister Luwellyn Landers, is expected to discuss the current situation in these two regions, including the developments in Syria, Yemen, Iraq, Libya and the Middle East Peace Process.

Speaking at the opening session, Landers said the MENA region is especially important because the countries are at a critical juncture in their history as they struggle to resolve and contain their conflicts and extremism.

Since 2011, several countries in the Middle East and North Africa have experienced waves of revolts based on demands for political, social and economic reform.

These conflicts are deeply complex, Landers said.

"The reason we are deliberating on the Middle East and North Africa in a separate meeting is that what happens there has an impact on our national interests, as brothers of global peace, security and stability. It has become more critical since the 2011 Arab Uprising because conflicts of diversion in the Middle East and North Africa have spread into other regions," said Landers.

The MENA region is generally important to South Africa because it is dependent on the region for oil and it is a destination for high-value products, which in turn supports industrial development and employment objectives at home.

In their opening remarks, BRICS country representatives expressed serious concerns about the political and security situation and escalation of the armed conflict in Libya and the negative consequences it has on the region.

They also expressed their concern with regard to the continuing violence in Syria, especially the deterioration of the humanitarian situation and growing threat of international terrorism and extremism.

Furthermore, they stressed their concern for the humanitarian impact of the ongoing military operation for the liberation of Mosul, while they reaffirmed their commitment to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

The BRICS representatives reiterated that the crises should be resolved in accordance with international law and the UN Charter.

They said resolutions should not resort to force or external interference but rather through broad national dialogue with due respect for independence, territorial integrity and sovereignty of the countries of the region.

The Deputy Ministers are setting the stage for the 10th BRICS Summit taking place in July under the theme 'BRICS in Africa: Collaboration with Developing Countries for Inclusive Growth and Shared Prosperity in the 4th Industrial Revolution'. - SAnews.gov.za

South Africa
Source: www.sanews.gov.za

South Africa is to host the BRICS ministers responsible for local government and disaster management, as well as mayors and other local government practitioners under the auspices of the BRICS Friendship Cities and Local Government Cooperation Urbanisation Forum.

The BRICS Friendship Cities and Local Government Cooperation Urbanisation Forum promotes engagement between BRICS states through cities and local bodies.

It promotes people to people cooperation among BRICS nations and collaboration at the local government level.

The forum, which will be chaired by Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs Zweli Mkhize, will be held in East London from 28 June to 1 July.

"This forum is a platform to strengthen collaboration between BRICS member states and to enable information-sharing in the local government sector for current and future collaboration.

"The forum provides a platform for connecting BRICS states, cities and local bodies for learning from one another by conversation and cooperation, through linked thematic areas," Mkhize said.

These meetings are part of the build-up activities towards the 10th BRICS Summit which will be hosted by President Cyril Ramaphosa in July.

The gathering will assist South Africa in meeting several socio-economic development goals.

Furthermore, the forum provides a platform to address issues such as managing urban development for inclusive growth.

It also provides an opportunity to engage BRICS counterparts in reversing apartheid spatial planning through sharing experiences with BRICS countries.

As part of the developing world, Mkhize said, South Africa faces the triple challenges of poverty, unemployment and inequality.

BRICS leaders engage in peer learning and share best practices and development models to address and combat these common challenges, he said, adding that four of the five BRICS countries are already among the 10 largest economies in the world.

"South Africa's prospects for economic growth and job creation depend increasingly on diversifying and strengthening its economic links with the fastest-growing economies of the world," said Mkhize.

The forum will also promote economic social and economic linkages with BRICS partners in infrastructure development which is key for service delivery in municipalities in South Africa.

According to the Minister, there are opportunities for strong partnerships in skills development and exchange in building and construction, green building, designing city regeneration schemes, upgrading informal settlements and new city expansion planning.

"As we initiate recovery programmes to support some of our distressed municipalities, we look forward to lessons from BRICS counterparts on using urban development to overcome poverty and social disadvantage. The BRICS partners also have a lot to learn from South Africa as a new democracy that is still fighting the legacy and backlogs of the past," said Mkhize.

The BRICS forum also lends the opportunity to involve young people in cities development, youth employment programmes and skills development. The BRICS forum also provides an opportunity to exchange views on urban resilience and disaster risk reductions initiatives.

It is an opportunity for sharing strategies on climate change, energy and resilience.

"South Africa seeks to address urban resilience, cities and climate change adaptation and disaster risk reductions and looks forward to a successful engagement with Ministers responsible for disaster management on the 1st of July."

The Friendship Cities, Local Government Cooperation and Urbanisation Forum and the Meeting of BRICS Ministers responsible for Disaster Management will culminate in the adoption of two proposed separate Declarations.

The intention of the declarations is to re-affirm cooperation among BRICS members within the sector, provide a record of that commitment and to guide further interactions beyond the meetings. - SAnews.gov.za

South Africa
Source: www.sanews.gov.za

The BRICS Deputy Ministers on the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) have committed to the basic principle that international peace and security should be achieved and sustained solely in accordance with and in full respect of international law, including the UN Charter.

They restated their conviction that there is no place for unlawful resorting to external interference in any conflict and that, ultimately, lasting peace could only be established through broad-based, inclusive national dialogue with due respect for the independence, territorial integrity and sovereignty of each of the countries of the region.

"They emphasized the importance of the UN Charter and the role of the UN Security Council as bearing the primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security," the Deputy Ministers said in a communique on Wednesday.

Their communique was issued after their meeting in Pretoria in which they exchanged views on the current situation in the Middle East and North African regions.

Fight against terrorism

The Deputy Ministers condemned terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, and reiterated their countries' commitment to supporting inter-BRICS and other multilateral efforts in countering the global threat of terrorism under the UN auspices.

They stressed that the fight against terrorism, including counter-terrorism measures, must be conducted in accordance with international law, including the Charter of the United Nations and relevant UNSC Resolutions.

Situation in Syria

The BRICS Deputy Ministers remained concerned about the situation in Syria and reaffirmed their commitment for an inclusive "Syrian-led, Syrian-owned" political process which safeguards the state sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Syria, in pursuance of United Nations Security Council Resolution 2254 (2015).

"They reiterated their strong condemnation of the use of chemical weapons by any party, for any purpose and under any circumstances and renewed calls for comprehensive, objective, independent, and transparent investigations of all alleged incidents," reads the communique.

In this regard, they highlighted their support for the continuation of the important work done in the context of the Geneva Peace Talks.

They also welcomed key contributions of the Astana Process, which showed signs of positive developments on the ground in the last months, in particular, the creation of de-escalation zones and holding of the Congress of the Syrian National Dialogue in Sochi on 30 January 2018.

Situation in Libya

With regard to the situation in Libya, the Deputy Ministers expressed their concern about the political and security situation in that country, highlighting its extremely negative consequences for the Middle East, North Africa and Sahel region.

They expressed their support for the continued efforts of the UN Special Representative for Libya, Ghassan Salame, as well as of regional actors to engage all Libyan stakeholders in a constructive dialogue in pursuance of the UN Action Plan for Libya announced in September 2017.

They noted the steps taken by Libyan authorities in combating the terrorist threats and encouraged the need to build consensus among the Libyan political forces with regard to an inclusive political solution in pursuance of the Libyan Political Agreement (LPA).

In Iraq, the meeting welcomed the parliamentary elections held in May, the first since the announcement in December 2017, and the complete liberation of the territories previously occupied by ISIS in Iraq.

They expressed the hope that the elections contribute to strengthen Iraq's democratic institutions and widen the dialogue, negotiation and promote political co-existence.

Yemen

With respect to Yemen, they expressed their grave concern about the conflict, which is having a disastrous impact on human security as well as regional security and stability.

They recognised that the conflict has already led to unspeakable suffering among the civilian population, including women, children and the elderly.

As such, they called for unhindered access for the provision of humanitarian assistance to all parts of Yemen and urged the international community expeditiously to make use of such access to relieve the health, social and economic situation in this country.

They further underscored their support for UN Special Representative Martin Griffiths' efforts to restart talks among all Yemeni parties and agreed that the way forward to achieve peace, prosperity and security in Yemen is through an inclusive Yemeni-led dialogue towards the achievement of a political solution to the conflict.

Palestinian-Israeli conflict

The meeting was unanimous in their resolve that the conflicts elsewhere in the Middle East and North Africa, saying they should not be used as a pretext to delay resolution of long-standing conflicts, in particular, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

They reiterated the need for renewed diplomatic efforts to achieving a just, lasting and comprehensive settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict while also reiterating that the status of Jerusalem is one of the final status issues to be resolved in the context of negotiations between Israel and Palestine.

The Deputy Ministers expressed concern regarding the escalation of violence in Gaza and called for restraint and full respect for international law in line with the UN General Assembly Resolution (A/RES/ES-10/20) on the protection of the Palestinian population.

Furthermore, they expressed their concern about the ongoing diplomatic crisis in the Gulf region.

They welcomed efforts by Kuwait to resolve the existing disagreements through negotiations and diplomatic engagement.

The deputy minister's meeting was in preparation for the 10th BRICS Summit taking place in July under the theme 'BRICS in Africa: Collaboration with Developing Countries for Inclusive Growth and Shared Prosperity in the 4th Industrial Revolution. - SAnews.gov.za

South Africa
Author: Yaroslav Lissovolik
Source: www.brics2018.org.za

At the 10th BRICS round table discussion at Moses Mabhida stadium in Durban, this week, were Musa Makhunga, president of the Durban Chamber of Commerce; Balduino Bwanga, Angola Consul General in Durban; Fawzia Peer, eThekwini's deputy mayor; Anil Sooklal, South Africa's ambassador to BRICS; Wang Jianzhou, China's Consul General in Durban; and Shashank Vikram, India's Consul General in Durban. The writer takes a look at the five-year cycles of the BRICS outreach programmes.

WITH South Africa's chairmanship in BRICS this year and its 10th summit expected to take place next month, the group has come full-circle in its outreach efforts vis-à-vis other developing economies.

In 2013, it was South Africa that launched the first outreach exercise with respect to its regional partners in Africa. The onset of the new five-year cycle marked by South Africa's chairmanship will build on China's earlier innovations with BRICS+ and will feature new approaches pointing to qualitative transformations in its dialogue with the developing world.

The outreach exercises at the outset were framed in a regional context, with all core BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) members inviting their regional partners to take part in the 2013-2018 summits.

Further innovations along the BRICS+ road may involve progression to forming a unified platform of regional integration arrangements that featured in the outreach activities of the past five-year cycle of summits.

Such an aggregation of regional arrangements from the past summits for each member would then feature the AU, Mercosur – Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay (given the difficulties experienced by Unasur – Union of South American Nations), the Eurasian Economic Union, the Shanghai Co-operation Organisation (SCO) as well as Bimstec (Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Co-operation).

The resulting acronym – BEAMS is suggestive of the role of the aggregating platform of regional integration blocks as supporting structures to the edifice built on BRICS. The BEAMS platform is to denote the aggregation of regional integration groups, with BRICS+ being a broader concept that incorporates other forms of BRICS interaction with developing economies such as platforms of regional developing institutions or regional financing arrangements.

BEAMS is a direct, almost one-for-one reconstruction of the sequence of BRICS outreach exercises with their regional partners throughout the 2013-2017 period. In effect it is the "revealed preference" of the BRICS economies with respect to the composition of the BRICS+ aggregating platform of regional integration groups.

The contribution from China was that of launching a diversified, global approach within the BRICS+ format that, taken together with earlier outreach exercises, lays the foundations for what China's foreign minister Wang Yi termed as the "most extensive platform for South-South co-operation with a global impact". In other words, BRICS+ and BEAMS as its sub-component, is a synthesis of earlier BRICS experiments and innovations in the field of building ties with the Global South.

While in the case of the BRICS grouping the key criterion was the selection of the largest heavyweights in terms of gross domestic product and market size across EM, in the case of the BEAMS/BRICS+ platform of "integration of integrations" the criterion is more geared towards selecting those groups of countries that are the closest allies to the respective BRICS core members.

Nonetheless, looking at the league table of regional arrangements formed by developing countries, it does appear that the regional groupings in the BEAMS platform such as in Eurasia, or Mercosur in South America are among the largest in terms of GDP in their respective regions. Accordingly, one may also consider the BEAMS/BRICS+ platform as the aggregation of some of the largest regional integration groups across the developing world.

The IMF's and World Bank's figures for 2016 suggest that the BEAMS platform comprising Bimstec, EAEU, the AU, Mercosur and the SCO would account for 27.4% of global GDP, well above 15% of the International Monetary Fun quota and 66% of the global population. This is a notable improvement compared with the BRICS core, which accounts for 22.3% of global GDP, less than the 15% benchmark for the IMF quota and 42% of the population.

Interestingly, both modifications are roughly on par in GDP terms with the largest regional integration arrangements in the world, namely Nafta (North American Free Trade Agreement), which in 2016 accounted for 28.1% of global GDP and only 6.5% of the world's population. At the same time in terms of GDP size BEAMS is notably behind such potential platforms as Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) (together with the US) and Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) – these account for 38.3% and 46.5% of global GDP respectively.

The way for an alliance of developing economies to edge closer to these levels of aggregated GDP weight would be to bring together all of the main regional trading arrangements of the Global South on top of BEAMS/TRIA such as Asean (Association of SouthEast Asian Nations) and the Gulf Co-operation Council. This in turn would also serve to bridge the gap with what currently appears to be the largest potential alliance in the world, namely a combined TPP and TTIP platform which would account for more than 60% of global GDP.

Aside from the quantitative considerations of the size of GDP and populations, compared to the BRICS core, the BEAMS/BRICS+ framework presents a qualitatively more diversified structure, which dilutes the prominence of one single country and presents greater diversity and variety of economic models and types of regional integration.

An "extended format" for BRICS via expanding economic co-operation with regional partners also renders such a platform more promising for increasing the use of national currencies across the developing world. The formation of the BEAMS/BRICS+ platform also allows participating economies to exploit the sizeable potential of reducing the South-South protectionism – the signing of the African Continental Free Trade Area is one of the most important recent advances in this area.

In this respect the regionalism (including mega-regionalism) of the Global South offers more scope for trade liberalisation and variability in integration patterns and formations compared with the largely structured and in some respects ossified regionalism of the developed world.

Perhaps the most important reason the BRICS+ platform based on aggregating regional groups is expedient and urgent is due to the trends observed in the world economy, namely the formation of mega-regional blocks such as the TPP and TTIP. While the formation of the latter has been postponed by tensions between the US and the EU, there are signs that the TTP partnership is brought back to life. The main race in the world economy today is the creation of aggregated platforms of regional integration arrangements that have enough mass and leverage to attract trade and investment flows from across the world economy.

In this respect the BEAMS formation may be the best that the Global South can come up with in terms of building a large enough platform (in effect its own mega-regional platform) to limit the adverse impact of trade diversion and losses in investment flows emanating from the emergence of other mega-regional blocks.

Lissovolik is the Eurasian Development Bank's managing director of research. He is a member of the advisory council of the Central Bank of Russia, a member of the council on foreign and defence policy and a member of the Bretton Woods Committee

Russia
Source: www.nkibrics.ru

Elisabetta Basile, Full Professor of Development Economics, Sapienza University of Rome

Claudio Cecchi, Full Professor of Environmental Economics, Sapienza University of Rome

1. Introduction

The aim of this paper is to explore the role of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (BRICS) in promoting and enhancing sustainable development. In the present historical period, this is a crucial issue. According to several scholars, we already are in the new era of Anthropocene and the human impact on the life on the Earth system is very near to become irreversible. The serious engagement of all countries – developed, developing, and emerging – is needed to mitigate the impact of human action on environment, enhancing the transition to sustainable development (Basile and Baud, 2018).

Several attempts to coordinate actions have failed, while others have not given the desired results.

This is the case of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and of the Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change. While a major agreement was reached among countries, this failure was largely due to the prevailing of vested interests over common needs. Since 2015 a new institutional framework for individual and collective action has been jointly defined by means of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, bringing about a renewed interest on environment and development. Our intention here is to understand if and how, in this new scenario, BRICS will play a role in supporting international action to address the environmental problems linked to economic and social development.

As a group, BRICS show a strong potential and a major interest in playing a leading role. In the

international arena, they are already engaged in the pursuing of shared aims and, by means of South-South cooperation, they have been able to involve an increasing number of less developed countries. However, as we argue in this paper, the effectiveness of their engagement in leading the way to sustainable development might be undermined by the differences among their economic and political interests that prevent a common strategy.

The paper is organized as follows. The second section summarises the new scenario brought about

by the launch of the SDGs and by the Paris Agreement. The focus is on the new pattern of engagement imposed on countries and societies as far as climate change and sustainability are concerned. The third section focuses on BRICS strategy to promote sustainable development by means of South- South cooperation. We show that South-South cooperation might play a key role in the pursuing of sustainable development by enlarging the scope of action to an increasing number of developing and emerging countries. The forth section points out the different interests of BRICS as far as sustainable development is concerned. The final section shows that a trade-off exists between BRICS' aspiration of becoming a hegemonic power and the interests of each country individually taken. Yet, as we argue, it is very likely that the hegemonic aspiration will prevail over conflicting interests, as environmental issues might become a major terrain to affirm a leading role worldwide.

2. A new scenario

When the association of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa was institutionalized into the BRICS association, the international community was already aware that the first UN MillenniumCampaign (2000-2015) was fated to only a limited success. By 2015 it was widely acknowledgedthat, while being the most successful anti-poverty effort in the history of humankind, the 8 MDGs

and the related 21 Targets were not fully reached and the job was left unfinished for millions of people in the most disadvantageous areas of the planet (MDGs Report, 2015). In the UN Summit in New York in September 2015, it was established that this partial success was to be addressed by means of the adoption of the 2030 Agenda which included the SDGs: a new set of 17 Goals and 169 Targets to be reached in 15 years to end poverty in all its forms, everywhere and forever.

Like the MDGs, also the SDGs are a major example of UN goal setting. As UN history shows, goal setting is a key function in any UN action agenda, and a good feasible device to link UN principles and norms to operational activities. It should rely on the analysis of evidence and be inspired bydevelopment needs, and, by defining targets and indicators, create the necessary conditions formonitoring and reporting on future achievements.

Indeed, the achievements of UN action by means of goal setting have been limited. The reason is that usually goals are not based on the assessment of socio-economic conditions nor always takedevelopment priorities into account. The goal setting for the first Millennium Campaign was strongly influenced by the tensions among interests and countries, keeping into account political priorities and interests in the UN (Browne, 2017). Such tensions clearly emerged in the MDG agenda, which was built on an agreement between Developed Countries (DCs) and Less Developed Countries (LDCs): LDCs would engage in achieving the first seven Goals, while DCs would ensure meeting the eighth Goal, i.e. Global Partnership for Development. Only the least controversial Goals – not necessarily the most important ones – were included, so accounting for the partial success of the action.

With the UN Campaign for the SDGs the operational framework is even more complicated andproblematic. The UN has conducted a huge goal setting exercise aiming at maximising inclusionwhile minimising tension. Moreover, the choice of Goals reveals a limited attention to development

needs, while respecting national policies and priorities and avoiding tensions and conflicts. Manyaspects influencing development, such as migration, terrorism, religious fundamentalism and human security at large, where conflicts of interest are strong, were not included. Finally, the Goals have been universally extended to DCs and LDCs – under a strong pressure from the BRICS – and new major areas have been included, such as climate change, economic inequality, innovation, sustainable consumption, while the very concept of sustainable development has been put at the core of the 2030 Agenda.

Environmental issues are also at the core of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which, since 1995, has collected together a wide number of country representatives in Conferences of Parties (CoPs) in order to define common actions to keep under control climate change. The CoPs are another major exercise of goal setting. As in the case of the Millennium Campaigns, the aim is to link UN principles and norms to operational activities, relying on development needs and monitoring and reporting on future achievements.

With the Kyoto Protocol (CoP 3, 1997) more than 150 nations agreed on the reduction of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions. However, despite the large number of participants, the Protocol came into force only in 2005 when it was signed by 40% of the participants. Moreover, the USA (the country responsible for the 22,4% of the emissions) never ratified the agreement and since 2001 refused to join other CoPs. Finally, the Protocol placed a heavier burden on developed nations, while China (3,2% of the emissions) and other LDCs and emerging countries were exempted from specific actions to reduce emissions.

With the CoP 21 (Paris, 2015) the situation drastically changes: i) all signatory countries (not only DCs) are required a specific engagement; ii) when signing the agreement, they explicitly accept the engagement to keep the increase of temperature 2°C above pre-industrial levels, "pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels" (Paris Agreement art. 2.1.a);however, iii) each signatory country individually is free to choose the way to follow in the pursuing of the aim.

These changes have major implications on the ways collective and individual action against climate change is carried out. The aim of action is defined by means of an indicator of climate change – the increase in the average temperature (while in the Kyoto Protocol the action was referred to the GHG emissions, which was supposed to be the major cause of climate change). Each participant is required a specific engagement, which is not imposed from above, being rather the outcome of individual decisions and capabilities. These major changes are largely the outcome of the requests of LDCs. The BRICS in particular took a strong position against EU proposal, which, in continuity with the Kyoto Protocol, suggested a decrease of the emissions up to 40%. Against the EU proposal, the USA supported the LDCs, rejecting any external control on environmental issues.

The SDGs and the agenda on climate change are intertwined. Climate change makes the pursuing of sustainable development more difficult as generates major uncertainties, increasing the cost of adaptation and resilience. Then, the actions to keep under control climate change are a major component of the agenda for sustainable development. Together with the strategies against poverty and inequality, these actions are global challenges that strongly require international cooperation.

3. Promoting sustainable development

In the context of international cooperation, the BRICS are candidates to play a key role, partly for their large and increasing economic importance and partly for their active involvement in the cooperation with LDCs by means of South-South cooperation.

In 2016, 42% of the world population was located in BRICS countries, while they contributed 22% of total world GDP and 42% of GHG emissions. Moreover, while the incidence of BRICS population has been almost stationary in the last decades, both the incidence of their GDP and GHG emissions has shown a marked increase since 2000 (WB Open Data Online, ww.worldbank.org). In the course of the first Millennium Campaign, when the Kyoto Protocol was in action, the role of BRICS was marginal, largely because the BRICS as an institution started only in 2009/10. As a group, the BRICS started becoming a major international player only after the 2008 financial crisis, with a major role in the negotiations for the 2030 Agenda and the Paris Agreement.

Cooperation among countries at different income levels is widely considered a necessary condition for the pursuing of collective aims in terms of sustainable development and climate change (UNOSSC, 2017). The Paris Agreement explicitly acknowledges the joint involvement of developed and developing countries in coordinated actions on the basis of the principle of 'common but differentiated responsibilities and capabilities'. Similarly, in the second Millennium Campaign, the SDGs have been extended to both DCs and LDCs, while, in continuity with MDG 8, SDG 17 points to "partnership for the goals".

In this context, the traditional patterns of North-South cooperation appear to be insufficient, partly for the uncertain and controversial impact on development and partly for the growing heterogeneity of the developing world (Alonso, 2012). New patterns of cooperation, new partners and new approaches are needed. For its features and performance, South-South cooperation seems to be an interesting candidate.

Long celebrated since the Bandung Conference (1955), South-South cooperation has recently become a major means to enhance collective action for sustainable development, complementing the traditional North-South cooperation. South-South cooperation is usually proposed as a case for win-win cooperation: by means of South-South cooperation, developing and emerging countries can voluntary assist other LDCs in mutually supportive ways to reach their development aims. This process has played a crucial role for the rise of Global South (Gray and Gills, 2016).

Since their institutionalization, the BRICS have led to the "rejuvenation" of South-South cooperation (Singh, 2017), by stimulating business among Southern countries, helping them to limit the impact of Bretton Woods institutions and of the North-South trade relations.

The BRICS countries are involved in two broad patterns of South-South cooperation that, for the sake of simplicity, we may call bilateral cooperation and multilateral cooperation: in bilateral cooperation a single BRICS country enters into cooperation with a single developing/emerging country; in multilateral cooperation, all BRICS countries are involved in South-South cooperation with a country or a group of countries.

The special relations that China and India have with Africa provide major examples of the first type of South-South cooperation.

China-Africa cooperation started in 2000 with the establishment of the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) that defined the principles on which the Sino-African relations were to be based: equality of rights, mutual benefits in economic relations, acknowledgment of diversity of cultures, shared engagement for a common prosperity, emphasis on friendly relations in case of conflicting interests (www.focac.org). China-Africa cooperation is often proposed as a form of winwin cooperation, in which both partners get several advantages: African partners receive investments and aid, while China can get a reliable access to the resources of which Africa is rich. Yet, the relationship is structurally unbalanced, as China is a single country with a strong economy, while the African partners are weak economies with multiple (and often conflicting) interests.

Also India is developing a close partnership with Africa, but she follows a different pattern. Also in Indo-African cooperation, the relationships between partners are unbalanced in favour of the Asian partner. However, the pattern is substantially different from China cooperation. First, India relies on her diaspora in Africa, started at the end of XIX century, which, by means of the involvement of large communities of citizens of Indian origin, provides a major human support to socio-economic and political relations. Second, India employs an inclusive and bottom-up strategy that is carried out democratically by means of soft power – i.e. by means of culture and values – so showing the way to a feasible model of development (Cheru and Obi, 2010).

China and India's model of cooperation includes a mix of investment, trade, and aid: aid is given without any form of conditionality, while the investments and money transfers are channelled through national banking institutions, such as the Exim Bank of China and the Exim Bank of India. In this way, the two Asian BRICS are implementing a pattern of cooperation which is outside the rules of the Developed Assistance Committee (DAC) of the OECD, the institution in charge of the registration and monitoring of official aid transfers from rich western countries to LDCs. This pattern of cooperation is largely controversial, as China and India, as all BRICS countries that operate outside the DAC in Africa and in other regions, are often seen as new colonial powers. Yet, this pattern also shows interesting aspects and, as the case of South-South cooperation with Africa shows, has helped several developing countries to reach important development results.

BRICS' multilateral South-South cooperation is carried out by means of two financial institutions that have been acquiring an increasing importance in the international finance system. The New Development Bank (NDB), also known as the BRICS Bank, is a financial institution strictly under the control of the BRICS with no less than 55% of total voting power, equally distributed among the 5 partners. Established in 2015, the NDB has the aim of supporting "infrastructure and sustainable development efforts" in BRICS and other emerging economies (ndb.int). The second financial institution is the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), a multilateral financial institution "founded to bring countries together to address Asia's daunting infrastructure funding gap"(). The AIIB is controlled by China (with 31% of total capital), India (8.7%) and Russia (6.8%), and involves also a large number of Asian and European countries (aiib.org).

The two institutions have a different nature and move in different contexts and with different aims.

So far, the NDB has founded only projects in BRICS countries, while the AIIB supports interventions on sustainable and green infrastructure in order to help Asian countries to meet their environmental and development goals. Through these two Southern-led institutions, the BRICS strongly contribute to the strengthening of South-South cooperation compensating one of its major shortcomings, that is the organizational and institutional weakness. This contribution appears to be particularly important keeping into account that both institutions are deeply engaged in the pursuing of sustainable development.

4. Differences and conflicting interests

The BRICS are a group of countries that strongly differ for their economic structure and performance, political regimes, international role. Building on these differences, several analysts argue that the association does not have a rock solid basis as the differences generate diverging interests and undermine the unity of the group, exercising a negative influence on the international role. Without a strong economic and political basis, the BRICS association is often seen as an outcome of a political strategy aimed at creating mainly a position of power. So, while Bremmer (2013: 180) maintains that the "countries are so dramatically different on virtually every metric", for Downie and Williams (2018: 2) the "BRICS are unlikely to act as a coalition" for the lack of coordination that follows from contrasting interests.

The differences among the BRICS and the consequent diverging interests cannot be denied. As it cannot be denied that the BRICS, individually taken, exercise a differentiated influence on international financial and commodity markets.

The dimension of population gives a rough idea of the different weight of the BRICS countries: while both India and China are well above 1.2 billions of people in 2016, South African population is only 56 millions, with South Africa and Russia in between. Moving to economic performance, the differences of GDP growth are likewise huge: two growing economies, India and China, respectively, 7.1% and 6.7% in 2016, two stagnant economies, Russia and South Africa, respectively -0.2% and 0.3%, and one declining, Brazil, -3.6%. This difference is matched by the difference in per capita GDP, which varies from 1.750 US$ (2016) for India to 8.768 for Russia. Very significant is also the difference on the public expenditure on health as a percentage of GDP, an indicator of the living standard that ranges from 1.2% for India to 6.0% for China. Also the Gini coefficient, a measure of the inequality of income distribution, shows an impressive variation, from 0.28 for rural India to 0.64 for South Africa. A similar degree of variation is observed for carbon dioxide emissions, which vary from 1.6 tonnes per capita per year in India, to more than 14.6 tonnes in Russia, while no official BRICS information is available for China(1). Finally, turning to trade, while Russia and South Africa are primary energy net exporters, India, China and Brazil are net importers. It is the opposite for the trade in goods and services, where China is a strong exporter together with Russia, while Brazil, India and South Africa are net importers.(2)

1 According to the WB estimate, China's per capita emissions are 7.6 tonnes per year (databank.worldbank.org).

2 The data is from BRICS. Joint Statistical Publication 2017, National Statistics Bureau of the People's Republic of China.

As the data suggests, the degree of homogeneity among the BRICS is rather low. A developing country like India, in which over 90% of the population live with less than 4$ per capita per day is included together with a major economic power, such as China, and with other countries with higher per capita income, such as Russia, in which only 5% of the population live below 4$ per capita per day. China, a country that is a major polluter and at the same time is actively engaged in sustainable development, is included together with other polluters, such as Russia and India, which show a weak engagement on environmental issues. Energy exporters – like Russia, a country with very rich reserves of oil and gasses – are included together with energy importers – like China, which much depends on imported oil and coal.

Another aspect, which adds to the lack of homogeneity of the BRICS, is the asymmetric distribution of power, with China in a dominant position over the other countries. This is largely accounted for by the very large dimension of China in terms of population and income growth and by a very aggressive policy in international financial markets.

There are strong differences among the BRICS also as far as the engagement for the Paris Agreement and the SDGs is concerned. While the BRICS have a common position, each country has adopted a different strategy defined on the basis of the expected timing of climate change. So, while China and South Africa assume that a peak will occur in the next decade, which would require a deep and rapid change in energy production and consumption, India builds on the hypothesis of a steady increase and Russia forecasts a slow pace of reduction of her emissions (Rinaldi and Martuscelli, 2016).

The strong differences and the contrasting aims and interests generate tensions and often also conflicts among the BRICS. A very important example of the tensions within the group is provided by the case of the flagship Chinese project known as "One Belt, One Road Initiative" (BRI), which takes its name from the Silk Road Economic Belt and the 21st Century Maritime Road. For its focus on environmental issues, the case of BRI is particularly interesting to explore BRICS strategy for sustainable development. In the words of the "Action plan on the Belt and Road Initiative" (The State Council. The People's Republic of China, 2017b), the BRI "aims to promote the connectivity of Asian, European and African continents and their adjacent seas, establish and strengthen partnerships among the countries along the Belt and Road, set up all-dimensional, multitiered and composite connectivity networks, and realize diversified, independent, balanced and sustainable development in these countries ... "(p. 2), while "... efforts should be made to promote green and low-carbon infrastructure construction and operation management, taking into full account the impact of climate change on the construction (p. 4)". It has been estimated that the project will involve more than 68 countries in a vast part of Asia, Europe and Africa (The State Council. The People's Republic of China, 2017a).

The first idea of BRI was launched by China's President at the end of 2013, while the Plan of Action was fully defined by 2015. The BRI will be funded by a mix of private funds and funds coming from state-owned institutions. According to the Deloitte website, at the end of 2016, 51% of the total investment was supplied by big state-owned commercial banks, 38% by China Development Bank, and the rest by several other sources, including the AIIB and the NDB. Moreover, the BRI is supported by the Russia-led Eurasian Economic Union (Beeson, Zeng, 2018: p. 8).

So far India has refused to be a partner in the initiative for two major reasons, which clearly show the worrying intertwining of economic, political and military issues. The first reason is found in a part of the project, i.e. the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, which directly interferes with India's political interests. The corridor crosses Kashmir, an area that India claims as hers, and India takes it as a threat to her sovereignty and territorial integrity. The second reason refers to the Maritime Silk Road, which India fears might be used for military purposes by the China's Army Navy (Jaishankar, 2017). The Belt and Road Initiative is a gigantic project, a Chinese initiative that will deeply change power relations worldwide. The major tensions between the two major BRICS countries are a symptom of serious interest conflicts in the association.

The differences in the patterns of socio-economic development, jointly with the differentiated interests and the asymmetric distribution of power within the group, are often seen as factors that might limit the economic and political impact of BRICS (Movchan, 2015). Due to the asymmetry of power, the BRICS do not appear to be a group of equal partners, but rather a China-led group, made of countries that are China's satellites, with India – a country as big as China but still suffering from major development problems – in an uncomfortable position. In this context, it seems very hard for the BRICS to speak with a unified voice, while the lack of mutual interests might very likely discourage joint initiatives and cultural differences might prevent the common understanding about priorities, so leading to different positions in international negotiations.

5. Will the BRICS succeed in leading the way to sustainable development?

The BRICS association was established only in 2009, but, in a very short period, its imprint on international relations has become already strong, and there are no doubts that the member countries are global players in the international scene.

So far we have described the nature and role of BRICS in contradictory terms. On the one side, we have pointed out the main results of the BRICS since they have been established as a formal association. On the other side, we have analysed their diversities in economic, social and political terms, speculating about the likely implications.

We have seen that the BRICS have marked their international presence in several ways reachingmajor results. Most probably the most important result, one that will certainly have a significant influence on future activities, has been the establishment of the BRICS institutions, in particular the NDB. We have shown that the NDB is playing a key role in the funding of economic initiatives in BRICS countries and, together with the AIIB, a China-led bank which involves also partners from all over the world, is contributing to major projects in infrastructures. BRICS financial institutions and the financial institutions that are expression of BRICS members, such as the AIIB, are strongly involved in the BRI, the flagship China project which will change the connectivity in a large part of Asia, Africa and Europe and will deeply impact of power relations among countries worldwide.

We have also seen that the potentialities of the BRICS are strongly linked to their increasing relations with LDCs that are carried on by means of South-South cooperation. In summarising the features of China and India's cooperation with Africa, we have shown how the two Asian giants are building strong political and economic linkages with African LDCs, which will enlarge BRICS sphere of influence ensuring the BRICS members the access to important resources.

The BRICS, both individually and as a group, have also played a very active role in UN negotiations for the SDGs and the Paris Agreement, in some case also in explicit opposition to EU and USA. In these contexts, their support to sustainable development has been strong and widely shared. However, as we have pointed out, the translation of principles into action has been largely differentiated. We have argued that this differential depends on the major differences of the BRICS in terms of economic and social development.

As shown, there are multiple differences among the BRICS, which range from the size of population and the economy, to economic results – measured in terms of per capita income and income growth rate – to investments in human development, to market integration. These differences give birth to significant imbalances that give birth to contrasting interests. So, the BRICS include large countries and small countries, growing countries and declining countries, countries with serious poverty problems and countries with Western poverty levels, countries that give priority to policies for sustainable development and countries that do not.

There are few doubts that BRICS association is built on differences and imbalances. There are also few doubts that, owing to China's economic and political power, the BRICS seem more a China-led association than an association among equal partners. Yet, BRICS association has a major internal strength that needs to be stressed. The BRI provides an interesting example of how this strength works.

As we have seen, while not being a BRICS project, the BRI involves, directly or indirectly, the majority of BRICS members, it is collecting huge investments worldwide, and will have a majorsocio-economic and political impact. Moreover, it is a project which is fated to change not only the connectivity but also the way in which green and low-carbon emission infrastructures are built topromote sustainable development. If India will confirm her opposition, her position will not be easy. Not now, and even worse in the future as the project will progress. Yet, despite her conflicting interests with China, India continues to be part of the BRICS, ensuring her presence to the BRICS Summits. Why it is so? Why the huge differences and the strong interest conflicts do not undermine the future of BRICS?

Our answer to these questions is that the strength of BRICS lies on the weakness of their competitors in terms of leadership in international relations. The BRICS are filling the space left open by the decline of former hegemonic powers, and they are filling it by investing their human, financial and political resources into the areas that appear to be most relevant in the future and involving countries that so far have been marginalized in international relations.

References

Alonso J.A. (2012) From aid to global development policy, UN-Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Working Paper No. 121, ST/ESA/2012/DWP/121

Amorim A., Mattos B., Santos M., Morales P. (2015) The BRICS on the road to COP 21. BPC Policy Brief, V. 5 N. 11. http://bricspolicycenter.org/homolog/uploads/trabalhos/7052/doc/122963575.pdf

Basile E., Baud I. (2018) Introduction: Reflecting on Development Studies in the New Millennium.

In Debating Development Studies. Paradigm, Knowledges, Impact, Voices. Edited by I. Baud, E.

Basile, T. Kontinen, S. von Itter. London and New York: Palgrave MacMillan (forthcoming).

Beeson M., Zeng J. (2018): The BRICS and global governance: China's contradictory role. Third

World Quarterly (online: 19 Mar 2018), DOI: 10.1080/01436597.2018.1438186 [accessed Jun 08

2018].

Bremmer I. (2013) Book Review "Breakout Nations: In Pursuit of the next Economic BRICS Academic Forum (2014) Brics and Africa: Partnership for Development, Integration and Industrialisation. Pretoria: The Department of Internal Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO).

BRICS Information Portal (2017) Sustainable Development Goals: BRICS and Russia. News 1

December. http://infobrics.org/post/26088/

BRICS Johannesburg (2018) Joint statement for the Fourth BRICS Ministers of Environment meeting

Zimbali, Durban, South Africa. 18 May. http://www.brics2018.org.za/en/joint-statement-fourthbrics-ministers-environment-meeting

Cheru F. and Obi C. (2010 (eds.) The Rise of China and India in Africa: Challenges, Opportunities

and Critical Interventions, Zed Books, London and New York.

de Coning C. (2017) The BRICS: The Last Line of Defence for Globalisation? Rising Powers

Quarterly. Volume 2, Issue 4, pp. 83-93

Degaut M. (2015) Do the BRICS Still Matter? Washington: Center for Strategic and International

Studies.

Deloitte Insights (2018) Embracing the BRI ecosystem in 2018. Navigating pitfalls and seizing

opportunities.https://www2.deloitte.com/insights/us/en/economy/asia-pacific/china-belt-and-roadinitiative.html#endnote-7

Dimock P. ed. (2017) The Role of BRICS in the World Economy & International Development.

Shanghai: New Development Bank.

Downie C., Williams M. (2018) After the Paris Agreement: What Role for the BRICS in Global

Climate Governance? Global Policy. doi: 10.1111/1758-5899.12550

European Parliament (2015) EU position for COP 21 climate change conference. Briefing November 2015

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2015/572787/EPRS_BRI(2015)572787_EN.pdf

Firstpost (2017) G20 Summit: Narendra Modi says role of BRICS countries important in climate

change and terror. 7 July. https://www.firstpost.com/india/g20-summit-narendra-modi-says-role-ofbrics-countries-important-in-climate-change-terror-3787563.html

Gray K. and Gills B.K. (2016) South–South cooperation and the rise of the Global South, Third World Quarterly, 37:4, 557-574, DOI: 10.1080/01436597.2015.1128817

Guriev S. (2015) Five questions about the BRICS nations. World Economic Forum,

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2015/07/five-questions-about-the-brics-nations/

Hongyu L. (2017) Globalization creates a new role for BRICS. Chinese Social Science Net. 6

September. http://english.cssn.cn/research/internationalstudies/201709/t20170906_3631160.shtml

Hopewell K. (2017) The BRICS – Merely a Fable? Emerging Power Alliances in Global Trade

Governance. International Affairs 93(6): 1377-96.

Jaishankar D. (2017) India feeling the heat on Belt and Road. The Interpreter at Lowi Institute.

https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/india-feeling-heat-belt-road

Kosolapova E. (2017) BRICS Commit to Cooperate on SDGs. IISD - SDG Knowledge Hub. 12

September 2017. http://sdg.iisd.org/news/brics-commit-to-cooperate-on-sdgs-climate-change/

Mai N., Richter C. (2017) Our responsibilities for future generations. 13 – 18 August. COP 23

Official Study Guide. Berlin: Berlin International Model United Nation (Berlin MUN)

Movchan A. (2015) 5 factors limiting the impact of the BRICS nations. World Economic Forum online.https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2015/07/5-factors-limiting-the-impact-of-the-brics-nations/

National Statistics Bureau of the People's Republic of China (2017) BRICS Joint Statistical 2017.

Beijing: China Statistics Press. ISBN 978-7-5037-8240-4

Singh S. (2017) The BRICS Model of South-South Cooperation, UJCI Africa-China Policy Brief N.2

Sitas A. (2018) Reconfiguring the World System: Envisioning inclusive development through a

socially responsive economy. THE SUNDAY independent 18/02/2018: p. 3

The State Council. The People's Republic of China (2017a) China pledges trans-regional customs coop for Belt and Road http://english.gov.cn/state_council/ministries/2015/05/27/content_281475115756220.htm

The State Council. The People's Republic of China (2017b) Full text: Action plan on the Belt and

Road Initiative." (http://english.gov.cn/archive/publications/2015/03/30/content_281475080249035.htm)

UNDP (2016) Scaling-Up South-South Cooperation for Sustainable Development. New York: United Nations Development Programme

United Nations Climate Change (2018) Paris Agreement: essential elements.

https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement

UNOSSC (2017) Climate Partnerships for a Sustainable Future: An initial overview of South-South

cooperation on climate change in the context of sustainable development and efforts to eradicate

poverty. New York: United Nations Office for South-South Cooperation

Viola E. and Basso L. (2016) Wandering Decarbonization: The BRIC Countries as Conservative

ClimatePowers, Revista Brasileira de PolıticaInternacional, 59 (1), pp. 1–22.

vomHaua M, Scott J., Hulmeb D. (2012) Beyond the BRICs: Alternative Strategies of Influence in

the Global Politics of Development. European Journal of Development Research, Vol. 24, 2, 187–204

Russia
Author: Roberta Ciampo
Source: www.nkibrics.ru

Roberta Ciampo, University of Rome La Sapienza. Expert in International Relations. Research Project in China at the Fudan University of Shanghai on thetheme: "The BRICS Cooperation as a new project of development. The case of China

Introduction

The need to face the infrastructural gap and the lack of resources among the BRICS countries had induced governments to create in 2015 their own financial institution, the New Development Bank (hereinafter NDB), whose task was firstly and foremost to coordinate the different infrastructural needs, and secondly to maintain the main focus on sustainable development.

However, since it was born recently, this new institution is still confronted today with various obstacles: how to define, build, measure and monitor sustainable development? How to incentivize investments? How to formalize these commitments with the interested parties?

1-For a new approach to multilateral development financing

The attempt to start a new kind of development stems from the individual national experiences of the BRICS countries, and from the sharing of common challenges, such as poverty and inequality. These challenges require the promotion of initiatives that are based on territorial realities, on different social and geographical contexts, and require greater guarantees for more equitable and inclusive benefits.

In recent decades, western investors have concentrated resources on one-way programs to reduce poverty or promote economic growth, while underestimating the role of infrastructures. This is partly due to the political costs associated with large-scale investment projects in the field of infrastructure, not counting the opposition from activists and civil society organizations; on the other hand, the traditional investments in infrastructure are often subject to criticism of social, environmental and human impact they cause on the territories. These practices highlighted the need for inclusive projects that promote the effective development of society as a whole.

Therefore, this translates into an imperative for the BRICS countries to ensure infrastructure development that is sustainable in all its forms.

In its first phase, the NDB will then have to put forward solutions, explain the reasons for its choices, if it wants to avoid replicating errors made by competing world institutions, but above all to lead a new radical approach to multilateral financing of development.

2-An open problem:How to build sustainable infrastructures

The simplest way to define a sustainable infrastructure development is to build it on the basis of three pillars: economic, social and environmental performance, obviously supported by the financial feasibility of the project. The ability of each pillar to produce effects on the sustainability of development will then depend on the national development priorities of the individual BRICS countries. In 2017, the Board of Governors of NDB implemented its first strategy for the period 2017-2021, arguing that the Bank intends to be "new" in three areas: Relationships, Instruments and Approaches. In each of these areas there are opportunities and challenges for the promotion of sustainable development, as demonstrated in fact by the percentage of two out of three of the projects dedicated to it.

The Relationships. Regarding the Relationships, the BRICS countries are both shareholders and borrowers of the NDB, as already known by the evident horizontal approach used in the South-SouthCooperation. The NDB could then become one of the major pillars able to support the development of the Global South through the Global South itself. In other words, the intent would be to encourage horizontal relationships and to build spaces for innovation and solutions adapted to the specific needs of the five countries, while respecting their priorities and strategies. In reality, this configuration is not at all surprising, since respect for territorial sovereignty continues to be a particularly sensitive issue for all member states. In any case, the NDB remains firm in supporting its commitment to a form of financial cooperation that entrusts the ways and strategies of project implementation to national laws, without these being in any way bound to economic or political conditionalities.

However, we must highlight some weaknesses of this model, which mainly consist in the lack of clear methodologies and tools, which are able to evaluate and strengthen the system of borrower countries, especially when these are not at the same level of internationally accepted standards.

On the one hand, the internal structure of the NDB encourages equity, mutual respect and trust among member states; most decisions are taken by simple majority; no member state has veto power; it is a structure that facilitates the initiative towards national and regional development banks, demonstrated by the fact that the NDB is willing to open access to other countries in order to increase the geographical diversity and dilute the homogeneous influence of countries with different degrees of development. On the other hand, however, the criteria for selecting projects and allocating funds are not clearly defined; the imperative of sovereignty could also clash with the need to ensure that the projects do not reproduce the typical donor-recipient inequality ratio.

The Instruments. With regard to the Instruments for infrastructure investment projects, it should be noted that the focus is primarily on sustainable infrastructure, and to this end the development of national technical knowledge and not imported from other models is encouraged. Some obstacles, however, would seem to undermine these ambitions: starting from the very concept of "sustainable infrastructure", that reveals a contradiction in terms, as already highlighted by Hochstetler, who affirms the incompatibility between sustainable development and investment in infrastructure. Hence, the need for clarification both on the type of sustainability that is intended to be achieved, illustrating the ways in which projects are funded or establishing methods to evaluate the development levels accomplished.

The Approaches. The third area in which the NDB declares its originality concerns the approach used. The NDB aims to decrease the period of time necessary for the approval of projects and its funding, a reduction of 6 months, compared to the 14 months required by the World Bank. A reduction that could, however, show its limits and be an obstacle to the success of the project, if it is determined at the expense of the social and environmental sphere.

Sustainable development and support to emerging markets through investments are two complementary elements. The NDB can not only encourage foreign investment, but it could also emerge in the coming years as a primary source of finance for developing countries.

The Bank uses a risk-based approach to project approval and oversight that imposes more intensive ex-ante reviews for complex projects that are risky from both a social and environmental point of view, while low-risk projects go through a more streamlined with ex post controls. Staff performance indicators and incentives should be geared towards evaluation, disbursement and risk outcomes, rather than the number of projects approved by the NDB staff. However, the lack of clarity on how to measure performance persists.

Recommendations

The intent of this article is then to propose suggestions and provide indications for a dynamic and innovative growth of the Bank:

1. First of all, the Development Bank needs to develop criteria and indicators toincentivize and evaluate the sustainability of projects, and these criteria should be based on standards, standards and good practices that already exist at global level for sustainable development, and then use them as an evaluation scale for future projects. Without a clear definition of "sustainable development", attempts to designate infrastructure as sustainable could in fact lead to failures or less satisfactory results.
2. Although the elaboration of common criteria for sustainable development is proposed here, the context and the development priorities of the countries taking them, must be taken into consideration. In other words, it is required that sustainable development be encouraged by a common but differentiated approach. This orientation also responds to the needs of individual countries, which will be more encouraged to participate in projects, if these are directly related to the implementation of national development priorities.
3. The typical approach adopted by multilateral development banks is the so-called "do not harm approach", which consists of safeguard policies to avoid, limit or compensate for the negative effects that investments have on the environment or in the social sphere. Safeguards help promote sustainability by protecting the people and environment from the potential adverse effect of development. For instance, environmentally sustainable growth can be achieved through the adoption of environmentally friendly technologies, or the establishment of institutional capacities to strengthen the enforcement of safeguard measures. This type of approach obviously has limits, as it presupposes from the beginning damage to the system, which are however justified by the presence of more significant benefits. This approach implies that development cannot be imposed from outside, but can only be achieved within that particular national system (within society governmental institutions, and companies). For this reason, it is recommended to combine this approach with a so-called "transformative", in which the methods of safeguarding are supported by dialogue, incentives, a healthier collaboration between investor and beneficiary of the investment.
4. To encourage investment in infrastructure, the NDB could offer financial incentives to its customers, such as particular credit rights, low-interest loans or insurance against risks. The higher the level of sustainability, the more generous incentives could be; or on the contrary, the failure to integrate environmental and social considerations into their project planning could be deemed ineligible for loans.

Final observations

At the present time, the NDB is in the initial phase of planning and organization (we recall that its inaugural strategy embraces the period 2017-2021) and therefore it remains unclear how far it will be able to define the financing framework for international development. New partnerships, innovative approaches, unprecedented opportunities to unlock new funds for developmentare emerging on the horizon, but all these elements need to be combined with clear methodologies, risk assessment indexes, shared guidelines andsystems for monitoring the performance of projects.

The NDB'scommitment to sustainable infrastructure is perhaps the most significant element that can distinguish it from the methods of multilateral development banks. As already mentioned, the NDB itself defines sustainable infrastructure as "the infrastructure that coordinates economic, environmental and social criteria in its projects and operations", adding that the introduction of these criteria derives from the awareness that traditional evaluation methods fail to account for several factors for sustainability that have a major influence in the medium and long-run.

In other words, the NDB's strategy recognizes the importance for sustainable infrastructures to "move beyond short-term", but it seems to require more time to clarify its critical points, to name a few, the hidden costs and risks of not applying a sustainable lens to the global development.

APPENDIX

Birth and Evolution of the New Development Bank

It was at the fourth BRICS summit in New Delhi (2012) that the leaders of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa took into consideration the idea of creating a New Bank to mobilize resources for infrastructure and sustainable development projects in the BRICS countries and in other emerging economies; but, only after agreeing the financial feasibility of this initiative, during the sixth BRICS summit in Fortaleza (2014), the leaders signed the agreement establishing the New Development Bank (NDB).In the statement by Fortaleza, the leaders stress that the NDB will strengthen cooperation between the BRICS countries and will complement the efforts of multilateral and regional financial institutions for global development, thus contributing to collective commitments to achieve the goal of strong, sustainable and sustainable growth. balanced.

The inaugural meeting of the Board of Governors of NDB was chaired by Russia and was held on the eve of the Ufa summit on 7 July 2015, when the Bank officially entered into existence as a legal entity. During the meeting, the appointment of the President, Mr. K.V. Kamath, as well as four Vice Presidents and the Board of Directors.

On 27 February 2016, both the agreement with the Government of the People's Republic of China concerning the bank's headquarters and the memorandum of understanding with the Shanghai Municipal People's Government were signed; with them the NDB became fully operational at the BRICS Tower in Shanghai.

On 17 August 2017, the New Development Bank officially opened the Africa Regional Center (ARC) in Johannesburg. The opening of this branch will be an important contribution to the development of sustainable infrastructures in South Africa and marks the fulfillment of a commitment assumed by the founders of the Bank in its Articles of Agreement.

Below is the organizational structure of the NDB:

The New Development Bank's purpose is to support infrastructure and sustainable development projects in BRICS and other emerging economies. Our work complements the existing efforts of multilateral and regional financial institutions for global growth and development. To fulfill our purpose, we support public and private projects through loans, guarantees, equity participation and other financial instruments. We also cooperate with international organizations and other financial entities, and provide technical assistance for projects to be supported by the Bank. In addition to financing development projects, we engage in informational, cultural and personnel exchanges with the purpose of contributing to the achievement of environmental and social sustainability.

In 2016-2017, the Board of Directors approved financial assistance loans of over USD 3.4 billion for projects in the fields of green economy, renewable energy, transport, water resources, irrigation and other areas.

Below is the list of projects implemented and those under construction:

Russia
Author: Giorgio Toscani
Source: www.nkibrics.ru

Giorgio Toscani, engineer, expert in Development Economy, and specialized in territorial management and land use, has collaborated with national and European Institutions. Past President and CEO in several Project Companies in environment and infrastructure sector of Italian Public-Private System (PatecipazioniStatali). Actually collaborate with Eurispes and its international Department.

Premise

According to the Economics, an infrastructure is commonly defined as the network of goods and services representing the fundamental element for the socio-economic development of a country.

Within the scope of the goods, purely economic are considered those basic infrastructures which allow the State to exercise the function of stimulating development; in addition, to such infrastructures we have to link the so called social infrastructures that guarantee the basic services to the citizen, ie those infrastructures that must have a high accessibility, at low-cost conditions, to allow the country to grow; in this framework we find the so called primary services such as transport, energy and telecommunications. For the set of infrastructures in Economics the synonym of social fixed capital is also used

1-BRICS commitments in the infrastructure sector

This brief introduction is useful to define the field of interests and goals of the Agreements signed by the BRICS Countries in occasion of the various summits and meetings. In fact:

- The BRICS Russian Chairmanship 2015/2016 identifies the following objectives:

a) Key-objective: reinforcement and consolidation of the political and economic BRICS position and role in international sphere.

b) To promote the solution of the most pressing economic problems on the basis of consolidated relationships between the five Partners

c) To achieve a progressive reform of the international monetary system

d) Further development in international monetary cooperation

e) New areas of cooperation

f) Promote initiatives of gradual establishment of new institutions and associations

- In the VIIth Summit of July 9th 2015 at UFA (Russia) the BRICS approved the Final Declaration of their work, in which they agree to carry on coordinated efforts to face the emerging challenges, ensuring peace and security, promoting sustainable development, the eradication of the poverty, inequality and youth unemployment.

It is repeated that the role of the NDB will serve as a strong tool to finance infrastructure and investments for sustainable development projects to be put in place at the beginning of 2016, also in collaboration with the Asian Impr.INV.Bank (AIIB).

- ThePriorities and Recommendationsfrom the UFA Summit 2015 are:

1) Promote practical cooperation in infrastructure development.

2) Include the regional areas and infrastructures to the Report.

3) Cooperation in infrastructure development: investing in infrastructures, particularly with integral development projects that ensure not only the basis for concrete economic growth, but also the increase the quality of life of the populations, the protection of the environment, the harmonization of projects with existing regional initiatives.

-In the Memorandum developed by the five Development Banks (NDB - BNDFEA - EIBIND - CHINADB - DESAFR) the area of cooperation is defined with the aim of increasing policies and procedures, within their respective competences, including the areas of infrastructure and sustainable development projects, in areas of mutual interest for the strengthening trade and economic relations.

2-The development of networks in the future of BRICS

Concerning the infrastructural projects, up to now it has been possible to distinguish between marginal projects and non-marginal projects, ie between projects that may have an impact on the structure of production. Regarding the effects of a project on the economic sectors and institutions we can consider as primary those effects concerning the creation of added value and as secondarythose related to the creation of additional added value, depending on the use of the added value of the main project.The primary effects can in turn be considered as directeffects those corresponding to the added value created by the project and divided among families, public administration, financial intermediaries and companies, and indirect those resulting from the purchases of companies and suppliers of goods and services for the project.

The goal of our time is to achieve a close integration between politics and economy as a condition for the creation of a new added value. In this respect, the BRICS should represent a strong model of a supranational union capable of becoming one of the poles of the modern world and representing a role of effective union and dynamics between Europe and the Asia-Pacific region. The state must support the most important infrastructure projects and first those projects that ensure the connections between the BRICS regions, with the aim promoting the best life quality.

In the regions BRICS should pursue economic-productive development by abandoning the concept of "post-industrialization" which can have negative consequences. In fact, post-industrialism involves the destruction of economic bases characterized by classes and branches of productive activities whose collapse of production, resulting in industrial desertification, causes the loss of all related activities of subsidiary and auxiliary services.

The refusal of industrial development is equivalent to rejecting development as such.In the US they are starting to think in terms of reindustrialization also due to the technological drive that pushes investors to favor technological areas. For this reason it can be said that a direct consequence of post-industrialization entails an increase in technological inferiority consequent to the suspension of development. It is necessary to move towards the creation of new highly technological structures with an accurate and balanced government action between industrial projects and infrastructure projects.

It is necessary that the BRICS countries build their future as an independent center of civilization by entering a new phase of integration-iteration with other European centers of culture generating their own impact based on their intrinsic value. A policy of expansion represents the cornerstone and foundation of liberal monetarism aimed at carrying out complex projects. A development policy also involves a qualitative change in global economic management. Mega projects cannot be an occasional choice but a fundamental method of development.The great works have given great prominence to the regions involved and have favored and developed branches of productive, industrial and service activities related to them.

Projects such as the development of atomic energy, the development of civil aeronautics, rail transport, radio-television systems, sports facilities and Olympic games, the construction of highway systems, all sustainable infrastructure projects have ensured a rapid expansion in the connective system. All these projects are of great importance for the development of the country and to improve the quality of life and must aim to break through a qualitatively innovative way of life and towards new industrial and production technologies.

An important step forward in the creation of technologically advanced industrial facilities for the modernization of a country is to set up an integrated infrastructure system. This implies a flexible unity of transport, energy, and telecommunications infrastructure systems, including space and satellites. That is required both to mitigate the obstacles that hinder a free exchange of products between countries, to revive a large-scale industrialization of products, brands, new goods, services, technologies, in relation to current production processes, favoring the transition from a system based on individual companies to a system of integrated industries, as well as from individual projects to integrated infrastructure projects.

Specifically, if construction companies, through interdisciplinary projects, take part with other companies in forming a production base in the area to develop, if a production system induces investments in complex projects; if companies in the energy, telecommunications, engineering will receive production orders from multi-infrastructural units, coming from integrated infrastructures, all this will arouse:

a) a reciprocal communication and a closer relationship between different service activities that currently are separated;

b) a greater synthesis between information and knowledge of all types of social and economic-productive flows that move through these integrated infrastructures;

c) an increase in both the intensity of the flows and an increase in the efficiency of production factors, through integrated infrastructure channels,

d) greater coordination of the participation by a growing number of the infrastructures' users, by changing requests and decisions relating to them with timely iterations.

All this will imply the start of an integrated and interrelated process of knowledge, technologies, new institutions and human essence, such as to develop the social fixed capital.

3-Cooperation and a new concept of value

The development of this "modus operandi" implies an extension of the concept of value as object of cooperation and interaction between different countries.If there are countries ready to embark on global development, processes and are able to push the world out of the current moment of crisis and stagnation, then a value to be achieve is not only the transformation of a social system but also a rapid increase in ability of the individuals and therefore of the entire community they represent.

This increase in capacity is determined by the acquisition of a proper knowledge about the new principles and effects of natural and social processes, the development of new technologies, the new human skills and competences that BRICS countries will have to achieve in the future.

The Final Declaration approved by the leaders on 4 September 2017 at the IX Summit in Xiamen (China), in addition to reaffirming the satisfaction for the results achieved in strengthening mutual cooperation, and in the development of cooperation between N.D.B. (New Development Bank) and C.R.A. (Contingent Reserve Arrangement), affirms the will to energize a more useful collaboration able to strengthen the development of the BRICS countries through greater communication and coordination for global economic development with the aim to build up a more equitable global economic order.

To this aim, the will to pursue fairness and justice is reaffirmed as a condition to safeguard regional peace and stability to achieve through a practical and constructive economic cooperation.

On the latter option, operational research groups were exercised on the identification of infrastructures and mega scientific projects (Dubne, 15-17 May 2017) in search of significant connectivity to be proposed in the Second Annual Reportof the BBC (BRICS Business Council).

It was hoped a potential intervention in funding by the N.D.B. (New Development Bank) to support economic and infrastructural development; taking this point as one of the 10 priorities of the Program.

1-A complete information on the activities of the 6 working groups was given, including the one on Infrastructures. Therefore the recommendations for the BRICS Governments were defined in the Second Annual Report. Concerning infrastructures, they envisage cooperation for investments in integral development projects able to promote an increase in the quality of life as well as in the protection of the environment as part of an integrated activity promoted with the regional initiatives of the five countries.

2-Particular attention has been given to the A.P.I. (Priority Integration Agenda) especially in Latin America, to PIDA Options in Africa, to the Belt and Road Program and RAZVITZIE in Eurasia.

3-The Infrastructure Working Group (W.G.I.) has identified the most significant projects for the BRICS countries.

3.1-For Brazil, 14 integrated projects were selected, mainly in the transport sector. Inside this set of projects, n.6 projects concern logistic corridors; n.4 projects are related to bi-oceanic and transoceanic rail connections, n ° 2 projects to multinational motorways.

3.2-For Russia, the following projects have been identified: the Moscow-Kazan high-speed railway; the Moscow-Beijing corridor connecting Russia with China and part of Eurasia; the development project of the RAZVITIE corridor.

3.3.-India intends to develop complex infrastructural projects in industrial corridors and smart cities, based on modern technology and high-intensity communications, using funding from the Indian branch of the Development Bank.

N.5 Corridors have been identified that are at different stage of development: 1) Delhi - Mumbai corridor, 2) Bengalore - Mumbai corridor: 3) Chennai - Bangalore corridor: 4) Visak - Bagetnam - Chennai corridor; 5) Amritsar - Kalkata corridor. These projects cross India and offer a potential opportunity for productive investment.

The port system in India is under severe pressure due to the increase in commercial activity and cargo traffic. Therefore, the development of port infrastructures aims to deepen the seabed for building terminals suited to particular types of LNG cargo with the aim of creating a total port capacity of 3200 MMT; in particular to achieve in 2020 the capacity of 2500 MMT of potential traffic.

The development of port traffic makes it possible to expand the range of port services such as barge transport, the maintenance and repair activities and pilotage services, and the creation of new ancillary and subsidiary activities.

India also reaffirms the importance of encouraging the development of infrastructures related to renewable energy production with the aim of making India less dependent on fossil products using clean energy.

4-China reaffirms the importance of developing the Silk Road as an occasion of the 21st century and confirms the importance of links with the land and maritime Silk Road projects.

5-South Africa gives priority to the Regional and Continental priority infrastructure development program in the transport and energy sector. In particular, it expresses priorities in the DIPA project and in the North-South development corridor, in clean energy and in the development of marine economy and marine connectivity and supporting the need for transport of nuclear and wind energy. It supports the development of the port and railway system.

4-The importance of the use of Intersectional and Forecasting Matrices

If we consider the universally recognized need to address the problems of production development, in particular the infrastructural one (in which one production choice instead another involves immediate and mediated chain reactions in various sectors of the economy) by means of the correct prediction of the mentioned reflexes, in this case the construction of inter-sectional and economic forecasting matrices (Leontief) can be useful.

The elaboration of matrices can be developed in a macroeconomic key that defines a structural interdependence scheme within a national or particular economic system. The Leontievian model aims to describe the structure of an economic system by explaining its size and functioning on the basis of interdependent relationships between the various sectors; it is useful analysis tool for setting up development programs.

In particular, the infrastructure sector includes that of building, which, in addition to directly influencing the production, conditions the development of numerous other branches of production activities and services. The correlations between the building sector and the other production sectors are highlighted in the inter-sectoral matrix. It highlights the influence that the construction industry has on the construction materials sector, the wood industry, and ferrous metals; it heavily influences the manufacturing sector, above all chemical and mechanical as well as the electrical, gas and water industries.

As far as services are concerned, in addition to transport and communications, the most involved sectors are those of credit, insurance, and local administration services.

In addition to the sectors most directly involved in production activities, other sectors are involved that can play an important role at local level. This refers in particular to the agriculture, clothing industry, the sector of machine repair.

Ultimately, through the matrix system we can measure the size of the mercantile channels and their propagation time, realize the shape of the system dealing with the location of plants, the routes of traffic and technology, all necessary elements to decide an economic policy compared to another one.

The usefulness of the model must consist in giving us a framework on which to study the consequences of the different hypotheses corresponding to the main alternative development policies.

China
Source: usa.chinadaily.com.cn

China's reform and opening-up policy has changed the country and the fate of Socialism, allowing the country to bid farewell to poverty and weakness and to regain historical glory and confidence as a big country, reported CNTV News App Friday.

Between 1978 and 2016, China's annual GDP growth averaged 9.7 percent, faster than any other country over the same time period as the United States achieved an annual growth rate of 2.7 percent, followed by Canada with 2.5 percent growth, the United Kingdom with 2.3 percent growth and Japan with 2.2 percent growth.

Even within the BRICS block, China's economic performance was outstanding as China's GDP of $12 trillion in 2017 was almost double the combined volume of Brazil, $2 trillion, Russia, $1.5 trillion, India, $2.6 trillion, and South Africa, $350 billion.

China's economy volume ranks second worldwide now, compared with the 8th slot in 1970.

In 1980, China's GDP was only 10.7 percent of the United States' GDP, 35.9 percent of Germany, 50.5 percent of the United States', 43.3 percent of France. However, in 2017, China's GDP was 3.3 times Germany's, 4.6 times UK's and 3.7 times France's.

In East Asia, in 1980, China's GDP was only 28.1 percent of Japan's but in 2010, China's GDP exceeded Japan's and in 2017, China's GDP was 2.47 times Japan's.

China's changes have shifted the world economic structure as in 1980, European Union's economy accounted for 34.1 percent of the world economy, while the US took up 25.7 percent and East Asia took up 15.8 percent, however, in 2017, East Asia accounted for 27.3 percent of world economy, while the US took up 24.3 percent and the EU took up 21.7 percent.

China has made great contributions to a more balanced trade system as China's entry into the WTO has allowed developing nations more advantages in negotiations.

China's fast growth since the reform and opening-up has also set a good example for other developing countries.

China's development has also lifted the country's 700 million people out of poverty, another great contribution to the world.

According to data of the International Monetary Fund, China's per capita GDP hit $8,116 in 2016, ranking 70th worldwide, close to Russia's $8,900 and Brazil's $8,700, but exceeding South Africa's $5,316 and India's $1,749.

However, the per capita GDP of the US of $57,000 was almost seven times that of China in the same year.

China's per capita GDP ranked 61st in 2017, moving up 65 slots compared with the year 1980 when Vietnam's per capita GDP was much higher than China's.

During the same time period, South Korea moved upward 36 slots followed by Singapore, India and Brazil with 27-slot, 27-slot and 22-slot upward movement.

In 1980, China's per capita GDP was $309.3, close to India's $276.4. However, in 2017, China's per capita GDP of $1,982.7 was 4.35 times India's.

Russia
Source: ac.gov.ru

The Analytical Center has hosted a round table on the BRICS nations, their development stages and traps they are facing, during which experts reviewed the economic growth models used in the various BRICS nations, discussed the challenges and development prospects of their energy sector, features of their social structure and opportunities for cooperation in science and education.

"Each BRICS nation has its unique specifics; South Africa has the highest social inequality in the world and Brazil and China are not far behind. They're all stuck in the middle income trap," said the chief adviser to the head of the Analytical Center Leonid Grigoriev. In his opinions, these countries need to push towards social stability and a developed market. "While they're following this path, it is hard going. But at this stage there can be no smooth sailing forward for any of them, and the developed nations had to push through this stage with difficulty," the expert explained.

Mr. Grigoriev also noted that there is no simple theory for how a country can get out of the middle income 'trap' and go on to become a stable democracy with appreciable GDP per capita. "The sustainable development goals can be achieved through the best institutions and practices as well as by coordinating efforts in trade, investments, education, R&D and politics," the analyst believes.

Analytical Center expert Victoria Pavlushina talked about social inequality in the BRICS nations. "One of the sustainable development goals is more equality between countries and within them. It's a most topical issue for all of the countries, especially for South Africa and India. All of the BRICS nations have prioritized this problem," the expert said. "Eradicating poverty and poorness is also high on the agenda of these countries," Victoria Pavlushina noted.

"South Africa still has a lot of inequality, even though they have managed to reduce it. Household incomes were growing until 2008 but then they started falling due to declining economic growth," the expert said. Besides, South Africa has the shortest life expectancy among all the BRICS nations, resulting from high mortality rates.

"In 2015 the BRICS countries together accounted for more than 1/3 of the global extraction and 36% of the global consumption of energy. A fifth of this consumption was in China," said Analytical Center expert Vlada Brilliantova. According to the analyst, the share of primary energy consumption can reach 45% by 2040. The growing demands of the energy sector, especially in India and China, have to be taken into account, the expert believes.

"On the whole, the energy sectors in the BRICS nations vary in resources, supplies and goals that their economies are striving to achieve. Thus, Russia is the largest energy exporter most interested in consistent energy sales, while Brazil would need serious investments before it can begin to export oil," Vlada Brilliantova said.

The participants in the discussion noted that the sustainable development goals had replaced the millennium overall development goal. These include innovative development, social, economic, energy and environmental programs.

South Africa
Source: www.brics2018.org.za

Exploring opportunities in the fourth industrial revolution, strengthening global peacekeeping and advancing the cause of women will be the key agenda points over the next couple of weeks as many influential leaders and role players from BRICS countries meet in South Africa.

In the next two weeks national security advisers from the BRICS member states will meet in Durban to discuss how the member states can contribute to peacekeeping missions, while the city will also host the meeting of the BRICS Business Council on July 22 and 23.

South Africa's ambassador to BRICS, Professor Anil Sooklal, said establishing and working on peacekeeping would be one of the priorities of the country's chairmanship of BRICS.

"Earlier this year one of the major global players drastically cut their contributions to the UN peacekeeping office and that impacts seriously on global peacekeeping and especially on the African continent. We felt that in keeping with the spirit of Madiba, who was an apostle of peace, that we need to advance his vision of peacekeeping," Sooklal said.

He was speaking during a round-table discussion on BRICS held at the Moses Mabhida Stadium yesterday. Sooklal said the establishment of a work-stream dedicated to women will also be a priority.

He said that the establishment of such a work-stream would be in honour of theegacy of anti-apartheid icon Albertina Sisulu.

On the side of the economy, South Africa will use its BRICS chairmanship to focus on the fourth industrial revolution with the country and the continent hoping to benefit from this without compromising the security of jobs.

While the continent is lagging way behind its counterparts like Asia, Sooklal said there was an opportunity for Africa to leapfrog.

Sooklal said one of the things that needed to be looked at was how Africa could take advantage of the fourth industrial revolution without compromising the future of jobs.

Musa Makhunga, the president of the Durban Chamber of Commerce, emphasised the importance of BRICS, saying it provided opportunities for SA to tap into the Asian market in terms of trade.

He said Australia was trading more with Asia and as a result it is reaping the rewards of that including a resources sector boom, while there is also growth in the services and tourism industry.

Deputy mayor Fawzia Peer said the BRICS summit would no doubt enhance collaboration between the member states.

"I am also sure that the BRICS conference will also give impetus to the successful implementation of the 2030 sustainable development goals."

Chinese consul-general in Durban Wang Jianzhou said BRICS brought "concrete benefit" to the millions of people in the five member states.

"Over the past 10 years the BRICS total GDP has grown by 179%, trade expanded by 94%," he said.

Shashank Vikram, India's consul general in Durban, said there was a "big human angle to the entire BRICS process".

He spoke of India's commitment to having a strong relationship with and investing in SA, pointing out a Mahindra factory that recently opened in Durban.

South Africa
Source: www.brics2018.org.za

Though renewable energy solutions have become less costly than coal, electricity generation in developing countries like South Africa remains coal-based. This was one of the critical talking points which arose during the panel on Energy Research at the recent 10th BRICS Academic Forum.
The question around coal-production costs comes at a particularly poignant time for South Africa – Eskom continues to make the headlines, requesting tariff hikes as it battles issues of debt and poor cost management.

The primary challenge in implementing renewable energy solutions, as Forum delegates pointed out, is the leveraging of finances to implement green energy solutions.

"In order to limit temperature increases to two degrees Celsius, additional investment of between $780-billion and $2.3-trillion will be required by 2035," says Jaya Josie from the South African delegation.

Climate projects offer great returns

The solution to this challenge lies with private capital, argues Aparajit Pandey from the Indian delegation. He points out that currently there are $100-trillion of assets under management, available across the world. "With institutional investors seeing returns between 0.15% and 3.45%, returns have stagnated over the past decade. What's more pension funds are facing a potential shortfall of $28-trillion," he says.

On the other hand, global returns on solar and wind projects are 10.3% and 17.5% respectively, Pandey notes, making the point that this dynamic presents a solution to both the shortfall in finance flows for climate action projects in the developing world, as well as the potential shortfall faced by institutional investors.

Banking regulations restrict energy projects

But, in order to begin implementing private capital solutions, there are hurdles which must be overcome. The problem, says Pandey, is that any project must be financed through a balance of debt and equity – with the debt usually provided by banks.

"But banks are subject to international regulations such as the Basel Norms which affect how banks lend money, and Basel III specifically actually makes lending for projects like renewable energy more difficult."

The reason for this, he says, is that certain projects – including those in certain geographies, those that are long-term in nature and those that use special purpose vehicles (SPVs) – are considered by the Basel laws to be more risky.

Pandey believes that one way to circumvent these challenges is to incorporate climate risk into the equation, thereby disincentivising banks to invest in projects that aren't green. Another option, he adds, would be to formulate an alternative credit rating system.

Green bonds have a greater role to play

Finally, Pandey suggested green bonds as a potential solution.

Josie agrees, commenting that green bonds, which are tax-exempt and used to fund green projects, will play a key role in helping to fund climate projects.

"BRICS countries have already had considerable involvement in the green bond market," he says. "In 2017, China's total of green bond issuances was $37.1-billion, while Brazilian and Indian-labelled green bonds accounted for $3.67-billion and $3.2-billion respectively."

In terms of next steps, Pandey believes BRICS countries need to use their collective influence to push for reforms by the Bank for International Settlements. "Alternatively, following in the steps of the New Development Bank and the Contingent Reserve Arrangement, an alternative system can be formed," he says.

A research platform could be on the cards

At the moment, however, BRICS-to-BRICS partnerships are not common when it comes to energy research. In fact, Liliana Proskuryakova from the Russian delegation, reveals that while 50% of the research publications in South Africa are carried out in co-operation with foreign countries, just 15.1% of publications are produced in co-operation with BRICS countries.

To further co-operation, the BRICS Think Tanks Council has recommended the establishment of a BRICS Energy Research Platform. "The purpose of the platform would be to provide key information for strategic planning of activities of governmental structures, local authorities and enterprises of the BRICS countries," says Professor Ari Sitas, Chairperson of the South African BRICS Think Tank.

"It's evident that BRICS needs to strengthen its role in reforming the international energy architecture, so we believe it's time to create a new institution responsible for estimates and long-term forecasts that provide actual and quality information on key trends in the energy sector," he says.

This suggestion, along with a list of 19 other recommendations tabled during the Academic Forum, will be presented to BRICS leaders for their consideration.

South Africa
Source: www.brics2018.org.za

JOHANNESBURG - The climate Smart Approaches seminar of the 8th BRICS Meeting of the Agriculture Cooperation Working Group is under way at Skukuza in Mpumalanga.

Michael Mlengana, the director-general of the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (Daff), on Tuesday said: "We are here to discuss, share and exchange ideas as BRICS members on how Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa are dealing with climate change."

Mlengana hoped the seminar, ending on Friday, would come up with practical solutions on how to deal with the scourge of climate change.

He said Daff has adopted Climate Smart Agriculture which was aimed at promoting and upscaling sustainable agricultural production, while also reducing greenhouse gases and ensuring food security.

"Food security is the primary objective of our government," said Mlengana, adding that a particular focus would be placed on small scale farmers as they carried the heavy burden of climate change due to their limited resources.

Vusumzi Robert Shongwe, MEC for Mpumalanga Department Agriculture, Rural Development, Land and Environmental Affairs, echoed Mlengana, saying the rural poor were most affected by global warming.

He said BRICS members had agreed to deepen cooperation on food security and nutrition, agricultural innovation, and agricultural trade and investment, among others, to help achieve the UN Sustainable Development Goals.

Shongwe noted that in the Kruger National Park, hippos have died by their hundreds by the end of the 2016 dry season.

He said Mpumalanga was committed to working with all stakeholders such as academia, private and public sectors and researchers to respond effectively to the climate change impact.

"We can we improve the lives of our people through the BRICS initiative," he said.

The seminar, ending on Friday, will host a gala dinner for the BRICS agriculture ministers on Thursday.

South Africa
Source: www.cnbcafrica.com

The Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, (COGTA), Dr Zweli Mkhize, will host BRICS Ministers responsible for local government and disaster management as well as mayors and other local government practitioners under the auspices of the BRICS Friendship Cities and Local Government Cooperation Urbanisation Forum, in East London on 28 June through to the 1st of July 2018.

The first meeting, the Friendship Cities and Local Government Cooperation Forum and the Urbanisation Forum will meet on 28 – 29 June and the second meeting of Ministers responsible for disaster management will meet on the 1st of July 2018 both in East London.

The BRICS Sectoral meetings are part of the build-up activities towards the 10th BRICS Summit that will be hosted by President Cyril Ramaphosa in July.


The BRICS Friendship Cities and Local Government Cooperation Urbanisation Forum promotes engagement between BRICS states through cities and local bodies. It promotes people to people cooperation amongst BRICS nations and collaboration at the local government level.

"This Forum is a platform to strengthen collaboration between BRICS member states and to enable information-sharing in the local government sector for current and future collaboration. The Forum provides platform for connecting BRICS states, cities and local bodies for learning from one another by conversation and cooperation, through linked thematic areas,'' said Minister Mkhize.

The gathering will assist South Africa to meet several socio-economic development goals. The Forum provides platform to address issues such as managing urban development for inclusive growth. It also provides an opportunity to engage BRICS counterparts on reversing apartheid spatial planning through sharing experiences with BRICS countries.

"As part of the developing world, South Africa faces the triple challenges of poverty, unemployment and inequality. BRICS Leaders engage in peer learning and share best practices and development models to address and combat these common challenges. Four of the five BRICS countries are already among the 10 largest economies in the world. South Africa's prospects for economic growth and job creation depend increasingly on diversifying and strengthening its economic links with the fastest-growing economies of the world", said Minister Mkhize.

The Forum will also promote economic social and economic linkages with BRICS partners in infrastructure development which is key for service delivery in municipalities in South Africa.

"There are opportunities for strong partnerships in skills development and exchange in building and construction, green building, designing city regeneration schemes, upgrading informal settlements and new city expansion planning. As we initiate recovery programmes to support some of our distressed municipalities, we look forward to lessons from BRICS counterparts on using urban development to overcome poverty and social disadvantage. The BRICS partners also have a lot to learn from South Africa as a new democracy that is still fighting the legacy and backlogs of the past,'' said Dr Mkhize.

The BRICS forum also lends opportunity to involve young people in cities development, youth employment programmes and skills development. The BRICS forum also provides opportunity to exchange views on urban resilience and disaster risk reductions initiatives. It is an opportunity for sharing strategies on climate change, energy and resilience.

"South Africa seeks to address urban resilience, cities and climate change adaptation and disaster risk reductions and looks forward to a successful engagement with Ministers responsible for disaster management on the 1st of July.

The Friendship Cities, Local Government Cooperation and Urbanisation Forum and the Meeting of BRICS Ministers responsible for Disaster Management will culminate in the adoption of two proposed separate Declarations. The intention of the declarations is to re-affirm cooperation among BRICS members within the sector, provide a record of that commitment and to guide further interactions beyond the meetings.

Members of the media are invited to attend and cover the event as follows:

Dates: 28 June – 01 July 2018

Time: 08h00

Venue: East London ICC, Buffalo City – Eastern Cape Province

Members of the media should apply for accreditation by filling in the attached form and sending it back to CoGTA on or before 22 June 2018.

Distributed by APO Group on behalf of Republic of South Africa: Department of Government Communication and Information.Media files

South Africa
Source: sabtt.org.za

Interviews from the 10th BRICS Academic forum held at the Sandton International Convention Centre between the 28th – 31st of May 2018:

• Minister Naledi Pandor's interview with CNBC
• Prof. Sitas CNBC Power lunch interview
• Prof. Sitas interview with the SABC

South Africa
Source: www.sanews.gov.za

As the country prepares for the 10th BRICS summit, on the agenda is how South African youth can benefit from the grouping.

"As we continue leveraging the opportunities provided by the BRICS formation, we must ensure that we infuse and harness youth dividends," International Relations and Cooperation Deputy Minister Luwellyn Landers said on Monday.

"Young people represent 66% of South Africa's population and the challenge, at hand, is how to harness their collective potential to be productive and contribute to the growth of an inclusive, knowledge-driven industrial economy. On the continent the rate the youth account for is 60%," Landers said.

He was speaking at the Speaker's Meeting held at the South African Institute of International Affairs (SAIIA), in Johannesburg. The event was a platform for the department to highlight the importance of South Africa's participation in BRICS and its benefits for the country.

Landers used the meeting to highlight some of the progress the BRICS group has made.

The BRICS countries produce a third of the world's industrial products and one-half of agricultural goods.

The Deputy Minister quoted the Standard Bank Report on BRICS published in 2017, which reflects that as at the end of 2016, the collective Gross Domestic Product of the BRICS countries was larger than that of the entire European Union, and accounted for 22.5% of total global output.

Though the value of external trade relationships has declined, the BRICS are still a collectively profound trading partner for developing economies in general and Africa in particular, with these flows bolstered by investment on the continent, particularly from China, South Africa and India.

In this regard, Landers said there is a general consensus that since its inception the BRICS formation has joined an array of inter-regional bodies that contribute to the global diffusion of power.

"It is not an illusion that BRICS countries collectively and individually contribute to the tectonic shift due to amongst others the increased economic dominance of China and the re-emergence of Russia."

As the current chair, South Africa will host the BRICS Summit in July under the theme: "BRICS in Africa: Collaboration for Inclusive Growth and Shared Prosperity in the 4th Industrial Revolution".

"South Africa's approach to its Chairship is grounded in the intention to ensure programmatic continuity for BRICS and a committment to executing approximately 100 sectoral meetings, reflective of the expanded BRICS architecture. We also intend to bring a specific focus to the challenges and opportunities presented by the 4th Industrial Revolution," Landers added.

Already South Africa has proposed new areas of BRICS cooperation, which include a working group on peacekeeping, the establishment of a vaccine research centre, the establishment of the BRICS gender and women forum, the BRICS strategic partnership towards the advancement of the Fourth Industrial Revolution as well as the establishment of the BRICS Tourism Track of Cooperation.

The 2018 Summit will be an important milestone as it represents a decade of BRICS collaboration at the highest diplomatic level. It is expected to culminate in the adoption of the Johannesburg Declaration, which will include BRICS' commitments for the year ahead. – SAnews.gov.za