Conclusions: a possible BRICS position in negotiations for a post-2015 agenda?

Considering their different economic sizes, competitive advantages and development stages, it is hard to define a common position of BRICS to the post-2015 agenda on the basis of only Brazil and China. However, as the most influential member countries of the BRICS, economically speaking, the experiences of Brazil and China can give us some clues to possible common positions within the BRICS group. Similarly to Brazil and China, all BRICS countries share certain common characteristics in regard to huge domestic sustainable development tasks, a new identity of providing development assistance, and being supporters of non-conditional assistance. To explore a possible common position of the BRICS countries to the post-2015 agenda, we need to undertake a text analysis of BRICS summit declaration.

Based on the experiences of Brazil and China, the importance of BRICS countries as development aid providers will increase in post-2015 development cooperation though it cannot replace the leadership of DAC countries in international development cooperation in the short term.

Haibin Niu

German Development Institute / Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE)

110

Increasing capital resources, active global diplomacy and growing ‘big-power’ identity will help to build a strong foundation for BRICS’s influence in future development cooperation. Brazil’s international cooperation reflects its wishes to promote its international influence and prestige since countries receiving help usually like to learn from the countries that provide help. BRICS countries have some special advantages in international development cooperation. These advantages include the applicability of BRICS’ development experiences, traditional friendship, and non-interference in internal affairs. For example, Brazil mainly uses its domestic achievements and knowledge to support its international image as a leading development model. Brazil focuses on technological and public cooperation without introducing political topics into its development cooperation. Africa became a main topic for the 2013 BRICS summit in South Africa, and the promotion of development partnership with Africa became a priority for the summit. The major achievement of the summit – agreeing to establish a new development bank – partially served this partnership. The bank will be the first achievement collectively initiated by major developing countries to mainly serve the development cause of the developing world. Coordinating their positions towards the post-2015 development agenda will, most likely, be on the agenda of the 2014 BRICS summit in Brazil.

Nonetheless, there are several reasons why BRICS will not replace the leading position of the DAC. Firstly, Brazil and China show that BRICS countries lack an independent and strong agency in charge of international development cooperation. Dependence on the Foreign Ministry or the Ministry of Commerce suggests that the cooperation has a strong shadow of diplomatic and commercial interests. This kind of institutional arrangement makes it hard for BRICS countries to develop an independent and sustainable international cooperation policy. Secondly, there is no special institution within BRICS like DAC to coordinate and regulate their development cooperation practices. This shows that it is necessary for BRICS countries to exchange their views on development approaches and to integrate their international development cooperation. To some extent, however, there are differences in development models followed by individual BRICS countries which would need to be addressed. Thirdly, norms such as ‘common but different responsibilities’ indicate that BRICS will play a secondary, supportive role in international cooperation. Fourthly, BRICS countries need to invest most of their resources in their own domestic development.

World Bank data shows that most of the 1.2 billion people living under USD

1.25 daily are from emerging economies rather than the poorest countries.

The emerging middle classes in BRICS countries are demanding that more financial resources are provided to support sanitation, infrastructure, education, and so on.

The fifth summit of BRICS provides some useful clues to understanding the BRICS perspective on the post-2015 agenda. Firstly, BRICS emphasises the importance of multilateral cooperation but with different priorities.

The G20’s development agenda and the critical importance of the United Nations as a multilateral platform for sustainable development were also underlined by the BRICS summit declaration. BRICS gave a positive review of the outcome document of Rio+20 and agreed to participate in the future MDGs. They argued that the negotiation of the post-2015 agenda should be an inclusive and transparent intergovernmental process. However, Brazil has shown more interest in the SDGs based on its Rio+20 declaration and domestic achievements on social inclusiveness. South Africa, similar to its neighbours in Africa, is also giving a high profile to supporting the SDGs since there will be external assistance available. Nonetheless, there is still no consensus regarding the role of SDGs in post-2015 agenda within BRICS.

Secondly, BRICS puts emphasis on the comprehensive nature of the development concept, which requires finance, trade, climate change and security to be taken into account when promoting development cooperation.

These external factors regarding development require related negotiations to consider the development rights of developing countries. The BRICS development bank initiative demonstrates that BRICS countries are trying to expand development finance. Whether OECD countries maintain stable macro-economic policies and safeguard world peace and, even more so, fair trade policies are also of concern to the BRICS countries when they consider development issues.

Thirdly, BRICS values the importance of the MDGs in the post-2015 agenda. When thinking about the difficulties in realising the MDGs, BRICS points to those low-income countries that cannot achieve the MDGs by themselves, but rather need help through the international development partnership. The post-2015 agenda should build upon the MDGs, continue to keep poverty reduction and human development as a core concern, and consider the influence of emerging challenges and individual situations.

The key to a successful post-2015 agenda is to ensure that more resources are available to assist developing countries. Even though China has made

Haibin Niu

German Development Institute / Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE)

112

some aid commitment at bilateral level, it is hard for it to make a specific commitment at the UN level because of the principle of ‘common but different responsibilities’.

Although BRICS countries have made great development achievements not necessarily based on Western experiences, this does not mean that they should overlook the successful experiences of Western countries in international development cooperation. Both the domestic development experiences and external development cooperation of developed countries have provided valuable experiences for BRICS countries. Domestic development policies in Brazil and China have been treated as tools to enhance national integration.

Furthermore, BRICS countries are experiencing transformation of their own development models which will pay more attention to sustainable development and the modernisation of governance structures. Along with this, the increasing overseas interests demand a more stable environment in partner countries. Brazil’s practices of public policy training can improve the capacity of partners’ governance though this might not be achieved by applying preconditions to the cooperation. Though BRICS countries do not explicitly mention conditionality for development cooperation, the importance of a stable domestic environment and good governance in development partners has been given more weight by the BRICS group.

On account of their rising influence in international development cooperation, the BRICS countries should develop a common approach. The DAC, on the other hand, also aims to influence the way BRICS engages in cooperation. As far as financing development is concerned, there are currently three differences between BRICS and the DAC, namely: the ‘win-win’ model; lack of policy conditions for financing; and focusing more on an individual project’s debt than on long-term debt sustainability and macro-economic factors (Babb 2013). What is lacking is an independent policy focus of the BRICS on development cooperation proper as opposed to diplomatic and commercial perspectives. With the deepening of BRICS development cooperation, these countries will have to concern themselves with the overall sustainability of the economy and the participation of NGOs and independent development consultants. BRICS countries also need to develop their own review standards and regulatory mechanisms to evaluate their performance regarding development cooperation since the DAC standards may not be suitable. In the long run, the biggest challenge for BRICS is to find a sustainable way to achieve development.

Bibliography

Babb, S. (2013): The Washington consensus as transnational policy paradigm : its origins, trajectory and likely successor, in: Review of International Political Economy 20 (2), 268–297

BFM (Brazilian Financial Ministry) (2012): Green and sustainable economy : the Finance Minister’s perspective, Brasilia; online: http://www.uncsd2012.org/

index.php?page=view&type=1000&nr=524&menu=126#sthash.rfgiqH8Y.dpuf (accessed 1 Mar. 2014)

Burges, S. W. (2011): Brazilian international development cooperation : budgets, procedures and issues with engagement, in: Global Studies Review 7 (3); online:

http://www.globality-gmu.net/archives/2726 (accessed 1 Jul. 2014)

CNAOSC (Chinese News Affairs Office of State Council) (2011): China’s foreign aid;

online: http://www.gov.cn/gzdt/2011-04/21/content_1849712.htm (accessed 1 Jan. 2014)

Cintra, M. (2011): Brazilian cooperation for international development : 2005-2009, Brasilia/Brazil: Ipea/ABC

GoB (Government of Brazil) / EU (2013): Joint statement of the 6th Brazil-EU summit, 24 Jan., Brasilia; online: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_

Data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/135015.pdf (accessed 6 Feb. 2014)

Ortiz, F. (2012): Breast milk banks : from Brazil to the world, in: Inter Press Service IPS, 27 Sep.; online: http://www.ipsnews.net/2012/09/breast-milk-banks-from-brazil-to-the-world/ (accessed 2 Feb. 2014)

OWG (Open Working Group of the United Nations General Assembly) (2014):

Open Working Group on Sustainable Development Goals working document, New York; online: http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/

documents/3686WorkingDoc_0205_additionalsupporters.pdf (accessed 20 May 2014)

official post-2015 position