Читать книгу The Political Economy of the BRICS Countries - Группа авторов - Страница 62

Nation states, defined territorially in terms of political boundaries, face a variety of environmental problems (United Nations, 2013). The most common of these problems are air pollution and carbon dioxide emissions, water pollution, loss of soil fertility due to overuse of fertilizers and pesticides, and the presence of chemicals in everyday life such as those found in food, toiletries, and cosmetics. Loss of biodiversity and interrupted bio-geo-chemical cycles like the nitrogen cycle and phosphorous cycle are also present in many nations. Along with these ‘bads’ (opposite of economic goods), there are problems of depletion of resources necessary to support life like fresh water, marine stocks, and the fertility of the top soil (without which food would not be available). The extent of these problems varies from nation to nation, depending on the level of effective government policies, overall economic development, educational attainments, and the geography of the place. For instance, a nation like Saudi Arabia that is dependent heavily on a finite stock of oil for development, may face one set of problems related to a non-renewable resource for sustainable development, while another nation like Bolivia may face problems related to cutting down of rainforests for timber and fuel without an adequate pace of replenishment of trees and biodiversity. Other nations like China or India may face problems from a burgeoning population requiring more thermal power and urban space along with the rapidly growing number of cars and trucks. Hence, each country needs to address its own specific set of problems, yet be consistent with global goals and targets.

BRICS is not one nation. It is a set of five countries that are quite diverse and spread over four continents — Brazil in South America, Russia in Europe, India and China in Asia, and South Africa in Africa. BRICS was born out of a changing political world order. The unipolar world after the Cold War with US hegemony gave way to a multipolar system after the great financial crisis of 2008. The BRICS nations were growing rapidly and collectively constituted a significant share in the global economy. Goldman Sachs conducted a study which claimed that these economies would be the fastest growing ones and by 2050 would provide leadership to the world economy. In the report, O’Neill (2001) claimed that these nations, especially China, would affect the rest of the world through their domestic policies, particularly fiscal and monetary policies. It was only after the publication of the report that the BRICS began to be considered together and aroused new interest in their progress. In data collected by Santana et al. (2014) Brazil, Russia, India, and China together accounted for 28.9% of the world’s land area, 43.2% of the world’s population, and 20.6% of crude oil production and even generated about 27% of the world’s gross domestic product (GDP). In 2010, South Africa was added to the BRIC acronym. It is quite clear that though these countries are treated as one block, their political, social, cultural, and economic features are quite diverse.

Despite their diversity in many respects, they were still treated as one for many other reasons of similarity. It was considered that these nations would comprise the largest economic block by 2050 because of their tremendous growth potential. The similarities were attributed to the presence of fertile land, abundant natural resources, and the large low-cost labor force. This combination of factors, along with good infrastructure, made these nations attractive to foreign direct investment. These features of infrastructure were telecommunications, which was growing rapidly, sharp rise in electricity consumption, increased access to water and growing urbanization, better sanitation, and improved road and rail connectivity. In terms of social and environmental development, all these countries had been successful in pulling a significant number of people out of poverty, allowing for greater consumption levels. All the BRICS are committed to a better environment and have preemptive as well as corrective policies in place to protect and conserve the natural environment. They all share the common aspiration to achieve a better quality of life for their citizens.

However, despite these positive features, BRICS do have problems that need quick and systematic remedies. These pertain to economic inefficiencies; lack of education, sanitation, and health facilities; and depletion of resources along with very alarming levels of urban pollution. Many of these problems have been a result of rapid economic growth that these nations have experienced in the recent past.

Global Citizen (2016) computed a People’s Report Card 2016¹ grading nations in terms of their performance in relation to the Sustainable Development Goals that replaced the Millennium Development Goals of the United Nations. The report took 2030 as the target date within which the goals were to be achieved. If all the goals were to be achieved, the world would get an A grade. This would be the benchmark, and then 2016 data would be compared to the ‘perfect’ grade, and a relative grade assigned to a nation for 2016.

The report computed three sets of indicators: basic needs, well-being, and opportunities. Basic needs included nutrition, medical care, water and sanitation, and shelter and personal safety. The world grade was a C. Well-being included access to basic knowledge, access to information, communications, health and wellness, and the quality of the physical environment. In this category, the world’s grade was slightly better at C+. Finally, the set of opportunity included personal rights, freedom of choice, tolerance and inclusion, and access to advanced education. Here the global grade was C once again. The three sets of measured characteristics were aggregated into a Social Progress Index and the world’s grade was marked as C+ in 2016.

The social progress index was computed for a number of countries. Ten nations received an A grade. These included Canada, United Kingdom, Sweden, Finland, and Austria. The worst performers with a grade of D− included Afghanistan, Angola, Central African Republic, Chad, and Yemen. The BRICS were not too good. Brazil was the best with a grade of B−, Russia, China, and South Africa received a grade of C+ which was at par with the world grade. India was the worst performer at D+. These results, though only indicative to a large extent, and perhaps not exhaustive, do reveal that the BRICS may have a long way to go before they can claim to have achieved some important goalpost for sustainable development.