Assessing the Attractiveness of South Africa as a Manufacturing Destination Relative to Other BRICS Countries

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hardin Ratshisusu
Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Svetlana Avdasheva ◽  
Tatiana Radchenko

Within the group of BRICS, China, Russia, and South Africa use conduct remedies more often than developed jurisdictions. Remedies are applied under merger approval or as an outcome of investigation of anticompetitive conducts. Effects of conduct remedies on companies’ decisions and market performance still need explanation. This chapter explains the use of conduct remedies, with special emphasis on Russia, by the specific position of BRICS in international division of labor, which allows the large companies, and first of all domestic ones, to discriminate customers in BRICS home markets, vis-à-vis international customers. Together with positive effects on domestic customers, competition economics predicts the possibility of negative effects of remedies on the managerial decisions within the target company. Under some circumstances, remedies may even weaken competition in the global product markets.


2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 676
Author(s):  
Ramiz ur Rehman ◽  
Muhammad Zain ul Abidin ◽  
Rizwan Ali ◽  
Safwan Mohd Nor ◽  
Muhammad Akram Naseem ◽  
...  

This study investigates the integration of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) equity indices with conventional indices in Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS) individually and across all BRICS countries to better understand regional economic cooperation. Accordingly, we look at daily returns from 13 July 2013 to 28 February 2018 for the Morgan Stanley Capital International (MSCI) ESG indices and MSCI composite indices of the respective countries. To analyze the integration between the ESG equity indices of the sampled countries with their regional and across regional conventional counterparts, the Johansen Co-integration test is employed in this study. Further, the vector error correction model (VECM) is applied to test the causality between the sampled time-series. The impulse response function analysis further explains the impulse responses of each country’s MSCI ESG returns to one standard deviation of innovations to MSCI composite returns of the same country and across countries. Finally, the extent of the MSCI composite returns’ impact on the MSCI ESG returns in the same country indices, and cross-regional indices is examined with variance decomposition analysis. The results suggest that all ESG equity indices are integrated with conventional indices in all BRICS countries. Furthermore, there is a short-or long-run causality between MSCI ESG and MSCI composite equity indices of China and South Africa. Moreover, the study finds only short-run causality between conventional and non-conventional equity indices of Brazil and Russia, whereas we find only long-run causality between India’s non-conventional and conventional equity indices. Finally, the study finds that the all-individual country MSCI ESG equity indices shows a long-run causality with MSCI composite equity indices of all other BRICS countries. The findings also confirm the economic and financial cooperation between the BRICS countries.


Author(s):  
Miroslaw Przygoda

The so-called “BRICS nations” have recently proven to be the most fascinating group of worldwide economies that collaborate with each other. The name is an acronym for an association comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa. The BRICS members are all developing or newly industrialised countries, they are however distinguished by their large, rapidly growing economies and their significant impact on regional and global affairs. Before the inclusion of South Africa, the organisation was known as BRIC. On 13 April 2011, when South Africa joined the group, BRIC gained the letter “S”. The name “BRIC” itself was used for the first time by Jim O’Neill, a British economist of Goldman Sachs. Published in November 2001 and then widespread, O’Neill’s forecast predicted that by the half of the 21st century those countries would have become world powers. As of 2014, the BRICS countries represent almost 3 billion people – approximately 40% of the entire world population. The five nations have a combined nominal GDP of US$ 16.039 trillion, equivalent to approximately 20% of the gross world product, and an estimated US$ 4 trillion in combined foreign reserves. Since 2010, the representatives of the BRICS government have been meeting annually at formal summits. The nations within this group do not form a political alliance or an official trade association. The priorities of the members are as follows: Development of a new currency system; Reforming the United Nations, Increasing the role of developing countries in the international monetary institutions. Having regard to the emerging political and economic changes on a global scale, the BRICS nations have been undertaking new ventures and initiatives aimed to make them key players on the international arena. Today, it is really captivating to see to what extent those intentions are real and exercisable.


2021 ◽  
pp. 2150053
Author(s):  
SMRUTI RANJAN BEHERA ◽  
TAPAS MISHRA ◽  
DEVI PRASAD DASH ◽  
LINGARAJ MALLICK

Rapid urbanization, openness and growth in human development index are some of the leading determinants of energy consumption in developing countries, particularly in BRICS economies (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa). Thanks to their innate tendency to converge to the growth path of developed nations, BRICS countries are under increasing pressure to limit high energy consumption — triggered by outsourcing from developed nations. This paper attempts to weigh the relative importance of various determinants of energy consumption in BRICS countries between 1980 and 2016, studying in-depth the long-run co-movement pattern of energy consumption with demographic characteristics (depicting demand pressure) and macroeconomic aggregates (depicting cheap production cost). By leveraging on the trade-off between domestic and foreign demand and by employing the autoregressive distributed lag bounds testing approach, we establish differential effects of various predictors: whilst an increase in population growth rate, gross domestic product and capital account openness exert a positive and significant impact on energy consumption in Brazil, China and South Africa, foreign direct investment (FDI) and human development appear to enhance energy consumption in India, China and South Africa. The growth in external demand and the FDI inflows appear to have pushed urbanization, leading to greater energy consumption during the study period. Keeping in mind the sustainability goal, stronger green energy practices and sustainable urbanization patterns are needed to curb excessive energy sources.


AJIL Unbound ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 112 ◽  
pp. 217-222 ◽  
Author(s):  
Congyan Cai

Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (the BRICS) have emerged as a new hub of power in international relations. They have begun to speak out jointly on a wide range of issues and to explore cooperating collectively. For instance, they strongly urge the Bretton Woods institutions to address their legitimacy deficits by transferring substantial voting power to emerging powers, and suggest that failure to do so will “run the risk of seeing [those institutions] fade into obsolescence.” The investment treaty regime may be another field in which they can exert influence, but the investment treaty policies of BRICS countries are diverging now more than ever. In particular, India and South Africa have taken significant measures, such as terminating investment treaties, that cast doubt on whether the BRICS can play a collective role in reforming such treaties. In this essay, I make two arguments. First, the recent investment treaty policies of some BRICS (India, South Africa, and to some extent Brazil) have shifted from one imbalanced approach that is too protective of foreign investors to another that is too protective of host states and is likely to be rejected by major powers such as the European Union, the United States, and China. Second, the BRICS together have the ability to craft approaches to investment treaties that encourage greater balance in the regime overall, including by remedying some of the defects inherent in the traditional investment treaties.


Author(s):  
Bas Hooijmaaijers ◽  
Stephan Keukeleire

Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS) have, since the beginning of the 21st century, gained greater influence in global political and economic affairs and, since 2006, also steadily developed and increased their political dialogue and cooperation. South Africa joining the BRICS political grouping in 2011 was matched by a strengthening of the BRICS dialogue. This was reflected in the broadening range of issues covered, the increasing level of specificity of the BRICS joint declarations and cooperation, and the institutionalization of BRICS cooperation in various policy fields, including the creation of the New Development Bank (NDB). Notwithstanding the increased interaction between the BRICS states on the various political, economic, and diplomatic levels, the countries differ considerably in their political, economic, military, and demographic weight and interests and in their regional and global aspirations. China particularly stands out among the BRICS due to its political and economic weight. There are sufficient reasons to question the significance and impact of the BRICS format. Still, the BRICS countries have found each other in their commitment to counter the “unjust” Western-dominated multilateral world in which they are generally underrepresented. The EU did not develop a “BRICS policy” as such, which is understandable given the major differences between the BRICS countries and the ambiguous nature of the BRICS format. To deal with the various emerging powers and complement its predominantly regional partnerships, the EU instead institutionalized and deepened the political and economic bilateral relations with each of the BRICS countries, including through the objective of establishing a bilateral “strategic partnership” with each of these countries. However, the analysis of the EU’s relationship with the BRICS countries indicates that the label “strategic partnerships” mainly served as a rhetorical façade which belied that the EU failed to turn these relationships into real strategic partnerships and to behave strategically toward the BRICS countries. Another challenge for the EU appears when analyzing the BRICS within the broader context of various emerging power constellations and multilateral frameworks, including variations of the BRICS format (such as BRICS Plus, BASIC, and IBSA), multilateral frameworks with one or more BRICS countries at their center (such as the SCO, EAEU, and BRI), and regional forums launched by China. Taken together, they point to an increasingly dense set of partially overlapping formal and informal networks on all political, diplomatic, and administrative levels, covering an ever-wider scope of policy areas and providing opportunities for debate, consultation, and coordination. Whereas most of these forums are in and of themselves not very influential, taken together they have an impact on the EU and its traditional view on multilateralism in several ways. Seen from this perspective, the BRICS and other multilateral forums pose major challenges for both European diplomats and European scholars. They will have to make considerable efforts to understand and engage with these various forums, which are manifestations of an increasingly influential and powerful non-Western world wherein the role of Europe is much more limited.


Lex Russica ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 9-17
Author(s):  
Ya. O. Alimova

The article is devoted to the peculiarities of regulation of cross-border contractual relations that are being developed within the BRICS countries in compliance with universal international treaties. The author has outlined the prospects and problems with which traders from BRICS countries are facing when concluding contracts. International treaties, which contain, above all, uniform substantive rules, play a great role in concluding cross-border contracts. However, all the BRICS countries are member-states to very few treaties. The author of the article has revealed that such conventions still exist, although not only in the contractual field. The article pays special attention to the peculiarities of application of the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards of 1958, the Cape Town Convention on International Interests in Mobile Equipment of 2001 and, indeed, the Vienna Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods of 1980 (although only three BRICS countries are involved, it can also be applied to India and South Africa).


2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (20) ◽  
pp. 11138
Author(s):  
Huan Zhang

This study selects the panel data of five BRICS nations (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) from 1990 to 2019 to empirically explore the impact of technological innovation and economic growth on carbon emissions under the context of carbon neutrality. Granger causality test results signify that there exists a one-way causality from technology patent to carbon emission and from economic growth to carbon emission. We also constructed an improved Stochastic Impacts by Regression on Population, Affluence, and Technology (STIRPAT) model. The regression results manifest that technology patents contribute to the realization of carbon emission reduction and carbon neutralization, while the economic growth of emerging economies represented by BRICS countries significantly improves carbon emissions, but every single BRICS country shows differentiated carbon emissions conditions with their economic development stages. The impact of the interaction term on carbon emissions for the five BRICS countries also presents country-specific heterogeneity. Moreover, the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) test results show that only Russia and South Africa have an inverted U-shaped curve relationship between economic growth and carbon emissions, whereas Brazil, India and China have a U-shaped curve relationship. There exists no EKC relationship when considering BRICS nations as a whole. Further robustness tests also verify that the conclusions obtained in this paper are consistent and stable. Finally, the paper puts forward relevant policy suggestions based on the research findings.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document