Search results

In this chapter, we document the growing importance of FDI from BRIC countries in relation to FDI from both developed and developing countries and investigate the types of firms that are responsible for BRIC FDI.

We follow a two-step empirical approach. First, we provide macro evidence on FDI from BRIC countries. We use UNCTAD data to highlight the patterns of FDI flows and stocks. Second, we provide firm-level evidence on FDI. Using ORBIS data, we elaborate a rich taxonomy of FDI that accounts for the decision to invest abroad and for the location, ownership, and number of foreign subsidiaries. Thus, we characterize BRIC multinationals’ involvement in FDI and examine the relationship between FDI and performance at the firm level.

We unveil new facts about BRIC multinationals. BRIC multinationals are in the minority in their home countries, but they outperform domestic enterprises. Within the group of BRIC investors, those firms that invest in developing countries, that operate in joint ventures, or that have more than five foreign subsidiaries are in the minority, but they outperform those firms that select other FDI strategies.

Our estimates document a positive and robust correlation between FDI and performance; however, the cross-sectional nature of our data does not permit a proper causality analysis.

Our work contributes to the International Economics literature on internationalization and firm performance as well as to the International Business literature on FDI from emerging economies. With respect to the former, we innovate by studying the relation between FDI strategies and firm performance. In relation to the latter, we innovate by introducing firm-level data and a cross-country approach that lets us illustrate the roles and features of FDI from BRIC countries.

The transformational prospects of the United Nations' 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are doubtless. Nonetheless, finding the appropriate implementation mechanisms to accomplish these goals and their targets and deliver on the promise of Agenda 2030 is proving challenging. Using publicly available documentary evidence from Voluntary National Reviews and Sustainable Development Reports, we analysed the progress of environmental SDG implementation in BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) and MINT (Mexico, Indonesia, Nigeria, Turkey) countries. The findings reveal an overall implementation progress level of 64% and 62% in BRICS and MINT, respectively. Relatively, countries in BRICS outperformed their MINT counterparts in five of the six environmental SDGs analysed. Our assessment broadly notes a promising engagement with environmental SDGs in these blocs, albeit with limited progress, and the presence of impressionistic practices in reportage of successes compared with challenges. We highlight the critical environmental goals and areas for practical actions to accomplish Agenda 2030 moving forward. The study specifically draws the attention of policymakers to issues of climate action (SDG13) and affordable and clean energy (SDG7), where immediate actions are needed to ramp up environmental actions. Given the limited time left to accomplish Agenda 2030, the findings of this study provide timely insight into the environmental SDGs that are at risk of failure in these developing countries. The study significantly implicates developing countries' ability to achieve Agenda 2030 and provides practical and actionable policy measures that are urgently needed to address the situation.

The research question is how home country corruption and nationalism may affect operations of BRIC multinational enterprises. BRIC composition permits a comparison of two authoritarian regimes and two constitutional democracies. Each BRIC features a different combination of corruption and nationalism. The chapter adds South Africa information for two limited reasons. First, from 2010 South Africa is a member of the BRIC summit process. South Africa is an important entry point to Africa, for BRIC multinationals and particularly for China. Second, concerning corruption and nationalism South Africa is analytically useful as a control context that helps illustrate but does not appear to change highly exploratory BRIC findings.

The chapter draws on limited literature and information concerning corruption and nationalism in BRICs to suggest tentative possibilities. Transparency International provides bribe payers index estimates for 28 large economies, with important multinational enterprises, and corruption perceptions index estimates including those 28 countries. These estimates include the four BRICs and South Africa. The available sources suggest some suggested findings about varying impacts of home country corruption and nationalism on operations of BRIC multinationals.

China and Russia are authoritarian regimes in transition from central planning-oriented communist regimes. They are global military powers, expanding influence in their respective regions. Brazil, India, and South Africa are constitutional democracies. India, a nuclear-armed military power, seeks a regional leadership role in South Asia. Brazil and South Africa are key countries economically in their regions. BRIC multinationals are positioned between home country and host country conditions. Chinese and Russian multinationals may reflect a stronger nationalistic tendency due to home country regimes and ownership structure.

The chapter is an original but highly exploratory inquiry into impacts of corruption and nationalism on BRIC multinationals. Extant BRIC literature tends to understudy effects of home country corruption and nationalism on managerial mindset and incentives in either commercial or state-owned enterprises.

The main purpose of this chapter is to explore the role BRICS countries have played in the formation of regional (free) trade agreements. The present chapter tries to understand and document recent developments and directions taken by the BRICS countries either individually or in aligning with each other at the regional and mega-regional levels.

The chapter is largely empirical and descriptive to analyse the recent RTAs policies of the BRICS countries.

This chapter provides in particular as assessment of the impact on BRICS countries of the three recent Mega-RTAs; that is TPP, TPIP and RCEP. For this purpose, an attempt had been made to find out the commonalties and divergences in the RTAs policies of the BRICS countries.

The chapter is divided into six sections. After a brief introduction, the second section deals with the reasons for countries entering into RTAs. The third section documents the directions of the current negotiations on Mega-RTAs and its (potential) geographical implications for the BRICS countries. The fourth and the fifth sections deal with the current status of these RTAs and their noticeable impact on the response of the BRICS countries. The final section concludes the research with suggestions and recommendations.

RTAs and Mega-RTAs frameworks have been useful for BRICS countries. This recent development in trade negotiations can be regarded as promising for them.

At the onset of the Global Financial Crisis in 2007–2008, majority of the analysts and policymakers have anticipated contagion from the markets volatility in the advanced economies (AEs) to the emerging markets (EMs). This chapter examines the volatility spillovers from the AEs’ equity markets (Japan, the United States and Europe) to the four key EMs, the BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China).

The period under study, from 2000 through mid-2014, reflects a time of varying regimes in markets volatility, including the periods of dot.com bubble, the Global Financial Crisis and the European Sovereign Debt Crisis, the Great Recession and the start of the Russian-Ukrainian geopolitical crisis. To estimate volatility cross-linkages between the AEs and BRIC markets, we use multivariate GARCH-BEKK model across a number of specifications.

We find that, the developed economies weighted return volatility did have a significant impact on volatility across all four of the BRIC economies returns. However, contrary to the consensus view, there was no evidence of volatility spillover from the individual AEs onto BRIC economies with the exception of a spillover from Europe to Brazil. The implied forward-looking expectations for markets volatility had a strong and significant spillover effect onto Brazil, Russia and China, and a weaker effect on India.

The evidence on volatility spillovers from the AEs markets to EMs puts into question the traditional view of financial and economic systems sustainability in the presence of higher orders of integration of the global monetary and financial systems. Overall, data suggest that we are witnessing less than perfect integration between BRIC economies and AEs markets to-date can offer some volatility hedging opportunities for investors.

Our chapter contributes to the growing literature on volatility spillovers from the AEs to the EMs in a number of ways. Firstly, we provide a formal analysis of the spillovers to the BRIC economies over the periods of recent crises. Secondly, we make new conclusions concerning longer-term spillovers as opposed to higher frequency volatility contagion covered by the previous literature. Thirdly, we consider a new channel for volatility contagion – the trade-weighted AEs volatility measure.

The study evaluated the interlinkages and diversification opportunities in the context of emerging bond markets from 2007:1 to 2020:5, using the vector autoregressive (VAR) model and sub‐period analyses to compare BRIC (2007:1–2010:11) and BRICS (2010:12–2020:5) regimes. As indicated by the breaking unit‐root test, dummies for the global financial crisis and COVID‐19 were incorporated in the analyses. VAR results showed that the Indian bond market responds positively to the previous change in the Chinese bond market during the BRIC era while BRICS bond markets are mostly uninfluenced by prior behavior patterns of one another. These suggested that the diversification opportunity has been increased following the admission of South Africa to the league. In addition, variance decomposition and impulse response provide proofs to suggest that BRICS bond markets are more exogenous and independent compared to what is obtained during the BRIC period. Consequently, the authors concluded that the BRICS bloc has provided greater diversification opportunities for emerging markets’ bondholders in the recent past.

The chapter examines the current state and prospects of cooperation between the Eurasian Economic Union and the BRICS members. Firstly, the chapter describes comparative analysis between the economic strategies, which represents the two associations facing similar challenges; set themselves similar goals and objectives to achieve sustainable economic growth. Also, the authors provide an empirical analysis of trade and economic cooperation between the EAEU and the BRICS countries, which shows different levels and dynamics of relations with each member of the BRICS. Furthermore, it is proposed to use new ‘soft’ formats, which, in the authors' opinion, will provide synergistic use of the fundamental platforms for dialogue created in the EAEU and BRICS to intensify cooperation and deepen practical interaction. Finally, the chapter concludes that the potential interaction between the two associations of developing countries would create positive prospects and new opportunities, subsequently accelerating their economic growth. Such consolidation of capabilities of these institutions would transfer such cooperation into a practical direction by implementing the goals defined in the strategic planning of the EAEU and BRICS countries.

Sustainable energy like renewable energy plays a critical role in achieving sustainable development goals including energy security in emerging economics. BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) constitutes about 23% of the world’s GDP, 40% of the world’s population and 36% share of the supply of primary energy in the world. Obviously the Bloc has tremendous potential in influencing the global sustainable clean energy transition with the advantages like lowering the costs of renewable, boosting employment in the sector of green energy, enhancement of energy security and improvement of local air quality. Despite the existence of varieties of renewable energy resources in the BRICS economies, renewable energy resources are found underdeveloped. The major objectives of this chapter are to assess progress of different forms of energy especially renewable energy, impact of development of renewable energy on carbon emission and policy issues in renewable energy development in the context of sustainable energy development of BRICS countries.

The goal of this chapter is to discuss the managerial implications of regulatory reforms in BRICS countries and how those reforms affect the strategy and performance of BRICS multinationals. In particular, we consider (1) how firms may learn from the institutional and competitive changes at home that accompany pro-market reforms and use this knowledge to venture out successfully across borders, (2) how firms may learn through their international operations as a means to enhance their competitiveness and responsiveness to reforms in their home market, and (3) how BRICS multinationals differ from other emerging market multinationals.

The chapter is primarily conceptual and relies heavily on case studies, interviews, and public financial data.

Ultimately, reforms are implemented by the state, but the strategic responses of managers to these reforms are largely what determine whether their firms will survive and thrive under the new and evolving regulatory conditions. BRICS firms are particularly well positioned to take advantage of reforms within their own countries and in other emerging markets, including other BRICS nations.

The chapter underscores the importance of aligning strategy with home and host market policies and environments.

The observations presented are conceptual and have not been verified quantitatively. We rely heavily on historical observation and, therefore, much of the analysis is selective to those firms and may not apply to other firms.