Building BRICs: Successes and Failures in “Emerging Economies”
The definition of countries in poverty has needed to open up to a wider lexicon of terms in order to explain the various ways in which a country could be in poverty, and the stages in which it might be able to get out of it. In financial circles, the term BRIC, referring to Brazil, Russia, India and China have created their own investment category, known in common speak as “Emerging Economies”, places like Mexico, Turkey, Indonesia and Thailand have joined the BRICs as potential gold mines for investors, win or lose, it has been an exciting ride.
Since the 1990s, emerging economies have been seen as the instigators of global economic collapse as well as the drivers of future untold fortunes. Economic collapse often followed early regulatory changes in many of these countries. Reading like a villain in the latest Batman movie, The Asian Tigers, a collection of smaller Asian economies was hit by financial crisis in the late 1990s. Russia, Turkey, Brazil also collapsed since then on more than one occasion. Mexico was one of the first to collapse in 1993, complemented by Argentina as one of the last, which had a number of severe collapses, leading to a major one in 2001. All these economies seem to be doing relatively well now, especially larger ones like China and India, who this week were strong enough and had enough clout to stop the Doha Round of the WTO, based to a great degree on India’s disapproval of the agricultural limitations in the agreement, a source of income in which emerging economies often have as one of their staples of national revenue.
With India now being able to determine the course of future international trade treaties and China being seen by many as the next economic power and rightful host of the Olympics, what will countries like Russia and Brazil do to place themselves in such a position in the future? Russia, earning massive revenue from its oil reserves has spent the last twenty years trying to reassert itself amongst oligarchs and conflicts, economically and militarily. While Russia has had many opportunities in reality, cities like Moscow and St.Petersburg have taken much of the benefits and have left rural Russia in neglect. Much of the country’s wealth is only now being re-absorbed and stability in government reasserted while rights of protest have been curbed to a great degree. Recently, military exercises in the North Atlantic and with China have put NATO on alert, showing that which Russia might not become the next economic giant, it certainly wishes to be heard in some manner.
While large yearly GDP revenue is considered an economic miracle in most of the world, 9-15% GDP growth was often common in Latin America throughout the 90s, and resulted in spectacular economic collapse in Brazil, Argentina and throughout the region many times over through 2001. Brazil, with its former labour leader and President has not taken the populist approach to economics, adopting policies of centrists past Presidents to form a step-by-step approach to growth for the world’s next big emerging economy. With a slow and stable growth rate of 5%-6%, Brazil is moving slowly out of economic instability to become the next stable global economic power. While Brazil has a population of over 170 million people, the Brazilian economy is about the same size as Canada, which has a population of 32 million. Brazil, with its stable progressive growth rate and poverty reduction strategies spends much of its time acquiring an economic future while trying to reduce its poverty rate and reduce inequality in the process. Avoiding heavy IMF measures to slash inflation, and avoiding Chavez like populism in reducing poverty in exchange for its business class, Brazil may stand out as the model for Emerging Market development if high GDP rates in India and China cannot manage its plus 10%-15% GDP and the changes and attention it brings in the long run. While time will tell which development strategies are successful in the long run, it is evident that the BRICs of the world are all different and all successful in their own unique achievements.
October 5th, 2008 at 1:18 pm
[…] Brazil is currently lead by prudent left wing leader Lula and has become a beacon for reform and investment in South America. Since financial collapses that characterized the country in the 1990s, Brazil has been able to maintain a balanced level of growth and social reforms that has brought confidence into Brazil and has made it the likely next emerging economy to become another China or India. While political issues still exist to a great degree, oil and slow progress seems to be paying off and Brazil will likely weather this economic storm with a few scratches and bruises, but keep afloat. Chile is in a similar situation, with left leaning leaders and prudent economic policies and progressive social policies, stability may become a mainstay of many countries in the Americas. […]
October 5th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
[…] Brazil is currently lead by prudent left wing leader Lula and has become a beacon for reform and investment in South America. Since financial collapses that characterized the country in the 1990s, Brazil has been able to maintain a balanced level of growth and social reforms that has brought confidence into Brazil and has made it the next likely emerging economy to become another China or India. While political issues still exist to a great degree, oil and slow progress seems to be paying off and Brazil will likely weather this economic storm with a few scratches and bruises, but keep afloat. Chile is in a similar situation. With left leaning leaders and prudent economic policies and progressive social policies, stability may become a mainstay of many countries in the Americas in the future. […]
November 1st, 2008 at 6:05 pm
[…] Emerging economies must be addressed to end this letter. China, India and Russia, as well as other nations have achieved a great deal of development, and with recent funds have been able to address national problems of poverty and development, many thought were impossible to tackle only 5 years ago. These countries have a right to compete and gain wealth, but if companies from the US and EU seek to find fortune in those countries and work with local companies which may produce harmful products or take away American jobs, than those American and European companies should be challenged and blame should not be placed on Canada or Mexico, who have lost much as well, and irrational barriers should not be placed on developing economies because companies from the US and EU take advantage of their consumers. To create scapegoats in this debate, is to create a situation where no one can foresee economic troubles, and regulation is left to create blameless policymakers in its wake. The crisis of the last 20 years was always not one of tangible losses, but in confidence, that companies and the government might and have lied to you, and that anarchy is unavoidable when problems ignite. Trade, finance and economics needs to work in society, as a parallel to democracy, in order to allow a leader to create any “Change” that is needed. The world needs a US presence, one with clear foresight and the ability to stop alienating its friends and address real threats to everyone’s security. Only an understanding of the world who cannot vote will allow for any positive change to take place. A failure is no longer an option for America and their friends. […]