Advertisement

Beyond the BRICs: Alternative Strategies of Influence in the Global Politics of Development

  • Matthias vom Hau
  • James Scott
  • David Hulme
Part of the Palgrave Readers in Economics book series (PRE)

Abstract

This introductory essay situates the subsequent special issue within a comparative framework that helps to unpack the new global politics of development. It argues that there is a set of countries beyond Brazil, Russia, India and China — often described as ‘the BRICs’ — that are emerging to a position of increased international prominence and which merit greater attention than they have hitherto received. Recent economic risers such as South Africa, South Korea, Turkey and Mexico are responding to their economic growth and seeking to secure greater influence within regional and global affairs. The analytical framework developed here distinguishes between four distinct strategies of inter national engagement: issue leading, opportunity seeking, region organising and region mobilising. The framework further suggests the need to focus on new global opportunities and pressures, as well as the specific interests and capacities of states when accounting for the adoption of a particular strategy of engagement.

Keywords

Foreign Direct Investment Comparative International Development Domestic Politics International Influence Global Politics 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Acharya, A. (2009) Constructing a Security Community in Southeast Asia: ASEAN and the Problem of Regional Order, 2nd edn. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Amsden, A. (2001) The Rise of ‘The Rest’: Challenges to the West From Late-Industrializing Economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Apaydin, F. (2012) Overseas development aid across the global south: Lessons from the Turkish experience in Sub-Saharan Africa and Central Asia. European Journal of Development Research 24 (2): 261–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aydin, M. (2000) Determinants of Turkish foreign policy: Changing patterns and conjunctures during the cold war. Middle Eastern Studies 36 (1): 103–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baran, Z. (2008) Turkey and the Wider Black Sea region. In: D. Hamilton and G. Mangott (eds.) The Wider Black Sea Region in the 21st Century: Strategic, Economic and Energy Perspectives. Washington DC: Center for Transatlantic Relations, pp. 87–102.Google Scholar
  6. Barber, J. and Barratt, J. (1990) South Africa’s Foreign Policy: The Search for Status and Security 1945–1988. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Barnett, M.N. and Duvall, R. (2004) Power in Global Governance. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boston Consulting Group. (2006) The new global challengers, http://www.bcg.com/documents/file20519.pdf, accessed 18 April 2011.Google Scholar
  9. Brysk, A. (2000) From Tribal Village to Global Village: Indian Rights and International Relations in Latin America. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Carmody, P. (2012) Another BRIC in the wall? South Africa’s developmental impact and contradictory rise in Africa and beyond. European Journal of Development Research 24 (2): 223–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Castells, M. (1997) The Power of Identity. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  12. Cotula, L., Verneulen, S., Leonard, R. and Keeley, J. (2009) Land Grab or Development Opportunity? Agricultural Investment and International Land Deals in Africa. London: FAO, IIED and IFAD.Google Scholar
  13. Deere, C. (2009) The Implementation Game. The TRIPS Agreement and the Global Politics of Intellectual Property Reform in Developing Countries. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Dosman, E.J. (2008) Brazil and Mexico: The politics of continental drift. In: D. Drache (ed.) Big Picture Realities: Canada and Mexico at the Crossroads. Ontario, Canada: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, pp. 219–236.Google Scholar
  15. Evans, P. and Rauch, J. (1999) Analysis of ‘Weberian’ state structures and economic growth. American Sociological Review 64 (5): 748–765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ferguson, J. (1990) The Anti-Politics Machine: ‘Development,’ Depoliticization, and Bureaucratic Power in Lesotho. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Fortune. (2011) Global 500: Annual ranking of the world’s largest corporations, http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/global500/2010/index.html, accessed 18 April 2011.Google Scholar
  18. Friedberg, A.L. (2005) The future of US-China relations: Is conflict inevitable? International Security 30 (2): 7–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Held, D., McGrew, A., Goldblatt, D. and Perraton, J. (1999) Global Transformation: Politics, Economics and Culture. Cambridge, UK: Polity.Google Scholar
  20. Higgott, R.A. and Cooper, A.F. (1990) Middle power leadership and coalition building: Australia, the Cairns Group and the Uruguay Round of trade negotiations. International Organization 44 (4): 589–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ismail, F. (2012) Reflections on a new democratic South Africa’s role in the multilateral trading system. In: R. Wilkinson and J. Scott (eds.) Trade, Poverty, Development: Getting Beyond the WTO’s Doha Deadlock. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. Johnston, A.I. (2003) Is China a status quo power? International Security 27 (4): 5–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jordaan, E. (2012) South Africa, multilateralism and the global politics of development. European Journal of Development Research 24 (2): 283–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kalinowski, T. and Cho, H. (2012) Korea’s search for a global role between hard economic interests and soft power. European Journal of Development Research 24 (2): 242–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Keohane, R.O. (1969) Lilliputians’ dilemmas: Small states in international politics. International Organization 23 (2): 291–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kohli, A. (2009) Nationalist versus dependent capitalist development: Alternate pathways of Asia and Latin America in a globalized world. Studies in Comparative International Development (SCID) 44 (4): 386–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Korzeniewicz, R.P. (2012) Trends in world income inequality and the ‘Emerging Middle’. European Journal of Development Research 24 (2): 205–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lange, M., Mahoney, J. and vom Hau, M. (2006) Colonialism and development: A comparative analysis of Spanish and British colonies. American Journal of Sociology 111 (6): 1412–1462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Loveman, M. (2005) The modern state and the primitive accumulation of symbolic power. American Journal of Sociology 110 (6): 1651–1683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Macfarlane, S.N. (2006) The ‘R’ in BRICs: Is Russia an emerging power? International Affairs 82 (1): 41–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mahoney, J. and Goertz, G. (2004) The possibility principle: Choosing negative cases in comparative research. American Political Science Review 98 (4): 653–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mann, M. (1993) The Sources of Social Power. Volume 2: The Rise of Classes and Nation States 1760–1914. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Meyer, J.W., Boli, J., Thomas, G.M. and Ramirez, F.O. (1997) World society and the nation-state. American Journal of Sociology 103 (1): 144–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Milanovic, B. (2010) The Haves and the Have-Nots: A Brief and Idiosyncratic History of Global Inequality. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  35. Narlikar, A. (2010) New Powers: How to become One and how to Manage them. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Nye Jr, J.S. (1990) Soft power. Foreign Policy 80 (Autumn): 153–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pearson, M. (2006) China in Geneva: Lessons from China’s early years in the world trade organization. In: A.I. Johnston and R.S. Ross (eds.) New Directions in the Study of China’s Foreign Policy. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, pp. 242–275.Google Scholar
  38. Phillips, N. (2003) The rise and fall of open regionalism? Comparative reflections on regional governance in the Southern Cone of Latin America. Third World Quarterly 24 (2): 217–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pouliot, V. (2008) The logic of practicality: A theory of practice of security communities. International Organization 62 (2): 257–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pratt, C. (ed.) (1990) Middle power internationalism and global poverty. In: Middle Power Internationalism: The North-South Dimension. Montreal, Canada: McGill-Queen’s University Press, pp. 3–24.Google Scholar
  41. Ramo, J.C. (2004) The Beijing Consensus. London: The Foreign Policy Centre.Google Scholar
  42. Rueschemeyer, D. (2009) Usable Theory: Analytic Tools for Social and Political Research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Schneider, B.R. (2004) Business Politics and the State in Twentieth-Century Latin America. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Segal, G. (1999) Does China matter? Foreign Affairs 78 (5): 24–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Shadlen, K. (2012) The Mexican exception: Patents and innovation policy in a non-conformist and reluctant middle income country. European Journal of Development Research 24 (2): 300–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Shafer, D.M. (1994) Winners and Losers: How Sectors Shape the Developmental Prospects of States. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Soares de Lima, M. and Hirst, M. (2006) Brazil as an intermediate state and regional power: Action, choice and responsibilities. International Affairs 82 (1): 21–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Soifer, H. and vom Hau, M. 2008 Unpacking the strength of the state: The utility of state infra-structural power. Studies in Comparative International Development 43 (3–4): 219–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Tilly, C. (1998) Durable Inequality. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  50. Wade, R. (2010) After the crisis: Industrial policy and the developmental state in low-income countries. Global Policy 1 (2): 150–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Waldner, D. (1999) State Building and Late Development. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Wendt, A. (1999) Social Theory of International Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wilson, D. and Purushothaman, R. (2003) Dreaming with the BRICs: The Path to 2050. New York: Goldman Sachs. Global Economics Paper No. 99.Google Scholar
  54. Zweig, D. and Jianhai, B. (2005) China’s global hunt for energy. Foreign Affairs 84 (5): 25–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matthias vom Hau
    • 1
  • James Scott
    • 2
  • David Hulme
    • 2
  1. 1.Institut Barcelona d’Estudis Internacionals (IBEI)BarcelonaSpain
  2. 2.Brooks World Poverty InstituteUniversity of ManchesterManchesterUK

Personalised recommendations