The Wikimedia Foundation is holding a referendum to gather more input

into the development and usage of an opt-in personal image hiding feature.
Learn more and share your view.

[Help with translations!]

BRIC
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Not to be confused with BRICS.

Brazil, Russia, India, China

BRIC

Federative Republic of Brazil

President (head of state and government): Dilma Rousseff
Russian Federation
President (head of state): Dmitry Medvedev
Prime Minister (head of government): Vladimir Putin
Republic of India
President (head of state): Pratibha Patil
Prime Minister (head of government): Manmohan Singh
People's Republic of China
President (head of state): Hu Jintao
Premier (head of government): Wen Jiabao

GDP (PPP)[show]
GDP (nominal)[show]
 Area[show]
Population[show]

In economics, BRIC is a grouping acronym that refers to the countries of Brazil, Russia,
India and China, which are all deemed to be at a similar stage of newly advanced economic
development. It is typically rendered as "the BRICs" or "the BRIC countries" or alternatively
as the "Big Four".

The acronym was coined by Jim O'Neill in a 2001 paper entitled "Building Better Global
Economic BRICs".[1][2][3] The acronym has come into widespread use as a symbol of the shift
in global economic power away from the developed G7 economies towards the developing
world.

According to a paper published in 2005, Mexico and South Korea were the only other
countries comparable to the BRICs, but their economies were excluded initially because they
were considered already more developed, as they were already members of the OECD.[4]

Several of the more developed of the N-11 countries, in particular Turkey, Mexico, Nigeria
and Indonesia, are seen as the most likely contenders to join the BRICs. Some other
developing countries that have not yet reached the N-11 economic level, such as South
Africa, aspire to BRIC status. Economists at the Reuters 2011 Investment Outlook Summit,
held on 67 December 2010, dismissed the notion of South Africa joining BRIC.[5] Jim
O'Neill told the summit that he was constantly being lobbied about BRIC status by various
countries. He said that South Africa, at a population of under 50 million people, was just too
small an economy to join the BRIC ranks.[6]

Goldman Sachs has argued that, since the four BRIC countries are developing rapidly, by
2050 their combined economies could eclipse the combined economies of the current richest
countries of the world. These four countries, combined, currently account for more than a
quarter of the world's land area and more than 40% of the world's population.[7][8]

Goldman Sachs did not argue that the BRICs would organize themselves into an economic
bloc, or a formal trading association, as the European Union has done.[9] However, there are
some indications that the "four BRIC countries have been seeking to form a 'political club' or
'alliance'", and thereby converting "their growing economic power into greater geopolitical
clout".[10][11] On June 16, 2009, the leaders of the BRIC countries held their first summit in
Yekaterinburg, and issued a declaration calling for the establishment of an equitable,
democratic and multipolar world order. Since then they have met in Braslia in 2010 and will
meet in China in 2011.[12]

Contents
[hide]

1 Thesis
o 1.1 (2003) Dreaming with BRICs: The Path to 2050
o 1.2 (2004) Follow-up report
 o 1.3 (2007) Second Follow-up report
o 1.4 (2010) EM Equity in Two Decades: A Changing Landscape
2 Statistics
3 History
o 3.1 Enlargement
o 3.2 Marketing
o 3.3 International Law
o 3.4 Financial diversification
o 3.5 Criticism
4 Proposed inclusions
o 4.1 Mexico
o 4.2 South Korea
4.2.1 United Korea
5 See also
6 References
7 Bibliography
8 External links

[edit] Thesis

So Paulo, Brazil

Moscow, Russia

Mumbai, India
Shanghai, China

Goldman Sachs argues that the economic potential of Brazil, Russia, India and China is such
that they could become among the four most dominant economies by the year 2050. The
thesis was proposed by Jim O'Neill, global economist at Goldman Sachs.[13] These countries
encompass over 25% of the world's land coverage and 40% of the world's population and
hold a combined GDP (PPP) of 18.486 trillion dollars. On almost every scale, they would be
the largest entity on the global stage. These four countries are among the biggest and fastest
growing emerging markets.[citation needed]

However, it is not the intent of Goldman Sachs to argue that these four countries are a
political alliance (such as the European Union) or any formal trading association, like
ASEAN. Nevertheless, they have taken steps to increase their political cooperation, mainly as
a way of influencing the United States position on major trade accords, or, through the
implicit threat of political cooperation, as a way of extracting political concessions from the
United States, such as the proposed nuclear cooperation with India.[citation needed]

[edit] (2003) Dreaming with BRICs: The Path to 2050

The BRIC thesis recognizes that Brazil, Russia, India and China[14] have changed their
political systems to embrace global capitalism. Goldman Sachs predicts that China and India,
respectively, will become the dominant global suppliers of manufactured goods and services,
while Brazil and Russia will become similarly dominant as suppliers of raw materials. It
should be noted that of the four countries, Brazil remains the only nation that has the capacity
to continue all elements, meaning manufacturing, services, and resource supplying
simultaneously. Cooperation is thus hypothesized to be a logical next step among the BRICs
because Brazil and Russia together form the logical commodity suppliers to India and China.
Thus, the BRICs have the potential to form a powerful economic bloc to the exclusion of the
modern-day states currently of "Group of Eight" status. Brazil is dominant in soy and iron ore
while Russia has enormous supplies of oil and natural gas. Goldman Sachs' thesis thus
documents how commodities, work, technology, and companies have diffused outward from
the United States across the world.

Following the end of the Cold War or even before, the governments comprising BRIC all
initiated economic or political reforms to allow their countries to enter the world economy. In
order to compete, these countries have simultaneously stressed education, foreign investment,
domestic consumption, and domestic entrepreneurship.

[edit] (2004) Follow-up report

The Goldman Sachs global economics team released a follow-up report to its initial BRIC
study in 2004.[15] The report states that in BRIC nations, the number of people with an annual
income over a threshold of $3,000, will double in number within three years and reach 800
million people within a decade. This predicts a massive rise in the size of the middle class in
these nations. In 2025, it is calculated that the number of people in BRIC nations earning over
$15,000 may reach over 200 million. This indicates that a huge pickup in demand will not be
restricted to basic goods but impact higher-priced goods as well. According to the report, first
China and then a decade later India will begin to dominate the world economy.

Yet despite the balance of growth, swinging so decisively towards the BRIC economies, the
average wealth level of individuals in the more advanced economies will continue to far
outstrip the BRIC economic average.

The report also highlights India's great inefficiency in energy use and mentions the dramatic
under-representation of these economies in the global capital markets. The report also
emphasizes the enormous populations that exist within the BRIC nations, which makes it
relatively easy for their aggregate wealth to eclipse the G6, while per-capita income levels
remain far below the norm of today's industrialized countries. This phenomenon, too, will
affect world markets as multinational corporations will attempt to take advantage of the
enormous potential markets in the BRICs by producing, for example, far cheaper automobiles
and other manufactured goods affordable to the consumers within the BRICs in lieu of the
luxury models that currently bring the most income to automobile manufacturers. India and
China have already started making their presence felt in the service and manufacturing sector
respectively in the global arena. Developed economies of the world have already taken
serious note of this fact.

[edit] (2007) Second Follow-up report

This report compiled by lead authors Tushar Poddar and Eva Yi gives insight into "India's
Rising Growth Potential". It reveals updated projection figures attributed to the rising growth
trends in India over the last four years. Goldman Sachs assert that "India's influence on the
world economy will be bigger and quicker than implied in our previously published BRICs
research". They noted significant areas of research and development, and expansion that is
happening in the country, which will lead to the prosperity of the growing middle-class.[16]

India has 10 of the 30 fastest-growing urban areas in the world and, based on current trends,
we estimate a massive 700 million people will move to cities by 2050. This will have
significant implications for demand for urban infrastructure, real estate, and services.
[16]

In the revised 2007 figures, based on increased and sustaining growth, more inflows into
foreign direct investment, Goldman Sachs predicts that "from 2007 to 2020, India's GDP per
capita in US$ terms will quadruple", and that the Indian economy will surpass the United
States (in US$) by 2043.[16] It states that the four nations as a group will overtake the G7 in
2032.[16]

[edit] (2010) EM Equity in Two Decades: A Changing Landscape

According to a new report from Goldman Sachs, China might surpass the US in equity
market capitalization terms by 2030 and become the single largest equity market in the world.
By 2020, US GDP might be only slightly larger than China's GDP. Together, the four BRICs
may account for 41% of the world's market capitalization by 2030, the report said.[17]

Due to contraction of Japan's GDP in Q4 2010 by 1.1 percent from the previous quarter, so
China's GDP surpassed Japan's GDP by $5.88 trillion and $5.47 trillion respectively and
make China as Number 2 in Economy.[18]

Based on Forbes report released on March 2011, BRICs countries for the first time has
surpassed Europe in count of billionaires by 301 billionaires or one billionaire ahead over
Europe. It was the significant increase by 108 more billionaires than the previous years.[19]

[edit] Statistics

Proportion of world (countries with data) nominal GDP for the countries with the top 10
highest nominal GDP in 2010, from 1980 to 2010 with IMF projections until 2016. Countries
marked with an asterisk are non-G8 countries China, Brazil and India. Grey lines show actual
US dollar values.[20]

The Economist publishes an annual table of social and economic national statistics in its
Pocket World in Figures.[citation needed] Extrapolating the global rankings from their 2008
Edition for the BRIC countries and economies in relation to various categories provides an
interesting touchstone in relation to the economic underpinnings of the BRIC thesis. It also
illustrates how, despite their divergent economic bases, the economic indicators are
remarkably similar in global rankings between the different economies. It also suggests that,
while economic arguments can be made for linking Mexico into the BRIC thesis, the case for
including South Korea looks considerably weaker.

A Goldman Sachs paper published later in December 2005 explained why Mexico was not
included in the original BRICs.[4]

Statistics
Categories Brazil Russia India China
Area 5th 1st 7th 3rd
Population 5th 9th 2nd 1st
Population growth rate 107th 221st 90th 156th
 Labour force 5th 7th 2nd 1st
GDP (nominal) 8th 11th 10th 2nd
GDP (PPP) 7th 6th 4th 2nd
GDP (nominal) per capita 55th 54th 137th 95th
GDP (PPP) per capita 71st 51st 127th 93rd
GDP (real) growth rate 15th 88th 6th 5th
Human Development Index 73rd 65th 119th 89th
Exports 18th 11th 16th 1st
Imports 20th 17th 11th 2nd
Current account balance 47th 5th 169th 1st
Received FDI 11th 12th 29th 5th
Foreign exchange reserves 7th 3rd 6th 1st
External debt 28th 24th 26th 23rd
Public debt 47th 122nd 29th 98th
Electricity consumption 9th 4th 5th 2nd
Number of mobile phones 5th 4th 2nd 1st
Number of internet users 5th 7th 4th 1st
Motor vehicle production 6th 19th 7th 1st
Military expenditures 12th 5th 10th 2nd
Active troops 14th 5th 3rd 1st
Rail network 10th 2nd 4th 3rd
Road network 4th 8th 3rd 2nd

The ten largest economies in the world in 2050, measured in GDP nominal (billions of USD),
according to Goldman Sachs[21]
Gross Domestic Product in 2006 US$ billions[21]
Rank
2050 2045 2040 2035 2030 2025 2020 2015 2010 2006
2050 Country

1 China 70,710 57,310 45,022 34,348 25,610 18,437 12,630 8,133 4,667 2,682
United
2 38,514 33,904 29,823 26,097 22,817 20,087 17,978 16,194 14,535 13,245
States
3 India 37,668 25,278 16,510 10,514 6,683 4,316 2,848 1,900 1,256 909
4 Brazil 11,366 8,740 6,631 4,963 3,720 2,831 2,194 1,720 1,346 1,064
5 Mexico 9,340 7,204 5,471 4,102 3,068 2,303 1,742 1,327 1,009 851
6 Russia 8,580 7,420 6,320 5,265 4,265 3,341 2,554 1,900 1,371 982
7 Indonesia 7,010 4,846 3,286 2,192 1,479 1,033 752 562 419 350
8 Japan 6,677 6,300 6,042 5,886 5,814 5,570 5,224 4,861 4,604 4,336
United
9 5,133 4,744 4,344 3,937 3,595 3,333 3,101 2,835 2,546 2,310
Kingdom
10 Germany 5,024 4,714 4,388 4,048 3,761 3,631 3,519 3,326 3,083 2,851
11 Nigeria 4,640 2,870 1,765 1,083 680 445 306 218 158 121
12 France 4,592 4,227 3,892 3,567 3,306 3,055 2,815 2,577 2,366 2,194
South
13 4,083 3,562 3,089 2,644 2,241 1,861 1,508 1,305 1,071 887
Korea
14 Turkey 3,943 3,033 2,300 1,716 1,279 965 740 572 440 390
15 Vietnam 3,607 2,569 1,768 1,169 745 458 273 157 88 55
16 Canada 3,149 2,849 2,569 2,302 2,061 1,856 1,700 1,549 1,389 1,260
17 Philippines 3,010 2,040 1,353 882 582 400 289 215 162 117
18 Italy 2,950 2,737 2,559 2,444 2,391 2,326 2,224 2,072 1,914 1,809
19 Iran 2,663 2,133 1,673 1,273 953 716 544 415 312 245
20 Egypt 2,602 1,728 1,124 718 467 318 229 171 129 101
21 Pakistan 2,085 1,472 1,026 709 497 359 268 206 161 129
22 Bangladesh 1,466 1,001 676 451 304 210 150 110 81 63
Gross Domestic Product per capita (nominal)[21]
Percen
t
Ran
growt
k Country 2050 2045 2040 2035 2030 2025 2020 2015 2010 2006
h from
2050
2006
to
2050
United 91,68 83,48 76,04 69,01 62,71 57,44 53,50 50,20 47,01 44,37
1 206%
States 3 9 4 9 7 6 2 0 4 9
South 90,29 75,97 63,92 53,44 44,60 36,81 29,86 26,01 21,60 18,16
2 497%
Korea 4 9 4 9 2 3 8 2 2 1
United 79,23 73,80 67,39 61,04 55,90 52,22 49,17 45,59 41,54 38,10
3 207%
Kingdom 4 7 1 9 4 0 3 1 3 8
78,43 65,70 54,22 43,80 34,36 26,06 19,31 13,97 1,137
4 Russia 9,833 6,909
5 8 1 0 8 1 1 1 %
 76,00 69,53 63,46 57,72 52,66 48,62 45,96 43,44 40,54 38,07
5 Canada 199%
2 1 4 8 3 1 1 9 1 1
75,25 68,25 62,13 56,56 52,32 48,42 44,81 41,33 38,38 36,04
6 France 208%
3 2 6 2 7 9 1 2 0 5
68,25 62,65 57,11 51,71 47,26 45,03 43,22 40,58 37,47 34,58
7 Germany 197%
3 8 8 0 3 3 3 9 4 8
66,84 60,49 55,75 52,34 49,97 46,41 42,38 38,65 36,19 34,02
8 Japan 196%
6 2 6 5 5 9 5 0 4 1
63,14 49,39 38,25 29,41 22,69 17,68 13,97 11,17
9 Mexico 8,972 7,918 797%
9 3 5 7 4 5 9 6
58,54 52,76 48,07 44,94 43,19 41,35 38,99 35,90 32,94 31,12
10 Italy 188%
5 0 0 8 5 8 0 8 8 3
49,75 38,14 29,02 21,92 16,69 12,99 10,37
11 Brazil 8,427 6,882 5,657 879%
9 9 6 4 4 6 5
49,65 39,71 30,95 23,51 17,52 12,68 2,432
12 China 8,829 5,837 3,463 2,041
0 9 1 1 2 8 %
45,59 34,97 26,60 20,04 15,18 11,74
13 Turkey 9,291 7,460 6,005 5,545 822%
5 1 2 6 8 3
33,47 23,93 16,62 11,14 5,110
14 Vietnam 7,245 4,583 2,834 1,707 1,001 655
2 2 3 8 %
32,67 26,23 20,74 15,97 12,13
15 Iran 9,328 7,345 5,888 4,652 3,768 867%
6 1 6 9 9
22,39 15,64 10,78 1,485
16 Indonesia 7,365 5,123 3,711 2,813 2,197 1,724 1,508
5 2 4 %
20,83 14,44 2,550
17 India 9,802 6,524 4,360 2,979 2,091 1,492 1,061 817
6 6 %
20,50 14,02 1,600
18 Egypt 9,443 6,287 4,287 3,080 2,352 1,880 1,531 1,281
0 5 %
Philippine 20,38 14,26 1,553
19 9,815 6,678 4,635 3,372 2,591 2,075 1,688 1,312
s 8 0 %
13,01 1,416
20 Nigeria 8,934 6,117 4,191 2,944 2,161 1,665 1,332 1,087 919
4 %
21 Pakistan 7,066 5,183 3,775 2,744 2,035 1,568 1,260 1,050 897 778 908%
Banglades 1,225
22 5,235 3,767 2,698 1,917 1,384 1,027 790 627 510 427
h %
Gross Domestic Product in 2006 US$ billions[21]
Group Countrie 2045 2040 2035 2030 2025 2020 2015 2010 2006
2050
s s
Brazil,
Russia, 128,32 98,75 74,48 55,09 40,27 28,92 20,22 13,65
BRIC 8,640 5,637
India, 4 7 3 0 8 5 6 3
China
Canada,
59,47 53,61 48,28 43,74 39,85 36,78 33,41 30,43 28,00
G7 France, 66,039
5 7 1 5 8 1 4 7 5
Germany,
 Italy,
Japan,
United
Kingdom,
USA

The following three tables are lists of economies by incremental GDP from 2006 to 2050 by
Goldman Sachs. They illustrate that the BRICs and N11 nations are replacing G7 nations as
the main contributors to world's economic growth. From 2020 to 2050, nine of the ten largest
countries by incremental GDP are occupied by the BRICs and N11 nations, in which the
United States remains to be the only G7 member as one of the three biggest contributors to
the global economic growth. [21].

List of Economies by List of Economies by List of Economies by

Incremental Nominal GDP Incremental Nominal GDP Incremental Nominal GDP
from 2006 to 2020 from 2020 to 2035 from 2035 to 2050
Increment Increment Increment
al GDP in al GDP in al GDP in
Ran Ran Ran
Country billions of Country billions of Country billions of
k k k
2006 US$ 2006 US$ 2006 US$

1 China 9,948 1 China 21,718 1 36,362

China
United United 2 27,154
2 4,733 2 8,119 India
States States United
3 India 1,939 3 India 7,666 3 12,417
States
4 1,572 4 Brazil 2,769 4 Brazil 6,403
Russia
5 Brazil 1,130 5 Russia 2,711 5 5,238
Mexico
6 Mexico 891 6 2,360 6
Mexico Indonesia 4,818
7 Japan 888
7 Indonesia 1,440 7 Nigeria 3,557
United
8 791
Kingdom South 8 3,315
8 1,136 Russia
Korea
9 Germany 668
9 976 9 Vietnam 2,438
10 Italy 635 Turkey
11 France 621 10 10 2,227
Vietnam 896 Turkey
South
11 621 United
Korea 11 836 11 Philippine 2,128
Kingdom s
13 Canada 440
12 Nigeria 777 12 Egypt 1,884
14 Indonesia 402 13 France 752 South
13 1,439
14 Iran 729 Korea
15 Turkey 350 14 Iran 1,390
15 Japan 662
16 Iran 299 15 1,376
16 Canada 602 Pakistan
17 218
 Vietnam United
17 Philippine 593 16 1,196
Kingdom
18 Nigeria 185 s
17 France 1,025
18 Germany 529
19 Philippine 172
18 Banglades 1,015
s 19 Egypt 489 h
20 Pakistan 139 20 441
Pakistan 19 Germany 976
21 Egypt 128
21 Banglades 301 20 Canada 847
22 Banglades 87 h 21 Japan 791
h 22 Italy 220 22 Italy 506

At World Economic Forum 2011, there are 365 corporate executives from BRIC and other
emerging nations out of 1000 participants. It is a record number of executives from emerging
markets. Nomura Holdings Inc's co-head of global investment banking said that "It's a
reflection of where economic power and influence is starting to move." The IMF estimates
emerging markets may expand 6.5 percent in 2011, more than double the 2.5 percent rate for
developed countries. BRIC's takeover made record by 22 percent of global deals or increase
by 74 percent in one year and more than quadruple in the last five years.[22]

[edit] History

The BRIC leaders in 2010

Various sources refer to a purported "original" BRIC agreement that predates the Goldman
Sachs thesis. Some of these sources claim that President Vladimir Putin of Russia was the
driving force behind this original cooperative coalition of developing BRIC countries.
However, thus far, no text has been made public of any formal agreement to which all four
BRIC states are signatories. This does not mean, however, that they have not reached a
multitude of bilateral or even quadrilateral agreements. Evidence of agreements of this type
are abundant and are available on the foreign ministry websites of each of the four countries.
Trilateral agreements and frameworks made among the BRICs include the Shanghai
Cooperation Organization (member states include Russia and China, observers include India)
and the IBSA Trilateral Forum, which unites Brazil, India, and South Africa in annual
dialogues. Also important to note is the G-20 coalition of developing states which includes all
the BRICs.

Also, because of the popularity of the Goldman Sachs thesis "BRIC", this term has
sometimes been extended whereby "BRICK"[23][24] (K for South Korea), "BRIMC"[25][26] (M
for Mexico), "BRICA" (GCC Arab countries Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain, Oman
and the United Arab Emirates)[27] and "BRICET" (including Eastern Europe and Turkey)[28]
have become more generic marketing terms to refer to these emerging markets.

In an August 2010 op-ed, Jim O'Neill of Goldman Sachs argued that Africa could be
considered the next BRIC.[29] Analysts from rival banks have sought to move beyond the
BRIC concept, by introducing their own groupings of emerging markets. Proposals include
CIVETs (Colombia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Egypt, Turkey and South Africa), the EAGLES
(Emerging and Growth-Leading Economies) and the 7 per cent Club (which includes those
countries which have averaged economic growth of at least 7 per cent a year).[30]

[edit] Enlargement

Pretoria sought BRIC membership over 2010 and the process for formal admission began as
early as August 2010.[31] South Africa was officially admitted as a BRIC nation on December
24, 2010 after being invited by China and the other BRIC countries to join the group.[32] The
capital S in BRICS stands for South Africa. President Jacob Zuma is expected to attend the
BRICS summit in Beijing in April 2011 as a full member. South Africa stands at a unique
position to influence African economic growth and investment. According to Jim O'neill of
Goldman Sachs who originally coined the term, Africa's combined current gross domestic
product is reasonably similar to that of Brazil and Russia, and slightly above that of India.[33]
South Africa is a "gateway" to Southern Africa and Africa in general as the most developed
African country.[33] China is South Africas largest trading partner, and India wants to
increase commercial ties to Africa.[31] South Africa is also Africas largest economy, but as
number 31 in global GDP economies it is far behind its new partners.[31]

Jim O'Neill expressed surprise when South Africa joined BRIC since South Africa's economy
is a quarter of the size of Russia's (the least economically powerful BRIC nation).[34] He
believed that the potential was there but did not anticipate inclusion of South Africa at this
stage.[33] Martyn Davies, a South African emerging markets expert, argued that the decision
to invite South Africa made little commercial sense but was politically astute given China's
attempts to establish a foothold in Africa. Further, South Africa's inclusion in BRICS may
translate to greater South African support for China in global fora.[34]

African credentials are important geopolitically, giving BRICS a four-continent breadth,

influence and trade opportunities.[31] South Africa's addition is a deft political move that
further enhances BRICS power and status.[31] In the original essay that coined the term,
Goldman Sachs did not argue that the BRICs would organize themselves into an economic
bloc, or a formal trading association which this move signifies.[citation needed]

[edit] Marketing
The So Paulo Stock Exchange is the third-largest exchange operator by market value in the
world.[35]

The BRIC term is also used by companies who refer to the four named countries as key to
their emerging markets strategies. By comparison the reduced acronym IC would not be
attractive, although the term "Chindia" is often used. The BRIC's study specifically focuses
on large countries, not necessarily the wealthiest or the most productive and was never
intended to be an investment thesis. If investors read the Goldman's research carefully, and
agreed with the conclusions, then they would gain exposure to Asian debt and equity markets
rather than to Latin America. According to estimates provided by the USDA, the wealthiest
regions outside of the G6 in 2015 will be Hong Kong, South Korea and Singapore. Combined
with China and India, these five economies are likely to be the world's five most influential
economies outside of the G6.

On the other hand, when the "R" in BRIC is extended beyond Russia and is used as a loose
term to include all of Eastern Europe as well, then the BRIC story becomes more compelling.
At issue are the multiple serious problems which confront Russia (potentially unstable
government, environmental degradation, critical lack of modern infrastructure, etc.[citation
needed]
), and the comparatively much lower growth rate seen in Brazil. However, Brazil's
lower growth rate obscures the fact that the country is wealthier than China or India on a per-
capita basis, has a more developed and global integrated financial system and has an
economy potentially more diverse than the other BRICs due to its raw material and
manufacturing potential. Many other Eastern European countries, such as Poland, the Czech
Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, and several others were able to continually
sustain high economic growth rates and do not experience some of the problems that Russia
experiences or experience them to a lesser extent. In terms of GDP per capita in 2008, Brazil
ranked 64th, Russia 42nd, India 113th and China 89th. By comparison South Korea ranked
24th and Singapore 3rd.

Brazil's stock market, the Bovespa, has gone from approximately 9,000 in September 2002 to
over 70,000 in May 2008. Government policies have favored investment (lowering interest
rates), retiring foreign debt and expanding growth, and a reformulation of the tax system is
being voted in the congress. The British author and researcher Mark Kobayashi-Hillary wrote
a book in 2007 titled 'Building a Future with BRICs' for European publisher Springer Verlag
that examines the growth of the BRICs region and its effect on global sourcing. Contributors
to the book include Nandan Nilekani, and Shiv Nadar.

[edit] International Law

Brazilian lawyer and author Adler Martins has published a paper called "Contratos
Internacionais entre os pases do BRIC"[36] (International Agreements Among BRIC
countries) which highlights the international conventions ratified by the BRIC countries,
which allow them to maintain trade and investment activities safely within the group. Mr.
Martin's study is being further developed by the Federal University of the Minas Gerais State,
in Brazil.

[edit] Financial diversification

It has been argued that geographic diversification would eventually generate superior risk-
adjusted returns for long-term global investors by reducing overall portfolio risk while
capturing some of the higher rates of return offered by the emerging markets of Asia, Eastern
Europe and Latin America.[37] By doing so, these institutional investors have contributed to
the financial and economic development of key emerging nations such as Brazil, India,
China, and Russia. For global investors, India and China constitute both large-scale
production platforms and reservoirs of new consumers, whereas Russia is viewed essentially
as an exporter of oil and commodities- Brazil and Latin America being somehow "in the
middle".

[edit] Criticism

A criticism is that the BRIC projections are based on the assumptions that resources are
limitless and endlessly available when needed. In reality, many important resources currently
necessary to sustain economic growth, such as oil, natural gas, coal, other fossil fuels, and
uranium might soon experience a peak in production before enough renewable energy can be
developed and commercialized, which might result in slower economic growth than
anticipated, thus throwing off the projections and their dates. The economic emergence of the
BRICs will have unpredictable consequences for the global environment. Indeed, proponents
of a set carrying capacity for the Earth may argue that, given current technology, there is a
finite limit to how much the BRICs can develop before exceeding the ability of the global
economy to supply.[38]

Academics and experts have suggested that China is in a league of its own compared to the
other BRIC countries.[39] As David Rothkopf wrote in Foreign Policy, "Without China, the
BRICs are just the BRI, a bland, soft cheese that is primarily known for the whine [sic] that
goes with it. China is the muscle of the group and the Chinese know it. They have effective
veto power over any BRIC initiatives because without them, who cares really? They are the
one with the big reserves. They are the biggest potential market. They are the U.S. partner in
the G2 (imagine the coverage a G2 meeting gets vs. a G8 meeting) and the E2 (no climate
deal without them) and so on."[40] Deutsche Bank Research said in a report that
"economically, financially and politically, China overshadows and will continue to
overshadow the other BRICs." It added that China's economy is larger than that of the three
other BRIC economies (Brazil, Russia and India) combined. Moreover, China's exports and
its official forex reserve holdings are more than twice as large as those of the other BRICs
combined.[41] In that perspective, some pension investment experts have argued that China
alone accounts for more than 70% of the combined GDP growth generated by the BRIC
countries [from 1999 to 2010]: if there is a BRIC miracle its first and foremost a Chinese
one.[42] The "growth gap" between China and other large emerging economies such as
Brazil, Russia and India can be attributed to a large extent to China's early focus on ambitious
infrastructure projects: while China invested roughly 9% of its GDP on infrastructure in the
1990s and 2000s, most emerging economies invested only 2% to 5% of their GDP. This
considerable spending gap allowed the Chinese economy to grow at near optimal conditions
while many South American and South Asian economies suffered from various development
bottlenecks (poor transportation networks, aging power grids, mediocre schools...). [43]

There are many uncertainties and assumptions in the BRIC thesis that could mean that any or
all of these four countries will not live up to their promise.[citation needed] The preeminence of
China and India as major manufacturing countries with unrealised potential has been widely
recognised, but some commentators state that China's and Russia's large-scale disregard for
human rights and democracy could be a problem in the future. Human rights issues do not
inform the foreign policies of these two countries to the same extent as they do the policies of
other large states such as Japan, India, the EU states and the USA. There is also the
possibility of conflict over Taiwan in the case of China and smaller democracies that lie in
the vicinity of these two authoritarian giants will no doubt be affected by human rights issues
being relegated to a lower global priority.

There is also the issue of population growth. The population of Russia has been declining
rapidly in the 1990s and only recently did the Russian government predict the population to
stabilize and grow in 2020. Brazil's and China's populations will begin to decline in several
decades[citation needed], with their demographic windows closing in several decades as well. This
may have implications for those countries' future, for there might be a decrease in the overall
labor force and a negative change in the proportion of workers to retirees.

Brazil's economic potential has been anticipated for decades, but it had until recently
consistently failed to achieve investor expectations.[citation needed] Only in recent years has the
country established a framework of political, economic, and social policies that allowed it to
resume consistent growth. The result has been solid and paced economic development that
rival its early 70's "miracle years", as reflected in its expanding capital markets, lowest
unemployment rates in decades, and consistent international trade surpluses - that led to the
accumulation of reserves and liquidation of foreign debt (earning the country a coveted
investment grade by the S&P and Fitch Ratings in 2008).

Finally, India's relations with its neighbor Pakistan have always been tense. In 1998, there
was a nuclear standoff between Pakistan and India.[44] Border conflicts with Pakistan, mostly
over the long held dispute over Kashmir, has further aggravated any economic ties. This
impedes progress by limiting government finances, increasing social unrest, and limiting
potential domestic economic demand. Factors such as international conflict, civil unrest,
unwise political policy, outbreaks of disease and terrorism are all factors that are difficult to
predict and that could have an effect on the destiny of any country.

Other critics suggest that BRIC is nothing more than a neat acronym for the four largest
emerging market economies,[citation needed] but in economic and political terms nothing else
(apart from the fact that they are all big emerging markets) links the four. Two are
manufacturing based economies and big importers (China and India), but two are huge
exporters of natural resources (Brazil and Russia). The Economist, in its special report on
Brazil, expressed the following view: "In some ways Brazil is the steadiest of the BRICs.
Unlike China and Russia it is a full-blooded democracy; unlike India it has no serious
disputes with its neighbors. It is the only BRIC without a nuclear bomb." The Heritage
Foundation's "Economic Freedom Index", which measures factors such as protection of
property rights and free trade ranks Brazil ("moderately free") above the other BRICs
("mostly unfree").[45] Henry Kissinger has stated that the BRIC nations have no hope of
acting together as a coherent bloc in world affairs, and that any cooperation will be the result
of forces acting on the individual nations.[citation needed]

It is also noticed that BRIC countries have undermined qualitative factors that is reflected in
deterioration in Doing Business ranking 2010 and other several human indexes.[46]

In a not-so-subtle dig critical of the term as nothing more than a shorthand for emerging
markets generally, critics have suggested a correlating term, CEMENT (Countries in
Emerging Markets Excluded by New Terminology). Whilst they accept there has been
spectacular growth of the BRIC economies, these gains have largely been the result of the
strength of emerging markets generally, and that strength comes through having BRICs and
CEMENT.[47]

[edit] Proposed inclusions

Mexico and South Korea are currently the world's 13th and 15th largest by nominal GDP,[48]
just behind the BRIC and G7 economies, while both are experiencing rapid GDP growth of
5% every year, a figure comparable to Brazil from the original BRICs. Jim O'Neill, expert
from the same bank and creator of the economic thesis, stated that in 2001 when the paper
was created, it did not consider Mexico, but today it has been included because the country is
experiencing the same factors that the other countries first included present.[25][26] While
South Korea was not originally included in the BRICs, recent solid economic growth led to
Goldman Sachs proposing to add Mexico and South Korea to the BRICs, changing the
acronym to BRIMCK, with Jim O'Neill pointing out that Korea "is better placed than most
others to realize its potential due to its growth-supportive fundamentals.[49]

A Goldman Sachs paper published later in December 2005 explained why Mexico and South
Korea weren't included in the original BRICs. According to the paper,[4] among the other
countries they looked at, only Mexico and South Korea have the potential to rival the BRICs,
but they are economies that they decided to exclude initially because they looked to them as
already more developed. However, due to the popularity of the Goldman Sachs thesis,
"BRIMC" and "BRICK" are becoming more generic marketing terms to refer to these six
countries.

In their paper "BRICs and Beyond", Goldman Sachs stated that "Mexico, the four BRIC
countries and South Korea should not be really thought of as emerging markets in the
classical sense", adding that they are a "critical part of the modern globalised economy" and
"just as central to its functioning as the current G7".[50]

The term is primarily used in the economic and financial spheres as well as in academia. Its
usage has grown specially in the investment sector, where it is used to refer to the bonds
emitted by these emerging markets governments.[51][52][53]

[edit] Mexico

Mexico City, Mexico

Primarily, along with the BRICs,[54] Goldman Sachs argues that the economic potential of
Brazil, Russia, India, Mexico and China is such that they may become (with the USA) the six
most dominant economies by the year 2050. Due to Mexico's rapidly advancing
infrastructure, increasing middle class and rapidly declining poverty rates it is expected to
have a higher GDP per capita than all but three European countries by 2050, this new found
local wealth also contributes to the nation's economy by creating a large domestic consumer
market which in turn creates more jobs.

Mexico in 2050[55]
GDP in USD $9.340 trillion
GDP per capita $63,149
GDP growth (20152050) 4.0%
Total population 142 million

[edit] South Korea

Gangnam-gu, Seoul, Korea

South Korea is by far the most highly developed country when compared to the BRICs and
N-11s, with a GDP per capita higher than Italy and Spain and HDI higher than Switzerland,
France and the United Kingdom. Yet, it has been achieving growth rates of 4-6%, a figure
more than double that of other advanced economies. More importantly, it has a significantly
higher Growth Environment Score (Goldman Sachs' way of measuring the long-term
sustainability of growth) than all of the BRICs or N-11s.[50] Commentators such as William
Pesek Jr. from Bloomberg argue that Korea is "Another 'BRIC' in Global Wall", suggesting
that it stands out from the Next Eleven economies. By GDP (PPP), South Korea already
overtook a G7 and G8 economy, Canada, in 2009. It then surpassed Spain in 2010 and at
current speed, will take over Italy before 2018.[56] Economists from other investment firms
argue that Korea will have a GDP per capita of over $96,000 by 2050, surpassing the United
States and by far the wealthiest among the G7, BRIC and N-11 economies, suggesting that
wealth is more important than size for bond investors, stating that Korea's credit rating will
be rated AAA sooner than 2050.[57]

[edit] United Korea

Pyongyang, Korea

In September 2009, Goldman Sachs published its 188th Global Economics Paper named "A
United Korea?" which highlighted in detail the potential economic power of a United Korea,
which will surpass all current G7 countries except the United States, such as Japan, the
United Kingdom, Germany and France within 3040 years of reunification, estimating GDP
to surpass $6 trillion by 2050.[58] The young, skilled labor and large amount of natural
resources from the North combined with advanced technology, infrastructure and large
amount of capital in the South, as well as Korea's strategic location connecting three
economic powers, is likely going to create an economy larger than the bulk of the G7.
According to some opinions, a reunited Korea could occur before 2050,[58] or even between
2010 and 2020.[59] If it occurred, Korean reunification would immediately raise the country's
population to over 70 million.[60]

Korea in 2050[61]
United Korea South Korea North Korea
GDP in USD $6.056 trillion $4.073 trillion $1.982 trillion
GDP per capita $86,000 $96,000 $70,000
GDP growth (20152050) 4.8% 3.9% 11.4%
Total population 71 million 42 million 28 million

[edit] See also

Geographical country groupings such as EMEA and APAC
Potential superpower
Emerging markets
Next Eleven
EAGLEs, Emerging and Growth Leading Economies
North American Union
CIVETS
G8
G20
BASIC countries + Russia = BASICR
PIGS (economics)

[edit] References
1. ^ Kowitt, Beth (2009-06-17). "For Mr. BRIC, nations meeting a milestone". CNNMoney.com.
http://money.cnn.com/2009/06/17/news/economy/goldman_sachs_jim_oneill_interview.fortune/index.
htm. Retrieved 2009-06-18.
2. ^ Global Economics Paper No. 99, Dreaming with BRICs and Global Economics Paper 134, How
Solid Are the BRICs?
3. ^ Economist's Another BRIC in the wall 2008 article
4. ^ a b c "How Solid are the BRICs?" (PDF). Global Economics.
http://www2.goldmansachs.com/ideas/brics/how-solid-doc.pdf. Retrieved 2010-09-21.
5. ^ Reuters 2011 Investment Outlook Summit, London and New York, 6-7 December 2010
6. ^ Reuters 2011 Investment Outlook Summit, London and New York, 67 December 2010
7. ^ "bricnation.com". bricnation.com. http://bricnation.com/?p=24. Retrieved 2010-10-15.
8. ^ http://www.investordaily.com/cps/rde/xchg/id/style/801.htm?rdeCOQ=SID-3F579BCE-819F182C
9. ^ "Brazil, Russia, India And China (BRIC)". Investopedia.
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/bric.asp. Retrieved 2008-05-11.
10. ^ "BRICs helped by Western finance crisis: Goldman". Reuters. 2008-06-08.
http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSL071126420080608?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel
=0.
11. ^ Mortished, Carl (2008-05-16). "Russia shows its political clout by hosting Bric summit". The Times
(London). http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/markets/russia/article3941462.ece. Retrieved
2010-04-26.
12. ^ Halpin, Tony (2009-06-17). "Brazil, Russia, India and China form bloc to challenge US dominance".
The Times, 17 June 2009. Retrieved from
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6514737.ece.
13. ^ Ask the expert: BRICs and investor strategy from the Financial Times, Monday 2006-11-06 09:55
14. ^ Five Years of China's WTO Membership. EU and US Perspectives on China's Compliance with
Transparency Commitments and the Transitional Review Mechanism, Legal Issues of Economic
Integration, Kluwer Law International, Volume 33, Number 3, pp. 263-304, 2006. by Paolo Farah
15. ^ BRICs - Goldman Sachs Research Report
16. ^ a b c d "Microsoft Word - Draft of Global Econ Paper No 152.doc" (PDF).
http://www.usindiafriendship.net/viewpoints1/Indias_Rising_Growth_Potential.pdf. Retrieved 2010-
10-15.
17. ^ Goldman predicts: onwards and upwards for emerging markets, beyondbrics blog
18. ^ Japan's Gross Domestic Product Fell 0.3% at Year's End
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/14/business/global/14yen.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
19. ^ BRICs becoming billionaire factory http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/bc9b6d80-4a8d-11e0-82ab-
00144feab49a.html?ftcamp=rss#axzz1GCKIXd3V
20. ^ IMF World Economic Outlook database
21. ^ a b c d e "BRICS AND BEYOND" - Goldman Sachs study of BRIC and N11 nations, November 23,
2007.
22. ^ http://mobile.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=2065100&sid=a7CGZv5B2Guo
23. ^ August 27, 2008 12:00AM (2008-08-27). "The Australian Business - Emerging markets put China,
India in the shade". Theaustralian.news.com.au.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24224508-5001942,00.html. Retrieved 2010-10-
15.
24. ^ Martens, China, "IBM Targets Russian Developers: Could overtake India, China in number of
developers, says senior executive", OutSourcing World, February 11, 2006
25. ^ a b Le Figaro, newspaper, interview with expert Jim 0'Neill (French)
26. ^ a b "Opinion Page" (PDF). http://www.merit.unu.edu/archive/docs/hl/200611_Sergey%20-
%20Conference%20Report.pdf. Retrieved 2010-10-15.
27. ^ "Study: Energy-rich Arab countries are next emerging market". Thestar.com.my. 2007-02-23.
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2007/2/23/apworld/20070223082158&sec=apworld.
Retrieved 2010-10-15.
28. ^ Welcome to Huaye Iron&Steel Group[dead link]
29. ^ How Africa can become the next Bric, Jim O'Neill, Financial Times
30. ^ Acronym alert: the Eagles rock, beyondbrics blog
31. ^ a b c d e http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2011/01/21/bric-becomes-brics-changes-on-the-
geopolitical-chessboard/2/
32. ^ http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2011/01/21/bric-becomes-brics-changes-on-the-geopolitical-
chessboard/
33. ^ a b c http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/6c00e950-b153-11df-b899-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1Bgg5fGXt
34. ^ a b http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/south-africa/110107/south-africa-be-bric
35. ^ DealTalk: Nasdaq, CBOE top targets in exchange merger mania Reuters. Feb 10 2011.
36. ^ MARTINS, Adler. Available at http://jus.uol.com.br/revista/texto/17419/contratos-internacionais-
entre-os-paises-do-bric
37. ^ (French) see M. Nicolas J. Firzli, Asia-Pacific Funds as Diversification Tools for Institutional
Investors, http://www.canadianeuropean.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/docs/FONDS_DASIE-
PACIFIQUE_REVUE_AF_APR_09.95131642.pdf, retrieved 2009-04-02
38. ^ [Sapovadia, Vrajlal K., Bric Potency: Truth or Trance (April 3, 2010). Available at SSRN:
http://ssrn.com/abstract_id=1583828]
39. ^ "BRICs and G-2". Indianexpress.com. 2009-06-17. http://www.indianexpress.com/news/brics-and-
g2/477573/0. Retrieved 2010-10-15.
 40. ^ "What BRIC would be without China... | David Rothkopf". Rothkopf.foreignpolicy.com.
http://rothkopf.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/06/15/the_brics_and_what_the_brics_would_be_without
_china. Retrieved 2010-10-15.
41. ^ "The Hindu News Update Service". Chennai, India: Hindu.com. 2009-06-08.
http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/001200906081851.htm. Retrieved 2010-10-15.
42. ^ (English) see M. Nicolas J. Firzli, Forecasting the Future: The G7, the BRICs and the China
Model, JTW & An-Nahar, Mar 9 2011, http://www.turkishweekly.net/op-ed/2799/forecasting-the-
future-the-brics-and-the-china-model.html, retrieved 2011-03-09
43. ^ M. Nicolas Firzli & Vincent Bazi (Q4 2011). "Infrastructure Investments in an Age of Austerity :
The Pension and Sovereign Funds Perspective". Revue Analyse Financire, volume 41 (.).
http://www.turkishweekly.net/op-ed/2852/infrastructure-investments-in-an-age-of-austerity-the-
pension-and-sovereign-funds-perspective.html. Retrieved 30 July 2011.
44. ^ http://www.ploughshares.ca/libraries/monitor/monj98a.html
45. ^ "Land of promise". Economist.com.
http://www.economist.com/surveys/displaystory.cfm?story_id=E1_RJVNQGG. Retrieved 2010-10-15.
46. ^ "SSRN-BRIC Potency: Truth or Trance? by Vrajlal Sapovadia". Papers.ssrn.com. 2010-04-03.
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1583828. Retrieved 2010-10-15.
47. ^ "/ FTfm - Emerging Markets: Brics sceptics have their backs to the wall". Ft.com. 2006-12-11.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/7761deb2-88bc-11db-b485-0000779e2340,dwp_uuid=cc9f419c-4bb1-11da-
997b-0000779e2340.html. Retrieved 2010-10-15.
48. ^ See List of countries by GDP (nominal)
49. ^ Pesek, William (2005-12-08). "South Korea, Another `BRIC' in Global Wall: William Pesek Jr.".
Bloomberg.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000177&sid=aoJ4WG5LSf1s&refer=market_insight.
Retrieved 2010-10-15.
50. ^ a b http://www2.goldmansachs.com/ideas/brics/book/BRIC-Full.pdf
51. ^ Correio Da Manha, newspaper[dead link]
52. ^ Business Standard, "Emerging risk and return" [dead link]
53. ^ Company News Group, "L'oreal, first quarter sales report" [dead link]
54. ^ "BRIC thesis Goldman Sachs Investment Bank, "BRIC"". Gs.com.
http://www.gs.com/insight/research/reports/99.pdf. Retrieved 2010-10-15.
55. ^ Global Economics Paper No: 153 The N-11m: More Than an Acronym, March 28, 2007.
56. ^ List of countries by future GDP (PPP) estimates
57. ^ http://www.strattonstreetcapital.com/abf/reports/a%20pile%20of%20brics.pdf
58. ^ a b "Unified Korea to Exceed G7 in 2050". Koreatimes.co.kr. 2009-09-21.
http://koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/biz/2009/09/123_52202.html. Retrieved 2010-10-15.
59. ^ "Questia Online Library". Questia.com.
http://www.questia.com/googleScholar.qst?docId=5002508142. Retrieved 2010-10-15.
60. ^ List of countries by population
61. ^ "Global Economics Paper No: 188 "A United Korea?"" (PDF). http://www.nkeconwatch.com/nk-
uploads/global_economics_paper_no_188_final.pdf. Retrieved 2010-10-15.

[edit] Bibliography
Elder, Miriam, and Leahy, Joe, et al., Who's who: Bric leaders take their place at the top
table, Financial Times, London, September 25, 2008
Firzli, M. Nicolas, Forecasting the Future: The BRICs and the China Model, JTW/
USAK Research Center, Mar 9 2011
Kateb, Alexandre, Les nouvelles puissances mondiales. Pourquoi les BRIC changent le
monde" (The new global powers. Why the BRIC change the world) (in French), Paris :
Ellipses, 2011, 272 p. ISBN 978-2-7298-6473-6
O'Neill, Jim, BRICs could point the way out of the Economic Mire, Financial Times,
London, September 23, 2008, p. 28.
Mark Kobayashi-Hillary, 'Building a Future with BRICs: The Next Decade for
Offshoring' (Nov 2007). ISBN 978-3-540-46453-2.
 J. Vercueil, Les pays mergents. Brsil-Russie-Inde-Chine... Mutations conomiques et
nouveaux dfis (Emerging Countries. Brazil - Russia - India - China... Economic
Transformations and new Challenges) (in French), Paris : Bral, 2010, 207 p. ISBN 978-
2-7495-0957-0

[edit] External links

Business news from the BRIC countries
Goldman Sachs: The BRICs Dream: Web Tour, July 2006
Grant Thornton IBR - Emerging markets: reshaping the global economy. May 2008
Grant Thornton IBR - Emerging markets (BRIC) focus. 2007
Thomas Harr, Senior Analyst, Danske Bank: BRIC The Major Issues; June 2006
Kristalina Georgieva, Country Director Russian Federation, World Bank: BRIC
Countries in Comparative Perspective, 2006
Article on Brics from the Danish National Bank with extensive statistics and comaprisons
with G7 countries and Denmark,
Businessweek article on Goldman Sach's predictions regarding BRIC
Goldman Sach's predictions for BRIC (PDF)
"Mapping the Global Future: Report of the National Intelligence Council's 2020 Project"
- National Intelligence Council report and Forecast
Luxury Marketing in BRIC Countries: When Fashion and Foreign Policy Converge.
Market segment analysis by Criterion Global, International Media Buying firm
BBC Documentary Archive - four part audio documentary
BRIC's on BRIC's program : Harnessing growth in new realities at Fundaao dom Cabral,
13th business school in the world
Goldman Sachs - Global Economics Paper No. 99: Dreaming with BRICs: The Path to
2050, October, 2003 (PDF)
Goldman Sachs - How Solid are the BRICs? December, 2005 (PDF)
Goldman Sachs - Is this the BRICs Decade? May, 2010 (PDF)
Whos the best Bric now? September, 2010
"A short history" (Foreign Policy) by Blake Hounshell

[show]v d eBRICS countries

[show]v d eBRICS leaders

[show]v d eBRICS summits

[show]v d ePower in international relations

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRIC"
View page ratings
Rate this page
What's this?
Trustworthy

Objective

Complete

Well-written

I am highly knowledgeable about this topic (optional)

Submit ratings
Saved successfully
Your ratings have not been submitted yet
Categories: Multilateral relations of Russia | Foreign relations of India | Foreign relations of
the People's Republic of China | Foreign relations of Brazil | 2000s economic history |
Country classifications
Hidden categories: All articles with dead external links | Articles with dead external links
from October 2010 | All articles with unsourced statements | Articles with unsourced
statements from October 2010 | Articles with unsourced statements from September 2009 |
Articles with unsourced statements from July 2011 | Articles with unsourced statements from
January 2010 | Articles with unsourced statements from June 2010

Personal tools

Log in / create account

Namespaces

Article
Discussion

Variants

Views

Read
Edit
View history

Actions

Search
 Special:Search

Search

Navigation

Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia

Interaction

Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact Wikipedia

Toolbox

What links here

Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Cite this page
Rate this page

Print/export

Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages

Catal
esky
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Espaol
Esperanto
Franais


 Bahasa Indonesia

slenska
Italiano


Lietuvi
Magyar

Bahasa Melayu
Nederlands

Norsk (bokml)

Polski
Portugus

/ Srpski
Srpskohrvatski /
Suomi
Svenska

Trke

Ting Vit

This page was last modified on 18 August 2011 at 12:15.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License;
additional terms may apply. See Terms of use for details.
Wikipedia is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit
organization.
Contact us

Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Mobile view