‘BRICS’ Is About Geopolitics, Not Economics
S&P says the acronym no longer makes much financial sense. But the idea is more politically relevant than ever.
Five of a kind?
Photographer: Mikhail Klimentyev/AFP/Getty Images
BRICS, one of the most powerful concepts to emerge in political economy this century, makes little sense today, S&P Global Ratings said in an emailed note last week. But even if that’s true for economic analysis, the acronym coined by Goldman Sachs analyst Jim O’Neill has predicted the current geopolitical reality, which isn’t served well by 20th century institutions.
The acronym stands for Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, the latter a late addition that wasn’t in O’Neill’s original 2001 paper or its 2003 sequel (which used “BRICs,” as a plural). Both reports predicted that the first four of the non-Western economies eventually would account for a much bigger share of global economic output, overtaking large European economies, and told investors they’d be wrong to miss the opportunity to get involved in this global shift.