![Sample our Area Studies journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5922/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Area-Studies.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
In this paper we examine the BRICS (Brazil-Russia-India-China-South Africa) bloc's stated commitment to collective, inclusive development through the creation of the civil society participatory mechanism Civil BRICS. This state-created civil society platform within the bloc purports to shape BRICS policies in favour of the poor. We argue that after a decade of BRICS co-operation, it should be possible to observe policy shifts towards 'çollective' solutions to address endemic socio-economic inequalities in BRICS. Sketched against a backdrop of the realities of BRICS' exploitative bilateral trade and investment flows, we examine the scaling up of affected communities' social justice claims to Summit level. In 2018, for the first time, International Non-Governmental (INGOs) and Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) initiated a process of BRICS civil society engagement that is unique in the direct representation of affected communities. According to the INGOS and NGOs involved, this direct upscaling of activist and social movement representation strengthens and legitimises policy recommendations to the BRICS Summit. Our analysis shows that, to the contrary, affected communities' inclusion in annual BRICS development dialogues allows for minimal effective input. Activism inside and outside of co-opted participatory spaces (referred to as jam making versus tree shaking) are discussed in terms of strategic effectiveness.
Notes
1. Cooper and Thakur, “The Group of Twenty,” 9–11; Thakur, “How Representative are BRICS”; and Bond, “Uneven Development and Resource Extractivism.”
2. Thakur, “How Representative are BRICS?” 1791–3; and Bond and Garcia, An Anti-Capitalist Critique.
3. Cooper and Thakur, “The Group of Twenty.”
4. Bond, “BRICS and the Sub-Imperial”; Poskitt, Shankland and Taela, “Civil Society from the BRICS”; and Malcolmson, DIRCO Interview, 16 April 2018.
5. BRICS2018.org.za.
6. Thompson and Tsolekile-de Wet, “BRICS Development Strategies”; and Thompson, Tsolekile de Wet and Ondah Awaseh, “The False Promise.”
7. Wang, “BRICS Information Centre,” March 2018.
8. See for example, Chimni, “International Institutions today,” 1–37.
9. Weiss and Abdenur, “Emerging Powers”; Thakur, “How Representative”; Bond and Garcia, An Anti-Capitalist Critique; Bond, “Africans Continue Uprising”; Bond, “Uneven Development and Resource Extractivism”; and Thompson and Tsolekile de Wet, “BRICS Development Strategies.”
10. Bond, “Uneven Development and Resource Extractivism.”
11. Poskitt, Shankland and Taela, “Civil Society from the BRICS,” 19.
12. Bond, “BRICS and the Sub Imperial,” 15.
13. Weber, “China and Neoliberalism.”
14. Nilsen and von Holdt, “Rising Powers, People Rising,” 2.
15. Bond, “BRICS and the Sub-Imperial,” 17; and Amisi, Bond, Kamidza, “BRICS Corporate Snapshots,” 97.
16. Bond, “Africans Continue Uprising”; Yejoo, “Chinese led SEZs”; Brautigam and Tang, “African Shengzhen”; and Brautigam and Tang, “Economic Statecraft in China.”
17. Bond, “BRICS and the sub-imperial,” 17.
18. This categorization is used by Poskitt, Shankland and Taela, “Civil Society from the BRICS”; and Bond and Garcia, An Anti-Capitalist Critique.
19. Oxfam-EJN, Pre-Civil BRICS concept note, 1.
20. Malcolmson, DIRCO Interview 16 April 2018.
21. Poskitt, Shankland and Taela, “Civil Society from the BRICS,” 19.
22. Bond, “BRICS and the sub-imperial”; and Mawdsley and Roychaudhury (2014).
23. Bond and Garcia, An Anti-Capitalist Critique.
24. Ibid., 4.
25. See Poskitt, Shanklnad and Taela and Bond and Garcia for more in depth discussions of these typologies.
26. For example, Bond’s Mail and Guardian op ed piece, entitled Scholars get Drunk.
27. Cox, Production, Power; and Leysens, The Critical Theory.
28. Cornwall and Gaventa, “From Users”; Kabeer, Inclusive Citizenship; and Coelho and Von Lieres, “Mobilising for Democracy.”
29. Thompson and Tapscott, Citizenship and Social Movements; and Poskitt, Shankland and Taela, “Civil Society from the BRICS.”
30. Sändig et al., 'Affectedness in International Institutions'; Thompson, 2008; and Thompson and Tapscott, Citizenship and Social Movements
31. Kabeer, Inclusive Citizenship; and Newell and Wheeler, Rights, Resources.
32. Chimni, 'The Limits of the All Affected Principle'; Fraser, Fortunes of Feminism.
33. Cornwall and Gaventa, “From Users”; Cornwall and Coelho, “The Politics of Citizens”; Thompson, 2008; and Piper and Nadvi, “Popular mobilisation.”
34. SANI Concept note; Malcolmson, DIRCO, Interview 16 April 2018; and Mdlalose, Interviews 5 April and 27 April 2018.
35. Madhukar, SABTT, 5 April 2018.
36. 2018 SABTT Agenda Setting Concept note, 5.
37. Nilsen and von Holdt, 2.
38. Bond, “BRICS and the sub-imperial,” 17–23; Bond, “Uneven Development.”
39. Purugganan, Jafri and Solon, BRICS, A Global Trade; Thompson and Tsolekile de Wet, BRICS and Development; Sheldon et al, BRIC-Africa Trade; Bello-Schuneman et al,; Bond, “Uneven Development.”
40. Gu and Kitano, “Emerging Economies.”
41. Bond and Ndlovu, “Development Dilemmas”; Thompson and Tsolekile de Wet, “BRICS and Development”; Klassens, DTI, Interview, 19 March 2018; and Malcolmson, DIRCO, Interview 16 April 2018).
42. Amisi, Bond and Kamidza, “BRICS corporate snapshots.”
43. Katz, “Capitalist Mutations,” 87.
44. Amisi, Bond and Kamidza, “BRICS corporate snapshots,” 98.
45. Human Rights Watch, 2011; Brautigam and Tang African Shenghzen; and Yejoo, “Chinese Led SEZs.”
46. Zang, 2011: 66; Brautigam and Tang, “African Shengzhen”; Brautigam and Tang, “African Statecraft in China”; and Yejoo, “Chinese Led SEZs,” 14).
47. Thompson and Tsolekile de Wet, “BRICS and Development”; Malcolmson, DIRCO, Interview 16 April 2018; and Klassens, DTI Interview, 19 March 2018.
48. Brautigam and Tang, “African Shengzhen”; Brautigam and Tang, “African Statecraft in China”; Pretorius, “Special Economic Zones.”
49. Thompson and Leysens, “The Asian Example”; and DTI interviews, 19 March 2018.
50. StatsSA, 210.
51. Poskitt, Shankland and Taela, “Civil Society from the BRICS,” 14; and Bond, “Uneven Development.”
52. Bond and Ndlovu, “Development Dilemmas”; and Thompson, Tsolekile de Wet and Ondah Awaseh, “The False Promise.”
53. See note 27 above.
54. Bond, “BRICS and the sub-imperial”; and Bond, “Uneven Development.”
55. Arrighi et al., Anti-Systemic Movements, 27; and Cox, Production, Power.
56. Cox, Production, Power; and Cox, “Civil Society.”
57. See note 5 above.
58. BRICS2018.org.za; and Malcolmson et al., Interview, DIRCO, 16 April 2018.
59. Bond, “BRICS in Africa”; Bond, “BRICS and the sub-imperial”; and Poskitt, Shankland and Taela, “Civil Society from the BRICS.”
60. Bond, “BRICS in Africa.”
61. Poskitt, Shankland and Taela, “Civil Society from the BRICS,” 32–33.
62. SANI Concept Paper, 1; and Poskitt, Shankland and Taela, “Civil Society from the BRICS,” 33.
63. SANI Concept paper, 2.
64. ibid, 4; and Mdlalose, Civil BRICS Steering Committee co-chair, 27 April 2018.
65. SANI Concept paper, 2.
66. ibid.
67. ibid, p 7; and Poskitt, Shankland and Taela, “Civil Society from the BRICS.”
68. ibid.
69. ibid., 3.
70. ibid., 4.
71. ibid.; and Mdlalose, Interview 27 April 2018; Pre-Civil BRICS Pre-Consultative meeting, 24–25 April 2018.
72. Pre-Civil BRICS Consultative meeting, 2018.
73. Mdlalose, Interviews, 27 April and 27 April 2018.
74. Pre-Civil BRICS workshop 24–25 April 2018.
75. Poskitt, Shankland and Taela, “Civil Society from the BRICS.”
76. Malcomson, DIRCO Interview, 16 April 2018.
77. Ibid.
78. Kothari and Cooke, The Tyranny.
79. Maguwu, “The BRICS, Climate.”
80. Poskitt, Shankland and Taela, “Civil Society from the BRICS,” 38–39.
81. BRICS Summit Declaration, 2018.
82. See bricsfrombelow.org.
Additional information
Funding
Notes on contributors
Lisa Thompson
Lisa Thompson is Director and Professor within the Centre for Citizenship and Democracy (ACCEDE), School of Government, at the University of the Western Cape (UWC). Over the past two and half decades her research on global and local development discourses and practices has focused on the resonances and contradictions of local (state-based) and global constructions of development and social justice as they manifest in the Global North and South. Recent research focuses on the inclusion of affected communities in BRICS inclusive development strategies. Lisa is also part of various BRICS and Global South research and activist networks, including the BRICS Academic Forum, Civil BRICS and BRICS from below.
Pamela Tsolekile De Wet
Pamela Tsolekile de Wet is a senior researcher at the Centre for Citizenship and Democracy (ACCEDE), School of Government, at the University of the Western Cape (UWC). Her research on citizenship focuses on citizenship understandings and interpretations at grassroots and how these are included in policy discourses in the North and South. Together with Lisa Thompson, Pamela Tsolekile de Wet is joint project leader on BRICS inclusive development strategies and social justice, particularly as part of the National Institute for Humanities and Social Sciences (NIHSS) BRICS research cluster.