The Mint countries: Next economic giants? - BBC News BBC News The Mint countries: Next economic giants? 6 January 2014 Close share panel Image caption Building an Ikea for the 28 million people living in greater Jakarta In 2001 the world began talking about the Bric countries - Brazil, Russia, India and China - as potential powerhouses of the world economy. The term was coined by economist Jim O'Neill, who has now identified the "Mint" countries - Mexico, Indonesia, Nigeria and Turkey - as emerging economic giants. Here he explains why. So what is it about the so-called Mint countries that makes them so special? Why these four countries? A friend who has followed the Bric story noted sardonically that they are probably "fresher" than the Brics. What they really share beyond having a lot of people, is that at least for the next 20 years, they have really good "inner" demographics - they are all going to see a rise in the number of people eligible to work relative to those not working. This is the envy of many developed countries but also two of the Bric countries, China and Russia.

So, if Mexico, Indonesia, Nigeria and Turkey get their act together, some of them could match Chinese-style double-digit rates between 2003 and 2008. Something else three of them share, which Mexican Foreign Minister Jose Antonio Meade Kuribrena pointed out to me, is that they all have geographical positions that should be an advantage as patterns of world trade change. Find out more Listen to the first episode of MINT: The Next Economic Giants on BBC Radio 4 on Monday 6 January from 09:00 GMT MINT: The next economic giants For example, Mexico is next door to the US, but also Latin America. Indonesia is in the heart of South-east Asia but also has deep connections with China. And as we all know, Turkey is in both the West and East. Nigeria is not really similar in this regard for now, partly because of Africa's lack of development, but it could be in the future if African countries stop fighting and trade with each other. This might in fact be the basis for the Mint countries developing their own economic-political club just as the Bric countries did - one of the biggest surprises of the whole Bric thing for me.

I can smell the possibility of a Mint club already. What I also realised after talking to Meade Kuribrena, is that the creation of the Mint acronym could spur pressure for Nigeria to become a member of the G20, as the other Mints already are. This was something the charismatic Nigerian finance minister, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala was keen to talk about: "We know our time will come," she said. "We think they are missing something by not having us." Meade Kuribrena went so far as to suggest that, as a group of four countries, the Mints have more in common than the Brics. I am not sure about that, but it is an interesting idea. Economically three of them - Mexico, Indonesia and Nigeria - are commodity producers and only Turkey isn't. This contrasts with the Bric countries where two - Brazil and Russia - are commodity producers and the other two - China and India - aren't. In terms of wealth, Mexico and Turkey are at about the same level, earning annually about $10,000 (£6,100) per head.

This compares with $3,500 (£2,100) per head in Indonesia and $1,500 (£900) per head in Nigeria, which is on a par with India. They are a bit behind Russia - $14,000 (£8,500) per head - and Brazil on $11,300 (£6,800), but still a bit ahead of China - $6,000 (£3,600). A big question that guided my thinking on visits to these countries for the BBC was - "How do these countries actually feel on the ground, compared to my own expectations and the general consensus of opinion?" When expectations are low - as one might generally say about Nigeria for example (although not in recent years among specialist investors in Africa) - it is easier to be positively surprised. But the opposite is also true - and this could be a problem for Mexico, which financial investors are really quite excited about.

Image caption Mexico owes much of its rising wealth to the oil which it sits on, especially offshore oil I returned from my travels thinking it won't be so difficult for Nigeria and Turkey to positively surprise people, as many put far too much weight on the negative issues that are well-known - crime and corruption in Nigeria, for example, or heavy-handed government in Turkey. Indonesia, I am less sure about. The country's challenges are as big as I thought and I didn't hear too many things that made me go "Wow" in terms of trying to deal with them. The country needs more of a sense of commercial purpose beyond commodities, and has to improve its infrastructure. In Turkey, visits to white goods manufacturer Beko and Turkish Airlines, the world's fastest growing airline, definitely made me go "Wow", and in Nigeria, I was saying it all the time. Image caption Turkish Airlines: The world's fastest-growing airline The creativity in that place is so easy to get enthused about, at least it was for me, and I returned full of excitement about different personal investments I might follow up on.

In Mexico I was all set to be disappointed, as expectations are so high, but the young president and his equally young colleagues are full of determination to change the place. If you thought Maggie Thatcher stood for serious reforms, these guys make her seem like a kitten. They are reforming everything from education, energy and fiscal policy to the institution of government itself. What about all the challenges and things that usually scare people? Well corruption is obviously one topic that all four would seem to share, and I had many interesting discussions about it in each country. In Nigeria, Central Bank Governor Lamido Sanusi argued that corruption rarely prevents economic development - and that the growth of the economy, accompanied by improvements in education, will lead to better governance and greater transparency. Such views are important to listen to, as an alternative to our often simplistic Western way of thinking. For many credible people in the Mint countries, corruption is a consequence of their weak past, not a cause of a weak future, and certainly not the number one challenge. It falls way down a list compared with the costs of energy and the breadth of its availability and, of course, infrastructure.

Image caption Generators are much in demand in Lagos Sorting out energy policy was seen in both Mexico and Nigeria as a top priority and each country has launched a major initiatives this year, which if implemented, will accelerate growth rates significantly. Here is an amazing statistic. About 170 million people in Nigeria share about the same amount of power that is used by about 1.5 million people in the UK. Almost every business has to generate its own power. The costs are enormous. "Can you imagine, can you believe, that this country has been growing at 7% with no power, with zero power? It's a joke." says Africa's richest man, Aliko Dangote. More from BBC News Mexico approves energy bill He's right. I reckon Nigeria could grow at 10-12% by sorting out this problem alone. That would double the size of its economy in six or seven years. In Indonesia, the fourth largest country in the world, I would say leadership and infrastructure are the major challenges, though there are many more too. But challenges and opportunities sit side by side.

In one of Jakarta's slum areas, Pluit, the land is sinking by 20cm per year because of over-extraction of water, but property prices elsewhere in the city are rocketing. I talked to a man building the country's first Ikea store, who reckons a third of greater Jakarta's population of 28 million (the third biggest conurbation in the world) would have sufficient disposable income to shop at his store. As he said: "We just know it's going to work." In Turkey of course, its politics and the combination of a Muslim faith with some kind of desire to do things the Western way is a unique sort of challenge. Some might argue the same challenge exists for Indonesia but I returned thinking this was not the case. In Jakarta at least, the Western way of doing things seems to be generally accepted - in striking contrast with Turkey. So can the Mints join the top 10 largest economies in the world, after the US, China, the rest of the Brics and maybe Japan? I think so, though it may take 30 years.

I look forward to going back to each of them more regularly now I am helping to put them on the map, just as happened with the Bric countries 12 years ago. Listen to the first episode of MINT: The Next Economic Giants on BBC Radio 4 on Monday 6 January from 09:00 GMT, or afterwards on iPlayer . Follow @BBCNewsMagazine on Twitter and on Facebook BRIC Countries - Background, Facts, News and Original Articles BRIC Countries Select Page BRIC Countries – Background, Key Facts, News and Original Articles The BRIC countries label refers to a select group of four large, developing countries ( Brazil , Russia, India and China ). The four BRIC countries are distinguished from a host of other promising emerging markets by their demographic and economic potential to rank among the world’s largest and most influential economies in the 21st century (and by having a reasonable chance of realizing that potential). Together, the four original BRIC countries comprise more than 2.8 billion people or 40 percent of the world’s population, cover more than a quarter of the world’s land area over three continents, and account for more than 25 percent of global GDP.

Follow @GlobalSherpa BRIC Countries’ Path to 2050 A country’s population and demographics, among other factors, directly affect the potential size of its economy and its capacity to function as an engine of global economic growth and development. As early as 2003, Goldman Sachs forecasted that China and India would become the first and third largest economies by 2050, with Brazil and Russia capturing the fifth and sixth spots. The chart below shows a more recent forecast of the world ranking of the biggest economies in the year 2050. (Click on the image below to view the full-size chart in a separate tab or browser window.) One BRIC, Two BRICs The BRIC designation was first coined by Jim O’Neil of Goldman Sachs in a 2001 paper titled “The World Needs Better Economic BRICs.” The BRIC countries have since gone on to meet and seek out opportunities for cooperation in trade, investment, infrastructure development and other arenas. China invited South Africa to join the group of BRIC nations in December, 2010 and hosted the third annual BRICs Summit in April, 2011.

Key Indicators and Statistics Economic Growth and Development of the BRICs From 2000 to 2008, the BRIC countries’ combined share of total world economic output rose from 16 to 22 percent. Together, the BRIC countries accounted for 30 percent of the increase in global output during the period. To date, the scale of China’s economy and pace of its development has out-distanced those of its BRIC peers. China alone contributed more than half of the BRIC countries’ share and greater than 15 percent of the growth in world economic output from 2000 to 2008. The chart above on key development indicators for the BRIC countries shows the sharp contrast in GDP, merchandise exports and the UNDP’s Human Development Index (HDI) between China and the other BRIC countries. Growing BRIC Middle Class The rapid economic growth and demographics of China and India are expected to give rise to a large middle class whose consumption would help drive the BRICs’ economic development and expansion of the global economy. The charts below depict how the increase in the middle class population of the BRIC countries is forecasted to more than double that of the developed G7 economies.

(Click on the images below to view the full-size charts in separate tabs or browser windows.) Science and Technology in the BRICs The BRIC countries of China, India and Brazil account for much of the dramatic increase in science research investments and scientific publications. Since 2002, global spending on science R&D has increased by 45 percent to more than $1,000 billion (one trillion) U.S. dollars. From 2002 to 2007, China, India and Brazil more than doubled their spending on science research, raising their collective share of global R&D spending from 17 to 24 percent. China’s development planning has targeted a number of scientific fields and related industries, including clean energy, green transportation and rare earths, among others. Since 1999, China’s spending on science R&D has grown 20 percent annually to more than $100 billion. By 2020, China plans to invest 2.5 percent of GDP in science research. Next 11 Emerging Markets Many analysts and commentators have suggested expanding the original group of four BRIC nations to include other emerging markets.

Goldman Sachs has resisted conferring BRIC status on other developing countries on the grounds that their demographics and economic characteristics do not hold the potential for them to rival the economic size or influence of the BRIC countries or today’s leading economies (e.g., U.S. and Japan). In a nod to the interest in other emerging markets, Goldman Sachs identified another group of economically dynamic and promising developing countries creatively labeled the “Next 11” in its 2005 Economics Paper No. 134 “How Solid are the BRICs?” The Next 11 consists of a broader group of emerging markets with the potential to play significant roles in the global economy, including: Bangladesh, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Korea, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Turkey and Vietnam. Mexico and South Korea Of the Next 11, two countries, Mexico and “perhaps” South Korea, were considered to “have the capacity to become as important globally as the BRICs.” Both OECD countries were excluded from the BRIC grouping on the basis that they were already too much farther along in their economic development than the BRICs and were not likely to attain the economic stature or global influence of the original four BRIC countries.

Indonesia Indonesia has been one of the stronger performers of the Next 11 group of developing countries. With greater than 230 million people, Indonesia’s population is more than 4 times larger than South Africa’s population and more than 60 percent bigger than Russia’s. At $540.3 billion in 2009, Indonesia’s GDP was nearly double that of South Africa, though it was still less than half the size of Russia’s economy. South Africa Despite China’s invitation, Goldman Sachs’ O’Neil has long contended that South Africa’s population of 50 million people, a fraction of Russia’s 143 million and China’s 1.34 billion people, is too small for BRIC status. At roughly $285 billion in 2009, South Africa’s economy was less than one quarter that of Russia’s, the smallest of the original BRIC country economies at about $1,232 billion. Growth Environment Score (GES) The Growth Environment Score (GES) was introduced by Goldman Sachs in the same paper that identified the Next 11.

The GES is an index developed to measure the extent to which structural conditions and policy settings in a country are conducive to transforming the economic potential of the BRICs, Next 11 and other countries into reality. The GES consists of 13 sub-indices that fall under one of five categories of economic growth determinants: o Macroeconomic stability – inflation, government deficit and external debt o Macroeconomic conditions – investment and openness o Technological capabilities – penetration of phones, PCs and internet o Human capital – average years of secondary education and life expectancy o Political conditions – political stability, rule of law and corruption In the original 2005 version of the GES, the scores for each of the four BRIC countries fell in the top half and above the mean of the rankings for all developing countries. On the other hand, the BRICs came in well behind more developed economies on the list of GES scores for all countries, with China ranking 53, Russia 81, Brazil 95 and India 97.

Among the N-11, South Korea fared best at 17 with a score comparable to many advanced economies, followed by Mexico (59), Vietnam (63), South Africa (80), Iran (86), Egypt (91), Turkey (112), Indonesia (114), Pakistan (126), Bangladesh (134) and Nigeria (147). Follow @GlobalSherpa Original BRIC Articles and Related Content BRIC Country pages: Brazil , China , India (with live news feeds, country background and statistics, and links to original articles) Brazil, Russia, India And China - BRIC Definition | Investopedia Brazil, Russia, India And China - BRIC Loading the player... What does 'Brazil, Russia, India And China - BRIC' mean Brazil, Russia, India and China (BRIC) refer to the idea that China and India will, by 2050, become the world's dominant suppliers of manufactured goods and services, respectively, while Brazil and Russia will become similarly dominant as suppliers of raw materials . Due to lower labor and production costs, many companies also cite BRIC as a source of foreign expansion opportunity, and promising economies in which to invest.

BREAKING DOWN 'Brazil, Russia, India And China - BRIC' BRIC is an acronym for the economies of Brazil, Russia, India and China combined, originally projected to be the fastest growing market economies by Jim O'Neill of Goldman Sachs first in 2001, but most prominently in a follow up paper published in 2003. It has been speculated that by 2050 these four economies would be wealthier than most of the current major economic powers. The Goldman Sachs thesis doesn’t argue that these countries are a political alliance (like the European Union ) or a formal trading association - but states instead they have the potential to form a powerful economic bloc. The countries haven’t announced any formal trade agreement between them, but leaders of the four countries have attended summits together, and acted in concert with each others interests. BRIC or ‘Big Four’ is now also used as a more generic marketing term to refer to these four emerging economies. Columbia University has established the BRICLab , where foreign, domestic, and financial policies of BRIC members are examined.

Introduction and Early Writing on BRIC 2001: In 2001 Jim O’Niell wrote a report , published by Goldman Sachs noting that Brazil, Russia, India and China’s GDP was set to rise 1.7% in the next year, and then be in a position to continue to grow. In the paper Building Better Economic BRICs O’Niell runs through four scenarios on measuring and projecting GDP adjusted for PPP . In all those scenarios, the nominal GDP assumption for the BRICs rises from the 2001 measurement of 8% in USD, to 14.2%. While weighted heavily by China, the other countries grow relative to G7 countries . 2003: Dominic Wilson and Roopa Purushothaman wrote a report " Dreaming with BRICs: The Path to 2050 ," once again published by Goldman Sachs making the claim that by 2050 BRIC could grow to a size larger than the G6, and that it’s quite possible that the largest economies in the world by GDP may not be the richest.

This set of projections are based on the assumption that policies and institutions are established to help support economic growth, which as the report states, is by no means a guarantee. Given the amount of projected growth – by Wilson and Purushothaman’s measurements up to 300% – even falling somewhat short of the potential growth of any or all members of the BRIC group would still entail a large amount of potential growth. The report shows a projected per capita income for BRIC countries in 2050 that would be lower than G6 countries with the exception of Russia. 2004: The Goldman Sachs global economics exam publish, Growth and Development: The Path to 2050 , a 158 page report going highlighting challenges and opportunities for BRIC countries. Roughly outlined, the report highlights India’s inefficient energy grid and consumption, projects possible growth the number of people living in BRIC countries earning more than $3,000 a year up to 800 million people within a decade.

Additionally the report looks at the lack of a substantial presence in global capital markets , and notes the large populations of while per capita income levels will remain lower than industrialized economies , the aggregate wealth of the BRIC countries will exceed that of the G6 partly due to the large populations of the countries. 2007: " BRICs and Beyond " is published by Goldman Sachs, a nearly 300 page report looking again at BRIC growth potential, environmental impact of the growing economies, and sustainability of growth. The report also looks at the Next 11 , or N-11, (a term for eleven emerging economies) in relationship to the BRIC nations, and ascendency of new global markets. BRIC Summits and Political Cooperation While BRIC has no publicly disclosed formal quadrilateral trade agreement, the heads of state of the BRICS countries have met regularly since 2009 at a yearly summit . The first summit was held in the Russian city of Yekaterinburg in 2009, presidents Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva of Brazil, Hu Jintao of China, Dmitry Medvedev of Russia, and Prime Minister Manmohan Sing of India were all in attendance.

South Africa entered a bid to join the BRIC group in August of 2010 and was eventually invited in December of that same year, and attended the April 2011 summit in the Chinese city of Sanya, effectively changing the name of the group to BRICS. Criticism of BRICs While a lot has been made about the enormous potential growth of the BRIC nations, O’Neils thesis has been challenged over the years as the economic and geopolitical climate has shifted. A couple fundamental criticisms of the the investment concept include the idea perceived by some as implicit in the argument for continuous growth by raw material providers that natural resources are limitless. Those critiquing the model of growth say that it ignores the finite nature of fossil fuel, uranium, and other resources . It’s been argued by Deutsche Bank Research and editorials written in Foreign Policy Magazine that China outstrips the other BRIC members economies by a huge amount, making up 70% GDP growth of the group countries, putting the country in a seemingly different category than other members of BRIC.

Still others have cited human rights issues in China and Russia, as well as Russia’s annexation of Crimea and direct or indirect support of Russian separatist fighters in Ukraine as reason to doubt a fundamental tenants of the BRIC thesis . An editorial written for Reuters and published in 2014 categorized Russia’s belligerency as evidence that globalization is not inevitable, nor is it irreversible. Criticism aside, as of 2013 combined GDP has outpaced Goldman Sachs expectations by nearly half. The original BRIC theory will continue to evolve as time goes on as some projections fall short and others meet their mark. Trading Center BRIC and the Mobile First Economy BRIC and the Mobile First Economy Posted by Ian LeWinter on Thu, May 7, 2015 @ 04:00 AM Brazil, Russia, India and China. What do they have in common? Well, economists believe these four countries — collectively known as BRIC countries — are in a comparable phase of economic progress they term “newly advanced.” Why are the BRIC countries important? Financial clout, pure and simple.

Goldman Sachs has predicted the BRIC economies will eclipse the combined economies of the richest countries of the world.1 The Rise of the Mobile First Economies Back in 2001, investment banker Jim O’Neill wrote a paper titled “Building Better Global Economic BRICs.”2 In it, he coined the acronym, which has become a symbol of economic shift from the G7 economies toward the BRIC nations — a shift from developed to developing economies. Less than a decade after O’Neill’s report, the BRIC countries accounted for roughly 25 percent of the world’s land area and, equally, 25 percent of the world’s gross national income. The key factor, however, is the size of its population. This quarter of the world’s land area contained over 40% of the world’s population.3 The leaders of the BRIC countries met for their first summit in Yekaterinburg, the fourth-largest city in Russia, where they issued a joint declaration calling for a multi-polar world order. Projections vary as to the future economic clout of the BRIC countries in this new world order.

Some believe that the BRIC economies may overtake the G7 economies by as soon as 2027.4 Correspondingly, the BRIC economies have mobile device numbers that are growing so fast, they are being termed “mobile first” economies. India: A Snapshot of the Mobile First Generation As you’ve probably guessed from the name, Mobile First means prioritizing an online experience for mobile before the desktop — or any other device. In the past, when users’ focus was on the desktop, mobile design was an afterthought. But today, more people are using their mobile devices for online shopping (M-Commerce) and social networking than ever before. Taking a look at a mobile snapshot of India in 2015 paints a telling picture of a mobile first economy. A leader in the BRIC economy, India is growing financially stronger while phones are getting less expensive. Producers in India are now selling smartphones for as little as $70, and have captured almost half of all sales in that market.5 It’s not news that Facebook, the world’s largest social media site, says that it has more than 100 million users in India.

What is stunning, is that nearly 84 million of those users access Facebook through their mobile devices.6 ( ) Some are calling statistics such as this, indicators of the rise of the mobile first generation. Here are more stats that agree with this characterization: Mobile adoption rates. India has 405 million unique mobile subscribers out of about 900 million registered mobile connection, of which about 762 million are active (more than twice the population of the United States).7 The only country with more registered mobile connections is China, another BRIC country, with 1.2 billion.8 Mobile Internet. Of nearly 290 million Internet users, 60% (about 174 million)9 access their Internet through their mobile device. This is comparable to the U.S. value of 63%.10 Smartphone purchases. This year, India will see a 40% increase from 100 million smartphones shipped to nearly 140 million.

This will also represent an increase from about 19 percent smartphones over feature phones, to about 32 percent — from one-fifth to one-third.11 About 65% of mobile users in India use their devices to message.12 (The U.S. value is 81%).13 89% message at home, while 73% message at work.14 For more information on Voxox’s low calling rates to and from India, see the post in this blog, GOOD NEWS ABOUT CALLING INDIA: SUPER-CHEAP & FREE INTERNATIONAL CALLS . 1. “Brazil, Russia, India and China (BRIC)”. Investopedia. 21 May 2008. 2. O’Neill, Jim (30 November 2001. Building Better Global Economic BRICs, Global Economics Paper No. 66. Goldman Sachs. 3. “BRICnation.com”. Retrieved 15 October 2010. 4. Rana Foroohar (20 March 2009). “BRICs Overtake G7 By 2027”. Retrieved 19 June 2012.

5. Agustino Fontevecchia (7 July 2014). “India’s 243 Million Internet Users and the Mobile E-Commerce Revolution”. Forbes.com. 6. Shelley Singh (9 April 2014). “After 100 million users in India, Facebook aims at 1 billion”. The Economic Times. 7, 9, 11, 12 and 14. 8. List of Countries by Number of Mobile Phones in Use. In Wikipedia. Retrieved 5 May 2015. 10 and 13. Explainer: What Are the BRICS? | AS/COA Explainer: What Are the BRICS? (Image: Government of South Africa) Brendan O'Boyle July 11, 2014 Updated July 16, 2014—Originally an investment catchphrase, a group of five countries known as the BRICS decided to band together on the global stage. The BRICS, made up of Brazil, China, India, Russia, and South Africa, are characterized by rapidly growing economies and increasing international influence.

With over 40 percent of the world’s population, these countries’ combined output constitutes more than 20 percent of global GDP. Economists predict that Brazil, China, India, and Russia will join the United States as the five largest economies in the world by 2050 . Leaders from the BRICS have taken steps to capitalize on the group’s economic potential by holding summits to discuss market integration and diplomatic cooperation. On July 15, the heads of state of all five BRICS countries convened in Fortaleza, Brazil, for their sixth summit , cementing the creation of a new development bank and a foreign exchange reserves pool. AS/COA Online looks at how BRICS has changed over the years and where the group is heading. See how BRICS trade has evolved in a series of infographics . Origins and Evolution The BRIC acronym originally referred to the informal grouping of Brazil, China, India, and Russia. Goldman Sachs economist Jim O’Neill first coined the name in 2001, predicting that the four countries’ share of global GDP would increase significantly over the first decade of the century and would outpace growth of some of the world’s largest economies.

Over the next few years, foreign ministers from these four countries began to meet sporadically, first convening in 2006 during the sixty-first UN General Assembly in New York. These dialogues looked at ways the countries could cooperate politically. Soon, though, talks turned to the economic crisis. As the 2008 recession hit U.S. and European markets, steady growth in China and India increased the BRIC countries’ confidence in weathering the slowdown. Oliver Stuenkel, a fellow at the Berlin-based Global Public Policy Institute , wrote that the instability in developed countries juxtaposed with the relative strength of developing economies “ caused a legitimacy crisis of the international financial order, which led to equally unprecedented cooperation between emerging powers.” This cooperation came to light when BRIC finance ministers met in November 2008 in São Paulo, Brazil and released a communiqué detailing their commitment to work together in light of the financial crisis. That month, then Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and his Brazilian counterpart Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva agreed to arrange the first BRIC heads-of-state summit. The countries approved a rotating presidency, which is given to the country that hosts the annual summit.

As such, Brazil will assume the position this month. When China held the presidency in 2010, BRIC became BRICS when former Chinese President Hu Jintao wrote a formal invitation to South Africa to include the country in the group. Heads-of-State Summits The first heads-of-state BRIC meeting took place in June 2009 in Yekaterinburg , Russia. Medvedev described the summit as a necessary reaction to the global financial crisis . During the meeting, leaders discussed the importance of creating a more diverse international monetary system , with a diminished reliance on the dollar as the global reserve currency. The second summit was held the following year in Brazil, and saw the addition of South African President Jacob Zuma as an attendee. Topics included Iran’s nuclear program and the importance of cooperation in the areas of energy and food security . In December 2010, South Africa was officially invited to become the fifth member of the group. The sub-Saharan African country had actively campaigned for an invitation and saw its inclusion in the group as a way to connect the BRIC economies with the African market . BRIC formally became BRICS at the third summit in Hainan, China in April 2011.

In April 2012, the fourth summit was held in New Delhi, India, where heads of state called for expanded voting rights at the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The delegates also began considering an alternative BRICS-led development bank , a proposal that was formally agreed to at the fifth summit in South Africa in March 2013. Also during the South Africa summit, countries agreed to establish the BRICS Business Council made up of five entrepreneurs from each country to discuss ways to expand cooperation. The Council has a rotating chair between the five countries. In July 2014, the sixth summit took place in Fortaleza, Brazil, where leaders signed agreements to establish a development bank and a currency reserve pool. Discussions also touched on the IMF’s lack of reforms to ensure greater representation of developing countries, as well as sustainable development. BRICS Institutions The BRICS model has evolved from investment lingo to a formalized network hoping to capitalize on the group’s collective promise in the wake of instability in the global economy. In doing so, it has taken on a greater geopolitical role , with aims to enact institutional reforms that shift global power.

While initial discussions focused on the need to reform international institutions, including the IMF and the UN Security Council, recent developments center on creating a new institutional body. At the BRICS presidential summit in 2013, delegates agreed to establish a BRICS development bank which would serve as an alternative to the World Bank . Watch a video to find out what experts think about the bloc's future. Leaders formalized this institution at the July 2014 summit, signing an agreement to create the “New Development Bank” with $100 billion in capital. Initially, the five countries will each underwrite $10 billion in capital for a total of $50 billion. Located in Shanghai, the bank will fund infrastructure and sustainable development projects in both BRICS countries and developing markets. The first bank president will hail from India, and the presidency will rotate. The board of directors will come from Brazil, and the first chair of the board of governors will be Russian. South Africa will be home to the bank’s first regional center for Africa. The heads of state instructed finance ministers from the five counties to work on organizing the bank’s operations.

Slated to open in 2016, bank membership will be open to other countries, though BRICS capital share cannot fall below 55 percent. Heads of state also signed an accord to found a joint foreign exchange reserves pool called a Contingent Reserve Arrangement—similar to the IMF—which establishes an initial reserve of $100 billion and acts as an emergency option for BRICS countries with balance-of-payment troubles. Much of the fund will be provided by China, which will contribute $41 billion. Brazil, India, and Russia, will each contribute $18 billion while South Africa will contribute $5 billion. "It is a sign of the times, which demand reform of the IMF," said Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff at the summit . Adding New Members Before the July summit, there was speculation about the possible invitation of Argentina to the BRICS. For the first time, Argentine President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner has been invited to attend the summit as the only non-bloc head of state in attendance.

The invitation came during a May 28 meeting between Russia and Argentina’s foreign ministers, and fueled discussion of the country's possible inclusion in the BRICS membership, given the process of South Africa’s incorporation in 2011. But during the summit, Rousseff said Argentine membership was not in the cards , though she said it could happen in the future with consensus among all five members. Incorporating new countries has proved controversial. O’Neill himself expressed doubt over the merit of South Africa’s addition , claiming that other countries with high growth, including South Korea, more adequately fit the description of a BRIC as he laid out in his 2001 paper. The Economist even suggested that South Africa’s inclusion took place to represent African countries in a way that kept the acronym intact and not as a result of comparative economic factors. Plus, adding new members raises questions over both the permanence and efficacy of the label. Numerous countries, including Indonesia, Mexico, and Vietnam, fit the emerging market description as Argentina does, some economists say. For example, Indonesia, which has the second fastest economic growth in Asia after China, has for years lead economists to ask if BRICS should instead be BRIICS.

Rachel Glickhouse contributed to this report. The Economic Returns to Higher Education in the BRIC Countries and their Implications for Higher Education Expansion Printed from Share: MyIDEAS : Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper The Economic Returns to Higher Education in the BRIC Countries and their Implications for Higher Education Expansion Contents: (Professor of Education at Stanford University School of Education (USA)) Prashant Loyalka (Assistant Professor at Beijing University’s China Institute for Educational Finance Research (China)) Gregory Androushchak () (Head of the Laboratory for Analysis and Modeling of Institutional Dynamics, the National Research University Higher School of Economics (Russia)) Anna Proudnikova (Research Fellow of the Laboratory for Analysis and Modeling of Institutional Dynamics, the National Research University Higher School of Economics (Russia)) Abstract This paper focuses on the changing economic value of secondary and higher education in four potential world economic powerhouses—Brazil, Russia, India, and China—known as the BRIC countries.

We show that in the past twenty-five years in the BRIC countries, changes in rates of return to higher education have not conformed to the diminishing returns to capital theory, which says that rates decline with level of education and that this pattern holds as countries develop economically and educationally. The rates to university completion have generally risen relative to the rates to investment in lower levels of education, and in all but India are now higher than the payoff to secondary schooling. We argue that this reflects the rapid economic change in all four countries, including their incorporation into the global economy, and, in Russia and China, the transformation from command to increasingly market economies Download Info If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page . Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large. File URL: Download Restriction: no The Global Economy: Will MINT Countries Be The New BRICs? : Parallels : NPR Enlarge this image Shoppers gaze at a jewelry store display window in the Turkish capital Ankara on Feb. 19.

Some economists have coined the term MINT to include the up-and-coming emerging markets of Mexico, Indonesia, Nigeria and Turkey. But Turkey has been hit by street protests, and others in the group have had their share of recent turbulence. Adem Altan/AFP/Getty Images hide caption toggle caption Adem Altan/AFP/Getty Images Shoppers gaze at a jewelry store display window in the Turkish capital Ankara on Feb. 19. Some economists have coined the term MINT to include the up-and-coming emerging markets of Mexico, Indonesia, Nigeria and Turkey. But Turkey has been hit by street protests, and others in the group have had their share of recent turbulence. Adem Altan/AFP/Getty Images The world of finance gave birth in 2001 to a new buzzword: BRIC. The word is an acronym for Brazil, Russia, India and China. Jim O'Neill, an economist with Goldman Sachs who's been credited with coining the term, saw those four countries as turbo-charged engines among emerging markets, ones that would give Western economies a run for their money. O'Neill says when he dreamed up the acronym 13 years ago, people didn't really focus on the potential importance of some of these countries. "It sort of transformed ...

the way, I think, many people thought about the world," he says now. For a stretch, the fast-growing BRIC economies lived up to the hype. The four countries formed their own economic and political alliance. In 2010, South Africa joined the group. But O'Neill considered it an interloper, saying South Africa isn't at the same level as the others. The four original BRIC countries were his babies, but like many children, they can disappoint. "China is the only one of the four that's growing by more than I ever assumed; the other three so far this decade have been disappointing," says O'Neill, particularly Brazil and Russia. "I have joked that if I had to dream the acronym up again today, I'd just call it 'C,' " he says. Article continues after sponsorship While the BRIC engines may be misfiring, other economies have been gaining speed. O'Neill has now come up with a new group of promising emerging markets. He's coined them M-I-N-T. Indonesian workers at a construction site in the capital Jakarta on Nov. 25. Indonesia has the largest economy in southeast Asia and has generally had strong growth in recent years.

Adi Weda/EPA/Landov hide caption toggle caption Adi Weda/EPA/Landov Indonesian workers at a construction site in the capital Jakarta on Nov. 25. Indonesia has the largest economy in southeast Asia and has generally had strong growth in recent years. Adi Weda/EPA/Landov Plenty Of Other Contenders Not so fast, says Oliver Williams, an analyst for WealthInsight. He says there are many other emerging markets, and analysts are also weighing in with their choices. "I think anyone wanting their fame in economics has come up with a grouping," he says. There's MIST (Mexico, India, South Korea, Turkey). There's the Fragile Five, which stands for Indonesia, South Africa, Brazil, Turkey and India. "Some optimists have named them the Fabulous Five," he laughs. There's also PINE (Philippines, Indonesia, Nigeria and Ethiopia) and CIVETS (Colombia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Egypt, Turkey and South Africa). There are the EAGLEs, which stands for Emerging and Growth Leading Economies and includes Brazil, China, Egypt, India, Indonesia, South Korea, Mexico, Russia, Taiwan and Turkey.

With the exception of MIKT (Mexico, Indonesia, South Korea and Turkey), the acronyms roll off the tongue, and incorporate emerging markets from all corners of the globe, says Williams. Williams says he might start working on his own grouping, focusing on markets in Africa, particularly East Africa. "You've got Kenya, you've got Ethiopia, Tanzania, Uganda," he says, which would give him KETU. However, they could be rearranged to come up with the catchier K-U-T-E. Not An Investment Strategy Andrew Feltus, a portfolio manager at Pioneer Investments, says many emerging markets bear strong similarities that include good fiscal policies and dynamic demographics. But there are also differences in terms of how developed the countries are. Feltus says lumping four or five together under an acronym and forgetting the rest is an oversimplification. "I'm kind of cynical on the whole idea. I think it's much more a marketing exercise than necessarily a true investment strategy," he says. Then there are the so-called black swans — developments such as terrorism, sanctions, natural disasters, even elections, that can alter a country's fortunes. Feltus points to Turkey, the final letter in the acronym MINT.

It is a fast-growing economy, but the government has been battling corruption allegations and widespread street protests. Feltus says he would rework MINT. "I don't even know if I would include the 'T' in it," he says. "Actually, that's going to be MINI," meaning Mexico, India Nigeria and Indonesia. But Feltus says he does not recommend that anyone build a strategy based on MINI or any other acronym. However, O'Neill, the man behind BRIC, is sticking with MINT — even though he says people contact him all the time with suggestions. "I don't need to make up any more acronyms myself; I can just have the world doing it for me," he adds. Economy Slows in BRICS Countries as Worries Mount - SPIEGEL ONLINE Economy Slows in BRICS Countries as Worries Mount Troubled Times Developing Economies Hit a BRICS Wall Until recently, investors viewed China, Brazil and India as a sure thing. Lately, though, their economies have shown signs of weakness and money has begun flowing back to the West. Worries are mounting the BRICS dream is fading.

By Erich Follath and Martin Hesse Martin Hesse Comment It was 12 years ago that Jim O'Neill had his innovative idea. An investment banker with Goldman Sachs, he had become convinced following the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks that the United States and Europe were facing economic decline. He believed that developing countries such as China, India, Brazil and Russia could profit immensely from globalization and become the new locomotives of the global economy. O'Neill wanted to advise his clients to invest their money in the promising new players. But he needed a catchy name. It proved to be a simple task. He simply took the first letter of each country in the quartet and came up with BRIC, an acronym which sounded like the foundation for a solid investment. O'Neill, celebrated by Businessweek as a "rock star" in the industry, looked for years like a vastly successful prophet. From 2001 to 2013, the economic output of the four BRIC countries rose from some $3 billion a year to $15 billion. The quartet's growth, later made a quintet with the inclusion of South Africa (BRICS), was instrumental in protecting Western prosperity as well.

Investors made a mint and O'Neill's club even emerged as a real political power. Now, the countries' leaders meet regularly and, despite their many differences, have often managed to function as a counterweight to the West. "The South has risen at an unprecedented speed and scale," reads the United Nations Human Development Report 2013, completed just a few months ago. Historian Niall Ferguson wrote in his 2011 book "Civilization: The West and the Rest" of "the end of 500 years of Western predominance." It is, he suggested, an epochal change. But now, after having become so used to success in recent years, reality has begun to catch up to the BRICS states. Growth rates in 2013 were far below where they were at their high-water marks. Whereas China's growth rate reached a high of 14 percent just a few years ago, for example, it topped out at just 8 percent last year. In India, economic expansion fell from a one-time apex of 10 percent to less than 5 percent in 2013; in Brazil growth went from a high of 6 percent to 3 percent.

Such values are still higher than those seen in the EU, but they are no longer as impressive. And worry is spreading. Now, there is a new moniker being used to describe the developing giants: the "fragile five." It was coined by James Lord, a currency expert at Morgan Stanley and is meant as a warning to the now brittle-seeming countries of Brazil, India and South Africa as well as to Turkey and Indonesia, both of which are threatened with collapse. Slow-Down or the End? What has happened? Have the economic climbers reached the end of their tethers or is it merely a temporary slow-down? Some have warned of overreacting, but the development raises questions for the global economy and for the people in those countries where economic success went at least partially hand-in-hand with increased political freedoms and a new self-confidence. The bad news is quickly mounting. On Tuesday of last week, India's central bank raised interest rates higher than expected in an effort to get massive inflation under control. That night, Turkey did the same thing, raising its prime lending rate to 10 percent. Soon thereafter, South Africa followed with an increase of its own.

Developing countries have become uneasy and are doing all they can to slow investor flight and the collapse of their currencies. Indeed, it almost seems as though the supposed decline of the West was but an illusion. In recent years, hundreds of billions was invested in the sovereign bonds of developing nations because returns in the established Western markets were comparatively weak. But last May, it took just a few words from then-Federal Reserve head Ben Bernanke to reverse the flow. He hinted that the US central bank could begin pumping less money into the financial system if the American recovery continued. A first wave of investors fleeing the developing world was the result. It took just half a year before Bernanke made good on his pledge. Now that the Fed has in fact begun to tighten monetary policy, a second wave has begun -- and it is nothing short of a tsunami. Increasing numbers of investors have begun pulling out of uncertain markets in the belief that US growth and climbing interest rates are a sure thing. Since Bernanke's announcement, Brazil's real, the Turkish lira and the South African rand have lost up to a quarter of their value. It is an extremely dangerous development for the countries affected, particularly for those that import more than they export like India and Brazil.

The gap, after all, must be filled with money from abroad. That may explain why Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff unabashedly courted international investors at the World Economic Forum in Davos in mid-January. Addressing bankers and captains of industry as if it were some kind of IPO road show, Rousseff said emerging economies like Brazil "have the biggest investment opportunities." She said her country had sufficient currency reserves and that the financial system is stable enough to weather the current storms. The president argued it would be a mistake to only pay attention to short-term developments. It is "absolutely essential," she said, "to bear in mind a medium and long-term time horizon in our reviews." Emerging Middle Classes Find Their Voice It isn't just the raw figures that are fueling concern among the governments of developing nations. From Beijing to New Delhi to Rio, the upswing has fostered a new self-awareness in people, creating a broad popular movement in the truest sense of the term. In recent years, impressive middle classes have taken shape in virtually all of the emerging economies. Members of that middle class are now demanding a larger piece of the pie and higher wages.

At the same time, they also want "good governance" -- meaning greater responsibility and accountability for their leaders -- and the right to increased democratic participation. Economic progress has served as catalyst for political demands. If that dream now suddenly ends, it could also slam the brakes on these emerging popular movements -- or at least stir emotions in dangerous ways. This is particularly true of Brazil, a country that has made major social progress in recent years. Unemployment is down as a result of the boom and the country's support programs for the poorest segment of society have been largely successful. It may be happening slowly, but in contrast to many other countries around the world, the gap between the rich and poor is actually narrowing in Brazil. Still, the people want more. They are conscious of corruption among leaders and the ruling class; they are outraged when they see money wasted on lavish construction projects like the ones underway for the upcoming World Cup in the country. Indeed, it seems a paradox. Brazil is crazy for football and sports in general, but they are protesting against this summer's World Cup and the 2016 Summer Olympics because they have come to realize that there are more important things in life than flashy stadiums.

They want things like better schools for their children and decent, affordable health insurance. As a left-leaning social democrat, Rousseff has no other choice than to back the protests as long as they remain peaceful -- and offer some kind of relief. Of course, that can only happen if she can keep Brazil's economy from faltering . Raw Nerves in India The situation in India is worse . Nepotism has become endemic and a part of the ruling class is criminal. Nearly one-third of all parliamentarians are the subjects of criminal proceedings. The country has become one where cities with universities and world-class firms exist next to shockingly underdeveloped towns and villages. The numerous cases of rape suggest that women are still viewed as second-class citizens. Meanwhile, regional differences continue to grow. Nevertheless, civil society has also been strengthened in India as a result of the boom, and mass protests have forced the government to act. Thus far, the economy has managed to remain stable and business leaders are hoping that it will start growing again after elections this fall. Narendra Modi, the leading candidate for the Hindu nationalist BJP party, is viewed as an effective, business-friendly politician.

At the same time, he is also seen as being insensitive towards minorities because of his role in bloody anti-Muslim riots. Critics accused Modi of inaction as the chief government minister in the state of Gujarat during the deadly protests in 2002. Hundreds of people, mostly Muslim, were killed, and the United States responded by banning him from entering the country. Indian Central Bank chief Raghuram Rajan is a good example of just how raw nerves in New Delhi have become. He has accused the US and Europe of short-sighted economic greed and argues that industrialized nations must assist developing countries with their currency problems -- especially given that India, China and Co. helped dampen the crisis in 2008. "Industrial countries have to play a part in restoring that, and they can't at this point wash their hands off and say we'll do what we need to and you do the adjustment," Rajan told Bloomberg TV in an interview earlier this month. Concerns about Chinese Economy One worry shared leaders of both BRICS states and Western countries alike is the possibility of an economic collapse in China. Last year China became the world's greatest trading power.

Within five years at the latest, China will likely surpass the United States to become the world's No. 1 economy. But the country still faces plenty of challenges, particularly the next, more difficult level of development. After all, the step from the global poorhouse to the middle class is an easier one than climbing the next few rungs to the top. The droves of inexpensive workers who abandoned China's agricultural sector and were absorbed by industry -- thus transforming the country into the world's factory -- are now becoming a burden. They are beginning to demand higher wages and the state must provide for healthcare and pensions. China's economic model, its authoritarian state-controlled capitalism, is being pushed to its limits. In order to reach the next level of development, the Communist Party will likely have to adopt Western state structures. The unspoken deal between leaders and their people -- we ensure rising prosperity as long as you don't get too involved in politics -- is threatening to collapse. In addition to creating instability among 40 percent of the global population, a significant worsening of the economic situation in the BRICS countries could have significant consequences for the West. Global German companies like BASF and Siemens now generate a significant portion of their profits in the Far East.

Volkswagen sells more cars in China than in Germany. Despite all of the problems with troubled banks and highly indebted municipalities, China still has some $3.8 trillion in currency reserves, more than any other country worldwide. It is certainly enough to soften the blow and likely sufficient to finance a rapid recovery in the event of a crisis. O'Neill, for his part, has embarked on a new path. The man who once managed some $800 billion for Goldman Sachs quit his job at the investment bank last April. He took some time off, began filming country profiles for the BBC and is now promoting investment in countries like Mexico and Nigeria. Now 56, O'Neill told SPIEGEL that he always felt like "an outsider in my industry." He has found a new issue to focus on in his films: Social justice. O'Neill believes that the global economy finds itself at something of a divide. It is not so much one that runs between industrialized countries and the developing world so much as between the global rich and poor. He speaks of the headlines made by the pope and by New York's new mayor with their speeches focusing on income inequality and growing societal splits.

He believes that we could be in the early stages of a redistribution of wealth, one which places less emphasis on capital and more on climbing incomes among the lower classes, propelled by taxes or minimum wage laws. And, he adds, "we as investors" clearly have to take such developments into account. But also as human beings. Translated from the German by Charles Hawley and Daryl Lindsey Article...

Question: In economics, which four countries are known as the BRIC countries?
Answer: Brazil, Russia, India, China