This chapter investigates the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) coalition’s response to the dual crises of climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic. Utilizing a constructivist framework and content analysis via Voyant Tools, the study examines joint declarations from 2017 to 2021 to assess the group's institutional governance capacity. The analysis reveals that despite the existential threat posed by climate change, the BRICS’ institutional response remains “highly insufficient,” primarily due to a developmental model heavily reliant on intensive land use, forestry, and extractivist projects. The COVID-19 pandemic acted as an intervening variable, exacerbating existing vulnerabilities in the Global South and shifting political priorities toward immediate national interests and economic recovery. Through its constitutional integration of “ecological civilization” and the promotion of a green Belt and Road Initiative, China is increasingly acting as an agenda-setter for a new model of sustainable development within the bloc. The chapter concludes that the BRICS platform currently lacks the institutional learning and steering capacity necessary for concerted climate policy. It argues for a transition from non-binding soft law toward more robust, binding cooperation mechanisms that integrate multi-hazard risk assessments and prioritize an ecological transition over traditional, asymmetric economic growth.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

BRICS Response to Climate Governance Crisis in Pandemic Times

  • Douglas de Castro,
  • Danielle Mendes Thame Denny

摘要

This chapter investigates the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) coalition’s response to the dual crises of climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic. Utilizing a constructivist framework and content analysis via Voyant Tools, the study examines joint declarations from 2017 to 2021 to assess the group's institutional governance capacity. The analysis reveals that despite the existential threat posed by climate change, the BRICS’ institutional response remains “highly insufficient,” primarily due to a developmental model heavily reliant on intensive land use, forestry, and extractivist projects. The COVID-19 pandemic acted as an intervening variable, exacerbating existing vulnerabilities in the Global South and shifting political priorities toward immediate national interests and economic recovery. Through its constitutional integration of “ecological civilization” and the promotion of a green Belt and Road Initiative, China is increasingly acting as an agenda-setter for a new model of sustainable development within the bloc. The chapter concludes that the BRICS platform currently lacks the institutional learning and steering capacity necessary for concerted climate policy. It argues for a transition from non-binding soft law toward more robust, binding cooperation mechanisms that integrate multi-hazard risk assessments and prioritize an ecological transition over traditional, asymmetric economic growth.