Shifting geopolitical sands: COP 28 and the new BRICS+
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The new additions to Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (BRICS) expand into the broader Middle East and North Africa region, adding some of the largest populations and strongest economies of the region to BRICS+. Since the BRICS summit in August 2023, significant media attention has been given to the impacts of these shifting geopolitical sands, from the potential for de-dollarization processes, and the distribution of resource reserves for influencing markets. Conference of the Parties (COP) 28 presents an opportunity for these emerging economies (BRICS+) to assert their role in addressing the global climate crisis and push for more equitable and effective solutions. However, only little has been explored on how the new BRICS+ alignment will influence climate negotiations at COP 28 and the sustainability transition more broadly. This perspective article explores what the changes to BRICS+ mean for COP 28 and the relevance of COP 28 being hosted in a BRICS+ member country. Design/methodology/approach In crafting this perspective paper on BRICS+, the authors' methodology primarily entails a comprehensive review of existing literature, policy documents and academic analyses related to the BRICS+, as well as the examination of official statements, declarations and policy shifts from BRICS+ member countries to gauge their intentions and priorities within this expanded framework. The authors also monitor developments leading up to COP 28 to provide real-time insights into how BRICS+ dynamics shape climate negotiations. Findings The authors' perspective article puts forth a number of insights. First, the BRICS+ member countries are prominent players in global geopolitics. Their involvement in COP 28 could lead to climate negotiations being intertwined with broader geopolitical issues, potentially impacting the pace and direction of climate agreements. Second, COP 28 offers a critical opportunity to bridge the divide between developed and developing nations in the realm of climate action and sustainable development. The BRICS+ countries may, in this COP event, explore options beyond the traditional intergovernmental institutions, which often reflect the influence, hegemony and power dynamics of the Global North. This includes South–South collaboration, bilateral financial support, innovative financing and direct trade. Finally, agendas related to capacity building in this coming event will be a critical component of the global climate change agenda in a way that develops South–South dialogs for climate change adaptation and mitigation. Originality/value The authors' research sheds light on the implications of this expansion for climate negotiations, a critical global concern. It delves into uncharted territory by examining how the BRICS+ alignment may influence climate initiatives, which has not been thoroughly explored in existing literature. This comprehensive perspective fills a critical gap in the current discourse, providing policymakers and scholars with a more holistic understanding of the implications of BRICS+ for the global agenda on sustainability. Moreover, the research offers real-time insights by monitoring developments leading up to and during COP 28, allowing for timely analysis and informed recommendations. This aspect of the research provides immediate value to stakeholders engaged in climate negotiations and international relations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".