University of Toronto
BRICS flags
BRICS Information Centre
Logo


2013 BRICS Durban Summit Compliance Report

July 11, 2014

This compliance report assesses the compliance of the BRICS members over the period of 27 March 2013 to 1 July 2014. It assesses five priority commitments of the 47 made at the Durban Summit hosted by South Africa in March 2013.

Download the full report here.

We welcome feedback on this report! If you have any comment about our assessment, or if you know of any actions taken by a BRICS member between 27 March 2013 and 1 July 2014 that might affect that assessment, please contact us at
brics@utoronto.ca and iori@hse.ru


Introduction and Summary

The 2013 BRICS Durban Compliance Report, prepared by the BRICS Research Group (the University of Toronto and the International Organizations Research Institute of the National Research University Higher School of Economics (IORI HSE), analyzes compliance performance by BRICS countries with a selection of five priority commitments drawn from the total of 47 commitments made by the leaders at the Durban Summit on 26-27 March 2013. The report covers actions taken by the BRICS countries during the period from 27 March 2013 to 1 July 2014. This timeframe allows for an assessment of compliance for the period between the 2013 Durban Summit and the 2014 Fortaleza Summit, hosted by Brazil on 14-16 July 2014.

[back to top]

Methodology and Scoring System

This report draws on the methodology developed by the G8 Research Group, which has been monitoring G8 compliance annually since 1996 and semi-annually since 2002. The same methodology has been adopted for monitoring G20 performance since 2008. The use of this time-tested methodology builds cross-institutional, cross-member and cross-issue consistency and thus allows compatibility and comparability of the compliance performance by the G20 and BRICS, providing foundation for evidence-based assessment of these institutions effectiveness.

The methodology uses a scale from -1 to +1, where +1 indicates full compliance with the stated commitment, -1 indicates a failure to comply or action taken that is directly opposite to the stated goal of the commitment, and 0 indicates partial compliance or work in progress, such as initiatives that have been launched but are not yet near completion and whose final results can therefore not be assessed. Each member receives a score of -1, 0 or +1 for each commitment. For convenience, the scientific scores reported in the tables in this summary have been converted to percentages, where -1 equals 0% and +1 equals 100%.1

[The formula to convert a score into a percentage is P=50×(S+1), where P is the percentage and S is the score.]

[back to top]

Commitment Breakdown

The BRICS leaders made a total of 47 commitments at the Durban Summit. These commitments, as identified by the BRICS Research Group, are drawn from the official BRICS eThekwini Declaration and Statement by BRICS Leaders on the Establishment of the BRICS-Led Development Bank. They cover issue areas ranging from climate change to terrorism.

[A commitment is defined as a discrete, specific, publicly expressed, collectively agreed statement of intent; a promise by summit members that they will undertake future action to move toward, meet or adjust to an identified target. More information on commitment selection and scoring guidelines is available in the G8 Commitment/Compliance Coding and Reference Manual at www.g8.utoronto.ca/compliance.]

[back to top]

Selection of Commitments

Although BRICS countries made a total of 47 commitments at the Durban Summit, the BRICS Research Group has assessed the members' compliance with five priority commitments (see Table 1). For each compliance cycle (that is, the period between summits), the research team selects commitments that reflect the breadth of the BRICS agenda and also reflect the priorities of the summit's host, while balancing the selection to allow for comparison with past and future summits.3 The selection also replicates the breakdown of issue areas and the proportion of commitments in each one. Primary criteria for selecting a priority commitment for assessment are the comprehensiveness and relevance to the summit, the BRICS and the world. Selected commitments must also meet secondary criteria of performance such as measurability and ability to commit within a year. Tertiary criteria include significance as identified by relevant stakeholders in the host country and scientific teams.

[back to top]

The Final Compliance Scores

For the period from 27 March 2013 to 1 July 2014, BRICS countries achieved an average final compliance score of +0.48, which translates to 74%. The final compliance scores by commitment are contained in Table 2.

[back to top]

Compliance by Commitment

Overall compliance by commitment has been high, with all scores distributed from 0 to +1. The highest scoring commitment is that on support for an open, transparent and rules-based multilateral trading system, reaching +1 (100%). Two commitments share the lowest score of +0.20 (60%): cooperation in the field of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and support for the stabilization of Afghanistan. For more information on scoring by commitment, see Table 2.

This is the third BRICS compliance report produced by the BRICS Research Group (Table 3). The average score increased from the 2012 Delhi Summit, when it reached +0.28 or 64%, and equals the average compliance score with 2011 Sanya Summit commitments. While the time span is too short to make valid conclusions on compliance trends, the analysis reveals that BRICS countries complied well with their commitments on development (average score in 2011-13 is +0.53 or 77%) and climate change (+0.50 or 75% in 2011-12). Performance on the issue of trade is uneven, with an average of +0.47 (74%) from 2011 to 2013, while the efforts to comply with the commitments on reform of the international financial institutions should be consolidated (+0.20 or 60% in 2011-12). It should be noted, however, that the commitments from the same area were not identical throughout different summits.

[back to top]

Future Research and Reports

The information contained in this report provides BRICS countries and other stakeholders with an indication of their compliance in the period between the Sanya and New Delhi summits. This report has been produced as an invitation for others to provide additional or more complete information on compliance. Feedback should be sent to brics@utoronto.ca and iori@hse.ru.

[back to top]

Table 1: 2013 BRICS Durban Summit Priority Commitments

Priority Area Commitment
Development: Industrialization in Africa [9] Within the framework of the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD), we support African countries in their industrialisation process through ... capacity-building
Trade: Multilateral Trade System [21] We reaffirm our support for an open, transparent and rules-based multilateral trading system.
Macroeconomic Policy: Small and Medium-SizedEnterprises [24] We will explore opportunities for cooperating in the field of SMEs and recognise the need for promoting dialogue among the respective Ministries and Agencies in charge of the theme, particularly with a view to promoting their international exchange and cooperation and fostering innovation, research and development.
Regional Security: Afghanistan [29] We affirm our commitment to support Afghanistan's emergence as a peaceful, stable and democratic state, free of terrorism and extremism, and underscore the need for more effective regional and international cooperation for the stabilisation of Afghanistan, including by combating terrorism.
Terrorism [36] We reiterate our strong condemnation of terrorism in all its forms and manifestations and stress that there can be no justification, whatsoever, for any acts of terrorism. We believe that the UN has a central role in coordinating international action against terrorism within the framework of the UN Charter and in accordance with principles and norms of international law. In this context, we support the implementation of the UN General Assembly Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy and are determined to strengthen cooperation in countering this global threat.

[back to top]

Table 2: 2013 BRICS Durban Summit Compliance Scores

  Brazil Russia India China South Africa Average
Development: Industrialization in Africa +1 +1 +1 +1 -1 +0.60 80%
Trade: Multilateral Trade System +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1.00 100%
Macroeconomic: Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises 0 0 +1 +1 -1 +0.20 60%
Regional Security: Afghanistan 0 +1 0 +1 -1 +0.20 60%
Terrorism 0 +1 +1 0 0 +0.40 70%
Average +0.40 +0.80 +0.80 +0.80 -0.40 +0.48 74%
70% 90% 90% 90% 30%    

[back to top]

Table 3: BRICS Compliance Scores, 2011-13

Area Summit Brazil Russia India China South Africa Average
Development 2011 +1 0 +1 +1 0 +0.60 80%
2012 0 0 0 +1 +1 +0.40 70%
2013 +1 +1 +1 +1 -1 +0.60 80%
Average +0.67 +0.33 +0.67 +1.00 0 +0.53 77%
Trade 2011 0 0 +1 +1 0 +0.40 70%
2012 0 -1 +1 0 0 0 50%
2013 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1.00 100%
Average +0.33 0 +1.00 +0.67 +0.33 +0.47 73%
Climate Change 2011 +1 +1 +1 0 +1 +0.80 90%
2012 0 +1 +1 -1 0 +0.20 60%
Average +0.50 +1.00 +1.00 -0.50 +0.50 +0.50 75%
IFI Reform 2011 0 0 +1 +1 -1 +0.20 60%
2012 0 0 0 +1 0 +0.20 60%
Average 0 0 +0.50 +1.00 -0.50 +0.20 60%
Finance 2011 +1 0 +1 0 0 +0.40 70%
Energy 2012 0 +1 0 +1 +1 +0.60 80%
Macroeconomic Policy 2013 0 0 +1 +1 -1 +0.20 60%
Regional Security 2013 0 +1 0 +1 -1 +0.20 60%
Terrorism 2013 0 +1 +1 0 0 +0.40 70%

[back to top]

Research Team

Professor John Kirton, Co-director, BRICS Research Group
Professor Marina Larionova, Co-director, BRICS Research Group; Head, HSE International Organizations Research Institute

Tannuva Akbar
Caroline Bracht
Andrew Defor
Olga Milkina
Vitaly Nagornov
Victoria Pavlyushina
Mark Rakhmangulov
Rebeca Ramirez
Elizaveta Safonkina
Andrei Sakharov
Vahini Sathiamoorthy
Andrey Shelepov

See also the International Organizations Research Institute at the National Research University Higher School of Economics

[back to top]