BRICS Information Centre

Home | Compliance

2022 BRICS Bejing Summit
Final Compliance Report

Alissa Xinhe Wang, Angela Min Yi Hou, Ashton Mathias, Pantea Jamshidi Nouri and Yana Sadeghi
and the University of Toronto BRICS Research Group,
and
Alexander Ignatov, Irina Popova, Andrey Shelepov, Pavel Doronin, Andrei Sakharov
and the Center for International Institutions Research
of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration,
Moscow
16 August 2023

This final compliance report assesses the compliance of the BRICS members for the period of 23 June 2022 (the day of the 2022 Beijing Summit) to 4 July 2023. It assesses 18 priority commitments of the 162 commitments made by the leaders at the Beijing Summit.

This report was prepared by the BRICS Research Group led by the Center for International Institutions Research of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA) and the Global Governance Program at Trinity College in the University of Toronto.

Download the full report here. See the scores in Table 3.

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 23 June 2022 to 4 July 2023 that might affect that assessment, please contact us at brics@utoronto.ca

Introduction and Summary

The 2022 BRICS Beijing Final Compliance Report, prepared by the BRICS Research Group (based at the University of Toronto and the Center for International Institutions Research of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration [RANEPA]), analyses compliance performance by BRICS countries with 18 priority commitments drawn from the total 162 commitments made by the leaders at the Beijing Summit, which was held virtually on 23 June 2022. This report builds on the interim compliance report, which assessed actions taken between 23 June 2022 and 13 January 2023.

Methodology and Scoring System

This report draws on the methodology developed by the G7 Research Group, which has been monitoring G7 compliance since 1996 and adapted for monitoring G20 performance since 2008. The use of this time-tested methodology provides for cross-institutional, cross-member and cross-issue consistency and thus allows compatibility and comparability of the compliance performance by different summit institutions and establishes a foundation for evidence-based assessment of the effectiveness of these institutions.*

The methodology uses a scale from −1 to +1, where +1 (100%) indicates full compliance with the stated commitment, −1 (0%) indicates a failure to comply or action taken that is directly opposite to the stated goal of the commitment, and 0 (50%) 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. (The formula to convert a score into a percentage is P = 50 × (S + 1), where P is the percentage and S is the score.)

* Informal summitry institutions are defined as international institutions with limited membership, relatively low bureaucracy and reliance on open, flexible and voluntary approaches. Regular meetings of the heads of states and governments who engage on a wide range of international, regional and domestic politics stand at the pinnacle of such international arrangements, which involve many actors operating according to established procedures on two levels: domestic and international. Commitments contained in the collectively agreed documents are not legally binding but their implementation is stimulated by peer pressure. Among such bodies engaged in global and regional governance are G7, G20, BRICS, the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum and others.

Breakdown of Commitments

At the Beijing Summit in 2022, the BRICS leaders focused on seven pillars: strengthening and reforming global governance, working in solidarity to combat COVID-19, safeguarding peace and security, promoting economic recovery, expediting implementation of the 20230 agenda for sustainable development, deepening people-to-people exchanges and institutional development. The theme was "Foster High-quality BRICS Partnership, Usher in a New Era for Global Development." The topics discussed included a brighter shared future for the international community based on mutually beneficial cooperation; the COVID-19 pandemic and disease prevention; peace, security and counter-terrorism cooperation; sustainable development and innovative means to achieve it. BRICS leaders also acknowledged the need to strengthen and reform the multilateral system.

Selection of Commitments

For each compliance cycle (that is, the period between summits), the research team selects commitments that reflect the breadth of the BRICS agenda and the priorities of the summit's host, while balancing the selection to allow for comparison with past and future summits. The selection also takes into account the breakdown of issue areas and the proportion of commitments in each one (see Table 1). The 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 meet secondary criteria such as measurability and ability to comply within a year. Tertiary criteria include significance, as identified by relevant stakeholders in the host country and scientific teams. Of the 162 commitments made at the 2022 Beijing Summit, the BRICS Research Group selected 18 priority commitments for its compliance assessment (see Table 2).

Compliance Scores

Compliance for the 2022 Beijing Summit Final report is +0.39 (69%) (see Table 3).

By country, India and China earned the highest compliance score at +0.50 (75%). South Africa followed with a score of +0.44 (72%) and Brazil earned +0.28 (64%). Russia received the lowest score of +0.22 (61%) (see Table 4).

By issue, seven commitments achieved 100% compliance: on universal health coverage, information and communications technologies and the digital economy, development and recovery in labour and employment, the macroeconomic commitment on standardization, anti-corruption law enforcement, interconnectivity of supply chains in trade, and the 2030 Agenda on Sustainable Development. The commitment on infrastructure investment and public-private partnerships earned the next highest score, with +0.80 (90%), followed by the commitment on reforming the International Monetary Fund, with +0.60 (80%). The commitment on combating terrorism received the next highest score, with +0.40 (70%), closely by reforming the World Trade Organization and international taxation both with +0.20 (60%). The commitments on infectious diseases and on economic recovery and sustainable development in Africa both received a 0 (50%). The remaining commitments achieved less than 50% (see Table 5).

[back to top]

Table 1: Distribution of BRICS Commitments Across Issue Areas, 2009–2022 ↩

[back to top]

Table 2: 2022 BRICS Beijing Summit Priority Commitments ↩

[back to top]

Table 3: 2022 BRICS Beijing Summit Final Compliance Scores ↩

Note: ICT = information and communications technologies; IMF = International Monetary Fund; PPP = public-private partnerships; WTO = World Trade Organization.

[back to top]

Table 4: BRICS Compliance Scores, 2019–2022 ↩

[back to top]

Table 5: 2022 BRICS Beijing Summit Final Compliance Scores by Commitment ↩

[back to top]

Follow @BRICSresearch on Twitter | Please send comments to brics@utoronto.ca
This page was last updated on September 5, 2023
All contents copyright © 2023. University of Toronto unless otherwise stated. All rights reserved.