I think the following article is worth reading , as it might shed some new light on world affairs n economics in the next 50 years ...cheers eG

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/co ... 03,00.html

New in acronym-land

CARBS

Canada, Australia, Russia, Brasil, South Africa

5 Commodity rich nations covering 29% of the earth's landmass and producing 25% of most major commodities.
(also with economies that are vulnerable to falling prices, with Russia & Brasil the most exposed)

Am reading The Growth Map by Jim O'Neill (now Chairman of Goldman Sachs Asset Management, & originator of the BRIC acronym). GS regularly develop Global Economics Papers and this book is a distillation, updating (without the data) on these themes. The book came out mid 2011 and is highly recommended to:

- counter the pessimism of the 'submerging economies'
- look where to allocate for future themes (not necessarily resources),
- understand the S curve of consumption (consumer durable expenditures) - this will be an interesting space
- as will be alternative energy (solar, & battery for cars)

as posted on 15 Aug 2011 in this thread: outlook-for-6021-12.html

“Demand in the so-called BRIC economies is now more important to the world economy than the U.S and Europe. In the decade that finished in 2010, the BRICs added around $8,000 billion to global gross domestic product, equivalent to about 80 per cent of that of the Group of Seven leading economies. The BRICs will probably add around $12,000 billion more over the next decade, double the U.S and Eurozone combined.

The latest retail sales indicators suggest that Chinese consumption is probably rising by around 20 per cent per year. The current size of Chinese consumption is $2,100 billion. Assuming the level is as low as the 35 per cent of GDP in the official data, then a 20 per cent growth rate translates into an extra $400 billion a year. The combined rate of consumption growth in the other BRIC nations is similar, meaning that these four countries alone will add something like $800 billion to global growth this year alone.”

If anything, some of the earlier assumptions from the original concept in 2001 on the importance of the BRIC economies, (and those since developed on the N-11* to follow), have been understated/ revised upward; not that anything is linear and progresses without a hitch.

Being an economist, there must be variables to put into the pot and derive comparitors/ differentiators.

Macroeconomic variables
Inflation
Government deficit
Investment spending
External debt
Degree of openness

Microeconomic variables
Mobile phone use
Internet use
Use of computers
Life expectancy
Education
Rue of law
Corruption
Stability of government

*Bangladesh, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, S Korea, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Turkey, Vietnam.

In the current uncertain economic conditions, countries, businesses and institutions around the world are undergoing unprecedented change with new challenges and opportunities every day. Some countries, however, are better able to manage and mitigate the risks associated with change and capitalize on new opportunities.

There has been little focus on the concept of change readiness, and there are few reliable and appropriate measures to assess it. Recognizing this, KPMG International, in collaboration with researchers from the Overseas Development Institute (ODI), evaluated the need and opportunity for a new forward-looking index – the Change Readiness Index – to assess the capability of individual countries to manage change.

While the specific policies and actions that will be required to manage change will depend on the nature of the change itself, the Index is based on the premise that the underlying capability of a country to manage change is dependent on certain fundamental characteristics. These characteristics, along with the hypotheses for the expected meaning of the results are outlined in the report

http://www.kpmg.com/global/en/issuesand ... fault.aspx

THE LIST
1 Chile
2 Tunisia
3 Taiwan
4 Jordan
5 Kazakhstan
6 Morocco
7 Malaysia
8 Uruguay
9 Turkey
10 Peru
11 Botswana
12 Costa Rica
13 China
14 Syrian Arab Republic
15 Namibia
16 Colombia
17 Algeria
18 Ghana
19 Lithuania
20 Zambia
21 Mexico
22 Sri Lanka
23 India
24 Nicaragua
25 Panama
26 South Africa
27 Jamaica
28 Kenya
29 Mongolia
30 Indonesia
31 Brazil
32 Thailand
33 Macedonia
34 Dominican Republic
35 Mali
36 Senegal
37 Ukraine
38 Philippines
39 Nigeria
40 Cameroon
41 Egypt, Arab Republic
42 Paraguay
43 Cambodia
44 Romania
45 Bangladesh
46 Uganda
47 Argentina
48 Ecuador
49 Vietnam
50 Nepal
51 Russian Federation
52 Guatemala
53 Tanzania
54 Pakistan
55 Ethiopia
56 Venezuela, R.B.
57 Honduras
58 Zimbabwe
59 Mozambique
60 Bolivia


I would add a few other qualifiers :- landlocked (-ve), megalomaniac next door (-ve), non-strategic and thus less meddling (+ve), unfinished business - religious or ruling family stuff (-ve) including recent uprisings etc

also some lightweight stuff in the SMH, reprinted from The Guardian

They lack the size of China or India. Many have to import natural resources. They have yet to be given a snappy label such as the BRICS. But Chile, Tunisia, Taiwan, Jordan and Kazakhstan have been identified as the possible rising stars in a report that looks at the ability of countries to grasp the opportunities of a rapidly changing global economy.

The study from consultants at KPMG and the Overseas Development Institute think tank looked at the long-term potential of 60 emerging market countries and found some surprising names in its roll call of those deemed most fit to face the future.

After using economic, governance and social measures, the report found to the researchers' surprise that the five BRICS - Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa - were well down the league table.

Instead, it tended to be smaller countries that were best geared to change, seen as the critical factor in determining the capacity for sustained, long-term growth.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/small-count ... z1tHvzF1gC