A Framework for Decision-Makers
Focus: South Africa & China
BRICS Energy Diplomacy and Climate Transitions
May 2026
Executive Summary
Key Findings:
01 03 05
02 04 06
The expanded BRICS bloc — now 10 members including Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran, and the UAE — represents the most consequential arena in global climate politics.
It accounts for over 50% of global GHG emissions, 60% of the world's population, ~43.6% of global oil production, and more than half of global solar capacity. Yet BRICS is not a coherent bloc: it is a battleground of competing interests, timelines, and worldviews. This briefing synthesises 18 months of SAIIA research (2024–2025): systems mapping across 10 BRICS countries, 40+ strategic interviews, and participatory futures labs. The core argument is that the transition is primarily a power contest, not a technical or financial challenge. Incumbent fossil-industrial interests — SOEs, national oil companies, and the governments dependent on their revenues — actively obstruct transformation. China is the central variable: simultaneously the world's largest emitter and the dominant enabler of clean energy transition. South Africa is the normative leader constrained by its own grid. Together they embody the BRICS energy contradiction.
Use the arrows and animated icons throughout to explore research insights and details.
Contents
Section 06
Contents
The BRICS Climate and Energy Compass
06
Section 04
The Narrative Battle: Why Stories Matter as Much as Policy
04
Section 07
Strategic Priorities and Recommendations
07
Section 03
03
Where Change Is Already Happening: Niches, Coalescence, and the Conditions for Transformation
08
05
02
01
Section 01
The BRICS Climate and Energy Transitions Arena: Context, Actors, and Fault Lines
Section 08
What Happens Next: Pathways to Impact
Section 05
Six Insights for Decision-Makers
Section 02
Power Dynamics in BRICS Climate and Energy Transitions
01
BRICS began in 2009; the 2024–2025 expansion fundamentally altered the consensus dynamic. Iran and the UAE bring OPEC+ perspectives; Indonesia brings critical mineral assets and energy access challenges; Egypt and Ethiopia bring climate vulnerability priorities.
1.1
1.2
1.3
How BRICS Members Are Positioned: Five Actor Groups
Why Standard Approaches Are Not Working
The Forums That Shape BRICS Climate Action
The BRICS Climate and Energy Transitions Arena: Context, Actors, and Fault Lines
1.4
1.5
1.6
China and South Africa: The Bloc's Central Contradiction in Microcosm
Where BRICS Converges and Where It Does Not
The Finance Dimension: Key Developments 2024 –2025
02
2.1
2.3
2.2
Five Subsystems of the BRICS Climate and Just Transition Ecosystem
Actor Typology: Who Blocks and Who Enables
What Holds the System in Place
Power Dynamics in BRICS Climate and Energy Transitions
2.4
Three Regimes in Tension
03
3.1
3.2
3.3
Three Niche Horizons
Six High-Potential Niches and the Incorporation Risk
Three Coalescence Pathways
Where Change Is Already Happening: Niches, Coalescence, and the Conditions for Transformation
3.5
3.4
SA and China: Key Niche Complementarity
The Critical Juncture: Why the 2025–2027 Window Matters
04
The most persistent barriers to transition are not technical or financial — they are narrative. Coal in several BRICS contexts remains a symbol of national development and sovereignty. Renewable energy is perceived in some circles as a foreign, elite-led agenda. These narrative lock-ins make it harder to mobilise political support even when economics favour transition.
4.1
4.2
4.3
Five Narratives Structuring the BRICS Climate Debate
Narrative Sovereignty
What This Means for Decision-Makers
The Narrative Battle: Why Stories Matter as Much as Policy
05
5.1
5.2
5.3
Insight 1
Insight 2
Insight 3
Six Insights for Decision-Makers
5.5
5.6
5.4
Insight 4
Insight 6
Insight 5
06
The BRICS Climate and Energy Compass is a strategic navigation tool — not a blueprint. It provides five interconnected axes integrating three frameworks: Five Transformative Pillars (destination), Five Governance Principles (pathway), and Five Strategic Imperatives (momentum).
6.1
6.2
6.3
The Five Transformative Pillars
Five Governance Principles
Five Strategic Imperatives (The Battlefield)
The BRICS Climate and Energy Compass
6.4
The Five Compass Axes
07
Climate finance is the strategic fulcrum. Three priorities address the most critical systemic blockages, with accountability mechanisms and Regime Flip Metrics to ensure transformation, not rhetoric.
7.3
7.1
7.2
Priority 1: Systemic Reform of Global and BRICS-Internal Financial Architecture
Priority 2: Catalysing Investment in Hard-to-Abate Sectors
Priority 3: Localising Climate Finance and Building Sub-National Capacity
Strategic Priorities and Recommendations
Accountability Framework
7.4
7.5
Key Regime Flip Metrics (2025→2030)
08
8.3
8.1
8.2
Immediate Priorities (0–12 months): Laying the Foundation
Medium-Term Actions (1–3 years): Building Transformation Momentum
Longer-Term Structural Changes (3–5 years): Consolidating the New Regime
What Happens Next: Pathways to Impact
8.4
8.5
Critical Risk Mitigation
From Navigation to Transformation
Glossary
Thank you
Our Research Partner
1.6. China and South Africa: The Bloc's Central Contradiction in Microcosm
South Africa: The Normative Leader Constrained by Its Own Grid
China: The Structural Pivot
SA is one of the most credible global voices for just transition, the first JETP country, now at $12.8bn (ZAR 222bn) even after US withdrawal, with a JET Investment Plan targeting ~$85bn over five years. SA's 2024 Climate Change Act introduced sectoral emissions limits and carbon budgets for large polluters. Wind and solar more than doubled their share of electricity from 2019–2023.
However, SA added 800 MW of new coal in 2024, is investing in fossil gas, and lacks sectoral implementation plans to make its 2050 net-zero target credible. Climate Action Tracker rates national policies as "Almost Sufficient" but fair share as "Insufficient." Energy security dominates the domestic political agenda, creating persistent tension between SA's normative international leadership and its implementation record. SA actively engages China for clean technology support, an opportunity for accelerated transfer, and a risk of new dependency if terms are not carefully managed.
China is simultaneously the world's largest Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emitter and the global leader in renewable manufacturing. In 2024, it reached its 1,200 GW wind and solar target six years ahead of schedule. Non-fossil power generation reached ~42% in 2025; NEV retail sales surpassed 50%. In September 2025, China announced its first absolute emissions reduction target: a 7–10% cut by 2035.
Yet China approved over 100 GW of new coal power in 2022–2023, over 90% of global new coal construction. Emissions rose 3% in 2023. China’s historical carbon intensity framing (emissions per unit of GDP, rather than absolute limits) allowed emissions to rise even as the economy decarbonised relative to GDP growth. Within BRICS, China's manufacturing dominance creates the technology the transition needs, but also creates dependencies other members must actively manage. Redirecting China's manufacturing capacity, expanding concessional climate finance, and structuring technology-sharing arrangements within BRICS are among the highest-leverage interventions available.
4.2. Narrative Sovereignty
Two culturally grounded frames emerged from the research as particularly powerful:
Eco-Ubuntu — extending the Southern African concept of shared humanity ("I am because we are") to ecological interdependence, connecting individual energy access to community and ecological health; and Energy Sovereignty — community control over energy systems as development opportunity, not burden, connecting to cooperative economics and indigenous governance traditions.
7.3. Priority 3: Localising Climate Finance and Building Sub-National Capacity
Direct Local Finance Access: Dedicated funding windows within national climate funds for sub-national governments and grassroots organisations. Target: climate finance directly to subnational/community entities from 5–10% to 30% by 2030. Capacity Building: Training for provincial/municipal officials and community leaders; BRICS fellowship programmes; peer learning networks.
Community-Led Project Ownership: Community veto power; compensation for unavoidable losses; binding enforcement of community benefit agreements on all BRICS-funded projectsby 2028.
National policies fail without provincial and municipal implementation capacity. The absence of direct local finance channels is the most consistent barrier to community-scale projects across all BRICS contexts.
1.3. Gaps in Conventional Policy Analysis
Climate and energy challenges, from finance to governance, within the BRICS context stem from a complex interplay of systemic issues. More than sustainability concerns, transitions in BRICS are driven by geostrategic, economic and technological imperatives. Conventional analyses tend to flatten the bloc into a single coherent agenda, missing the grey space of hybrid compromise where ambitious climate rhetoric can mask continued fossil expansion.
7.2. Priority 2: Catalysing Investment in Hard-to-Abate Sectors
Transition Finance Mechanisms: Blended finance, concessional loans, and risk-sharing for heavy industry decarbonisation. Target: critical minerals beneficiated within BRICS from ~20–30% to 60% by 2030. Intra-BRICS Green Value Chains: Facilitate trade in green technologies with binding technology transfer clauses and local equity requirements. Target: local currency settlement for 50% of intra-BRICS climate trade.
Technology Sovereignty Compacts: Patent-pooling agreements; joint ventures with mandatory local content; open-source distributed renewable designs.
Conventional green finance reaches solar and wind. It does not reach steel, cement, and fertiliser plants — the most stubborn BRICS emissions. Dedicated instruments are required, not rebranded conventional lending.
06
In several BRICS contexts, coal remains a symbol of national development and sovereignty. Technical and financial solutions alone will keep failing unless narrative change accompanies them. Narrative sovereignty is a precondition for policy success.
3.1. Three Niche Horizons
The Three Horizons framework situates niches: H1 (Strained Present) — stabilise current systems while phasing out the most outdated H2 (Transitional Middle) — scale BRICS-specific credit mechanisms, green hydrogen pilots, NDB climate finance H3 (Transformed Future) — community-owned energy infrastructure, genuine financial sovereignty, polycentric governance. Most BRICS investment concentrates in H1–H2. The consistent gap is H3.
2.3. What Holds the System in Place
The incumbent system survives through material embedding (fossil infrastructure), cognitive naturalisation (the belief that coal equals development; that bigger is better), and institutional anchoring. Three cognitive lock-ins are most consequential: developmentalism, national energy sovereignty narratives, and technological optimism. China's manufacturing overcapacity is now driving clean technology costs below fossil fuel economics — a structural crack in incumbent advantage. Critical minerals beneficiation (SA, Brazil, Indonesia) is the industrial policy lever that converts resource possession into sovereignty.
7.5. Key Regime Flip Metrics (2025→2030)
1.2. How BRICS Members Are Positioned: Five Actor Groups
6.1. The Five Transformative Pillars
Pillar 1: Distributed Energy Sovereignty: Community-owned renewable systems; energy as commons, not commodity; microgrids and peer-to-peer trading.
Pillar 2: Circular Industrial Metabolism: Closed-loop material flows; regional beneficiation of critical minerals; green hydrogen feedstock; industrial symbiosis.
Pillar 3: Regenerative Finance Architecture: Value retained within BRICS; concessional transformation finance; NDB/AIIB with revised risk frameworks; local currency bonds.
Pillar 4: Polycentric Climate Governance: Subnational climate funds with direct access; community benefit agreements with enforcement; citizen assemblies; Indigenous territorial governance.
Pillar 5: Pluralistic Knowledge Systems: Diverse epistemologies; BRICS research networks; traditional knowledge registries with community control; open-source adaptation platforms. SA-specific grounding: load shedding demonstrates centralised system vulnerability; the JETP scaffolding could reorient toward distributed sovereignty; SA's constitutional environmental rights and Climate Change Act provide polycentric precedents.
6.3. Five Strategic Imperatives (The Battlefield)
Disrupt Fossil Fuel Lock-in: Moratoria on new fossil exploration; accelerated coal phase-out in SA/India with international support; BRICS transition funds internalising social costs of fossil dependence.
Democratise Technology Access: BRICS technology compacts pooling patents; joint ventures with mandatory local content; open-source distributed renewable designs; NDB financing conditioned on technology sharing.
Reform Financial Architecture: NDB/AIIB capitalisation with revised risk frameworks; BRICS climate fund with grant components; local currency settlement; collective advocacy for IMF/World Bank governance reform.
Build Subnational Capacity: Dedicated funding windows for municipal/community projects; BRICS fellowship programmes; peer learning networks; BRICS Climate Knowledge Commons.Narrative Transformation: BRICS-wide media/education campaigns; cultural production imagining sustainable futures; climate/energy integration into school curricula.
01
BRICS is at a genuine turning point, but inaction is equally possible. The 2024–2025 expansion made the bloc simultaneously more powerful and more internally divided on climate. The window for coordinated action is real — so is the risk of a decade of hybrid compromise that changes nothing fundamental.
8.5. From Navigation to Transformation
For China, this means redirecting manufacturing capacity, expanding concessional climate finance within BRICS, and accepting technology-sharing obligations commensurate with its structural power. For South Africa, it means closing the gap between its normative JETP leadership and domestic implementation — making the Climate Change Act's sectoral budgets operational, accelerating coal phase-out with international support, and ensuring China-SA technology partnerships build genuine sovereignty rather than new dependency. The immediate priorities (0–12 months) require no new institutions — only the decision to use existing ones differently. The window is open. The work begins.
The Compass, Strategic Priorities, Accountability Framework, and Regime Flip Metrics form an integrated regime shift strategy. The destination is a BRICS energy system that is distributed rather than centralised, circular rather than linear, sovereign rather than dependent, polycentric rather than concentrated, and pluralistic rather than hegemonic.
03
China controls 80% of global solar manufacturing, 60% of battery production, and is the largest bilateral creditor to many BRICS members. How China deploys this leverage will determine whether BRICS achieves a just transition — or a greenwashed one.
6.4. The Five Compass Axes
The pillars, principles, and imperatives converge in five navigation axes:
Axis 1 (Sovereign Energy Transitions), Axis 2 (Just Socio-Ecological Development), Axis 3 (Strategic Foresight and Risk Navigation), Axis 4 (Multipolar Cooperation and Regional Integration), and Axis 5 (Narrative Sovereignty — at the Compass centre). Each axis translates structural transformation into actionable direction for policy and investment decisions.
7.1. The Five Compass Axes
5.3. Insight 3
NDB’s potential to fund early-stage green industrialisation is consistently underutilised. Risk-sharing mechanisms, de-risked finance for green start-ups, and regulatory reform removing friction for community-owned models are as important as direct project finance.
Innovation needs institutional support, not just funding.
1.5. The Finance Dimension: Key Developments 2024–2025
COP29's New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) of $300bn/year by 2035 was widely seen as inadequate by developing countries. The Baku to Belem Roadmap and South Africa's G20 presidency technical work on MDB reform advanced incrementally. The Sevilla Commitment (2025) supported clean technology investment access. On fossil fuel phaseout, COP29 and COP30 showed regression, excluding clear references to fossil fuel phaseout and without follow up on the Just Transition Work Programme agreed at COP28.
5.2. Insight 2
Simply replacing fossil fuels with renewables without changing who owns, benefits from, and governs the energy system reproduces inequalities in new form. Projects must be designed for community ownership from the outset, not as a consultation add-on. Framing question for any investment: does this change who owns and governs energy?
Energy substitution ≠ energy justice.
5.1. Insight 1
Fix governance architecture before adding programmes. Governance fragmentation — not finance scarcity — is the primary reason well-designed programmes fail at scale. BRICS needs cooperative frameworks including regional planning platforms, a climate and energy fellowship programme, and interoperable regulatory frameworks. For funders: governance capacity investments deliver more durable impact than additional programme funding.
Fix governance architecture before adding programmes.
3.4. SA and China: Key Niche Complementarity
The most critical complementarity in BRICS is between China's manufacturing capacity, Brazil's social governance innovation, and SA's normative and financial sophistication. SA has high niche potential for governance innovation (JETP architecture, constitutional environmental rights, civil society capacity) but moderate delivery at scale given the energy crisis. The barrier is geopolitical — achieving this complementarity requires deliberate cooperation frameworks the current BRICS architecture does not provide.
2.2. Actor Typology: Who Blocks and Who Enables
A critical finding is role ambiguity: China is simultaneously the dominant niche innovator (renewable manufacturing) and the most powerful regime maintainer (coal expansion). The NDB has a structural enabler mandate but operates as a transition broker. SA is a norm entrepreneur internationally and a regime maintainer domestically. Any strategy treating these actors as having coherent single-direction positions will misread the system.
04
Six innovation niches are already challenging the dominant fossil-industrial model: community-owned renewables, green hydrogen industrialisation, critical minerals beneficiation, transition finance mechanisms, indigenous knowledge systems, and BRICS financial architecture reform. None is yet strong enough to transform the system alone.
7.4. Accountability Framework
Three tiers ensure commitments translate into transformation:
National: Independent climate commissions with statutory mandate (SA's Presidential Climate Commission as model); investigate complaints; recommend corrective action. Enforcement: judicial review, fiscal penalties. BRICS: Climate and Just Transition Review Mechanism — peer review on all three priorities; public Regime Flip Metric reporting. Enforcement: suspension of BRICS institutional voting rights; restricted collective financing access.
International: Enhanced NDCs and Paris reporting; collective BRICS positions in other forums conditioned on member compliance.
Redress Mechanism: A BRICS Ombudsperson for Climate Justice with independent mandate to investigate community rights violations, recommend policy changes, and facilitate mediation between communities and NDB/governments/private sector.
5.4. Insight 4
Changing the story is structural, not soft. CLA reveals that surface-level policy changes fail without addressing underlying worldviews. Eco-Ubuntu and Energy Sovereignty are culturally grounded frames that generic "green" messaging cannot replicate. Youth participation and intergenerational dialogue are key mechanisms.
Changing the story is structural, not soft.
3.5. The Critical Juncture: Why the 2025–2027 Window Matters
Four factors make this window distinctive: 1. Political concentration around Brazil's COP30 and SA's G20 presidency outputs (now requiring implementation) 2. Clean tech cost declines approaching fossil stranding thresholds 3. Debt sustainability pressures creating openings for transition finance conditionality 4. Escalating social mobilisation as critical junctures are contingent and reversible — the grey space could persist indefinitely without deliberate intervention.
(0–12 months)
8.1. Immediate Priorities: Laying the Foundation
Establish National Climate Commissions: Operationalise independent commissions in all BRICS members — building on SA's Presidential Climate Commission model — with statutory mandate, funding, and community complaint mechanisms.
Launch BRICS Climate and Just Transition Review Mechanism: Peer review body to monitor the Strategic Priority Action Plan, assess Regime Flip Metrics, and authorise cross-border civil society monitoring.
Operationalise NDB 40% Climate Commitment: Redirect NDB portfolio toward hard-to-abate sectors and subnational access; issue first local-currency climate bonds; establish subnational funding window. Dissemination and Stakeholder Engagement: Policy briefs in all five BRICS languages; ministerial briefings; incorporate feedback into action plan refinement.
4.1. Five Narratives Structuring the BRICS Climate Debate
Climate Justice and Historical Responsibility: Climate change as historical injustice requiring Northern finance/technology transfer; underpins CBDR-RC. Weakened as China and BRICS members themselves become major emitters.
Developmental Sovereignty: Economic growth and poverty eradication precede climate action; legitimates continued fossil investment; powerful in fossil-dependent economies.
Technological Transformation and Green Industrialisation: Climate action as economic opportunity; China exemplifies this — domestic renewable dominance as compatible with growth. Most accessible for technology funders.
Just Transition as Distributive Justice: SA has been most influential here; centres worker and community benefit, community ownership, feminist energy policy. Risk: "just transition" increasingly used as a label without redistributive content.
Multipolar Climate Governance: BRICS as architect of global norms, not recipient of Northern frameworks; underpins the Compass framework.
01
02
03
04
05
8.4. Critical Risk Mitigation
02
The primary obstacle to faster, fairer energy transitions is not technology or finance — it is incumbent power. SOEs and national oil companies actively work to slow or co-opt transitions to maintain revenue streams.
1.1. The Forums that Shape BRICS Climate and Energy Action
2.1. Five Subsystems of the BRICS Climate and Just Transition Ecosystem
1. Energy-Industrialisation Nexus: Fossil lock-in vs. green industrialisation, with China's manufacturing dominance reshaping dynamics 2. Policy and Governance Architecture: National sovereignty vs. collective BRICS positioning 3. Finance and Investment Ecosystem: Concessional vs. market-rate capital, dollar-denominated vs. BRICS currency aspirations 4. Society and Culture: Extractive development models vs. regenerative worldviews 5. Markets and Value Chains: Global North/China value chain dominance vs. BRICS industrial sovereignty.
5.6. Insight 6
BRICS is currently a reluctant follower in global climate diplomacy. It represents the majority of global emissions, resources, and population, and has both the opportunity and responsibility to define what inclusive, resilient green development looks like on its own terms.
BRICS has the standing to lead global climate governance — but only if it acts collectively.
5.5. Insight 5
Investment concentrated in H1 (stabilisation) and H2 (technology scaling) without H3 (governance reform, narrative change, community ownership) means innovations get absorbed into the old system rather than replacing it. Protect H3 investments from short-term deprioritisation.
Think in all three time horizons simultaneously.
05
Energy substitution without energy justice reproduces existing inequalities in new form. True justice requires changes in ownership, access, and decision-making — not just technology deployment.
3.3. Three Coalescence Pathways
Individual niches remain vulnerable to co-optation. Three natural coalescence pathways make niches collectively stronger:
Energy Democracy Nexus: Community renewables + Indigenous knowledge + Financial architecture reform — community-controlled generation financed through BRICS mechanisms.
Green Industrial Sovereignty: Critical minerals + Green hydrogen + Transition finance — BRICS-coordinated value chains from extraction through to manufactured products, resisting Global North supply chain dominance.
Climate Justice Finance: Transition finance + Architecture reform + Indigenous knowledge — BRICS concessional, non-debt finance for transitions designed by affected communities.
(1–3 years)
8.2. Medium-Term Actions: Building Transformation Momentum
MDB Reform Advocacy Campaign: Coordinate BRICS G20/IMF/World Bank positions; target: concessional finance ratio to 30% by 2028.
Niche Protection and Connection: Targeted funding and cross-niche connection for all six niches; immediate focus on community-owned renewables and financial architecture reform.
BRICS Climate Knowledge Commons: Governance architecture for peer learning; 500 subnational officials trained through fellowship programmes.
Hard-to-Abate Sector Transition Facilities: Blended finance with mandatory technology transfer; deploy $10bn transition finance; 40% local content achieved. Local Access Funding Windows: Operational in all BRICS members by 2027; 15% climate finance flowing directly to subnational entities.
4.3. What This Means for Decision-Makers
Every technical and financial intervention either reinforces or challenges the existing narrative architecture. A community solar project designed, owned, and governed by its community does something different to public discourse than the same number of panels installed by a state utility. Both count as "renewable capacity." Only one builds narrative sovereignty. Narrative and communications work must be funded as core programme activity, not a reporting add-on.
(3–5 years)
8.3. Longer-Term Structural Changes: Consolidating the New Regime
NDB Transformation: 40% climate commitment through instruments reaching hard-to-abate sectors and community-scale projects — not just utility-scale renewables. 50% of climate portfolio in hard-to-abate; 30% in subnational/community.
Narrative Sovereignty Infrastructure: Long-term BRICS research networks, civic education, cultural production centres centring Global South-led visions of just energy futures.
Circular Industrial Metabolism: Binding regional value chains for critical minerals and green hydrogen with local beneficiation, technology transfer, and exit strategies; 60% intra-BRICS mineral beneficiation.
Polycentric Governance Institutionalisation: Subnational climate funds with direct access and citizen assemblies with deliberative authority recognised in national law across BRICS.
BRICS Ombudsperson Institutionalisation: Permanent investigative mandate with policy recommendation authority and mediation capacity; annual report to Review Mechanism.
2.4. Three Regimes in Tension
The BRICS energy system contains three simultaneous regimes: (1) the Incumbent Fossil-Industrial Complex — dominant in Russia, Iran, UAE, and coal-dependent regions of SA, India, Indonesia (2) the Emerging Decentralised Green Regime — community-owned renewables, green hydrogen pilots, BRICS-specific finance instruments, seen in Brazil, SA's JETP niches, China's manufacturing ecosystem (3) the Transition "Grey Space" — hybrid compromises where green labels mask continued fossil logic. The grey space is not neutral: without intervention, incumbents absorb niche innovations before they can displace the regime.
6.2. Five Governance Principles
CBDR-BRICS: Differentiated responsibilities — China/Russia bear greater finance/technology transfer responsibility; SA/Brazil lead normative innovation; Egypt/Ethiopia model adaptation.
Subsidiarity with Solidarity: Decisions at lowest effective level; BRICS institutions coordinate and mobilise collective resources, not direct.
Precaution with Participation: Distributional impact assessment required; community veto power; compensation for unavoidable losses. Generalises the JETP model.
Circularity with Sovereignty: Regional value chain integration without sacrificing national autonomy; Chinese investment in BRICS beneficiation with local equity participation and technology transfer exit strategies.
Transparency with Trust: Open data plus deliberate relationship-building; essential given BRICS cooperation occurs among states with divergent interests and mutual suspicions.
1.4. BRICS Areas of Convergence and Divergence
Convergence is on: demanding enhanced climate finance and fairer MDB architecture from developed countries; resisting binding externally-imposed phaseout timelines; opposing the EU CBAM as protectionist; and invoking CBDR-RC. Divergence is sharp on fossil fuel phaseout substance, net-zero ambition (targets range from 2050 to 2070), and what "just transition" actually requires. The critical insight: convergence on principles frequently masks divergence on substance.
3.2. Six High-Potential Niches and the Incorporation Risk
BRICS Energy Diplomacy and Climate Transitions
Vector and Vine
Created on April 18, 2026
Start designing with a free template
Discover more than 1500 professional designs like these:
View
Terrazzo Presentation
View
Visual Presentation
View
Relaxing Presentation
View
Modern Presentation
View
Colorful Presentation
View
Modular Structure Presentation
View
Chromatic Presentation
Explore all templates
Transcript
A Framework for Decision-Makers
Focus: South Africa & China
BRICS Energy Diplomacy and Climate Transitions
May 2026
Executive Summary
Key Findings:
01 03 05
02 04 06
The expanded BRICS bloc — now 10 members including Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran, and the UAE — represents the most consequential arena in global climate politics.
It accounts for over 50% of global GHG emissions, 60% of the world's population, ~43.6% of global oil production, and more than half of global solar capacity. Yet BRICS is not a coherent bloc: it is a battleground of competing interests, timelines, and worldviews. This briefing synthesises 18 months of SAIIA research (2024–2025): systems mapping across 10 BRICS countries, 40+ strategic interviews, and participatory futures labs. The core argument is that the transition is primarily a power contest, not a technical or financial challenge. Incumbent fossil-industrial interests — SOEs, national oil companies, and the governments dependent on their revenues — actively obstruct transformation. China is the central variable: simultaneously the world's largest emitter and the dominant enabler of clean energy transition. South Africa is the normative leader constrained by its own grid. Together they embody the BRICS energy contradiction.
Use the arrows and animated icons throughout to explore research insights and details.
Contents
Section 06
Contents
The BRICS Climate and Energy Compass
06
Section 04
The Narrative Battle: Why Stories Matter as Much as Policy
04
Section 07
Strategic Priorities and Recommendations
07
Section 03
03
Where Change Is Already Happening: Niches, Coalescence, and the Conditions for Transformation
08
05
02
01
Section 01
The BRICS Climate and Energy Transitions Arena: Context, Actors, and Fault Lines
Section 08
What Happens Next: Pathways to Impact
Section 05
Six Insights for Decision-Makers
Section 02
Power Dynamics in BRICS Climate and Energy Transitions
01
BRICS began in 2009; the 2024–2025 expansion fundamentally altered the consensus dynamic. Iran and the UAE bring OPEC+ perspectives; Indonesia brings critical mineral assets and energy access challenges; Egypt and Ethiopia bring climate vulnerability priorities.
1.1
1.2
1.3
How BRICS Members Are Positioned: Five Actor Groups
Why Standard Approaches Are Not Working
The Forums That Shape BRICS Climate Action
The BRICS Climate and Energy Transitions Arena: Context, Actors, and Fault Lines
1.4
1.5
1.6
China and South Africa: The Bloc's Central Contradiction in Microcosm
Where BRICS Converges and Where It Does Not
The Finance Dimension: Key Developments 2024 –2025
02
2.1
2.3
2.2
Five Subsystems of the BRICS Climate and Just Transition Ecosystem
Actor Typology: Who Blocks and Who Enables
What Holds the System in Place
Power Dynamics in BRICS Climate and Energy Transitions
2.4
Three Regimes in Tension
03
3.1
3.2
3.3
Three Niche Horizons
Six High-Potential Niches and the Incorporation Risk
Three Coalescence Pathways
Where Change Is Already Happening: Niches, Coalescence, and the Conditions for Transformation
3.5
3.4
SA and China: Key Niche Complementarity
The Critical Juncture: Why the 2025–2027 Window Matters
04
The most persistent barriers to transition are not technical or financial — they are narrative. Coal in several BRICS contexts remains a symbol of national development and sovereignty. Renewable energy is perceived in some circles as a foreign, elite-led agenda. These narrative lock-ins make it harder to mobilise political support even when economics favour transition.
4.1
4.2
4.3
Five Narratives Structuring the BRICS Climate Debate
Narrative Sovereignty
What This Means for Decision-Makers
The Narrative Battle: Why Stories Matter as Much as Policy
05
5.1
5.2
5.3
Insight 1
Insight 2
Insight 3
Six Insights for Decision-Makers
5.5
5.6
5.4
Insight 4
Insight 6
Insight 5
06
The BRICS Climate and Energy Compass is a strategic navigation tool — not a blueprint. It provides five interconnected axes integrating three frameworks: Five Transformative Pillars (destination), Five Governance Principles (pathway), and Five Strategic Imperatives (momentum).
6.1
6.2
6.3
The Five Transformative Pillars
Five Governance Principles
Five Strategic Imperatives (The Battlefield)
The BRICS Climate and Energy Compass
6.4
The Five Compass Axes
07
Climate finance is the strategic fulcrum. Three priorities address the most critical systemic blockages, with accountability mechanisms and Regime Flip Metrics to ensure transformation, not rhetoric.
7.3
7.1
7.2
Priority 1: Systemic Reform of Global and BRICS-Internal Financial Architecture
Priority 2: Catalysing Investment in Hard-to-Abate Sectors
Priority 3: Localising Climate Finance and Building Sub-National Capacity
Strategic Priorities and Recommendations
Accountability Framework
7.4
7.5
Key Regime Flip Metrics (2025→2030)
08
8.3
8.1
8.2
Immediate Priorities (0–12 months): Laying the Foundation
Medium-Term Actions (1–3 years): Building Transformation Momentum
Longer-Term Structural Changes (3–5 years): Consolidating the New Regime
What Happens Next: Pathways to Impact
8.4
8.5
Critical Risk Mitigation
From Navigation to Transformation
Glossary
Thank you
Our Research Partner
1.6. China and South Africa: The Bloc's Central Contradiction in Microcosm
South Africa: The Normative Leader Constrained by Its Own Grid
China: The Structural Pivot
SA is one of the most credible global voices for just transition, the first JETP country, now at $12.8bn (ZAR 222bn) even after US withdrawal, with a JET Investment Plan targeting ~$85bn over five years. SA's 2024 Climate Change Act introduced sectoral emissions limits and carbon budgets for large polluters. Wind and solar more than doubled their share of electricity from 2019–2023. However, SA added 800 MW of new coal in 2024, is investing in fossil gas, and lacks sectoral implementation plans to make its 2050 net-zero target credible. Climate Action Tracker rates national policies as "Almost Sufficient" but fair share as "Insufficient." Energy security dominates the domestic political agenda, creating persistent tension between SA's normative international leadership and its implementation record. SA actively engages China for clean technology support, an opportunity for accelerated transfer, and a risk of new dependency if terms are not carefully managed.
China is simultaneously the world's largest Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emitter and the global leader in renewable manufacturing. In 2024, it reached its 1,200 GW wind and solar target six years ahead of schedule. Non-fossil power generation reached ~42% in 2025; NEV retail sales surpassed 50%. In September 2025, China announced its first absolute emissions reduction target: a 7–10% cut by 2035. Yet China approved over 100 GW of new coal power in 2022–2023, over 90% of global new coal construction. Emissions rose 3% in 2023. China’s historical carbon intensity framing (emissions per unit of GDP, rather than absolute limits) allowed emissions to rise even as the economy decarbonised relative to GDP growth. Within BRICS, China's manufacturing dominance creates the technology the transition needs, but also creates dependencies other members must actively manage. Redirecting China's manufacturing capacity, expanding concessional climate finance, and structuring technology-sharing arrangements within BRICS are among the highest-leverage interventions available.
4.2. Narrative Sovereignty
Two culturally grounded frames emerged from the research as particularly powerful:
Eco-Ubuntu — extending the Southern African concept of shared humanity ("I am because we are") to ecological interdependence, connecting individual energy access to community and ecological health; and Energy Sovereignty — community control over energy systems as development opportunity, not burden, connecting to cooperative economics and indigenous governance traditions.
7.3. Priority 3: Localising Climate Finance and Building Sub-National Capacity
Direct Local Finance Access: Dedicated funding windows within national climate funds for sub-national governments and grassroots organisations. Target: climate finance directly to subnational/community entities from 5–10% to 30% by 2030. Capacity Building: Training for provincial/municipal officials and community leaders; BRICS fellowship programmes; peer learning networks. Community-Led Project Ownership: Community veto power; compensation for unavoidable losses; binding enforcement of community benefit agreements on all BRICS-funded projectsby 2028.
National policies fail without provincial and municipal implementation capacity. The absence of direct local finance channels is the most consistent barrier to community-scale projects across all BRICS contexts.
1.3. Gaps in Conventional Policy Analysis
Climate and energy challenges, from finance to governance, within the BRICS context stem from a complex interplay of systemic issues. More than sustainability concerns, transitions in BRICS are driven by geostrategic, economic and technological imperatives. Conventional analyses tend to flatten the bloc into a single coherent agenda, missing the grey space of hybrid compromise where ambitious climate rhetoric can mask continued fossil expansion.
7.2. Priority 2: Catalysing Investment in Hard-to-Abate Sectors
Transition Finance Mechanisms: Blended finance, concessional loans, and risk-sharing for heavy industry decarbonisation. Target: critical minerals beneficiated within BRICS from ~20–30% to 60% by 2030. Intra-BRICS Green Value Chains: Facilitate trade in green technologies with binding technology transfer clauses and local equity requirements. Target: local currency settlement for 50% of intra-BRICS climate trade. Technology Sovereignty Compacts: Patent-pooling agreements; joint ventures with mandatory local content; open-source distributed renewable designs.
Conventional green finance reaches solar and wind. It does not reach steel, cement, and fertiliser plants — the most stubborn BRICS emissions. Dedicated instruments are required, not rebranded conventional lending.
06
In several BRICS contexts, coal remains a symbol of national development and sovereignty. Technical and financial solutions alone will keep failing unless narrative change accompanies them. Narrative sovereignty is a precondition for policy success.
3.1. Three Niche Horizons
The Three Horizons framework situates niches: H1 (Strained Present) — stabilise current systems while phasing out the most outdated H2 (Transitional Middle) — scale BRICS-specific credit mechanisms, green hydrogen pilots, NDB climate finance H3 (Transformed Future) — community-owned energy infrastructure, genuine financial sovereignty, polycentric governance. Most BRICS investment concentrates in H1–H2. The consistent gap is H3.
2.3. What Holds the System in Place
The incumbent system survives through material embedding (fossil infrastructure), cognitive naturalisation (the belief that coal equals development; that bigger is better), and institutional anchoring. Three cognitive lock-ins are most consequential: developmentalism, national energy sovereignty narratives, and technological optimism. China's manufacturing overcapacity is now driving clean technology costs below fossil fuel economics — a structural crack in incumbent advantage. Critical minerals beneficiation (SA, Brazil, Indonesia) is the industrial policy lever that converts resource possession into sovereignty.
7.5. Key Regime Flip Metrics (2025→2030)
1.2. How BRICS Members Are Positioned: Five Actor Groups
6.1. The Five Transformative Pillars
Pillar 1: Distributed Energy Sovereignty: Community-owned renewable systems; energy as commons, not commodity; microgrids and peer-to-peer trading. Pillar 2: Circular Industrial Metabolism: Closed-loop material flows; regional beneficiation of critical minerals; green hydrogen feedstock; industrial symbiosis. Pillar 3: Regenerative Finance Architecture: Value retained within BRICS; concessional transformation finance; NDB/AIIB with revised risk frameworks; local currency bonds. Pillar 4: Polycentric Climate Governance: Subnational climate funds with direct access; community benefit agreements with enforcement; citizen assemblies; Indigenous territorial governance.
Pillar 5: Pluralistic Knowledge Systems: Diverse epistemologies; BRICS research networks; traditional knowledge registries with community control; open-source adaptation platforms. SA-specific grounding: load shedding demonstrates centralised system vulnerability; the JETP scaffolding could reorient toward distributed sovereignty; SA's constitutional environmental rights and Climate Change Act provide polycentric precedents.
6.3. Five Strategic Imperatives (The Battlefield)
Disrupt Fossil Fuel Lock-in: Moratoria on new fossil exploration; accelerated coal phase-out in SA/India with international support; BRICS transition funds internalising social costs of fossil dependence. Democratise Technology Access: BRICS technology compacts pooling patents; joint ventures with mandatory local content; open-source distributed renewable designs; NDB financing conditioned on technology sharing. Reform Financial Architecture: NDB/AIIB capitalisation with revised risk frameworks; BRICS climate fund with grant components; local currency settlement; collective advocacy for IMF/World Bank governance reform.
Build Subnational Capacity: Dedicated funding windows for municipal/community projects; BRICS fellowship programmes; peer learning networks; BRICS Climate Knowledge Commons.Narrative Transformation: BRICS-wide media/education campaigns; cultural production imagining sustainable futures; climate/energy integration into school curricula.
01
BRICS is at a genuine turning point, but inaction is equally possible. The 2024–2025 expansion made the bloc simultaneously more powerful and more internally divided on climate. The window for coordinated action is real — so is the risk of a decade of hybrid compromise that changes nothing fundamental.
8.5. From Navigation to Transformation
For China, this means redirecting manufacturing capacity, expanding concessional climate finance within BRICS, and accepting technology-sharing obligations commensurate with its structural power. For South Africa, it means closing the gap between its normative JETP leadership and domestic implementation — making the Climate Change Act's sectoral budgets operational, accelerating coal phase-out with international support, and ensuring China-SA technology partnerships build genuine sovereignty rather than new dependency. The immediate priorities (0–12 months) require no new institutions — only the decision to use existing ones differently. The window is open. The work begins.
The Compass, Strategic Priorities, Accountability Framework, and Regime Flip Metrics form an integrated regime shift strategy. The destination is a BRICS energy system that is distributed rather than centralised, circular rather than linear, sovereign rather than dependent, polycentric rather than concentrated, and pluralistic rather than hegemonic.
03
China controls 80% of global solar manufacturing, 60% of battery production, and is the largest bilateral creditor to many BRICS members. How China deploys this leverage will determine whether BRICS achieves a just transition — or a greenwashed one.
6.4. The Five Compass Axes
The pillars, principles, and imperatives converge in five navigation axes:
Axis 1 (Sovereign Energy Transitions), Axis 2 (Just Socio-Ecological Development), Axis 3 (Strategic Foresight and Risk Navigation), Axis 4 (Multipolar Cooperation and Regional Integration), and Axis 5 (Narrative Sovereignty — at the Compass centre). Each axis translates structural transformation into actionable direction for policy and investment decisions.
7.1. The Five Compass Axes
5.3. Insight 3
NDB’s potential to fund early-stage green industrialisation is consistently underutilised. Risk-sharing mechanisms, de-risked finance for green start-ups, and regulatory reform removing friction for community-owned models are as important as direct project finance.
Innovation needs institutional support, not just funding.
1.5. The Finance Dimension: Key Developments 2024–2025
COP29's New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) of $300bn/year by 2035 was widely seen as inadequate by developing countries. The Baku to Belem Roadmap and South Africa's G20 presidency technical work on MDB reform advanced incrementally. The Sevilla Commitment (2025) supported clean technology investment access. On fossil fuel phaseout, COP29 and COP30 showed regression, excluding clear references to fossil fuel phaseout and without follow up on the Just Transition Work Programme agreed at COP28.
5.2. Insight 2
Simply replacing fossil fuels with renewables without changing who owns, benefits from, and governs the energy system reproduces inequalities in new form. Projects must be designed for community ownership from the outset, not as a consultation add-on. Framing question for any investment: does this change who owns and governs energy?
Energy substitution ≠ energy justice.
5.1. Insight 1
Fix governance architecture before adding programmes. Governance fragmentation — not finance scarcity — is the primary reason well-designed programmes fail at scale. BRICS needs cooperative frameworks including regional planning platforms, a climate and energy fellowship programme, and interoperable regulatory frameworks. For funders: governance capacity investments deliver more durable impact than additional programme funding.
Fix governance architecture before adding programmes.
3.4. SA and China: Key Niche Complementarity
The most critical complementarity in BRICS is between China's manufacturing capacity, Brazil's social governance innovation, and SA's normative and financial sophistication. SA has high niche potential for governance innovation (JETP architecture, constitutional environmental rights, civil society capacity) but moderate delivery at scale given the energy crisis. The barrier is geopolitical — achieving this complementarity requires deliberate cooperation frameworks the current BRICS architecture does not provide.
2.2. Actor Typology: Who Blocks and Who Enables
A critical finding is role ambiguity: China is simultaneously the dominant niche innovator (renewable manufacturing) and the most powerful regime maintainer (coal expansion). The NDB has a structural enabler mandate but operates as a transition broker. SA is a norm entrepreneur internationally and a regime maintainer domestically. Any strategy treating these actors as having coherent single-direction positions will misread the system.
04
Six innovation niches are already challenging the dominant fossil-industrial model: community-owned renewables, green hydrogen industrialisation, critical minerals beneficiation, transition finance mechanisms, indigenous knowledge systems, and BRICS financial architecture reform. None is yet strong enough to transform the system alone.
7.4. Accountability Framework
Three tiers ensure commitments translate into transformation:
National: Independent climate commissions with statutory mandate (SA's Presidential Climate Commission as model); investigate complaints; recommend corrective action. Enforcement: judicial review, fiscal penalties. BRICS: Climate and Just Transition Review Mechanism — peer review on all three priorities; public Regime Flip Metric reporting. Enforcement: suspension of BRICS institutional voting rights; restricted collective financing access.
International: Enhanced NDCs and Paris reporting; collective BRICS positions in other forums conditioned on member compliance. Redress Mechanism: A BRICS Ombudsperson for Climate Justice with independent mandate to investigate community rights violations, recommend policy changes, and facilitate mediation between communities and NDB/governments/private sector.
5.4. Insight 4
Changing the story is structural, not soft. CLA reveals that surface-level policy changes fail without addressing underlying worldviews. Eco-Ubuntu and Energy Sovereignty are culturally grounded frames that generic "green" messaging cannot replicate. Youth participation and intergenerational dialogue are key mechanisms.
Changing the story is structural, not soft.
3.5. The Critical Juncture: Why the 2025–2027 Window Matters
Four factors make this window distinctive: 1. Political concentration around Brazil's COP30 and SA's G20 presidency outputs (now requiring implementation) 2. Clean tech cost declines approaching fossil stranding thresholds 3. Debt sustainability pressures creating openings for transition finance conditionality 4. Escalating social mobilisation as critical junctures are contingent and reversible — the grey space could persist indefinitely without deliberate intervention.
(0–12 months)
8.1. Immediate Priorities: Laying the Foundation
Establish National Climate Commissions: Operationalise independent commissions in all BRICS members — building on SA's Presidential Climate Commission model — with statutory mandate, funding, and community complaint mechanisms. Launch BRICS Climate and Just Transition Review Mechanism: Peer review body to monitor the Strategic Priority Action Plan, assess Regime Flip Metrics, and authorise cross-border civil society monitoring.
Operationalise NDB 40% Climate Commitment: Redirect NDB portfolio toward hard-to-abate sectors and subnational access; issue first local-currency climate bonds; establish subnational funding window. Dissemination and Stakeholder Engagement: Policy briefs in all five BRICS languages; ministerial briefings; incorporate feedback into action plan refinement.
4.1. Five Narratives Structuring the BRICS Climate Debate
Climate Justice and Historical Responsibility: Climate change as historical injustice requiring Northern finance/technology transfer; underpins CBDR-RC. Weakened as China and BRICS members themselves become major emitters. Developmental Sovereignty: Economic growth and poverty eradication precede climate action; legitimates continued fossil investment; powerful in fossil-dependent economies. Technological Transformation and Green Industrialisation: Climate action as economic opportunity; China exemplifies this — domestic renewable dominance as compatible with growth. Most accessible for technology funders. Just Transition as Distributive Justice: SA has been most influential here; centres worker and community benefit, community ownership, feminist energy policy. Risk: "just transition" increasingly used as a label without redistributive content. Multipolar Climate Governance: BRICS as architect of global norms, not recipient of Northern frameworks; underpins the Compass framework.
01
02
03
04
05
8.4. Critical Risk Mitigation
02
The primary obstacle to faster, fairer energy transitions is not technology or finance — it is incumbent power. SOEs and national oil companies actively work to slow or co-opt transitions to maintain revenue streams.
1.1. The Forums that Shape BRICS Climate and Energy Action
2.1. Five Subsystems of the BRICS Climate and Just Transition Ecosystem
1. Energy-Industrialisation Nexus: Fossil lock-in vs. green industrialisation, with China's manufacturing dominance reshaping dynamics 2. Policy and Governance Architecture: National sovereignty vs. collective BRICS positioning 3. Finance and Investment Ecosystem: Concessional vs. market-rate capital, dollar-denominated vs. BRICS currency aspirations 4. Society and Culture: Extractive development models vs. regenerative worldviews 5. Markets and Value Chains: Global North/China value chain dominance vs. BRICS industrial sovereignty.
5.6. Insight 6
BRICS is currently a reluctant follower in global climate diplomacy. It represents the majority of global emissions, resources, and population, and has both the opportunity and responsibility to define what inclusive, resilient green development looks like on its own terms.
BRICS has the standing to lead global climate governance — but only if it acts collectively.
5.5. Insight 5
Investment concentrated in H1 (stabilisation) and H2 (technology scaling) without H3 (governance reform, narrative change, community ownership) means innovations get absorbed into the old system rather than replacing it. Protect H3 investments from short-term deprioritisation.
Think in all three time horizons simultaneously.
05
Energy substitution without energy justice reproduces existing inequalities in new form. True justice requires changes in ownership, access, and decision-making — not just technology deployment.
3.3. Three Coalescence Pathways
Individual niches remain vulnerable to co-optation. Three natural coalescence pathways make niches collectively stronger: Energy Democracy Nexus: Community renewables + Indigenous knowledge + Financial architecture reform — community-controlled generation financed through BRICS mechanisms. Green Industrial Sovereignty: Critical minerals + Green hydrogen + Transition finance — BRICS-coordinated value chains from extraction through to manufactured products, resisting Global North supply chain dominance. Climate Justice Finance: Transition finance + Architecture reform + Indigenous knowledge — BRICS concessional, non-debt finance for transitions designed by affected communities.
(1–3 years)
8.2. Medium-Term Actions: Building Transformation Momentum
MDB Reform Advocacy Campaign: Coordinate BRICS G20/IMF/World Bank positions; target: concessional finance ratio to 30% by 2028. Niche Protection and Connection: Targeted funding and cross-niche connection for all six niches; immediate focus on community-owned renewables and financial architecture reform. BRICS Climate Knowledge Commons: Governance architecture for peer learning; 500 subnational officials trained through fellowship programmes.
Hard-to-Abate Sector Transition Facilities: Blended finance with mandatory technology transfer; deploy $10bn transition finance; 40% local content achieved. Local Access Funding Windows: Operational in all BRICS members by 2027; 15% climate finance flowing directly to subnational entities.
4.3. What This Means for Decision-Makers
Every technical and financial intervention either reinforces or challenges the existing narrative architecture. A community solar project designed, owned, and governed by its community does something different to public discourse than the same number of panels installed by a state utility. Both count as "renewable capacity." Only one builds narrative sovereignty. Narrative and communications work must be funded as core programme activity, not a reporting add-on.
(3–5 years)
8.3. Longer-Term Structural Changes: Consolidating the New Regime
NDB Transformation: 40% climate commitment through instruments reaching hard-to-abate sectors and community-scale projects — not just utility-scale renewables. 50% of climate portfolio in hard-to-abate; 30% in subnational/community. Narrative Sovereignty Infrastructure: Long-term BRICS research networks, civic education, cultural production centres centring Global South-led visions of just energy futures. Circular Industrial Metabolism: Binding regional value chains for critical minerals and green hydrogen with local beneficiation, technology transfer, and exit strategies; 60% intra-BRICS mineral beneficiation.
Polycentric Governance Institutionalisation: Subnational climate funds with direct access and citizen assemblies with deliberative authority recognised in national law across BRICS. BRICS Ombudsperson Institutionalisation: Permanent investigative mandate with policy recommendation authority and mediation capacity; annual report to Review Mechanism.
2.4. Three Regimes in Tension
The BRICS energy system contains three simultaneous regimes: (1) the Incumbent Fossil-Industrial Complex — dominant in Russia, Iran, UAE, and coal-dependent regions of SA, India, Indonesia (2) the Emerging Decentralised Green Regime — community-owned renewables, green hydrogen pilots, BRICS-specific finance instruments, seen in Brazil, SA's JETP niches, China's manufacturing ecosystem (3) the Transition "Grey Space" — hybrid compromises where green labels mask continued fossil logic. The grey space is not neutral: without intervention, incumbents absorb niche innovations before they can displace the regime.
6.2. Five Governance Principles
CBDR-BRICS: Differentiated responsibilities — China/Russia bear greater finance/technology transfer responsibility; SA/Brazil lead normative innovation; Egypt/Ethiopia model adaptation. Subsidiarity with Solidarity: Decisions at lowest effective level; BRICS institutions coordinate and mobilise collective resources, not direct. Precaution with Participation: Distributional impact assessment required; community veto power; compensation for unavoidable losses. Generalises the JETP model.
Circularity with Sovereignty: Regional value chain integration without sacrificing national autonomy; Chinese investment in BRICS beneficiation with local equity participation and technology transfer exit strategies. Transparency with Trust: Open data plus deliberate relationship-building; essential given BRICS cooperation occurs among states with divergent interests and mutual suspicions.
1.4. BRICS Areas of Convergence and Divergence
Convergence is on: demanding enhanced climate finance and fairer MDB architecture from developed countries; resisting binding externally-imposed phaseout timelines; opposing the EU CBAM as protectionist; and invoking CBDR-RC. Divergence is sharp on fossil fuel phaseout substance, net-zero ambition (targets range from 2050 to 2070), and what "just transition" actually requires. The critical insight: convergence on principles frequently masks divergence on substance.
3.2. Six High-Potential Niches and the Incorporation Risk