Emerging power
An emerging power is a sovereign state undergoing rapid expansion in economic output, technological capabilities, and diplomatic assertiveness, enabling it to challenge the prevailing international order established by traditional great powers.[1] These nations typically feature large populations, abundant natural resources, and sustained high GDP growth rates, which fuel investments in military modernization and infrastructure.[2] Key exemplars include China, whose GDP surpassed $18 trillion by 2023 through export-led industrialization and state-directed innovation; India, projected to achieve over 7% annual growth amid a demographic dividend; and Brazil, leveraging agricultural and mineral exports despite governance challenges.[3] The BRICS grouping—initially Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa—exemplifies collective efforts by such powers to amplify their voice in global governance, as seen in its 2023 expansion to include Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, representing over 45% of the world's population and 28% of global GDP.[2] While these powers drive multipolarity through initiatives like the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and Belt and Road, controversies arise from authoritarian tendencies in some members, territorial aggressions such as China's South China Sea claims, and dependencies on commodity cycles that expose vulnerabilities to global downturns.[4] Empirical assessments underscore that true emergence hinges on translating economic gains into soft power and institutional reforms, rather than mere size, with varying success across cases—China's military buildup contrasts with India's democratic constraints on expansionism.[5]Definition and Conceptual Framework
Core Definition
An emerging power refers to a sovereign state undergoing rapid socioeconomic transformation, marked by accelerating economic output, demographic advantages, and expanding international engagement, which collectively enable it to challenge aspects of the prevailing global hierarchy dominated by established powers. These states typically exhibit sustained real GDP growth rates exceeding 5% annually over decades, transitioning from low- to middle-income classifications as defined by institutions like the World Bank, with increasing contributions to global GDP—such as China's share rising from under 2% in 1990 to over 18% by 2023.[5] [1] This economic momentum stems from factors including large labor forces, industrialization, and integration into global supply chains, fostering capabilities that extend beyond domestic development into geopolitical leverage.[2] Central to the concept is the interplay of material capabilities and agency: emerging powers not only accumulate resources but actively pursue status elevation through diplomatic assertiveness, military modernization, and institutional entrepreneurship. Military attributes often include rising defense budgets relative to GDP—averaging 2-3% in many cases—and investments in advanced technologies like asymmetric warfare assets, enabling regional influence projection without yet matching great-power parity. Politically, these nations advocate for multipolarity, critiquing Western-centric norms in forums such as the United Nations or World Trade Organization, while forming coalitions like the BRICS grouping (established 2009) to amplify collective voice on issues from trade rules to development finance.[6] [1] The designation remains analytical rather than rigidly codified, requiring evidence of trajectory over snapshot metrics; for instance, a state must demonstrate not just growth but resilience against reversals, such as through diversified exports exceeding 20% of GDP or strategic resource control (e.g., rare earths or energy reserves). Scholarly assessments emphasize causal links between internal reforms—like market liberalization in India post-1991—and external ambitions, distinguishing true emergents from transient booms. While the term gained prominence in the 1990s amid post-Cold War shifts, its application demands scrutiny of sustainability, as uneven development or dependency on foreign capital can limit ascent.[5][7]Historical Evolution of the Concept
The concept of emerging powers traces its intellectual antecedents to mid-20th-century international relations theory, particularly A.F.K. Organski's power transition theory outlined in his 1958 book World Politics. This framework analyzed how differential growth rates enable subordinate states to challenge dominant hegemons, often leading to conflict when the rising contender nears power parity and harbors dissatisfaction with the status quo.[8] Although Organski did not use the phrase "emerging powers," his emphasis on ascendant states' capacity to alter global hierarchies provided a causal foundation for later conceptualizations, shifting focus from static balances to dynamic transitions driven by economic and military capabilities.[8] By the 1970s, empirical observations of rapid industrialization in select developing economies crystallized early applications of the idea, with countries designated as Newly Industrializing Countries (NICs) including the Asian Tigers—South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore—alongside Brazil and Mexico. These states achieved average annual GDP growth rates exceeding 7% through export-led strategies, elevating their global economic shares from under 5% in 1970 to over 10% by 1980.[9] Brazil, for instance, was explicitly regarded as an emerging power during this decade due to its industrial expansion and regional influence.[2] The term "emerging markets" emerged in 1981, coined by Antoine van Agtmael at the International Finance Corporation to reframe perceptions of high-growth developing economies as viable investment destinations rather than high-risk frontiers.[10] The end of the Cold War in 1991 and accelerated globalization in the 1990s broadened the concept beyond economics to encompass geopolitical agency, as NICs and larger economies like China and India integrated into world trade, with their combined exports rising from $200 billion in 1990 to $1.5 trillion by 2000. The decisive popularization of "emerging powers" occurred in 2001 with Jim O'Neill's Goldman Sachs report "Building Better Global Economic BRICs," which forecasted that Brazil, Russia, India, and China would collectively generate half the world's GDP growth by 2020 and overtake G6 economies by 2041 based on purchasing power parity projections.[11] This analysis, rooted in demographic and productivity trends, transitioned the discourse from mere market potential to systemic challengers capable of influencing institutions like the IMF and WTO.[3] Subsequent developments, including the 2009 addition of South Africa to form BRICS, underscored the term's evolution toward multifaceted power, incorporating diplomatic coalitions and demands for reformed global governance.[2]Key Characteristics and Criteria
Economic Dimensions
Economic dimensions form the foundational criterion for identifying emerging powers, characterized primarily by sustained high rates of GDP growth that propel these nations up the global economic hierarchy. Such growth typically exceeds 5% annually over extended periods, driven by factors including large populations exceeding 100 million inhabitants, which foster expansive domestic markets, and potential urbanization rates surpassing 50%.[12] [13] Rapid industrialization, urbanization, and technological adoption further underpin this expansion, enabling these economies to transition from low- to middle-income status while integrating into global supply chains.[14] A hallmark is the increasing share in global output and trade; collectively, emerging and developing economies accounted for approximately 60% of global GDP in purchasing power parity terms by 2016, rising from under 50% a decade prior, with their contributions to worldwide growth often outpacing advanced economies.[15] This shift manifests in enhanced export competitiveness, financial infrastructure development—such as established banking systems, stock exchanges, and unified currencies—and rising foreign direct investment inflows that support infrastructure and human capital accumulation.[16] For instance, growth spillovers from domestic shocks in major emerging markets have grown comparable to those from advanced economies over the past two decades, underscoring their systemic importance.[17] [18] Sustaining economic ascent requires diversification beyond commodity dependence toward manufacturing and services, alongside policies promoting innovation and demographic dividends from youthful populations and natural resource endowments.[19] These attributes not only amplify domestic productivity but also bolster leverage in international economic institutions, where emerging powers advocate for reforms reflecting their augmented weight—evident in groups like BRICS, whose combined GDP share reached about 21% at market exchange rates by the mid-2010s.[18] However, uneven progress across sectors and vulnerability to external shocks highlight that raw growth alone insufficiently guarantees enduring power without structural reforms.[4]Political and Military Attributes
Emerging powers demonstrate political attributes characterized by assertive diplomacy and expanding influence in multilateral institutions, often leveraging economic leverage to advocate for reformed global governance structures that reflect multipolarity. These states prioritize sovereignty and non-interference principles, frequently aligning with like-minded nations to counterbalance Western-dominated frameworks, as evidenced by their growing roles in forums such as the BRICS grouping, where they coordinate positions on trade, development, and security issues.[4] [1] This diplomatic ambition stems from status-seeking behaviors, where rising material capacities translate into demands for greater representation in bodies like the United Nations Security Council, though success varies based on coalition-building efficacy and avoidance of overt confrontation.[1] Militarily, emerging powers invest heavily in force modernization to achieve regional dominance and limited global reach, with defense expenditures often rising in tandem with GDP growth to fund acquisitions of advanced platforms such as fighter jets, submarines, and missile systems. For instance, these nations emphasize anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD) capabilities to deter interventions, reflecting a strategic shift from territorial defense to power projection amid perceived threats from established powers.[20] [21] Historical analyses indicate that such military expansions correlate with economic ascent, enabling these states to participate in peacekeeping, counterterrorism, and expeditionary operations, though qualitative gaps persist in areas like joint operations and logistics compared to mature militaries.[20] Despite rapid hardware improvements—driven by domestic R&D and foreign technology transfers—effectiveness hinges on addressing internal challenges like corruption and training deficiencies, as uneven progress can undermine deterrence credibility.[22][23]Institutional and Soft Power Factors
Emerging powers enhance their global influence through the establishment of parallel international institutions, circumventing limitations in Western-dominated bodies like the IMF and World Bank. The BRICS countries launched the New Development Bank (NDB) in 2014, headquartered in Shanghai, to fund infrastructure and sustainable development projects primarily in emerging economies, with initial capital of $100 billion.[24] By 2023, the NDB alongside China's Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), established in 2016 with 103 member countries, had approved over $71 billion in loans across sectors including energy and transportation.[25] These entities grant BRICS members structural power by enabling norm-setting in development finance, such as prioritizing infrastructure over conditional lending, though their lending volumes remain below the World Bank's $300 billion annual average.[26] Complementing new institutions, emerging powers pursue greater representation within existing global organizations to amplify their voice. China, India, and Brazil have secured incremental quota reforms in the IMF, increasing their combined voting shares from 13% in 2010 to over 15% by 2023, yet they still advocate for further adjustments to reflect economic realities.[27] Staffing patterns in organizations like the UN and IMF exhibit persistent Western bias, with emerging powers holding only about 20% of senior positions despite comprising over 40% of global GDP by purchasing power parity in 2023.[28] This underrepresentation prompts initiatives like BRICS' Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA), activated in 2014 with $100 billion in pooled reserves for currency crisis support, reducing reliance on G7-led facilities.[29] Soft power among emerging economies relies on cultural diplomacy and values projection, though outcomes vary by reception and domestic credibility. In the 2024 Global Soft Power Index, China ranked third overall, buoyed by economic familiarity and media reach, while India climbed due to cultural exports like Bollywood films—exported to over 100 countries annually—and yoga, practiced by an estimated 300 million people worldwide following the UN's 2014 International Day of Yoga declaration.[30] [31] [32] Brazil leverages Carnival and football, drawing 6 million tourists yearly pre-COVID, to foster regional affinity in Latin America.[33] However, China's Confucius Institutes, numbering over 500 globally at peak in 2019 but reduced to under 400 by 2024 amid Western closures, have proven ineffective in Europe and North America due to perceptions of propaganda and threats to academic autonomy, with over 100 U.S. campuses shuttering partnerships since 2014.[34] [35] These efforts underscore that soft power efficacy hinges on perceived authenticity rather than state-directed promotion, as coercive undertones erode appeal in democratic societies.[36]Prominent Examples
Core BRICS Nations
The core BRICS nations—Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa—originated as an informal grouping of large emerging economies seeking greater influence in global economic governance amid perceptions of Western institutional dominance. The acronym BRIC was first proposed in a 2001 Goldman Sachs report by economist Jim O'Neill to denote Brazil, Russia, India, and China as high-growth markets projected to drive future global expansion, based on their demographic advantages, resource endowments, and industrialization trajectories.[37] These four convened for their inaugural summit on June 16, 2009, in Yekaterinburg, Russia, where they formalized coordination on trade, investment, and multilateral reforms, emphasizing South-South cooperation without formal treaty obligations.[38] South Africa acceded in December 2010, invited due to its continental leadership and commodity exports, transforming BRIC into BRICS and expanding the group's representation in Africa.[39] Economically, the core BRICS nations wield outsized influence through scale and diversification: China as the world's manufacturing powerhouse, India leveraging services and a young workforce, Brazil and Russia via commodities, and South Africa through mining and regional finance. According to IMF estimates for 2024, their combined nominal GDP approached $27 trillion, accounting for over 25% of global output, with China contributing the lion's share at $18.75 trillion, India $3.91 trillion, Brazil $2.17 trillion, Russia approximately $2.0 trillion (resilient despite sanctions via energy rerouting to Asia), and South Africa $0.37 trillion.[40] [41] This aggregate reflects faster-than-average growth, with BRICS averaging 4% GDP expansion in 2024 versus the global 3.3%, driven by domestic demand and intra-group trade exceeding $500 billion annually.[42] However, per capita metrics reveal disparities—China at around $13,000, India under $3,000—highlighting uneven development and reliance on state-led models in China and Russia versus market-oriented reforms in India and Brazil. Institutionally, the grouping established the New Development Bank (NDB) in 2014 during the Fortaleza summit, operationalized in 2015 with headquarters in Shanghai and equal shareholding among founders, to finance infrastructure and sustainable projects totaling over $30 billion approved by 2024 as a counter to IMF-World Bank conditionality.[43] The NDB prioritizes non-sovereign lending and local-currency issuance to mitigate dollar dependence, approving projects like renewable energy in India and rail in Brazil, though its scale remains modest compared to Bretton Woods institutions.[44] Politically, core BRICS nations advocate for IMF quota reforms and UN Security Council expansion, positioning themselves as voices for the Global South, yet their authoritarian leanings in Russia and China contrast with Brazil and India's democratic systems, fostering debates on shared values.[45] Internal frictions undermine cohesion: India-China relations strain under unresolved Himalayan border disputes, including the 2020 Galwan Valley clash that killed over 20 Indian soldiers and prompted troop buildups exceeding 100,000, complicating joint initiatives.[45] Russia's post-2022 Ukraine invasion faced Western sanctions slashing technology access and GDP by 2-3% initially, though wartime spending and Asian pivots sustained 3% growth in 2024; this isolation tests BRICS solidarity, as India and Brazil balance neutrality with energy imports from Moscow.[46] Brazil grapples with commodity volatility and fiscal deficits, while South Africa's energy crises and inequality hinder its pivot role.[47] Despite these, BRICS endures as a forum for de-dollarization experiments, like local-currency settlements comprising 20% of intra-trade by 2024, signaling emergent multipolarity without supranational authority.[48]Expanded and Peripheral Contenders
Indonesia, with a population exceeding 270 million and nominal GDP of approximately $1.4 trillion in 2024, ranks as Southeast Asia's largest economy and is projected to achieve 4.9% real GDP growth in 2025, driven by domestic consumption, commodity exports, and infrastructure investments. Its strategic location astride key maritime trade routes enhances its geopolitical leverage, positioning it as a counterweight to Chinese influence in the region through ASEAN leadership and partnerships like the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue's indirect engagements. However, vulnerabilities persist, including reliance on raw material exports and exposure to global commodity price fluctuations, which could hinder sustained ascent without diversification into higher-value manufacturing.[49] Mexico, benefiting from proximity to the United States and integration via the USMCA trade agreement, recorded a nominal GDP of $1.8 trillion in 2024 and anticipates 2.4% growth in 2025, bolstered by nearshoring trends amid U.S.-China tensions. As a G20 member, it wields influence in North American energy markets, with oil production exceeding 1.8 million barrels per day, though internal challenges like cartel violence and fiscal deficits limit broader power projection. Goldman Sachs identifies Mexico among the Next 11 economies poised for significant expansion, potentially ranking in the global top 10 by 2050 if reforms address rule-of-law weaknesses.[50] Turkey, aspiring to bridge Europe and the Middle East, projects a nominal GDP surpassing $1.1 trillion in 2025, elevating it to the world's 16th largest economy, fueled by 3.0% growth projections and a manufacturing sector contributing over 20% to GDP.[51] Its military expenditures, at $40 billion annually, support regional interventions in Syria and Libya, underscoring NATO membership alongside independent foreign policy maneuvers, such as energy deals with Russia despite Western sanctions. Yet, chronic inflation above 50% in recent years and currency depreciation undermine long-term stability, as evidenced by lira volatility eroding investor confidence. Vietnam emerges as a high-growth outlier, with 2025 GDP growth forecasted at 6.1%, propelled by export-led industrialization and foreign direct investment inflows exceeding $20 billion yearly, shifting supply chains from China. Its nominal GDP neared $450 billion in 2024, with electronics and textiles dominating exports valued at over $370 billion. Geopolitically, Vietnam balances U.S. partnerships—evident in upgraded comprehensive strategic ties in 2023—against South China Sea disputes with Beijing, enhancing its soft power through economic diplomacy. Structural risks include overreliance on low-wage labor and environmental strains from rapid urbanization, potentially capping ascent without technological upgrades.[52] Nigeria, Africa's most populous nation at over 220 million, holds Africa's largest economy with a 2024 nominal GDP of $252 billion, though 2025 growth is tempered at 3.1% amid oil dependency, which accounts for 90% of exports despite diversification efforts into agriculture and tech hubs like Lagos' Yaba corridor. As a potential pan-African leader via ECOWAS, its military engages regional insurgencies, but governance issues, including corruption indices ranking it 145th globally in 2024, impede broader influence. Inclusion in Goldman Sachs' Next 11 underscores demographic dividends, with youth comprising 70% of the population driving urban consumption, yet insecurity and infrastructure deficits—power outages costing 4% of GDP annually—pose barriers to realizing power status.[50]| Country | 2025 Projected GDP Growth (%) | Nominal GDP 2024 (USD trillion) | Key Strength | Primary Challenge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Indonesia | 4.9 | 1.4 | Resource exports, population | Commodity volatility |
| Mexico | 2.4 | 1.8 | Nearshoring, trade integration | Security and fiscal issues |
| Turkey | 3.0 | 1.1 (proj.) | Manufacturing, military reach | Inflation and currency woes |
| Vietnam | 6.1 | 0.45 | FDI, export manufacturing | Labor and environmental costs |
| Nigeria | 3.1 | 0.25 | Demographics, oil reserves | Governance and infrastructure |