Plastic bag bans have lingering impacts, even after repeals

Banning free plastic bags for groceries in Texas resulted in customers purchasing more plastic bags, study finds

University of California - Riverside

 

image: 

Hai Che

view more 

Credit: UC Riverside

Regulations imposed to protect the environment may continue to have impacts even after they are repealed. And those lingering impacts include some that run contrary to the goals of the policies.

Such are te findings of a study published in the Journal of Marketing Research co-authored by UC Riverside marketing professor Hai Che that examined policies to curtail the use of single-use plastic bags in grocery stores and other retail outlets in Austin and Dallas, Texas—policies that were later repealed.

Significantly, the behaviors spurred by the plastic bag rules continued after the rules were no longer in place. And some impacts were not beneficial to the environment.

Che and his coauthors found an increase in sales of plastic bags after the cities prohibited stores from giving away free plastic bags for carrying home groceries. They quantified plastic bag sales by analyzing barcode scanner data on consumer purchases.

“We were hoping for positive spillover effects, like customers will be more environmentally conscious and consume less one-time use plastic or paper products,” said Che, an associate professor at UCR’s School of Business. “But that’s not what happened in the data. People wound up buying more plastic.”

Che added store customer had been repurposing the free grocery bags al as liners for household trash bins.”

The bag rules, however,  most likely changed consumer behavior in positive ways as well, such as people getting in the habit of using reusable canvas or burlap bags for everyday shopping, although such data wasn’t available to the researchers, Che said.

The study found that the longer a policy is in place, the longer the behaviors spurred by the policy lingered on.

The Dallas City Council had imposed a 5-cent fee for single-use bags for five months in 2015 before repealing the fee when the city faced lawsuits from plastic bag manufacturers. When free bags became available again, plastic bag sales initially declined sharply and returned to pre-policy levels after 13 months.

The Austin City Council banned single-use carryout bags in 2013, and the policy remained in place for five years until 2018 when the Texas Supreme Court struck down such bans statewide when it ruled on a case about a similar bag ban in Lerado. After the repeal, the carryover effect of plastic bag purchases declined gradually and did not revert to the pre-policy baseline after 18 months, which was the end of the researchers’ analysis time frame. In fact, the carryover effect remained 38.6% above the baseline even at the end of the analysis

To assess the net environmental impact, the research team conducted a “break-even analysis” to determine if the plastic bag policy, despite the negative spillover effects, ultimately reduced plastic waste. They calculated how many fewer single-use grocery bags consumers would need to use to offset the additional trash bags purchased due to the policy. In Dallas, consumers would need to use one less grocery bag every seven trips, while in Austin, it would be one less bag every five trips to break even in terms of environmental impact.

burlap bag
Bans on free plastic bags for groceries are designed to encourage use of  reusable canvas or burlap bags which reduce plastic waste in the environment.  (Photo by Fiona Goodall/Getty Images)
“Interestingly, even a slight reduction in grocery bag use can offset the increased plastic consumption from trash bags,” Che said. “This suggests that these policies might still benefit the environment overall, even when repealed.”

The study’s title is “Are We Worse Off After Policy Repeals? Evidence from Two Green Policies.” In addition to Che, the authors are Dinesh Puranam of the Marshall School of Business at the University of Southern California, Sungjin Kim of Rutgers Business School at Rutgers University, and Jihoon Hong at W.P. Carey School of Business at Arizona State University.

The study contributes to a growing body of knowledge on the unintended consequences of environmental policies and offers insights applicable beyond plastic bag usage, Che said.

“While our study focused on plastic bags, similar spillover effects have been documented in policies targeting sugary drinks, energy efficiency, and health incentives,” Che said. “In each case, behaviors that weren’t directly targeted by the policy—like purchasing more sugary snacks when soda is taxed—can offset or even undermine the policy’s primary goals.”

---

Journal

Journal of Marketing Research

DOI

10.1177/00222437241290157 

Method of Research

Observational study

Subject of Research

People

Article Title

Are We Worse off after Policy Repeals? Evidence from Two Green Policies

Which EU country is the biggest consumer of lightweight plastic bags?

The number of lightweight plastic bags purchased across the EU is staggering – nearly 30 billion in 2022 alone. However, their usage rate is declining rapidly. Which countries use the most, and which are the most eco-friendly?

EU member states have taken progressive steps over the past decade to reduce the use of lightweight plastic bags, including imposing additional charges or levies and promoting the adoption of compostable and biodegradable alternatives.

Although these measures have not fully resolved the issue, they have proven effective: Today, EU citizens purchase about 30% fewer lightweight plastic bags compared to 2018, according to a Eurostat report published on Tuesday.

However, the overall consumption remains significantly high.

In 2022 alone, nearly 30 billion lightweight plastic bags were bought across the EU, averaging more than 66 bags per person.

Lithuanians buy nearly a bag a day, Belgians almost none in a year

Lithuania recorded the highest use per capita, with 249, followed by Latvia (193) and the Czech Republic (185).

With only four bags per capita, Belgium reported the lowest consumption rate, followed by Poland (7) and Portugal (13).

Consumption of lighweight plastic carrier bags, 2022Eurostat

What are lightweight plastic bags, and what impact do they have?

Lightweight plastic bags are less than 50 microns thick and are normally used for carrying small amounts of groceries.

They have a devastating impact on the environment.

Not only do they take centuries to decompose, but they also break up into microplastics, ending up in the human and animal food chain.

 

New findings on animal viruses with potential to infect humans

Study shows how virus family gains entry to mammal cells

Ohio State University

COLUMBUS, Ohio – Scientists investigating animal viruses with potential to infect humans have identified a critical protein that could enable spillover of a family of organisms called arteriviruses.

In a new study, researchers identified a protein in mammals that welcomes arteriviruses into host cells to start an infection. The team also found that an existing monoclonal antibody that binds to this protein protects cells from viral infection.

Arteriviruses circulate broadly in many types of mammals around the world that serve as natural hosts – such as nonhuman primates, pigs and horses – but so far have not been detected in humans.

The researchers’ aim is to better understand mechanisms of arterivirus infection to get a handle on how high the infection risk is for humans and what preparation may be needed should a spillover occur in the future.

“It’s important to consider that since we have no known arteriviruses infecting people that we’re essentially immunologically naïve, so we can’t rely on preexisting immunity to help us,” said co-lead author Cody Warren, assistant professor of veterinary biosciences at The Ohio State University.

Warren co-led the work with Adam Bailey, assistant professor of pathology and laboratory medicine at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. The study was published recently in Nature Communications.

Many natural hosts of arteriviruses have no signs of disease, but the virus that infects swine can cause pneumonia, as well as abortions in pregnant pigs, and other strains can cause hemorrhagic fever or encephalitis when they switch animal hosts.

These viruses also have the unusual ability to maintain long-term infections and become more virulent when they find new hosts – which gives them time to evolve and improve their chances of transmission.

The research team set out to find proteins in mammals that arteriviruses use as receptors to gain entry to host cells and make copies of themselves. Bailey used genome-wide CRISPR-knockout screening technology to identify specific genes that, when disrupted, rendered cells resistant to viral infection. Such genes would then be considered essential to the viral infection process. The unbiased screen identified two genes, FCGRT and B2M, whose protein products come together to form the FcRn receptor (neonatal Fc receptor) that is expressed on the surface of cells.

The FcRn receptor molecule has a specific role in shuttling antibodies across the placenta to a fetus, but is also present in immune cells and cells that line blood vessel walls – both of which are targeted by arteriviruses.

Results from this study demonstrated that FcRn is used for host cell entry by at least five arteriviruses that infect monkeys, pigs and horses, respectively: three diverse strains of simian arteriviruses, porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus 2 (PRRSV-2), and equine arteritis virus (EAV).

Knocking out the major component of the FcRn complex – the FCGRT gene – from host cells blocked viral infection, and pre-treating cells with a monoclonal antibody against FcRn protected against infection.

There was also a genetic twist to this story: Some mammal hosts were less susceptible to arterivirus infection based on differences in their species-specific FcRn’s sequence, meaning that in some cases, this protein will function as a barrier to cross-species infections.

“Chimpanzees and humans have pretty much all the same genes, but the sequence of those genes is slightly different,” Bailey said. “All mammals have the FcRn receptor, but their ability to support infection with a given arterivirus may vary.”

The CRISPR screen also identified a gene encoding another surface protein, CD163, which Warren and colleagues previously found to be a gatekeeper for an arterivirus called simian hemorrhagic fever virus (SHFV) to infect a cell.

A series of experiments in different cell types and using multiple viral strains in the new study showed that CD163 does have a role in infection by most arteriviruses, but it cannot act alone – interaction with FcRn is also key to facilitating arteriviral infection of host cells.

Spelling out these arterivirus infection steps is an important milestone, the researchers said.

“If we’re looking at virus biology, one of the most important things we can understand is entry mechanisms. Because if you can stop the ability of a virus to infect a cell through disrupting that initial virus-receptor contact, now you have a potential therapeutic strategy,” Warren said.

One of those “disruptors” could be blocking the receptor – so showing that an existing monoclonal antibody can stop viral infection in cells is also a plus for scientists examining viruses through a lens of pre-pandemic preparedness.

“If one of these viruses emerged in humans, I believe we’d be in big trouble,” Bailey said. “So that is the motivator for me.”

This work was supported by National Institutes of Health grants, University of Wisconsin-Madison startup funds, the G. Harold and Leila Y. Mathers Foundation, and the Burroughs Wellcome Fund Pathogenesis of Infectious Disease Program.

Co-authors included Teressa Shaw, Kylie Nennig, Xueer Qiu, Devon Klipsic and Igor Slukvin of UW-Madison; Devra Huey, Makky Mousa-Makky, Jared Compaleo, Fei Jiang and Haichang Li of Ohio State; Aadit Shah of Stanford University; Raymond Rowland of the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign; and Meagan Sullender and Megan Baldridge of Washington University in St. Louis.

#

Contacts:

Cody Warren, Warren.802@osu.edu
Adam Bailey, ALBailey@wisc.edu

Written by Emily Caldwell, Caldwell.151@osu.edu

 

---

Journal

Nature Communications

DOI

10.1038/s41467-024-51142-x 

Article Title

The neonatal Fc receptor (FcRn) is a pan-arterivirus receptor

BRICS Bloc Calls for Multipolar, Equitable, Democratic World Order

Abdul Rahman | 31 Oct 2024

In the Summit held in the Russian city of Kazan, BRICS members condemned the genocidal Israeli war on West Asia, the illegal sanctions regimes imposed on the people of the world by the US and its allies, and Western dominated multilateral institutions.

BRICS members at the end of the Kazan Summit. Photo: BRICS

The Kazan declaration adopted at the 16th BRICS summit in Russia on Wednesday, October 23, calls for comprehensive reforms in all international institutions to make the world order more “equitable, just, democratic and balanced.”

The declaration titled “Strengthening Multilateralism for Just Global Development and Security” noted that new power centers, both in economic and political spheres have emerged across the world which need to be given proper representation and weight.

It asserted that to make the international institutions more reflective of the changing global reality and to provide adequate representation to the developing world, reforms in the United Nations, including in the Security Council, and other global institutions, particularly in the Bretton Woods institutions are a must. The Bretton Wood institutions are international financial institutions such as the IMF, World Bank, and WTO created at the end of the Second World War.

The BRICS declaration specifically demands that a more effective World Trade Organization (WTO) is needed to tackle the growing trade disputes across the world and to end what the developing countries have been calling the “unilateral, punitive and discriminatory protectionism” practiced by the West.

The authority of the WTO has been gradually undermined by countries such as the US and the EU members after they started imposing arbitrary protectionist measures targeting imports from certain countries of the Global South, particularly China in recent days.

Non-interference

The Kazan declaration also referred to one of the most burning issues raised by the countries of the Global South, the repeated interference of the West in their domestic affairs and use of illegal unilateral sanctions against them.

Claiming that non-interference in the domestic matters of other countries is integral to international law, the BRICS declaration asserts that every country has the right to decide its own path of development.

Some BRICS members and several other countries such as Cuba, Venezuela, Syria, have been subjected to sanctions by the US and its Western allies which have affected the lives of people there hampering their development efforts.

The Kazan declaration underlines that, BRICS members “are deeply concerned about the disruptive effects of unlawful unilateral coercive measures, including illegal sanctions, on the world economy, international trade and the achievement of sustainable development goals” and call to devise ways to take “joint actions to oppose” all such measures.

BRICS economic partnership

BRICS has consistently denounced the West’s attempts to use its economic power as a weapon against the developing countries. It has proposed greater financial independence from the West as a way of dealing with the problem and has been exploring ways to do so.

The Kazan declaration reiterated the need for financial independence by creating deeper economic partnership among BRICS members. It decided to continue its attempts to expand the use of national currencies in bilateral and international trade.

The declaration emphasized on the continued negotiations over the BRICS Clear Settlement and Depository System for cross border settlements as an alternative to the West-led SWIFT system and the further development of New Development Bank as an alternative source of development funding.

The BRICS declaration also endorsed the proposal of a Grain Exchange Platform for poorer and sanctioned countries in Africa and elsewhere. It is expected to play a crucial role in ensuring price stability for food grains and raw materials essential for maintaining food security and economic activities.

The BRICS declaration endorsed the modalities of including more countries from the Global South in the grouping and created a new category of “partner country” given the lack of consensus on the further expansion in its core membership.

Palestinian right to self determination

The Kazan declaration sharply condemns the Israeli genocide on the people of Palestine and its attacks on civilians in the region and demanded an immediate ceasefire.

In a major move, BRICS nations agreed to term the Israeli cyber attack in September involving the detonation of hundreds of communication devices across Lebanon as “premeditated terrorist attacks.” Hundreds of people were killed and injured across the country.

The declaration condemned Israel’s airstrikes in Lebanon and Syria as well, specifically mentioning the Israeli attacks on the Iranian consulate in which some Iranian officials were killed.

BRICS nations also reiterated their commitment to an independent Palestinian state and their support to its full UN membership.

The Kazan declaration also termed the US military presence in Syria “illegal” and demanded its immediate withdrawal. Hundreds of US soldiers are currently deployed in Syria without the consent of the country’s government.

BRICS countries expressed their faith in the UN Charter and reiterated the need for a peaceful and political resolution of all conflicts in the world including the war in Ukraine.

Courtesy: Peoples Dispatch

BRICS & Stone Age

Shahzad Sharjeel

Published October 31, 2024

DAWN

MUKESH Ambani, of the unending wedding ceremonies fame, recently enlightened Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang about the Sanskrit meaning of his company’s name and its significance in the logframe of progress.

A little digression: we just witnessed two important conclaves where world leaders and nations aspiring to join their ranks got together to discuss ways of cooperation and agree upon the rules of competition. Pakistan hosted the delegates of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) in Islamabad, and Russian President Vladimir Putin recently welcomed the world leaders at the BRICS summit in Kazan. Indian External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar attended the Pakistan moot and Prime Minister Narendra Modi attended the BRICS meeting. He met Chinese President Xi Jinping on the sidelines.

Easing one of the irritants between them, India and China have agreed to resume patrols along the disputed Line of Actual Control in Ladakh. Soon after Mr Modi returned home, the CEO of Nvidia, a leader in chipmaking and AI, visited India. We, too, can claim that Bill Gates, another tech giant, visits Pakistan more often than he goes to his company headquarters. But alas! He comes here to share his concerns over our horrific failure on the polio front: over 40 new cases so far this year. Who knows what else he discusses while here? We only hear the bits and pieces about giving each family free-range chicken to have fresh eggs. News on this enlightening front has also dried up since Imran Khan’s imprisonment.

Returning to Ambani’s pearls of wisdom, he informed Mr Huang that in Hindi, ‘Vidya’ is the name of Sarasvati, the goddess of knowledge. In the Vedic scheme of things, one who prays to the goddess of knowledge gets the attention of Lakshmi, the goddess of prosperity. In other words, to borrow from the geeky world of IT, knowledge and prosperity are interconnected on the circuit board of progress; without this connection, the motherboard of any development strategy is nothing but a motherlode of chicken droppings.


It’s not as if no one of consequence visited us after the SCO summit.

It is not as if no one of consequence visited us following the SCO summit. The English cricket team was here. Entire transport systems like the celebrated Metro between Rawalpindi and Islamabad were suspended, and major highways and arteries connecting the twin cities and beyond were routinely closed to facilitate the 20-strong visiting squad’s commute between their hotel in Islamabad and the match venue in Rawalpindi.

It is beyond comprehension why these cricketers could not stay at a hotel in Rawalpindi to spare millions of people daily misery on the roads. If the five-star hotel in the garrison city does not meet the visiting princelings’ standards, other accommodations are there to give any manor or mansion a run for their money. They can also be put through the rigours of Kakul Academy, albeit much closer to the sea level, while there.

On conclaves and sporting events and their follow-up, one has never heard a squeak from any quarter regarding the gains and investments resulting from these spectacles. It would be great if the Pakistan Cricket Board or some chamber of commerce could tell us about revenue generation or a boost to the local economy from these unending hosting sprees. The state of planning that goes into these adventures could be discerned from the fact that stadium renovations are undertaken without any regard for timelines for the upcoming series. This recently resulted in most matches being played in Multan and Rawalpindi. Lahore has to be skipped, as we cannot risk thousands of PTI supporters turning it into a political ga­­la. It is not for no­­thing that cricket and the interior ministry are ent­rusted with the same person.

A few years back, we celebrated the return of international cricket to Pakistan. Remember, no one wanted to come here after the attack on the Sri Lankan team in 2009? One would like to ask who adopted and emboldened the forces who attacked the visiting team. The same benefactors now want us to celebrate the return of international cricket, but to what end, one must ask? To close down entire cities so that some boys could play ball?

Petty differences apart, all religions, ideologies, and philosophies hold the knowledge and its acquisition in the highest esteem. May we be granted some common sense, if not wisdom, to stop being mesmerised by jets doing aerobatics while letting off coloured smoke during parades and boys playing cricket to satisfy the ‘boys’ vanity.

We need to earn some Lakshmi. We cannot live on borrowed money or ideologies. We must decide whether to pursue a future of BRICS and SCO or be at the mercy of the bricks and stones brigade hell-bent on taking us back to the Stone Age.

The writer is a poet. His latest publication is a collection of satire essays titled Rindana.

shahzadsharjeel1@gmail.com

Published in Dawn, October 31st, 2024

The BRICS Summit in Kazan: A Manifesto for a Rational World Order

Alfred de Zayas

October 31, 2024
Facebook

TwitterRedditEmail

Photograph Source: Prime Minister’s Office – GODL-India

The Kazan Declaration of 23 October 2024, adopted at the 16th BRICS Summit[1] hosted by Russia in the city of Kazan on the Volga river from 22 to 24 October and attended by 36 countries[2], constitutes a pivotal moment for humanity. There is hope in the air, a certain optimism that we can gradually change the paradigm, marshal the world disorder, move away from bloc-mentality, abandon confrontational politics, phase out dependence on the US-dollar, and craft a coherent policy to enhance trade, social and cultural exchange in tandem with the Purposes and Principles of the  UN Charter and in the spirit of the UNESCO Constitution[3].

True enough, US and NATO provocations and war-mongering are not likely to disappear anytime soon.  In fact, judging by what we read in the mainstream media, there is a surge in bellicose rhetoric in the West and a real danger that continued escalation will drive humanity to Apocalypse — in which case the UN Charter and the Kazan Declaration will not matter, because we will no longer inhabit planet Earth.  Civilizations are not eternal. The Assyrian, Persian, Etruscan, Maya[4] civilizations all went under.  We could wake up dead tomorrow – if we do not prevent a nuclear confrontation. As John Lennon sang, “War is over – if you want it”.[5]

While tensions will persist for years, the very existence of BRICS and the future-oriented Kazan Summit offer an alternative to Western nihilism.  BRICS has just added 13 new members, and there are dozens more who want to join.  This is eloquent proof that the world is changing and will continue to evolve away from US hegemonic fantasies. Indeed, BRICS is far more representative of global realities than the EU or the G-7.  The thirteen new members are Algeria, Belarus, Bolivia, Cuba, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Nigeria, Thailand, Turkey, Uganda, Uzbekistan and Vietnam – a panorama that encompasses all continents.

Unlike the UN Summit of the Future and Pact for the Future[6] of 20-22 September 2024, the Kazan Declaration with its 134 paragraphs constitutes a major step in the development of a multipolar world order and a reaffirmation of the will of the Global Majority to strengthen international peace and security through multilateralism.  A return to the principles and purposes of the UN is possible when enough states commit to resolve all differences through diplomacy and exercise good faith instead of continuing to practice a “culture of cheating”[7].  International cooperation depends on mutual trust and mutual respect, on good faith, the implementation of treaties, pacta sunt servanda[8], and the sincere desire to foster international friendship in all fields through cultural exchange, sports and trade in the spirit of UNESCO.

It is worth highlighting some of the concrete achievements and proposals of the Kazan Summit, which evidence a new willingness to go forward in solidarity and abandon the confrontational approach of the US and European states.

The Kazan Declaration underlines the common commitment to sovereign equality, inclusiveness, consensus and democracy.  In this context we recall UN General Assembly Resolution 60/1 of 24 October 2005, paragraph 135 of which stipulated: “We reaffirm that democracy is a universal value based on the freely expressed will of people to determine their own political, economic, social and cultural systems and their full participation in all aspects of their lives. We also reaffirm that while democracies share common features, there is no single model of democracy, that it does not belong to any country or region, and reaffirm the necessity of due respect for sovereignty and the right of self-determination. We stress that democracy, development and respect for all human rights and fundamental freedoms are interdependent and mutually reinforcing. “[9]  This is the live and let live approach of the Global Majority, who reject the arrogance of some Western counties that pretend that only the “Western” model of democracy is valid.

The comprehensive agenda of the Kazan Declaration covers a broad range of activities in the areas of peace making and peace maintenance, climate change and the environment, global health and pandemics, fighting international drugs and terrorism, supporting women’s participation, people-to-people exchanges, energy security, digitalization, financial cooperation and the need for de-dollarization.  Proposals were tabled and discussed for new multilateral cross-border mechanisms for trade and finance, the modalities of creating a new currency, which, of course are long-term and complex in their implementation. Particularly important are paragraphs 62-69 of the Declaration.

Meanwhile BRICS has established a commission to study these proposals and is looking at alternatives to the U.S.-run SWIFT international banking communications and wire payment system, as well as for insurance for international commerce, which has been hijacked by the weaponization of the dollar.  But, even without operational non-dollar and non-SWIFT alternatives, bilateral trade in other national currencies is growing fast. SWIFT reports that the use of the U.S. dollar in international trade is down to 49%, Russia and China conducting most of their trade in Rubles and Yuan.

Strengthening multilateralism    

Paragraph 6 of the declaration stipulates, inter alia, “We note the emergence of new centres of power, policy decision-making and economic growth, which can pave the way for a more equitable, just, democratic and balanced multipolar world order. Multipolarity can expand opportunities for [developing countries] to unlock their constructive potential and enjoy universally beneficial, inclusive and equitable economic globalization and cooperation. Bearing in mind the need to adapt the current architecture of international relations to better reflect the contemporary realities, we reaffirm our commitment to multilateralism and upholding international law, including the Purposes and Principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations as its indispensable cornerstone, and the central role of the UN in the international system, in which sovereign states cooperate to maintain international peace and security, advance sustainable development, ensure the promotion and protection of democracy, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all as well as cooperation based on solidarity, mutual respect, justice and equality.”

Paragraph 7 notes “… As a positive step in this direction, we acknowledge the G20 Call to Action on Global Governance Reform launched by Brazil during its G20 presidency. We also acknowledge dialogues and partnerships which strengthen cooperation with the African continent like Summit of the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation, India-Africa Forum Summit, Russia-Africa Summit and Ministerial Conference.” 

Paragraph 8 recognizes the 2023 Johannesburg II Declaration and reaffirms “…support for a comprehensive reform of the United Nations, including its Security Council, with a view to making it more democratic, representative, effective and efficient, and to increase the representation of developing countries in the Council’s memberships so that it can adequately respond to prevailing global challenges….”

Rejection of Unilateralism in particular unilateral coercive measures[10]

Paragraph 10 stipulates:  “We are deeply concerned about the disruptive effect of unlawful unilateral coercive measures, including illegal sanctions, on the world economy, international trade, and the achievement of the sustainable development goals. Such measures undermine the UN Charter, the multilateral trading system, the sustainable development and environmental agreements. They also negatively impact economic growth, energy, health and food security exacerbating poverty and environmental challenges.”

Paragraph 13 stresses “… the universal and inclusive nature of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its Sustainable Development Goals, and that implementation should take into account different national circumstances, capacities and levels of development, whilst respecting national policies and priorities and in conformity with national legislation… We condemn the attempts to subject development to discriminatory politically motivated practices, including but not limited to unilateral coercive measures that are incompatible with the principles of the UN Charter, explicit or implied political conditionality of development assistance, activities, aiming at compromising the multiplicity of international development assistance providers.”

Paragraph 22 reiterates that “… unilateral coercive measures, inter-alia in the form of unilateral economic sanctions and secondary sanctions that are contrary to international law, have far-reaching implications for human rights, including the right to development, of the general population of targeted states, disproportionally affecting the poor and people in vulnerable situations. Therefore, we call for their elimination.”

Paragraph 34 stresses that “… Syria’s sovereignty and territorial integrity must be strictly observed. We condemn illegal foreign military presence that lead to increasing risks of a large-scale conflict in the region. We emphasize that illegal unilateral sanctions seriously exacerbate the suffering of the Syrian people.”

Paragraph 83 rejects “…unilateral, punitive and discriminatory protectionist measures, that are not in line with international law, under the pretext of environmental concerns, such as unilateral and discriminatory carbon border adjustment mechanisms (CBAMs), due diligence requirements, taxes and other measures and reconfirm our full support for the call in COP28 related to avoidance of unilateral trade measures based on climate or environment. We also oppose unilateral protectionist measures, which deliberately disrupt the global supply and production chains and distort competition.”

International Peace and Security

Paragraph 25 expresses concern over “… the rise of violence and continuing armed conflicts in different parts of the world including those that have significant impact at 8 both regional and international levels. We reiterate our commitment to the peaceful resolution of disputes through diplomacy, mediation, inclusive dialogue and consultations in a coordinated and cooperative manner and support all efforts conducive to the peaceful settlement of crises. We stress the need to engage in conflict prevention efforts, including through addressing their root causes. We acknowledge the legitimate and reasonable security concerns of all countries.”

Paragraph 30 reiterates “…grave concern at the deterioration of the situation and humanitarian crisis in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, in particular the unprecedented escalation of violence in the Gaza Strip and in West Bank as a result of the Israeli military offensive, which led to mass killing and injury of civilians, forced displacement and widespread destruction of civilian infrastructure. We stress the urgent need for an immediate, comprehensive and permanent ceasefire in the Gaza Strip, the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages and detainees from both sides who are being illegally held captive and the unhindered sustainable and at scale supply of humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip, and cessation of all aggressive actions. We denounce the Israeli attacks against humanitarian operations, facilities, personnel and distribution points. For this purpose, we call for the full implementation of resolutions 2712 (2023), 2720 (2023), 2728 (2024) and 2735 (2024) of the United Nations Security Council… We acknowledge the provisional measures of the International Court of Justice in the legal proceedings instituted by South Africa against Israel. We reaffirm our support for the State of Palestine’s full membership in the United Nations in the context of the unwavering commitment to the vision of the two-state solution based on international law including relevant UNSC and UNGA resolutions and the Arab Peace Initiative that includes the establishment of a sovereign, independent and viable State of Palestine in line with internationally recognised borders of June 1967 with East Jerusalem as its capital living side by side in peace and security with Israel.”

Paragraph 32 condemns “…the increasing incidents of terrorist attacks linked with ICT capabilities. In this regard, we condemn the premeditated terrorist act of detonating handheld communication devices in Beirut on 17 September 2024, resulted in the loss of life and injury of dozens of civilians. We reiterate that these attacks constitute a grave violation of International Law.”

Paragraph 43 calls for “… strengthening of non-proliferation and disarmament to safeguard and maintain global stability and international peace and security. We note the paramount importance of the efforts aiming at accelerating the implementation of the 12 resolutions on the Establishment of a Zone Free of Nuclear Weapons and other Weapons of Mass Destruction in the Middle East, including the Conference convened pursuant to UN General Assembly Decision 73/546. We call on all invited parties to participate in this conference in good faith and engage with this effort constructively.”

Fostering Economic and Financial Cooperation 

Paragraph 57 reiterates “… strong belief that multilateral cooperation is essential to limit the risks stemming from geopolitical and geo-economic fragmentation and commit to intensify efforts in areas of mutual interest, including but not limited to, trade, poverty and hunger reduction, sustainable development, including access to energy, water and food, fuel, fertilizers as well as 16 mitigating and adapting to the impact of climate change, education, and health, including pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.”

Paragraph 58 calls for the “…full implementation of Addis-Ababa Action Agenda adopted at the Third International Conference on Financing for Development in 2015 and the effective participation of developing countries in the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development, which will be held in Spain from 30 June to 3 July 2025. We call on the developed countries to honour their commitment to financing for development and encourage their cooperation with developing countries in different development areas including taxation, debt, trade, official development assistance, technology transfer and reforming of international financial architecture.”

Paragraph 60 focuses on problems associated with: “…high debt levels in some countries [which] reduce the fiscal space needed to address ongoing development challenges aggravated by spillover effects from external shocks, particularly from fluctuations in financial and monetary policies in some advanced economies as well as the inherent problems with the international financial architecture. High interest rates and tighter financing conditions worsen debt vulnerabilities in many countries. We believe it is necessary to address the international debt properly and in a holistic manner to support economic recovery and sustainable development, taking into account each nation’s laws and internal procedures, accompanied by sustainable external debt and fiscal prudence. We recognise the need to address in an effective, comprehensive and systematic manner the debt vulnerabilities of both low and middle income countries. One of the instruments, amongst others, to collectively address debt vulnerabilities is through predictable, orderly, timely and coordinated implementation of the G20 Common Framework for Debt Treatment with the participation of official bilateral creditors, private creditors and Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) in line with the principle of joint action and fair burden-sharing.”

Paragraph 61 deals with the SDGs and BRICS’ public-private partnerships. Paragraph 62 recognizes the key role of the New Development Bank in promoting infrastructure and sustainable development of its member countries, as well as expanding local currency financing.

Paragraph 63 welcomes “the BRICS Interbank Cooperation Mechanism (ICM) focus on facilitating and expanding innovative financial practices and approaches for projects and programmes, including finding acceptable mechanisms of financing in local currencies. We welcome a continued dialogue between the ICM and the NDB.”

Paragraph 65 reiterates the commitment “…to enhancing financial cooperation within BRICS. We recognise the widespread benefits of faster, low cost, more efficient, transparent, safe and inclusive cross-border payment instruments built upon the principle of minimizing trade barriers and non-discriminatory access. We welcome the use of local currencies in financial transactions between BRICS countries and their trading partners. We encourage strengthening of correspondent banking networks within BRICS and enabling settlements in local currencies in line with BRICS Cross-Border Payments Initiative (BCBPI), which is voluntary and nonbinding, and look forward to further discussions in this area, including in the BRICS Payment Task Force.”

Paragraph 66 refers to the necessity  “…of exploring the feasibility of connecting BRICS countries’ financial markets infrastructure. We agree to discuss and study the feasibility of establishment of an independent cross-border settlement and depositary infrastructure, BRICS Clear, an initiative to complement the existing financial market infrastructure, as well as BRICS independent reinsurance capacity, including BRICS (Re)Insurance Company, with participation on a voluntary basis.”

Paragraph 67 tasks the BRICS Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors with studying the issue of local currencies, payment instruments and platforms and report back by the next Summit.  Paragraph 68 recognizes “…the BRICS Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA) being an important mechanism to forestall short-term balance of payments pressures and further strengthen financial stability. We express our strong support for the CRA mechanism improvement via envisaging alternative eligible currencies and welcome finalization of the amendments to the CRA documents. We acknowledge the successful completion of the 7th CRA Test Run…”

Paragraph 102 recognizes the important of further enhancing and institutionalizing BRICS tax cooperation and welcomes the adoption of the BRICS Heads of Tax Authorities Governance Framework as an important step towards systematic and consistent tax cooperation among BRICS countries.

Paragraph 103 welcomes UN GA Resolution 78/230 on the Promotion of inclusive and effective international tax cooperation,[11]and expresses appreciation for the commitment in developing the Terms of Reference for a United Nations Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation.[12]

Paragraph 110 recognizes the need for deepening BRICS cooperation in the field of justice and acknowledges the first Meeting of the BRICS Ministers of Justice.  “We recognise the importance of attracting investment and developing the economies of the BRICS countries and developing robust framework to address Investors’ grievances with further consultation and deliberations among BRICS countries. We take note of the Russian initiative to establish the BRICS International Investment Arbitration Centre.”

Illicit financial flows, money-laundering and drugs

Paragraph 49 commits BRICS members “…to preventing and combating illicit financial flows, money laundering, terrorism financing, drug trafficking, corruption and the misuse of new technologies, including cryptocurrencies, for illegal and terrorist purposes. We reaffirm our commitment to the principles of technical and nonpoliticized nature of international anti-criminal cooperation including for the purpose of preventing and establishing financial traces of these crimes.”

Paragraph 50 calls for an enhanced dialogue within BRICS on the issues of “…  money-laundering and countering the financing of terrorism with the participation of relevant stakeholders.”

Paragraph 51 focuses on “…illicit drug production, trafficking and abuse worldwide, [which]… threatens public security and international and regional stability, health, safety and well-being of humankind and as well as undermines the sustainable development of States.”

Climate Change

Paragraph 14 underscores “…the Global Alliance against Hunger and Poverty and the work of the Task Force for a Global Mobilization against Climate Change, as well as the landmark Rio de Janeiro Declaration on International Tax Cooperation. We look forward to the successful hosting of the G20 leaders’ summit in Rio de Janeiro in November 2024 under the Brazilian presidency and reaffirm our willingness to coordinate our positions to enhance inclusiveness and amplify the voice of the Global South and further integrate their priorities in the G20 agenda through the consecutive G20 presidencies of BRICS member states – India, Brazil and South Africa – during 2023-2025 and beyond. In this regard, we also welcome and support the inclusion of the African Union as a member of the G20 at the G20 New Delhi Summit in 2023.”

Paragraph 18 recognizes that “land degradation, desertification, and drought are posing serious threats to the well-being and livelihoods of people and the environment, and, whilst acknowledging the ongoing efforts in promoting sustainable land management practices , we call for the urgent provision of increased financial resources, strong partnerships, and integrated policies to address the challenges….” Paragraph 19 commends global efforts towards tackling global water scarcity.

Paragraph 86 welcomes the establishment of the Contact Group on Climate Change and Sustainable Development by BRICS Environment Ministers on 28 June 2024, as well as the adoption of the Framework on Climate Change and Sustainable Development.  A BRICS Climate Research Platform is being established to enhance the scientific and expert exchange of views and best practices.  Paragraph 90 refers to the critical importance of the oceans for sustainable development and climate stability.

Global Health

Paragraph 93 reiterates BRICS support “…to the central coordinating role of the World Health Organization in the implementation of multilateral international efforts to protect public health from infectious diseases and epidemics and commit to reform and strengthen the international pandemic prevention, preparedness and response system. We recognise the fundamental role of primary health care as a key foundation for Universal Health Care and health system’s resilience, as well as on prevention and response to health emergencies. We welcome fostering closer ties among BRICS health institutions responsible for sanitary and epidemiological health and well-being, prevention, preparedness and response to epidemic prone communicable diseases and health impact following disasters and encourage further exploring opportunities for knowledge sharing, exchange of expertise and undertaking joint projects in the health sector.”

Paragraph 96 recalls the significant potential of BRICS countries “…in the field of nuclear medicine, we welcome the decision to establish a BRICS Working Group on Nuclear Medicine. We note the successful holding of the First BRICS Nuclear Medicine Forum on 20-21 June 2024 in St. Petersburg and the publication of the BRICS Review of Best Practices in Nuclear Medicine.”

People to People Exchanges

Paragraph 119 reaffirms the importance of “…BRICS people-to-people exchanges in enhancing mutual understanding, friendship and cooperation. We appreciate events, held under Russia’s chairmanship in 2024 including in the fields of media, culture, education, sports, arts, youth, civil society, public diplomacy, and academic exchanges and acknowledge that people-to-people exchanges play an essential role in enriching our societies and developing our economies. In this regard, we call for more efforts to respect diversity of cultures, highly value inheritance, innovation and creativity, jointly advocate robust international people-to-people exchanges and cooperation and recognise the adoption of the UNGA Resolution A/RES/78/286 entitled “International Day for Dialogue among Civilizations”[13].

Paragraph 123 emphasizes further “…that all BRICS countries have rich traditional sport culture and agree to support each other in the promotion of traditional and indigenous sports among BRICS countries and around the world. We strongly oppose any form of discrimination on grounds of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion, economic or other status of athletes. We recognise the importance of joint BRICS sports events, meetings, conferences, seminars in the field of sports science and sports medicine.”

Concluding thoughts

Economic dynamism and GDP expansion have shifted from the West to countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America including Brazil, China, India and South Africa. As a consequence, the U.S.-led international system devised at Bretton Woods in 1944 appears obsolete and has been so aggressively weaponized by the U.S. – to the detriment of the Global Majority — that many countries have decided to test other options.  It is impressive that numerous new institutions have been emerging to better reflect the economic realities of the 21st century, which can no longer be unipolar.  BRICS is the leading example.

In a certain sense, BRICS represents a “new dawn” of multipolarity and, hopefully, peace on the basis of the UN Charter and the respect of the sovereign equality of states and the self-determination of peoples.  As one observer noted: “BRICS intends to position itself as a multitasking laboratory of global governance, where new algorithms of multilateral cooperation and innovative models for solving the world’s major economic and political problems can be tested.” These are exciting times.

Let the West remain in denial about BRICS.  While some dogs may bark, the caravan moves on.

Notes.

[1] http://static.kremlin.ru/media/events/files/en/RosOySvLzGaJtmx2wYFv0lN4NSPZploG.pdf

[2] https://www.peoplesworld.org/article/brics-summit-in-kazan-is-evidence-of-the-fast-emerging-multipolar-world/

[3] https://www.unesco.org/en/legal-affairs/constitution

[4] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crmznzkly3go

[5]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7hxfGf7lyA
https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/war-over-if-you-want-it-john-and-yoko-40-years-later/

[6] https://www.un.org/en/summit-of-the-future

[7] https://www.counterpunch.org/2022/01/28/a-culture-of-cheating-on-the-origins-of-the-crisis-in-ukraine/

[8] Treaties must be observed. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Article 26.
https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/1_1_1969.pdf

[9] https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/n05/487/60/pdf/n0548760.pdf

[10] https://www.ohchr.org/en/special-procedures/sr-unilateral-coercive-measures

Cf. Hans Kochler (ed.), Responsibility in International Relations, International Progress Organization, Vienna 2024, pp. 139-170.

[11] https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/n23/431/97/pdf/n2343197.pdf

[12] See also the 2016 GA report of the UN Independent Expert on International Order, https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/n16/248/82/pdf/n1624882.pdf

[13] https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/n24/175/66/pdf/n2417566.pdf

Alfred de Zayas is a law professor at the Geneva School of Diplomacy and served as a UN Independent Expert on International Order 2012-18. He is the author of twelve books including “Building a Just World Order” (2021) “Countering Mainstream Narratives” 2022, and “The Human Rights Industry” (Clarity Press, 2021).