OBSERVARE
Universidade Autónoma de Lisboa
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026
290
BRICS VS. G7: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL
EFFICIENCY IN SHAPING GLOBAL ORDER
PATKAR KALPESH DILIP
patkarkalpesh.dilip@christuniversity.in
He specializes in Political Science and International Relations. His expertise includes Indian and
Western Political Philosophy, Comparative Politics, and International Politics. He is currently
pursuing a Ph.D. focusing on the idea of Nyaya in the Shanti Parva of the Mahabharata (India).
He is an Assistant Professor at Christ (Deemed to be University), Lavasa Campus, Pune. Kalpesh
has previously taught at Fergusson College (A) and Modern College of Arts, Science & Commerce
(A), Pune. His research is published in UGC-CARE and SCOPUS-listed journals, focusing on topics
such as the National Education Policy 2020 and Indian Knowledge Systems. Kalpesh actively
contributes to curriculum development, faculty training, and workshops on legal research and
academic quality standards. He has qualified for UGC-NET JRF and Maharashtra SET.
https://orcid.org/0009-0005-3452-8414
Abstract
The global distribution of power is increasingly shaped by the competing influences of two
major blocs: BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) and the G7 (Canada,
France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States). This paper
investigates how BRICS and the G7 shape the emerging multipolar global order. Using
comparative analysis of key indicators: GDP, trade flows, investment patterns, diplomatic
engagement, and strategic alliances. The paper examines each bloc’s structure and internal
cohesion. The analysis underscores the G7's historical supremacy, which stems from its
economic strength and political unity, in contrast to BRICS’ rising role as a representative for
the Global South and a platform for alternative governance models. Important metrics include
trade flows, investment trends, diplomatic efforts, and strategic alliances. The research also
assesses the internal dynamics within each bloc, including challenges to cohesion and the
effectiveness of decision-making. By comparing the advantages and drawbacks of BRICS and
G7, this paper provides insights into their respective functions in a multipolar world order,
evaluating their ability to promote transformative global agendas. Lastly, the paper concludes
that both alliances embody divergent approaches to global governance, reflecting deeper
shifts in international collaboration, competition, and the balance of power.
Keywords
Power-Dynamics, Efficiency, Geopolitical, Comparison, Multipolar.
Resumo
A distribuição global do poder é cada vez mais moldada pelas influências concorrentes de dois
grandes blocos: os BRICS (Brasil, Rússia, Índia, China e África do Sul) e o G7 (Canadá, França,
Alemanha, Itália, Japão, Reino Unido e Estados Unidos). Este artigo analisa a forma como o
BRICS e o G7 moldam a ordem global multipolar emergente. Para tal, utiliza uma análise
comparativa de indicadores-chave, nomeadamente o PIB, os fluxos comerciais, os padrões de
investimento, o envolvimento diplomático e as alianças estratégicas. O artigo examina a
estrutura e a coesão interna de cada bloco. A análise sublinha a supremacia histórica do G7,
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 290-306
Brics vs. G7: A Comparative Analysis of Economic and Political Efficiency
in Shaping Global Order
Patkar Kalpesh Dilip
291
que decorre da sua força económica e unidade política, em contraste com o papel crescente
dos BRICS como representantes do Sul Global e plataforma para modelos alternativos de
governação. Entre os indicadores importantes estão os fluxos comerciais, as tendências de
investimento, os esforços diplomáticos e as alianças estratégicas. A pesquisa também avalia
a dinâmica interna de cada bloco, incluindo os desafios à coesão e a eficácia da tomada de
decisões. Ao comparar as vantagens e desvantagens dos BRICS e do G7, este artigo fornece
visões sobre as respetivas funções numa ordem mundial multipolar, avaliando a sua
capacidade de promover agendas globais transformadoras. Por fim, o artigo conclui que
ambas as alianças incorporam abordagens divergentes à governança global, refletindo
mudanças mais profundas na colaboração internacional, na concorrência e no equilíbrio de
poder.
Palavras-chave
Dinâmica de poder, Eficiência, Geopolítica, Comparação, Multipolar.
How to cite this article
Dilip, Patkar Kalpesh (2025). Brics vs. G7: A Comparative Analysis of Economic and Political
Efficiency in Shaping Global Order. Janus.net, e-journal of international relations. VOL. 16, Nº. 2,
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 290-306. DOI https://doi.org/10.26619/1647-7251.16.2.16
Article submitted on 1st February 2025 and accepted for publication on 31st May 2025.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 290-306
Brics vs. G7: A Comparative Analysis of Economic and Political Efficiency
in Shaping Global Order
Patkar Kalpesh Dilip
292
BRICS VS. G7: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ECONOMIC AND
POLITICAL EFFICIENCY IN SHAPING GLOBAL ORDER
PATKAR KALPESH DILIP
Introduction
In two influential corners of the globe, two blocs chart competing visions for global
governance. One, the G7, rooted in the legacy of post-war prosperity and Western liberal
order, gathers the world’s most industrialised nations - Canada, France, Germany, Italy,
Japan, the UK, and the USA. The other, BRICS, comprises Brazil, Russia, India, China,
and South Africa. It represents emerging powers once sidelined by colonialism and global
inequities, now advocating for a multipolar world.
Formed in the 1970s, the G7 has long dominated international financial systems,
promoting democratic governance and market liberalism. In contrast, BRICS, emerging
in the early 2000s, challenges this dominance by offering alternative frameworks through
institutions like the New Development Bank and emphasising equitable development and
regional partnerships. However, both blocs face internal and external challenges, ranging
from slowing economic growth in the G7 to political and ideological divergences within
BRICS.
As global power dynamics shift in the 21st century, understanding the strategic visions,
structural strengths, and limitations of these two groups becomes vital to analysing the
future of international cooperation and competition.
Research Objective, Scope, and Methodology
This research aims to conduct a comparative analysis of BRICS and G7. It focuses on
their economic and political efficiency in shaping the global order. It seeks to understand
how these two blocs influence the globe and to evaluate their effectiveness in addressing
major global challenges.
This study adopts a qualitative and interdisciplinary analytical methodology to conduct a
comparative analysis of BRICS and G7 in shaping the global order. The research primarily
relies on secondary data drawn from peer-reviewed academic literature, policy
documents and institutional reports from the IMF, World Bank, WTO, UN, etc. Coding
categories were developed iteratively to ensure that both convergences and divergences
in rhetoric and implementation strategies were captured effectively.
This research examines both the economic and political dimensions of BRICS and G7. On
the economic front. The study measures their contributions to global GDP, trade, financial
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 290-306
Brics vs. G7: A Comparative Analysis of Economic and Political Efficiency
in Shaping Global Order
Patkar Kalpesh Dilip
293
stability, and responses to major economic crises. The paper investigates their political
leadership roles in global governance institutions and diplomatic alliances. Additionally,
the research adopts an interdisciplinary perspective, exploring the impact of technology,
cultural values, historical legacies, etc.
The scope of the study is confined to evaluating these factors in the context of key global
events from the early 2000s to the present, including the 2008 financial crisis and the
COVID-19 pandemic. It doesn’t go deeply into bilateral relations or domestic policies
unless they have a direct bearing on global influence. These events serve as "critical
junctures" that tested the leadership and coordination capacities of both BRICS and G7,
respectively.
While other crises (e.g., the Russia-Ukraine war, the Eurozone crisis) could have been
included, these two events were selected because they involved direct engagement by
both blocs and offered sufficient data for comparative review across political and
economic dimensions.
The study remains cognizant of limitations inherent in case selection and includes
triangulation through cross-referencing other relevant global developments to validate
conclusions where appropriate.
Historical Perspective
Historical legacies often influence and interfere with current global perspectives. The G7
nations largely emerged from colonial powers with a legacy of industrial dominance and
global influence. These countries built their wealth and power through colonial trade
networks and resource exploitation, which continue to affect their leadership in
international institutions. For example, nations like the United Kingdom and France
leverage historical ties to maintain influence in former colonies through diplomatic and
economic partnerships.
In contrast, BRICS nations are shaped by histories of colonisation, semi-colonization, or
imperial domination. These experiences foster a collective memory of resistance to
foreign control and a strong emphasis on sovereignty and development. BRICS countries
advocate for decolonial frameworks in global governance, which prioritize equitable
representation and challenge Western-dominated institutions. Examples include South-
South cooperation initiatives, which seek to promote mutual development without
dependency on traditional powers, and calls for reform of the UN Security Council to
include voices from the Global South.
While the G7 often defends the stability of existing institutions, BRICS pushes for a
restructuring of global power to reflect the realities of a multipolar world. This divergence
shapes ongoing debates about justice, equity, and legitimacy in global decision-making
processes. The G7 and BRICS represent two discrete blocks. The formation of the G7 was
rooted in the need for cooperation among leading industrialised nations to stabilise the
global economy following the devastation of World War II. In contrast, BRICS emerged
in the early 21st century as a coalition of major emerging economies seeking to challenge
the existing Western-centric world order and provide a voice for developing nations.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 290-306
Brics vs. G7: A Comparative Analysis of Economic and Political Efficiency
in Shaping Global Order
Patkar Kalpesh Dilip
294
The G7's historical evolution can be traced back to the 1970s when the world faced
multiple economic crises. It includes the collapse of the Bretton Woods system and the
oil shocks of the decade. Recognising the need for coordinated action, the leaders of six
major economies -USA, UK, Germany, Japan, France, and Italy - convened for
discussions on global economic stability. Canada joined shortly afterwards, forming the
Group of Seven (G7). The G7 became a platform for these countries to discuss and
coordinate policies on international trade, finance, and security, exerting significant
influence over global economic institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF)
and the World Bank.
On the other hand, BRICS emerged as a response to the growing economic and political
influence of countries outside the traditional Western sphere. The term “BRIC” was first
coined by economist Jim O’Neill in 2001 to highlight the rising economic potential of
Brazil, Russia, India, and China. South Africa was added in 2010, completing the BRICS
grouping. Unlike the G7, which was primarily formed by developed economies, BRICS
consists of emerging economies from diverse regions. These nations recognised the need
to create an alternative framework for global cooperation, emphasising multipolarity,
development finance, etc. BRICS countries collectively account for a noteworthy portion
of the world’s population, GDP growth, and trade, positioning themselves as a
counterbalance to the G7's influence (Economist Intelligence Unit, 2021).
The structure and decision-making processes of the G7 and BRICS reflect their different
origins and objectives. The G7 operates as an informal forum with no permanent
secretariat or formal treaty. Decisions are typically reached through consensus. The
meetings focus on key global issues like economic policy, security, and climate change.
Despite its informal structure, the G7 has maintained significant influence through its
coordination with global institutions like the IMF, the World Bank, and the World Trade
Organization (WTO). However, critics argue that the G7's membership is limited and does
not reflect the diverse realities of the global economy.
In comparison, BRICS has sought to institutionalise its cooperation by establishing formal
structures, including the BRICS Summit and the New Development Bank (NDB).
Decision-making within BRICS is also based on consensus, but the bloc emphasises equal
partnership among its members, regardless of their differing economic sizes and political
systems. This approach highlights BRICS' commitment to promoting inclusivity and
reducing the dominance of any single nation within the group. However, the bloc faces
internal challenges, such as balancing the competing interests of its members, which
range from authoritarian to democratic governments and from resource-exporting to
technology-driven economies.
The objectives and missions of the G7 and BRICS further explain their differing priorities
in global governance. The G7's core mission has been to promote economic stability,
liberal democracy and the rule of law. Over the decades, the G7 has focused on
addressing global challenges such as financial crises, terrorism, and climate change. Its
influence extends to shaping global financial regulations, promoting free trade, and
providing development assistance to poorer nations.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 290-306
Brics vs. G7: A Comparative Analysis of Economic and Political Efficiency
in Shaping Global Order
Patkar Kalpesh Dilip
295
Table 1. Detailed Timeline of G7 and BRICS Milestones
Year
Bloc
Milestone
1975
G7
G7 founded (originally G6) at Rambouillet Summit
1976
G7
Canada joins, making it G7
1997
G7/G8
Russia invited, becoming G8
2001
BRICS
BRIC term coined by Goldman Sachs economist Jim O’Neill
2006
BRICS
First formal BRIC foreign ministers' meeting
2008
BRICS
Global Financial Crisis; BRICS gains visibility
2009
BRICS
First BRIC Summit held in Yekaterinburg, Russia
2011
BRICS
South Africa joins; BRIC becomes BRICS
2014
BRICS
BRICS establishes the New Development Bank (NDB)
2014
G7
Russia suspended from G8 due to Crimea; G8 returns to G7
2015
G7
G7 commits to full decarbonization by 2100
2017
BRICS
BRICS Summit in Xiamen; Digital economy cooperation initiated
2020
Both
G7 and BRICS respond to COVID-19 crisis
2021
G7
G7 launches Build Back Better World (B3W) to rival BRI
2023
BRICS
BRICS expands, inviting six new countries (Argentina, Egypt, etc.)
Source: Authorship
BRICS, on the other hand, emphasises the importance of economic development, South-
South cooperation, and a more equitable global order. The bloc's mission is to foster
economic growth and infrastructure development in its member states and other
developing countries. BRICS aims to provide alternatives to financial assistance through
initiatives like the New Development Bank (NDB) and the Contingent Reserve
Arrangement (CRA). BRICS also advocates for reforms in global governance institutions
to provide further representation and voice to emerging economies.
The G7 and BRICS have evolved from different historical contexts to serve distinct
purposes in the global order. The G7, representing established industrial powers, focuses
on maintaining stability and leadership within a liberal international framework. BRICS,
representing a coalition of emerging economies, seeks to create a multipolar world that
promotes inclusive development and equitable governance. Despite their differences,
both blocs continue to play critical roles in shaping the economic and political landscape
of the 21st century.
Economic Perspectives: A Comparative Analysis
A] GDP & Global Trade:
BRICS and G7 have contrasting roles in shaping the global economy through their
contributions to global GDP and trade. BRICS, comprising major emerging markets, has
been a significant driver of global economic growth in recent years. Collectively, BRICS
nations contribute approximately $28 trillion to the global GDP (UNCTAD, 2022). It is
driven by rapid industrialisation, expanding consumer markets and infrastructural
development. Their economies, especially China and India, have experienced sustained
growth due to high investment rates and increasing integration into global supply chains.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 290-306
Brics vs. G7: A Comparative Analysis of Economic and Political Efficiency
in Shaping Global Order
Patkar Kalpesh Dilip
296
Figure 1. Global Trade Contribution (in % terms)
Source: WB Report & UNCTAD
Conversely, the G7 nations collectively contribute around $40 trillion to global GDP
(World Bank, 2023). These economies include technological dominance, advanced
financial markets, and established infrastructure. Despite slower growth rates compared
to BRICS, G7 countries maintain leadership in global trade (Eichengreen, 2011: 58),
contributing about 31% of the total trade. Their strength lies in high-value exports,
technological innovation, and strong intellectual property rights frameworks.
In terms of trade, BRICS nations account for approximately 18% of global trade, with a
focus on commodities, manufacturing, and digital services. While BRICS drives the
growth of emerging markets, the G7 sustains global economic stability. G7 is able to do
it through financial leadership and technological innovation. This underscores the
complementary yet competitive roles of the two blocs.
B] Strategy and Policy Impact:
BRICS and G7 employ separate economic strategies that influence their global roles.
BRICS emphasises regional cooperation and the establishment of alternative financial
institutions, for instance, the New Development Bank (NDB). The NDB focuses on
infrastructure development and provides funding to reduce member nations' dependency
on Western-led institutions like the IMF and World Bank. This strategy enhances regional
economic integration and allows BRICS members to exercise greater autonomy in their
financial policies.
In contrast, the G7 relies on coordination through long-established global institutions
such as the IMF and the World Bank. These institutions play a pivotal role in maintaining
global financial stability. It offers crisis response mechanisms, development assistance,
and financial oversight. The G7's strategies prioritise economic resilience through policy
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 290-306
Brics vs. G7: A Comparative Analysis of Economic and Political Efficiency
in Shaping Global Order
Patkar Kalpesh Dilip
297
coordination, debt management and fiscal incentives during crises. It benefits both
developed and developing countries under its influence (Global Finance Magazine, 2022).
Figure 2. Major Economic Investments by BRICS & G7 (in Billion USD)
Source: IMF, World Bank, and NDB reports
In terms of investment, G7 countries have contributed approximately $400 billion to
global development through these institutions. This significantly beats and outpaces the
$100 billion investment managed by BRICS initiatives like the NDB. This highlights the
scale of G7’s financial capacity but also underscores BRICS' growing importance in
providing alternative funding sources to emerging economies.
Table 2. BRICS’ NDP vs G7’s Bretton Woods Institutions
Institution
BRICS New Development Bank
(NDB)
G7 Bretton Woods Institutions
(IMF & World Bank)
Purpose
Provide alternative financing for
infrastructure in emerging economies
and developed countries without
rigorous conditions.
Debt restructuring programs, financial
aid during global crises to both
developing and developed countries.
Challenges
Limited global reach
Potential challenges in funding and
governance coordination.
Perceived dominance by Western
nations.
Conditionalities impacting recipient
nations’ sovereignty (Austerity
Measures)
Source: Authorship
While the NDB seeks to address these criticisms by promoting equitable partnerships, it
faces challenges related to limited funding capacity and coordination among its diverse
member states. In contrast, the Bretton Woods Institutions maintain extensive global
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 290-306
Brics vs. G7: A Comparative Analysis of Economic and Political Efficiency
in Shaping Global Order
Patkar Kalpesh Dilip
298
reach but must address perceptions of Western bias and conditionality-driven policies.
Both models reflect competing visions of global economic governance.
C] Resilience & Response to Economic Crisis:
Both BRICS and G7 have demonstrated varying degrees of resilience during major global
crises, with their responses shaped by their respective economic priorities and
institutional strengths.
Table 3. BRICS vs G7 – Comparative responses to Global Crises
Global Crisis
BRICS
G7
Financial Crisis
(2008)
Expansion of trade agreements,
Financial support through NDB
Massive financial incentives,
Coordinated central bank
interventions
Oil Price Shock
(2014)
Economic diversification efforts,
Support for domestic industries
Support for global oil supply stability,
Cooperation with OPEC
COVID-19
Pandemic
(2019)
Regional aid packages,
Increased healthcare funding,
Debt relief proposals
Large-scale fiscal packages,
Global vaccine distribution programs
Ukraine
Conflict
(2022)
Neutral diplomatic stance,
Efforts to maintain commodity trade
flows
Sanctions on Russia,
Financial aid to Ukraine,
Defence spending increased
Source: Authorship
During the 2008 financial crisis, the G7 led global recovery efforts through large-scale
financial incentives and coordinated interventions by central banks. These measures
aimed to stabilise financial markets and restore economic confidence. BRICS nations,
less impacted due to their relatively low exposure to Western financial markets, focused
on expanding regional trade agreements and supporting growth through infrastructure
investments (BBC News, 2023).
In the COVID-19 pandemic, G7 countries implemented extensive fiscal packages and
organised global initiatives like the COVAX program to distribute vaccines. BRICS nations,
on the other hand, prioritised regional cooperation, providing healthcare funding and
proposing debt relief for developing nations. Despite resource limitations, BRICS
countries emphasised self-reliance and alternative supply chains to mitigate the crisis's
economic impact.
Other crucial crises, such as the 2014 oil price shock and the Ukraine conflict in 2022,
further highlight differences in strategies. BRICS emphasises economic diversification
and maintaining commodity trade flows. In contrast, the G7 implemented policies like
sanctions and increased defence spending (Reuters, 2022). The comparison underscores
how G7 focuses on financial stability and global leadership, while BRICS emphasises
regional solidarity and alternative development strategies.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 290-306
Brics vs. G7: A Comparative Analysis of Economic and Political Efficiency
in Shaping Global Order
Patkar Kalpesh Dilip
299
D] Economic disparities:
Both BRICS and G7 nations face substantial internal challenges stemming from economic
disparities and inequalities.
In BRICS, income inequality is a persistent concern, mainly in Brazil and South Africa,
where large segments of the population remain excluded from economic growth.
Additionally, BRICS nations struggle with uneven development levels; for instance, India
has significant rural poverty despite high economic growth, while Russia faces economic
volatility due to dependency on oil exports (Leininger, 2018: 126).
The G7, while generally wealthier, also deals with structural issues like ageing
populations, mainly in Japan and Italy. It put tremendous economic pressure on
healthcare and pension systems. Economic stagnation in parts of Europe and the United
States has contributed to rising inequality and social unrest. These nations also face
challenges related to wealth concentration and limited upward mobility in lower-income
groups. Both blocs are implementing strategies to address these disparities
(Chossudovsky, 2003: 62).
BRICS has invested in infrastructure and education to promote inclusive growth, while
the G7 emphasises social safety nets, healthcare reform, and job creation. However, the
effectiveness of these measures varies due to political and institutional differences. It
means the complexity of achieving equitable development in both emerging and
developed economies.
E] Technology and Digital Economy:
Technological innovation and the digital economy are crucial drivers of growth and
influence for both BRICS and G7 nations. But their focus areas and strategies differ. G7
countries lead in advanced research and high-tech industries, with a strong emphasis on
artificial intelligence (AI), data privacy and global digital governance. The United States
and Japan, for instance, are pioneers in AI research, while the European Union has
established stringent regulations on data protection through the General Data Protection
Regulation (GDPR) (Matthews, 2020). These countries dominate global markets for high-
tech products and services, shaping digital norms and standards worldwide.
In contrast, BRICS nations are focusing on expanding digital infrastructure and
leveraging technology for socio-economic development. China has emerged as a leader
in AI with platforms like Deep Seek and Fintech with platforms like Alipay, WeChat Pay
etc., revolutionizing digital payments (Brooks, 2021). India has developed one of the
world's largest digital payment ecosystems through initiatives such as the Unified
Payments Interface (UPI). UPI has enhanced financial inclusion and supports economic
growth in third world countries at a phenomenal level. These innovations have helped
BRICS countries address challenges such as limited banking access and digital inequality
(OECD Observer, 2019).
While the G7 emphasizes maintaining leadership through technological exports and
global standards, BRICS is creating alternative digital frameworks that cater to the needs
of developing economies.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 290-306
Brics vs. G7: A Comparative Analysis of Economic and Political Efficiency
in Shaping Global Order
Patkar Kalpesh Dilip
300
Political Perspectives: A Comparative Analysis
A] Leadership in International Governance and Multilateral Institutes:
BRICS and G7 have discrete approaches to leadership and influence in major
international governance institutions like the UN, WTO, IMF and WHO.
Table 4. BRICS vs G7 – Comparison of Influences in Multilateral Organizations
Organisation
BRICS Influence
G7 Influence
United Nations
(UN)
Push for reform of Security Council to
increase representation for emerging
economies.
Dominant influence in decision-
making and peacekeeping
operations
World Trade
Organization
(WTO)
Advocacy for fairer trade rules and
support for developing nations
Leadership in setting trade policies
and dispute-resolution mechanisms
International
Monetary Fund
(IMF)
Establishment of New Development
Bank as an alternative financial
institution
Control of financial policy
frameworks and loan conditions
World Health
Organization
(WHO)
Support for global health initiatives
through regional collaborations
Major contributors to global health
funding and pandemic response
strategies
Source: Autorship
BRICS nations advocate for reforms to increase representation and fairness for emerging
economies. For example, they have called for restructuring the UN Security Council to
include permanent seats for countries from the Global South. In the WTO, BRICS
members push for equitable trade policies that protect the interests of developing
nations. BRICS perspective challenges the dominance of Western economies (Dupont,
2020: 47) & (Thakur, 2016: 22).
Conversely, the G7 exerts significant control over global governance structures. In the
UN, G7 nations are key players in peacekeeping operations and international security
initiatives. The G7 also leads in setting global financial frameworks through the IMF. They
influence loan conditions and policy recommendations. Additionally, the G7's role in the
WTO involves shaping trade rules and resolving disputes to maintain economic stability
(Allison, 2017: 80).
Both blocs are active in global health governance, with the G7 contributing large-scale
funding to initiatives like pandemic preparedness. BRICS, on the other hand, emphasises
regional health partnerships and alternative funding mechanisms. The ongoing
competition between the two blocs shapes global norms and decision-making processes
in multilateral organisations.
B] Soft Power, Alliances and Diplomacy:
BRICS and G7 leverage unique diplomatic alliances and soft power strategies to expand
their global influence. BRICS emphasises South-South cooperation. It supports the
solidarity among developing nations. BRICS members frequently advocate for non-
Western narratives, challenging the dominance of the Western-led liberal order. For
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 290-306
Brics vs. G7: A Comparative Analysis of Economic and Political Efficiency
in Shaping Global Order
Patkar Kalpesh Dilip
301
instance, partnerships with African and Latin American countries and China's Belt and
Road Initiative. It seeks to enhance global infrastructure connectivity. Additionally, BRICS
nations promote cultural exchange and investment in developing regions. BRICS
emphasises respect for national sovereignty and non-interference in domestic affairs
(Smith, 2018: A4).
On the other hand, the G7 trusts a well-established network of strategic alliances, for
instance, NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organisation) to maintain global security and
promote the liberal democratic order. G7 supports the Marshall Plan, which helped rebuild
Europe after World War II and continues to lead in international aid programs. The G7
also wields significant soft power through its dominance in global media, higher
education, and arts, reinforcing the appeal of Western values and governance models.
C] Approach towards Global Challenges:
BRICS and G7 vary in their approaches to addressing global challenges such as climate
change, cybersecurity, human rights, etc.
Table 5. BRICS vs G7 – Comparative Approaches to Global Challenges
Global
Challenge
BRICS Approach
G7 Approach
Climate Change
Support for differentiated
responsibilities, emphasis on
development-focused green policies
Leading global climate agreements
(e.g., Paris Agreement) focus on
carbon reduction targets.
Cybersecurity
Promotion of digital sovereignty, focus
on national cybersecurity measures
International cooperation on
cybersecurity standards, emphasis on
collective defence
Human Rights
Emphasis on non-interference in
domestic affairs, advocating for socio-
economic rights & human rights
Promotion of liberal democratic
values, emphasis on political and civil
rights
Source: Authorship
Environmental sustainability is a critical priority for both BRICS and G7. It is one the
convergence where a majority of them agree with future sustainability goal. It is only the
process that creates a stiff objection. Both BRICS and G7 are contributing to and
strategizing for the achievement of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The G7 takes
a leading role in global climate initiatives, emphasising Carbon Neutrality and renewable
energy transitions. The European Union's Green Deal and the United States'
recommitment to the Paris Agreement demonstrate these efforts. Investments in Wind,
Solar and Hydrogen energy aim to reduce the carbon footprint of G7 economies. It is
easier said than done because industrial legacies face challenges in achieving complete
carbon neutrality (Smith, 2018: A4).
BRICS nations, however, must balance rapid economic growth with environmental
sustainability. These countries emphasise climate justice, advocating that developed
nations bear greater responsibility for global emissions reductions. China leads the world
in solar energy capacity, while India’s National Solar Mission has significantly expanded
access to renewable energy. Brazil faces the dual challenge of economic development
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 290-306
Brics vs. G7: A Comparative Analysis of Economic and Political Efficiency
in Shaping Global Order
Patkar Kalpesh Dilip
302
and conserving the Amazon rainforest, which is crucial for global carbon sequestration
(Climate Policy Journal, 2021).
G7 countries grapple with industrial emissions and political resistance to strict
environmental policies, while BRICS nations contend with developmental priorities and
dependence on fossil fuels. Despite these hurdles, both blocs invest in green
technologies, signalling a global shift towards sustainable development pathways. Yet,
differences are there.
BRICS nations emphasise differentiated responsibilities in climate policy. They claim that
developed countries should bear a larger share of the burden. Their strategies focus on
balancing economic development with green policies. For instance, the BRICS Climate
Action Plan – A sustainable infrastructure plan in developing regions. BRICS also raises
partnerships with the Global South to share green technologies and investments.
Nevertheless, the G7 plays a leading role in global climate agreements like the Paris
Agreement. It supports rigorous & stringent carbon reduction targets and investments in
renewable energy. The G7’s approach emphasises global cooperation on climate issues,
with significant funding for climate adaptation and technology transfers to developing
countries.
Regarding cybersecurity, BRICS promotes digital sovereignty and national cybersecurity
measures. It battles with the efforts to impose global regulations they perceive as biased
towards Western interests. Meanwhile, G7 nations prioritise international cooperation and
collective defence against cyber threats, with frameworks on transparency and standard
cybersecurity protocols. (Lee, 2024: 60)
In human rights, BRICS advocates for non-interference, emphasising socio-economic
rights and national development. Conversely, the G7 stresses the protection of political
and civil liberties. They often criticise authoritarian governance models.
D] Response to Geopolitical Tensions:
BRICS and the G7 response reflect their contrasting ideologies and strategic priorities.
The G7 aligns closely with NATO and Western democratic values. G7 often uses military
and economic alliances to enforce global norms. A notable example is the G7's unified
response to the Russia-Ukraine conflict. It involved imposing severe sanctions on Russia
and providing military support to Ukraine. G7 remains active in the Indo-Pacific region,
countering China's influence by strengthening defence partnerships with Japan and
Australia. This reinforces commitment of G7 to a Western-led global order but also
intensifies geopolitical rivalries.
In contrast, BRICS underlines a counter-hegemonic stance, advocating for a multipolar
world where no single bloc dominates. BRICS nations often criticize Western interventions
and advocate for respecting national sovereignty. For example, BRICS countries have
expressed discontent with unilateral sanctions, arguing that such measures undermine
the International Law. Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) demonstrate the BRICS'
commitment to fostering regional stability and security cooperation (O'Brien, 2010: 51),
especially in Asia. Furthermore, BRICS supports peacebuilding and development projects
in Africa, giving an alternative to Western-led military and economic interventions.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 290-306
Brics vs. G7: A Comparative Analysis of Economic and Political Efficiency
in Shaping Global Order
Patkar Kalpesh Dilip
303
BRICS & G7 are deeply entangled in areas of global tension. For the G7, key challenges
include managing strained relations with Russia and China, notably over trade, human
rights, and security in the Indo-Pacific. For BRICS, tensions arise from criticism of
Western interventionism and the need to maintain solidarity among members with
differing geopolitical interests.
E] Political Sociology Dimension:
The G7 is rooted in cultural values that emphasise individualism, liberal democracy, and
human rights. These values are reflected in policies that promote free markets and civil
liberties. For instance, the USA’s healthcare reforms, the EU's privacy laws, etc. It
prioritises individual rights and market competitiveness. These cultural underpinnings
also influence the G7's efforts to promote Western governance models through
international institutions like the IMF and WTO.
BRICS, on the other hand, underlines collectivism and national sovereignty. These
nations often advocate for alternative approaches to governance. They resist what they
perceive as Western dominance. Examples include China's Belt and Road Initiative, which
focuses on state-led infrastructure development, and India's Rural Development &
Agriculture Support programs aimed at improving livelihoods through government
intervention. BRICS countries promote cultural diversity and multipolar cooperation.
They challenge the imposition of universal political and economic norms. (Al Jazeera,
2023) & (Kumar and Mendes, 2024: 38).
Conclusion
BRICS and G7 both face internal challenges and opportunities as they navigate an
increasingly complex global landscape. These factors impact their internal cohesion, unity
and future scenarios. It is crucial to understand this because multipolarity and
technological advancements are redefining influence and power.
BRICS faces significant challenges in maintaining internal cohesion due to economic
disparities and political divergences among its members. China’s economic and
technological dominance creates an imbalance within the group. It also hampers
equitable cooperation. Smaller economies like South Africa often struggle to match the
scale of China. Additionally, political tensions, such as the long-standing border disputes
between India and China, the Sino-Russian ideological conflicts, etc., pose risks to
strategic alignment. These factors complicate decision-making and the ability to present
a unified front in international governance (Cooper & Antkiewicz, 2008: 110).
G7 faces ageing populations and economic stagnation in the majority of the states. Japan
and several European countries are managing on the brink with declining birth rates and
increased pressure on social welfare systems. Furthermore, G7 nations have seen their
global influence wane in the face of rising economic powers like China and India. This
limits the G7's ability to sustain its leadership role in a world that is shifting toward
multipolarity.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 290-306
Brics vs. G7: A Comparative Analysis of Economic and Political Efficiency
in Shaping Global Order
Patkar Kalpesh Dilip
304
Despite internal challenges, both blocs have opportunities to strengthen their global
influence. BRICS can leverage its growing partnerships with the Global South to expand
its role in global governance. Belt and Road Initiative and South-South cooperation
programs have increased BRICS' strategic importance to emerging economies.
Additionally, BRICS countries, particularly China and India, are becoming leaders in
artificial intelligence (AI) development. BRICS has potential opportunities to drive
innovation and influence future global technological norms.
For the G7, prospects lie in strengthening alliances and shaping global standards in AI
ethics, Cybersecurity and Sustainable Development. The G7 has already made robust
steps in AI research and regulation. Furthermore, G7 nations are expanding their
geopolitical alliances in the Indo-Pacific, where partnerships with Australia, Japan and
India, i.e., QUAD Alliance, are helping counterbalance China’s growing influence. QUAD
is, ironically, a threat to BRICS.
A central challenge for BRICS is balancing economic development with political
alignment. While projects like the New Development Bank (NDB) have encouraged
infrastructure development, achieving consensus on broader policy issues remains
difficult. Divergent geopolitical interests, such as Russia's focus on military power versus
Brazil’s environmental priorities, hamper long-term cooperation. Similarly, G7 countries
face criticisms for their perceived dominance over global financial institutions, which has
strained relations with developing nations.
However, both groups have opportunities to lead in global issues. BRICS can expand its
influence by promoting alternative frameworks for economic development and digital
governance. Its emphasis on regional partnerships could allow it to become a central
player in addressing the needs of developing nations. On the other hand, the G7 can
maintain relevance by investing in technological innovation and forging stronger ties with
emerging economies. Efforts to lead on climate change, digital security, and economic
recovery will be crucial to the G7's long-term influence.
The internal challenges of BRICS and G7 highlight the difficulties and complexities of
maintaining unity within each bloc. However, both groups also have significant
opportunities to shape the future of global governance. Rising multipolarity and
technological advancements are reshaping the nature of influence and power, offering
both blocs a chance to redefine their roles worldwide. Through innovation, partnerships,
and effective leadership, BRICS and G7 can continue to compete and collaborate in
shaping the world’s political and economic landscape. (Singh, 2023: 115)
In conclusion, BRICS and G7 could find common ground in areas like climate change and
global health, where cooperation benefits everyone. Both blocs face shared risks from
rising temperatures, pandemics, and resource shortages. Working together on clean
energy, vaccine distribution, or early warning systems is possible, especially through
international platforms like the G20. Middle powers such as Indonesia could help bridge
differences. These countries are not strongly aligned with either bloc, making them good
mediators. They can promote dialogue and cooperation by focusing on common goals
like sustainable development and global stability, helping reduce tensions and
encouraging more inclusive global leadership.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 290-306
Brics vs. G7: A Comparative Analysis of Economic and Political Efficiency
in Shaping Global Order
Patkar Kalpesh Dilip
305
References
Allison, G. (2017). The future of global power competition. Foreign Affairs. 96(4): 80–
91.
Al Jazeera (2023). BRICS discusses creating alternative to US dollar. Al Jazeera [online].
August, 2023. [Accessed 30 January 2025]. Available at: https://www.aljazeera.com
BBC News (2023). Tensions rise between BRICS and G7. BBC News [online]. July, 2023.
[Accessed 30 January 2025]. Available at: https://www.bbc.com/news
Brooks, S. (2021). China's expanding influence through BRICS. The Diplomat [online].
March, 2021. [Accessed 30 January 2025]. Available at: https://thediplomat.com
Chossudovsky, M. (2003). The globalization of poverty and the new world order. Shanty
Bay, Canada: Global Research.
Climate Policy Journal (2021). India's role in global climate negotiations. Climate Policy
[online]. October, 2021. [Accessed 30 January 2025]. Available at:
https://www.climatepolicyjournal.com
Cooper, A. F., & Antkiewicz, A. (2008). Emerging powers in global governance: Lessons
from the Heiligendamm process. Waterloo, Canada: Wilfrid Laurier University Press.
Dupont, C. (2020). The economics of global governance reform. International Review of
Economics. 68(1): 45–67.
Economist Intelligence Unit (2021). Forecasts for global economic growth. The Economist
[online]. June, 2021. [Accessed 30 January 2025]. Available at: https://www.eiu.com
Eichengreen, B. (2011). Exorbitant privilege: The rise and fall of the dollar and the future
of the international monetary system. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Global Finance Magazine (2022). G7 leadership and economic recovery efforts. Global
Finance [online]. April, 2022. [Accessed 30 January 2025]. Available at:
https://www.gfmag.com
Kumar, A. and Mendes, P. (2024). De-dollarization and the BRICS bank: Shaping financial
sovereignty. Global South Economics. 12(3): 34–50.
Lee, H. (2024). G7’s Indo-Pacific pivot: Strategic recalibrations in response to China. The
International Affairs Journal. 77(1): 55–73.
Leininger, J. (2018). The politics of global inequality. In D. Held (ed.), International
political economy. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, pp. 120–138.
Matthews, C. (2020). AI leadership strategies in BRICS and G7 nations. World Economic
Forum [online]. May, 2020. [Accessed 30 January 2025]. Available at:
https://www.weforum.org
O'Brien, R. (2010). Multilateral institutions in crisis. In M. Cox (ed.), Globalization and
the challenges of global governance. London, UK: Routledge, pp. 45–61.
OECD Observer (2019). Digital infrastructure and financial inclusion. OECD Observer
[online]. September, 2019. [Accessed 30 January 2025]. Available at:
https://www.oecd.org
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 290-306
Brics vs. G7: A Comparative Analysis of Economic and Political Efficiency
in Shaping Global Order
Patkar Kalpesh Dilip
306
Reuters (2022). G7 sanctions and economic strategies. Reuters [online]. November,
2022. [Accessed 30 January 2025]. Available at: https://www.reuters.com
Singh, R. (2023). BRICS and the quest for a multipolar currency order. Foreign Policy
Review. 45(2): 112–129.
Smith, J. (2018). The rise of multipolarity in global finance. The Guardian. March 12, pp.
A3–A5.
Stiglitz, J. E. (2002). Globalization and its discontents. New York, NY: W.W. Norton &
Company.
Thakur, R. (2016). The United Nations, peace and security: From collective security to
the responsibility to protect. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
UNCTAD (2022). Development finance in emerging economies. UNCTAD Reports [online].
December, 2022. [Accessed 30 January 2025]. Available at: https://unctad.org
World Bank (2023). Infrastructure investment trends. World Bank Reports [online].
January, 2023. [Accessed 30 January 2025]. Available at: https://www.worldbank.org
