BRICS: Shaping Global Science and Technology Cooperation

BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) has emerged as a significant platform in the global science, technology, and innovation (STI) landscape, especially in the context of a shifting geopolitical order. Initially conceived as an economic grouping, BRICS now represents a collective effort by emerging economies to challenge Western dominance and promote a multipolar world.

In the STI domain, its significance lies in:

• Collaborative research: Joint research initiatives and innovation frameworks enable pooling of resources and expertise.
• Alternative governance models: It offers a platform for shaping global norms in areas like artificial intelligence and digital technologies.
• Capacity building: Member countries leverage complementary strengths to address shared challenges in health, energy, and environment.

For example, initiatives like the BRICS Technology Transfer Centre (TTC) and iBRICS network aim to promote cross-border technology commercialization and innovation ecosystems.

Thus, BRICS plays a crucial role in democratizing global STI governance and enabling the Global South to have a stronger voice in technological development and policy-making.

STI cooperation within BRICS has gained importance due to the rising fragmentation of global scientific collaboration. Increasing techno-nationalism, export controls, and geopolitical rivalries have restricted the free flow of knowledge and technology, particularly affecting developing countries.

This makes BRICS cooperation crucial for several reasons:

• Reducing dependency: It helps member countries reduce reliance on Western technologies and institutions.
• Ensuring inclusivity: BRICS promotes equitable access to innovation and technology for the Global South.
• Strategic autonomy: Collaborative frameworks strengthen national capabilities in critical sectors like AI, biotechnology, and space.

For instance, the 2025 BRICS Declaration on AI emphasizes inclusive and development-oriented AI governance, offering an alternative to dominant Western frameworks.

In this context, BRICS serves as a counterbalance to geopolitical fragmentation, ensuring that scientific progress remains collaborative and accessible rather than exclusive and competitive.

The institutional framework for STI cooperation in BRICS has evolved significantly since its formal recognition in 2011. The 2015 Memorandum of Understanding marked a turning point by establishing STI as a core strategic pillar, supported by structured mechanisms for collaboration.

Key elements of this evolution include:

• Action Plans: The 2017–2020 Innovation Cooperation Plan focused on entrepreneurship, technology transfer, and inclusive participation.
• Working Groups: Bodies like the STIEP Working Group coordinate initiatives across member countries.
• Annual Ministerial Meetings: These meetings set priorities and approve joint research calls.

For example, India’s leadership through agencies like CSIR and DBT demonstrates how national institutions drive BRICS-level cooperation.

Over time, the focus has shifted from basic research to innovation and commercialization, incorporating emerging areas such as AI, high-performance computing, and digital health.

Thus, BRICS has developed a multi-layered institutional architecture that supports sustained collaboration, although challenges in scaling and coordination remain.

Despite significant progress, STI cooperation within BRICS faces several structural and operational challenges that limit its effectiveness. These challenges stem from both internal diversity and external constraints.

Major challenges include:

• Heterogeneity among members: Differences in economic development and scientific capacity make coordination difficult.
• Low R&D expenditure: Except for China, most BRICS countries have relatively low GERD levels.
• Limited funding and infrastructure: Compared to models like the EU, BRICS lacks robust funding mechanisms.
• Weak institutional continuity: The rotating presidency system hampers long-term planning.

For instance, participation from new BRICS+ members has been uneven, with only a few countries actively engaging in research calls.

These challenges highlight the need for institutional strengthening, increased investment, and better coordination to unlock the full potential of BRICS STI cooperation.

BRICS+, with its expanded membership, has the potential to become a powerful platform for global STI collaboration, particularly for the Global South. It enhances inclusivity and provides opportunities for broader knowledge exchange and capacity building.

Potential advantages:

• Greater diversity: Inclusion of countries like Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Indonesia enriches resource and knowledge pools.
• South-South cooperation: Promotes collaboration among developing countries facing similar challenges.
• Global influence: A larger grouping can shape international norms in emerging technologies.

However, limitations persist:

• Divergent interests: Economic and political differences complicate consensus-building.
• Uneven participation: Not all members actively engage in initiatives.
• Institutional weaknesses: Lack of a permanent secretariat limits coordination.

For example, while BRICS has made progress in ICT and AI, areas like mega-science projects remain underdeveloped.

Thus, while BRICS+ holds immense promise, its success depends on addressing structural constraints and enhancing institutional capacity.

The BRICS approach to AI governance provides a compelling case study of how the grouping is influencing global technology norms. The 2025 BRICS Declaration on AI marked a significant shift by elevating AI to a central pillar of cooperation.

Key features of this approach include:

• Inclusivity: Emphasis on equitable access to AI technologies.
• Development orientation: Focus on using AI for social and economic development.
• Collaborative governance: Joint efforts to shape global standards.

For instance, BRICS initiatives integrate AI with sectors like healthcare, climate change, and digital infrastructure, addressing real-world challenges.

This approach contrasts with Western models that often prioritize commercial and strategic interests. By advocating a more inclusive framework, BRICS is contributing to a more balanced global discourse on AI governance.

However, challenges such as varying national capabilities and regulatory frameworks remain. Nonetheless, this case illustrates the potential of BRICS to act as a norm entrepreneur in emerging technologies.

India’s 2026 BRICS presidency presents a strategic opportunity to strengthen STI cooperation and enhance the group’s global relevance. With the theme of ‘Resilience, Innovation, Cooperation, and Sustainability’, India can play a leadership role in shaping the future agenda.

Key strategies India can adopt include:

• Institutional reforms: Propose the creation of a permanent secretariat for STI coordination.
• Mega-science projects: Initiate large-scale collaborative projects in areas like climate tech and biotechnology.
• Capacity building: Support weaker members in strengthening their innovation systems.

For example, India’s experience with digital public infrastructure (like Aadhaar and UPI) can serve as a model for technology-driven development.

Additionally, India can promote research on governance of emerging technologies, ensuring that BRICS plays a proactive role in global policy-making.

Thus, India’s presidency can act as a catalyst for transforming BRICS into a more cohesive, effective, and influential STI platform.